[biz-engineer]

Sharing articles worth reading from lensrental blog:
Lens Rentals | Blog
Lens Rentals | Blog

[Jlesalvignol]

«*Photons are like raindrops*»

Excellent!

[texandrews]

Well, it's Jim Kasson. Not only an optical engineer, but also the best photographer with an engineering background whose work I've seen, with a keen aesthetic that he spreads over several genres.

[GUB]

Quite a smug feeling when a smart guy like this echoes your own technique perfectly !
The only thing is how dangerously you are prepared to push that histo to the right.
But isn't this incorrect information for Canon owners? using Base iso ?

Attached Images

 

[biz-engineer]

Quite a smug feeling when a smart guy like this echoes your own technique perfectly !The only thing is how dangerously you are prepared to push that histo to the right.

If the goal is to minimize noise, then ETTR is the conventional approach.
I'd have a different and original take on this. Doing a lot of image stitching, or multi-exposures, for enhanced resolution, or enhanced depth of field. I'd say: expose for the moving parts of the composition (which may also involve a specific exposure time), and then take the time to bracket exposures for the remaining static parts of the composition. ETTR will reduce noise, but how will ETTR fit with the objective of the picture:
- will ETTR reduce noise where it matters the most?
- will ETTR produce intended depth of field and shutter speed effects?

[GUB]

I'd have a different and original take on this. Doing a lot of image stitching, or multi-exposures, for enhanced resolution, or enhanced depth of field. I'd say: expose for the moving parts of the composition (which may also involve a specific exposure time), and then take the time to bracket exposures for the remaining static parts of the composition. ETTR will reduce noise, but how will ETTR fit with the objective of the picture:

If you look at the screenshot of his review above you can see on the third row that he has prioritised shutter speed over dogged ETTR as you are suggesting.
And I like the way in this approach how your settings become grounded in the subjects requirements rather than just a function of adding up to a correct exposure.
Also the simplicity of having just 2 variables rather than iso as a third.

[biz-engineer]

Also the simplicity of having just 2 variables rather than iso as a third.

Exactly. ISO is only a calculation. The amount of light energy captured by the sensor is a function of lens aperture and how long the shutter is open. Setting exposure time as a function of SR also increases image quality.

[GUB]

Exactly. ISO is only a calculation.

Using iso as a variable is further complicated by having to add in EV adjustments in post processing as part of the noise regime.
With the above iso invariant approach one glance at the histogram and you have a total noise calculation - so simple.

[hjoseph7]

Sharing articles worth reading from lensrental blog:
Lens Rentals | Blog
Lens Rentals | Blog

Good to know, but reading that very complicated article is not going to make you a better photographer. If you have to calculate all those things before you take a shot, you will have missed it. Better to practice, practice, practice until things like zones and EC(exposure compensation) become natural...

[photoptimist]

It's interesting that the article said that the rule of thumb for film was to “expose for the shadows, develop for the highlights.” That makes sense given the physics of print film (which provides decent latitude for both under- and over-exposure) and the chemistry of film development (which needs regulation to prevent obliterating detail in the highlights).

In contrast, ETTR is essentially “expose for the highlights, develop for the shadows.” That makes sense given the physics of digital camera sensors (which are very unforgiving of over-exposure but can offer as much as a dozen stops of latitude in the shadows). Digital image "development" cannot recover a blown highlight but it can boost and de-noise a dark shadow.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

Good to know, but reading that very complicated article is not going to make you a better photographer. If you have to calculate all those things before you take a shot, you will have missed it.

But it may help you in taking a photograph with a better exposure. None of the calculations are needed prior to taking the shot. You really only need to know how your camera operates, the 3 biggies are how much headroom you have, how WB for a given illuminate alters your cameras histogram and how iso invariant your sensors is

Knowing just these 3 things can be done on the fly rather easily and can be adapted to most areas of photography

[GUB]

If you have to calculate all those things before you take a shot

What extra things do you have to calculate?.
As a photographer you should have a knowledge of the shutter and its implications and the aperture and its implications. If you don't because you have been leaving it to the camera then it is a stretch to call yourself a photographer.