Photography's Triangle

**StiffLegged** · 02-02-2020, 05:11 AM - **4 Likes**

I’ve learned a few things here, which with other factoids should revolutionise my photography. We all know, or learn, the bigger the aperture number means the smaller the opening, which is completely stupid (and must be corrected on the K-new.) I also learn that the ISO setting doesn’t mean ISO, it means noise or it means gain - not sure which but there just isn’t a Sharpie fine enough to correct the button label. Happily one setting is sensible: the bigger the shutter number the faster the shutter speed, huzzah! On another thread I also learned that some cameras might have different ISO to others and presumably make different noises - whether this is to anyone’s gain or not is unclear.

So what I should be doing is setting shutter and aperture to what suits me and weighing up how noisy the scene in front is, then fixing the results to a post. Never did it that way before but I’ll bet it has an effect on my photography!

(don’t take it seriously, chaps)

Dartmoor Dave · 02-02-2020, 06:35 AM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by StiffLegged

So what I should be doing is setting shutter and aperture to what suits me and weighing up how noisy the scene in front is, then fixing the results to a post. Never did it that way before but I’ll bet it has an effect on my photography! (don’t take it seriously, chaps)

Yep, Pentax could use ISO invariance as an opportunity to make the first DSLR perfectly suited to the 21st Century mind. A dial marked Fast Stuff / Slow Stuff instead of a shutter speed control. Another dial marked More Blurry Bits / Less Blurry Bits to change aperture. And no need for an ISO control at all, but maybe a warning that flashes up saying: "Go slower or blurrier or photo might be noisy."

photoptimist · 02-02-2020, 07:06 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by GUB

"Vehemently" is a bit of a strong word for it.I used the term "bickering" (as in children in a family environment) earlier in a lighthearted way.

Whether you like it or not the triangle changed at the advent of digital.
In film ISO was a measure of sensitivity
In digital it is a measure of gain.

One affects the image at the moment of image taking
One amplifies the errors of the sensor downstream from the image taking.

As for base ISO - the camera makers would tell you it is the native signal from the sensor that ISO adjustments amplify downstream. We know it aint that simple.

Film and digital are not as different as you think. Film ISO is a measure of gain in film, too. The grain size defines the gain -- it defines how big a black blot you get in the final image if the film gets hit by a few photons, cosmic ray, or heat damage. Development of a coarse-grain film amplifies the errors intrinsic to the medium (fogging) and the errors in the measurement process (Poisson shot noise) relative to that of fine-grained film.

At the level of the relationship between the brightness of the scene and the brightness of the final image, both film and digital act similarly when it comes to ISO. Higher ISO is both brighter and noisier for both types of cameras. And the reason they are so similar is that both film and digital use an amplification process (chemical amplification in film, electronic amplification in digital) to convert microscopic photons into a macroscopic effect.

Aaron28 · 02-02-2020, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by GUB

it makes sense to try a -EV

more often than not it gets set at -0.5 to -1.0 so I will not have much 'wiggle' room

btw these are the failed images i'm referring to

**GUB** · 02-02-2020, 12:44 PM

Why do you feel her head is too light? Have you already pulled it back in post processing and are aware detail is lost there?
Nice shots.

Aaron28 · 02-02-2020, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by GUB

Nice shots.

thanks!

Originally posted by GUB

Why do you feel her head is too light? Have you already pulled it back in post processing and are aware detail is lost there?

it's more her face skin not hair that's too bright but she's right under that light......tried a mask in post but it got wonky as hell....my skills are quite limited plus it's also a jpeg may get to fool with the raw after I go through the many others and try again

**GUB** · 02-02-2020, 05:20 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Aaron28

thanks!

it's more her face skin not hair that's too bright but she's right under that light......tried a mask in post but it got wonky as hell....my skills are quite limited plus it's also a jpeg may get to fool with the raw after I go through the many others and try again

I just downloaded into Gimp and yes the top of the forehead is just at clipping. (I say just at because I never got a dropper value with 100 in all channels.)
I know this is not a critique post but try cloning out the green bokeh in front off her face. Doing so calms the sense of brightness in that area and increasing the link with the bokeh girl in the background which I presume is an integral part of your work.

Aaron28 · 02-02-2020, 05:41 PM

Originally posted by GUB

I know this is not a critique post but try cloning out the green bokeh in front off her face. Doing so calms the sense of brightness in that area and increasing the link with the bokeh girl in the background which I presume is an integral part of your work.

appreciate that GUB.....I did pull back green a touch 'globally' on the curve table but it never occurred to me that the green had an effect on her face since it was in the background but the diffuse glow from it sure does.....thanks for the insight

**GUB** · 02-02-2020, 06:27 PM

Originally posted by Aaron28

appreciate that GUB.....I did pull back green a touch 'globally' on the curve table but it never occurred to me that the green had an effect on her face since it was in the background but the diffuse glow from it sure does.....thanks for the insight

Just to clarify - it is not actually affecting her face, but our viewing eye seeing the two bright areas there and they affect us.

Aaron28 · 02-02-2020, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by GUB

it is not actually affecting her face, but our viewing eye seeing the two bright areas there and they affect us.

yes thanks!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Cityscape dom in triangle	ignath	Post Your Photos!	4	10-12-2019 06:27 AM
Point and Shoot Competition #131 — Triangle(s)	Titia	Pentax Compact Cameras	19	02-04-2019 12:04 PM
Triangle Bokeh	dcpropilot	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	07-29-2017 07:41 AM
Hi from the golden triangle in Victoria Australia	MrRosestone	Welcomes and Introductions	7	08-25-2016 01:18 PM
Landscape A journey to Triangle Island	SointulArt	Post Your Photos!	5	04-29-2014 08:53 PM

02-02-2020, 05:11 AM - 4 Likes	#91
StiffLegged Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2018 Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,616	I’ve learned a few things here, which with other factoids should revolutionise my photography. We all know, or learn, the bigger the aperture number means the smaller the opening, which is completely stupid (and must be corrected on the K-new.) I also learn that the ISO setting doesn’t mean ISO, it means noise or it means gain - not sure which but there just isn’t a Sharpie fine enough to correct the button label. Happily one setting is sensible: the bigger the shutter number the faster the shutter speed, huzzah! On another thread I also learned that some cameras might have different ISO to others and presumably make different noises - whether this is to anyone’s gain or not is unclear. So what I should be doing is setting shutter and aperture to what suits me and weighing up how noisy the scene in front is, then fixing the results to a post. Never did it that way before but I’ll bet it has an effect on my photography! (don’t take it seriously, chaps)

02-02-2020, 06:35 AM - 3 Likes	#92
Dartmoor Dave Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Dartmoor, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,882	Originally posted by StiffLegged So what I should be doing is setting shutter and aperture to what suits me and weighing up how noisy the scene in front is, then fixing the results to a post. Never did it that way before but I’ll bet it has an effect on my photography! (don’t take it seriously, chaps) Yep, Pentax could use ISO invariance as an opportunity to make the first DSLR perfectly suited to the 21st Century mind. A dial marked Fast Stuff / Slow Stuff instead of a shutter speed control. Another dial marked More Blurry Bits / Less Blurry Bits to change aperture. And no need for an ISO control at all, but maybe a warning that flashes up saying: "Go slower or blurrier or photo might be noisy."

02-02-2020, 07:06 AM - 1 Like	#93
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,122	Originally posted by GUB "Vehemently" is a bit of a strong word for it.I used the term "bickering" (as in children in a family environment) earlier in a lighthearted way. Whether you like it or not the triangle changed at the advent of digital. In film ISO was a measure of sensitivity In digital it is a measure of gain. One affects the image at the moment of image taking One amplifies the errors of the sensor downstream from the image taking. As for base ISO - the camera makers would tell you it is the native signal from the sensor that ISO adjustments amplify downstream. We know it aint that simple. Film and digital are not as different as you think. Film ISO is a measure of gain in film, too. The grain size defines the gain -- it defines how big a black blot you get in the final image if the film gets hit by a few photons, cosmic ray, or heat damage. Development of a coarse-grain film amplifies the errors intrinsic to the medium (fogging) and the errors in the measurement process (Poisson shot noise) relative to that of fine-grained film. At the level of the relationship between the brightness of the scene and the brightness of the final image, both film and digital act similarly when it comes to ISO. Higher ISO is both brighter and noisier for both types of cameras. And the reason they are so similar is that both film and digital use an amplification process (chemical amplification in film, electronic amplification in digital) to convert microscopic photons into a macroscopic effect.

02-02-2020, 07:54 AM	#94
Aaron28 Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Huntsville, Al Posts: 7,131	Originally posted by GUB it makes sense to try a -EV more often than not it gets set at -0.5 to -1.0 so I will not have much 'wiggle' room btw these are the failed images i'm referring to

02-02-2020, 12:44 PM	#95
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Why do you feel her head is too light? Have you already pulled it back in post processing and are aware detail is lost there? Nice shots.

02-02-2020, 04:41 PM	#96
Aaron28 Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Huntsville, Al Posts: 7,131	Originally posted by GUB Nice shots. thanks! Originally posted by GUB Why do you feel her head is too light? Have you already pulled it back in post processing and are aware detail is lost there? it's more her face skin not hair that's too bright but she's right under that light......tried a mask in post but it got wonky as hell....my skills are quite limited plus it's also a jpeg may get to fool with the raw after I go through the many others and try again

02-02-2020, 05:20 PM - 1 Like	#97
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Originally posted by Aaron28 thanks! it's more her face skin not hair that's too bright but she's right under that light......tried a mask in post but it got wonky as hell....my skills are quite limited plus it's also a jpeg may get to fool with the raw after I go through the many others and try again I just downloaded into Gimp and yes the top of the forehead is just at clipping. (I say just at because I never got a dropper value with 100 in all channels.) I know this is not a critique post but try cloning out the green bokeh in front off her face. Doing so calms the sense of brightness in that area and increasing the link with the bokeh girl in the background which I presume is an integral part of your work.

02-02-2020, 05:41 PM	#98
Aaron28 Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Huntsville, Al Posts: 7,131	Originally posted by GUB I know this is not a critique post but try cloning out the green bokeh in front off her face. Doing so calms the sense of brightness in that area and increasing the link with the bokeh girl in the background which I presume is an integral part of your work. appreciate that GUB.....I did pull back green a touch 'globally' on the curve table but it never occurred to me that the green had an effect on her face since it was in the background but the diffuse glow from it sure does.....thanks for the insight

02-02-2020, 06:27 PM	#99
GUB Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Wanganui Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,760	Originally posted by Aaron28 appreciate that GUB.....I did pull back green a touch 'globally' on the curve table but it never occurred to me that the green had an effect on her face since it was in the background but the diffuse glow from it sure does.....thanks for the insight Just to clarify - it is not actually affecting her face, but our viewing eye seeing the two bright areas there and they affect us.

02-02-2020, 07:44 PM	#100
Aaron28 Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Huntsville, Al Posts: 7,131	Originally posted by GUB it is not actually affecting her face, but our viewing eye seeing the two bright areas there and they affect us. yes thanks!