If you would like my free guide to capturing motion in low light situations just look for the orange box over on the website, put your name, emails address in it, hit send it and I will send you my Free Guide to Capturing Light In Low Light Situations. froknowsphoto.com/the-secret-to-sharp-images/
@@laurenabk4782 In the video Jared recommended underexposing the image by one stop because he didn't want to go above 4000-5000 ISO and then he would recover the rest in post. Auto ISO would most likely set you at about 8000-10000 ISO and for most cameras (even high end) that is almost unusable range. It's better to be in control of your settings, especially when the lighting conditions are staying consistent and you can keep your settings the same. There's also a lot of other variables that can affect your AutoISO metering that could gives you inconsistent results. Ultimately, you need to know how far you can push your camera while out shooting and in post. That way you can make smarter decisions while on location.
I have to say Jared, this is one of your best videos. You took a complicated issue, simplified it, and educated your viewers like a good teacher would. Kudos, best video I've seen all day.
He gave the rational so no need to nitpick. once you get the factors and their influence you can move the settings up and down and watch your screen and then adjust accordingly. the point is not 1/320 or 1/500 the point is seeing the screen and fixing your exposure before getting back home.
Or just accept that not every image has to be free of any noise and suitable for extreme professional paid use cases. Maybe we just make videos only tailored to people who can afford D850s or 5D4s?
johan bauwens Oh I certainly think there's a place where limitations come in and your advice needs to be taken. If you want printable professional results, you are going to have to gear up for it
Being recently retired from 42+ years of computer programming, your use of the Exposure Triangle and the associated logical math involved to get the shot as close a possible in camera prior to post is the main reason I started following you and buying your videos. You were the first , and so far only person, who employed logic to getting it as close as possible in camera. Thank you. PS -- I really missed not having the Raw Talk fix from last week but understand feces occurs as well as multiple "Nor-Easters'.
This was a very useful video. I'm a dinosaur who was a newspaper photographer in the 70's and generally have used digital cameras only as convenience tools for snapshots in recent years, making mild corrections using the built-in photo editor n Windows.. To be honest, I didn't really understand what Lightroom or Photoshop were for. Now I get it, at least partially. It looks to me like you are getting your last stop of light electronically using a computer program, like we used to get ours with chemicals when we "pushed" our film. Correct? I can't get over the fact that modern digital cameras can be set to ISO 6400 or even higher, and can shoot at 10 frames per second. When I think about us shooting basketball with thumb-wind Nikon F's loaded with Tri-X and doing manual focus, I wonder how we brought home any images at all, much less enough to run one or two keepers in the paper every day. I'd love to go back in time with a modern DSLR and a good lens and see some of the old photographer's reactions to it. I remember guys who were still using TLRs back then.
Modern pro basketball photographers are still using stadium strobes, and alot of remote triggered cameras. Strobe still takes time to recycle so 10fps useless. Other than loading film, there not much difference to how it was shot with film cameras 20 years ago
@@alvareo92 I interned for a pro photographer who was the official photographer for the Clippers when they were in San Diego. Mike Chin is correct He hung large strobes in the rafters and triggered them electronically. Since the strobes were so powerful and fast around 1/800 second there was no reason to "push" the film.
This is a great video. I can’t tell you how self conscious I am when it comes to shooting action in low light and inevitably having to deal with noise in my images. Especially when it seems everyone else is shooting these clean/pristine photos. Glad and relieved to know I’m not crazy!
I came (back) here because I'm shooting an event in low light in a couple days. It's not sports so I'll likely set my camera on aperture priority. This was a great refresher since I've been lazy, shooting with my iPhone for most of my photos these past 2 years. I know the principles but the way you ran through this in this video realigned my mind quickly. Great job Jared, thanks so much!
Well done video, helped me with my manual settings so much I built a chart I carry that compares ISO, SS and Aperture starting at High Noon Sunny Day F16, ISO 100 and 1/125 (10,000 fc) down to very dimly lit room (10 fc) and surprised to discover these two scenes are only 10 light stops apart. I can now estimate exposure quickly and then rock in by 1/2 and 1/3 stops. Thanks.
I'd just like to point out that it depends on the camera - some more expensive full frame cameras have near perfect ISO invariance, meaning it doesn't impact the photo much to increase the ISO vs increasing the exposure in post. I believe the Pentax K-1 and Nikon D750 are some examples of ISO invariant cameras.
I just got a camera a few days ago and since then, I'm watching all your videos. I must say, this video made me finally understand the aperture/shutter speed/iso connection and how to work around a problem. Thank you for this. Brilliant.
The best tip in here was setup your camera fully, the light doesn't change. As many have said pushing the photo later will likely produce the same results as exposing correctly in camera due to iso invariance. I don't think underexposing slightly will help much with noise on most new cameras, however it may help guard against blown highlights. Adding more light, getting a faster lens or larger sensor all weigh in heavily towards a better result. Also filling the frame with your subject, spot on focus and smooth subject tracking and finding the absolute minimum shutter speed you can get away with.
Just a quick story for some encouragement for anyone struggling with learning photography, or did not understand this video: I fell in love with photography about a month-and-a-half ago, and I saw this video about a month ago for the first time, and I was so lost. I have watched many, many videos to learn about photography, and have read many articles too. My knowledge has increased exponentially (all free, because of RUclips and photography websites), and, thanks be to God, I now understand what Jarred is saying in this video! It's truly amazing. :D I really didn't think I would ever come to know photography. Fall in love with something, or someone, and you will care. Keep at it, folks. :)
Thank you! Thank you! For saying that the light is the light and not really changing. I shoot a lot of youth hockey and have migrated from auto ISO to full manual with great results. So often we forget that it’s all about the light first. Then the triangle is all about the environment.
very nicely done, Jared. 1/500 f2.8 ISO 5000 is what I would go with, as you pointed out. With some proper post editing the photographer can get a good image. I do a lot of low light shooting myself. I'm the house photographer at a music club in New York. I started with a couple of crop sensor bodies but eventually moved to full frame. I think for low light full frame is pretty much a necessity. As you know it handles high ISO much better. Excellent video!
This is Jared's genius at full power. There are a lot of really good photography youtube channels but very few rise to the level of actual output that Jared executes. His photos are killer! Others are good for sure, but Jared takes images that connect - then he takes the time to help us learn how to do the same. Understanding theory is one thing (and important) but the artistry is what sets photographers apart, and Jared has both at master levels.
honestly, out of all your vids that I have seen this is the best. It is a problem that I think a lot of people have and you were able to teach the method that would get rid of that issue in a simple form, as well as teaching a "cheat" to the system when it would maybe not be possible to follow perfectly. Thanks for this one!
Unless I'm way off in my technology and physics knowledge you could as well have increased the ISO another 0.875 stops (to 9375 or whatever the closest amount the camera allows) and have the same result. As far as I know you are doing the same thing in post production, simply adding gain. You only have to watch out for clipping highlights. Underexposing in camera and bringing back in post should theoretically get the same results as increasing the camera gain (ISO) the same amount.
I shoot with a Nikon D750 with a F2.8 and those numbers are spot on with little to no adjustments, in an "Arena" lighting, pro basketball. Incandescent lights flickr so that is my challenge, shooting in 3+ multiples & all are slightly diff in color
Just bought my first camera today and this video gave me an understanding of how to set my aperture, shutter speed, and iso to adjust to different lighting conditions. None of the other videos made sense until I saw this! thanks alot I seriously apprechiate it
It's been over five years and still learning new things from you all the time. What would have happened if you just lowered the shutter speed to 1/500 second and kept the same ISO and aperture??
shadyninja1 it would be over 2 stops of light off which is still a bit for postprocessing. One stop of light is from 1/800 to 1/400 but with 1/500 thats 75% difference out of full 100% to gain one stop of light. So about 2.25 stops of light off (still noticeably dark and minimal improvement)
Too be fair, that would've not made much difference with Jared's solution. Increasing the exposure during the post-processing afterwards would have the (almost) same effect as changing the ISO during the shot. I'm basing of the recent discussions of what ISO actually does (bumping up exposure in pre-processing is not too different to increasing ISO during shooting in low light scenarios). Sources: photographylife.com/iso-invariance-explained and ruclips.net/video/QVuI89YWAsw/видео.html and note: not everyone is agreeing on this.
Thanks man. I'm shooting another swim meet for my daughter's high school. The photos turned out "okay" last time but it took a lot of post work. Probably more than it should. The lighting at the natatorium is total crap. This has helped immensely. I was trying get the perfect exposure. Now I'm comfortable being 1 or 2 stops off.
Jared, it’s great to see you finally do a short tutorial of types and especially about this subject. I myself have been having the exact same issue photographing my son’s baseball games that just started for the season. Thank you for the tut and keep ‘em coming, we need more tuts!! Thanks!
I totally agree with Jared. I've encountered a lot of these issues since I started shooting films, especially B&W. Taking that knowledge to this modern technology, I admit Jared's thoughts will be very helpful to newbies and photography enthusiasts.
Basketball at the high school and college level can be a pretty fast-paced sport. Using a shutter speed slower than 1/800-second to capture more light will reduce noise in the image...but at a cost. Rather than capturing the athletes frozen in mid-motion, the slower shutter speed may add too much blur for your liking. As Jared states, you're f-stop isn't getting any faster than f/2.8 so, that's locked in. Use pre-game warmups to make some test exposures to select the slowest shutter speed that adequately freezes the action. I think the choice of 1/800 was probably solid. 1/500 would be too slow for my taste...but that's a personal choice. With your shutter speed and f-stop set, your exposure is set. Regardless of the ISO you use, you're not capturing any more light or adding more noise. You've got a couple of options for managing ISO when shooting sports. One, is to use the pre-game test exposures to select an ISO and lock that in. Another option, is to shoot manual (shutter speed and aperture) plus auto-ISO. The reason you might choose to go with auto-ISO is the possibility of inconsistent lighting in the venue. The light level on the court will be consistent at professional and top tier college/high school arenas. It's not uncommon for there to be inconsistent light at lower tier college/high school venues. During pre-game, ceck the lighting from the 3-4 locations you're most likely to use during the game. If lighting is consistent, do as Jared suggests and lock in an ISO. If it's inconsistent, use auto-ISO to allow your camera to adjust to a darker area. Keep in mind that adjusting brightness in Lightroom (or your image editing app of choice) is basically the same as using a different ISO in the field. You're not changing exposure. That's set when you choose the shutter speed and f-stop for the shoot. Whether adjusting ISO or "Exposure Comp" in Lightroom, all you're doing is changing post-exposure brightening. If you're not happy with the visibility of noise, there are tools in Lightroom that can mitigate this. In the Develop module, go to the Detail panel and increase "Masking" in the Sharpening tool. If you press the Alt button while adjusting the "Masking" slider, more of the image will look dark as you increase masking. The dark areas won't be sharpened. Increase the mask until the out-of-focus background is black and only the featured athlete is outlined in white. Adding this mask should reduce the visibility of noise in the background and lower the visibility of noise a skosh on your subject. It's a useful tool to de-emphasize noise in photos that, by their nature, don't capture an abundance of light.
I know this was posted forever ago, but I wanted to add on for anybody that could still benefit. What Bill is saying is very useful and correct... however, when saying that bumping the exposure in Lightroom in post production is essentially the same as boosting ISO in the field, that statement is only accurate for most Nikon/Sony users, not for most Canon users. Nikon/Sony sensors tend to be fairly ISO invariant (some say ISO-less, meaning that taking the image at ISO 100 and bumping it 3 stops in post would result in essentially the same product as taking the image at ISO 800 in the field). However, Canon sensors (in my research and experience) are generally NOT ISO invariant. The 5D Miii specifically is the furthest from ISO invariant I've ever seen, in that the increased voltage on the hardware produces a significantly cleaner image than one bumped in post production at a later time. You should be able to research your individual camera (or the one you're wanting to buy) to find if it is ISO invariant or not. So, Canon users, make sure you're getting the exposure right out of camera. Nikon/Sony users, you have a lot more leeway.
@@RobTiff0818 I'm still figuring this out myself but my experience so far on my 6Dii matches what you're saying. I got much better results letting the camera increased the ISO than trying to crank up exposure in Lightroom. Camera noise drives me crazy but there doesn't seem to be a free lunch option here without adding more light to the subject. I was just shooting kids playing basketball at 1/250th and it wasn't that bad, but I was going to go up to 1/500th the next time I try. Honestly, if I could get away with f/4 that would probably help with focus but that is probably not realistic so I'll stick to 2.8.
@@RichFreeman yes, the 6Dii is definitely not an ISO invariant sensor. The ISO invariant point on the 6Dii is apparently around ISO 3200 (in other words, you benefit from using the hardware ISO up through ISO 3200, but anything higher than that would be the same as boosting in post.) Fortunately, there's not a lot of advantage of ISO inariance in practical use in dark environments. The real benefit is the ability to expose for highlights and pull back the shadows to the same quality as if you exposed for the shadows (where you wouldn't be able to bring back the blown out highlights). The only advantage in a dark room (of ISO invariance) is brightening up in post if you under exposed. If you're having trouble exposing in a dark room (because the screen looks brighter, and you usually can't tell until you pull it up on your screen) just check your histogram. And finally, noise in indoor basketball photos is to be expected. Especially at a young age. It doesn't bother anybody as much as the photographer. So don't fret. But I would DEFINITELY try to shoot at at least 1/500 shutter. It's worth the noise to not have the motion blur. (unless that's the style you're going for...)
@@scrumpoxjnr You generally won't find a zoom faster than f/2.8. You could of course shoot with a prime, but if you're shooting sports that probably means a lot of cropping or missed shots, which isn't ideal.
I have been round and round with this topic and was extremely frustrated about my images from a recent evening soccer match. Tried again after watching your video and I have some shots I'm extremely proud of. Thank you!
Hi, Jared! Thanks for the video. This is one of the best videos I've seen in a while. I came here looking for a solution regarding the noise in my photos, for my Cropped Sensor Camera (an old Fuji X-T1) which I'll have to use it (as a favor to a friend) at a wedding, next week . I do not own a flash for it, and I don't wanna invest in one, just for this future event (I'm a landscape and street shooter, so a flash for me is not yet a priority) . Therefore, your advice is priceless for me, especially that I don't have to shoot indoors at very fast shutter speeds, just like the Photographer from your example . Thanks again and have a nice day!
THIS has been the best most informative video I ever seen on low lighting. The concept of "stops" and using shutter speed, ISO and Aperture to balance to find the best exposure was awesome. You just took a magical game and applied math to solve the issue. I'm an engineer, I'm a master a math. THIS i can do !
Thorough breakdown! At what point would you say its generally better (in terms of minimizing grain and noise) to go ahead and raise the ISO, instead of bringing it back in post?
From my experience getting a good exposure in camera is always better than underexposing and bringing it back in post. The “grain”/ imperfections due to “bringing back” an underexposed image in post is worse than grain from high iso (in my opinion). :) I’d say, personally, as Jared said, if you’re off by more than one stop raise the iso 👍 also bare in mind Lightroom/ photoshop have really sophisticated noise removal software. I know many photographers hate that. But it’s an option to consider if you really can’t stand the grain
Depends on the camera, sony, Nikon, and fuji cameras are largely "iso invariant" meaning you get identical results brightening in post. Canon cameras suck at this.
It largely depends on what kind of camera you have, and if it's considered to be ISO invariant (you can google if yours is or not). For example, I have a Nikon D750, which is considered to be ISO invariant. Let's assume I can take a photo at, say, 1/800 f2.8 ISO 3200 and properly expose my shot. I can also achieve the same image quality (in terms of grain and noise) if I use 1/800 f2.8 ISO 800 and later raise the exposure in post. In fact, there may be reasons why I choose to do this on purpose - and one such reason would be to retain highlight details (a night scene with some neon signs for example). I could raise the exposure in my shot on only the areas I wanted (leaving the bright signs alone) and get a semi-HDR like image.
Thanks Jared for this workflow. It indeed helps to look into and mix each of the 3 variables. I'm currently photographing stage music bands in summer evening festivals. I use an EOS 90D and the same 24-70mm lens from Tamron. There too, flash is not allowed. I always presume that I can fix noise and sharpness in post with e.g. Photo AI. I also think that using the latgest aperture of a lens is risky, especially as the lens sweet spot is usually at a higher f value. Also, you have to make for the microphone and other instruments in front of the mouth. You have some space for lower shutter speed, i.e. if they do not shake too much with their dancing moves. I might start with Aperture priority when the light is still fine, and evaluates the result. Then I switch to Manual with Auto (but limited) ISO. Settings (especially the shutter speed) depend on the zoom and the APS-C crop factor as well. I end up photographing at around 1/250, f/5, ISO 100-6400. It might be useful to address this with a follow-up video on this one, isn't it?
ironically I had came across this situation last night.. I had less action so I did go down to 1/100 of sec, f4 @ minimal ISO and did okay... somehow one of my shots the speed got moved up to 1/250 and came out a little grainier than I liked. Thanks.. this video is so handy and it reminds us of the basics..
Fro...I like a lot of what you say, but there is NO WAY to "cheat the system" to get less noise in the image. I've shot 1000's of indoor high school sports photos, which, because of poor high school gym lighting, is, IMHO, the hardest place to shoot sports photos (OK, night high school football games are right up there). There's only three things a person can do...buy a faster lens, buy a camera with the next larger sensor size (or a more modern, and probably better sensor of the same size (if your APS-C camera is 5 years old, get a new one...check the "low light - sports scores" at DXO Mark), or get better noise reduction software. That's it...there are NO shortcuts. Shutter speed... HAS to be high...esp when using focal lengths of, say 100mm or higher...the more zoomed the image is, the more camera shake will be an issue AND of course a person is ALSO trying to freeze the action. All that said, 1/800th is a minimum (perhaps at wide angles that can be reduced to 1/500th...maybe). Because if there's motion blur in the image from too low a shutter speed, the image is tossed out no matter how well noise was controlled. Believe me, I've tried to eek out a 1/2 stop here or there to fight noise...slowing the shutter down is a bad idea...unless the action is slow, and/or the focal length is wide...then MAYBE 1/500th will be OK. Focal ratio... As fast as possible, anything slower than 2.8 is pretty much worthless. I shot with an 85/1.8 and 135/2 for a while...that helped. ISO... With the above two set, use whatever ISO you have to to get proper exposure. Like you said, you could under expose some to try to reduce noise, but really, when you raise the exposure in post so the image looks properly exposed, the noise is gonna come right back. I think this is what reviewers call "ISO invariant sensors"...the noise is there no matter the ISO a person uses in the actual exposure, as when the image is brought to proper exposure in post, the noise makes itself known. Shooting indoor high school sports is VERY hard on a camera...which means it's expensive to get really good images...full frame sensor, fast glass, and good noise reduction software (DXO's "prime" noise reduction, is IMHO, the best out there).
Exactly. This is one of the most challenging shooting situations. The D500 is fairly ISO invariant, so setting the ISO to 4000 is pretty much the same as raising a stop in post. Lowering the shutter speed is fine. But that noise is going to be there at that ISO with aps-c. To get a stop and a half of light back, full frame is the way to go.
Agree. I shoot flag football in FL at schools with 4 stadium lights and hot spots at the 35 yard line and darkness in the end zone. I use a 6D, 70-200. I have tried f4 when I started years ago but now know that aint happening. I do get away with 640ss at times (game speed is slower than tackle football) but 800ss and that ISO cranked is the low edge I can do unless I want to drop $10 grand. Perfectly said. Thanks
I couldn't agree more, hopefully many read the comments. I don't shoot sports but do shoot live musicians all the time in beyond poor light with no flash allowed, buying a better camera and gear helped immensely. Cameras vary though how they work in regards to iso and noise, with my sony A7 the voltage applied across the sensor changes at somewhere around 640 iso so often I'll bump up to that rather than use 400 or 500, etc. Don't underestimate the skill of the photographer as well in panning along with the subject or following action smoothly, surprised Jared didn't talk about image stablization.
Great video. I had to use flash back in film days when shooting indoor HS basketball games for local papers. All manual film cameras, manual flash. Somehow we made it work..
If you play with Sharpening and Luminance in Lightroom it can really help with the grain and noise. I have a formula that works with my Canon’s and Fuji’s. I shoot a great deal of unit photography and DP’s are lighting their sets with less intensity than they did 10 years ago due to the better sensors in the high end studio cameras. Great for them but not great for still photographers so when I shoot indoors I have to live with high ISO’s. Good tip to tell people to learn to shoot manual and always in RAW. I rarely shoot with an on camera flash but when I do I never use TTL. I always shoot it in the manual mode.
"Now this is what i call cheating the system, i like to cheat the system" Subbed!!! The info in this vid alone will up your photography game regardless of camera system.First vid i've watched of yours and it's pricless,Thank you.
Good video! My experience, when in low light, you are going to produce grain. The most you can do is mitigate it. Learning the tradeoffs in settings is absolutely key. As a photographer in crappy lighting conditions, you can't be afraid of using iso. The parts I agree with. Manual settings, the selected numbers, and shooting RAW The part I disagreed with. Shooting sports less than f/2.8. Again, it's all about tradeoffs. If an 85mm f/1.8 is available to use, that is 1 stop of light just by lens selection, which is in a focal range that is probably being used anyway. Sure, you sacrifice some DOF, but that's the tradeoff. To get a 3/4 body shot at 70-85 mm from the baseline, I bet you are a good 15-20 feet away (for a teen/adult). At that distance and setting focal length to 85mm, going from f/2.8 to f/1.8 only sacrifices about half a foot of DOF, but you get one of your stops of light back, without sacrificing precious iso or shutter speed. Question, what about "exposing to the right"? Use a higher iso/f stop to intentionally over expose then correct in post. Like in your example, shoot at iso 8000 and 1/500 s, especially if you can use f/1.8.
If you're using an ISO invariant camera, there is theoretically no IQ disadvantage to shooting at low ISO and boosting it in post. Going from 1/800 to 1/500th is clawing back 2/3rd of a stop at the expense of not freezing the action quite as much. You could have stopped there. The rest won't affect IQ. The advantage of getting closer in camera is less work in post. These days you can get that back by editing one image and applying exposure edits to the rest. So it's not that big a deal. Whether 1/500th would have cut it would depend on how fast the action is. If you're getting blur, you might be better off staying at 1/800th and keeping the noise over the motion. To improve the IQ further you really have to start taking control of noise and sharpening when you're shooting in low light and the exposure requires you boost or use high ISO. What you need to do is going to depend on how you're using the final image. It'll be different for print, vs small screen (social media) vs large digital display. Pixel peeping is useful for getting that output to its best but no one is going to sit next to you while you zoom 1:1 at the computer.
Hahaha i look your video's so much and my kids if they hear the starting sounds of the clip they go like "Fro Knows Photooooooooo" hahahaha and sometimes i say it and then they say STOOP DADYYY STTOOOPPP ahhahahahaha so funny 😆
What would be the difference between shooting the photo at 8000iso and shooting at 5000 and bringing it back in post? Would these not grant the same results or very similar?
DarksteelTV I can understand that there would be a difference in this between sensors but for the most part would it not just be applied gain same as iso? Both are happening after the image is captured and both are using the same data to change exposure.
Depends on camera... I love ETTR but if you're raising the iso you're loosing DR, so if you need DR then lower the iso (if you have an iso invariant sensor). So really there should be 2 different versions of this depending on your sensor.
Well done! A clear example of problem solving. And maybe an example of why pros shoot full frame, with a bigger dynamic range to allow shooting at higher ISOs.
No guys! Jared actually made a mistake. The camera used was a D750. Even if you use the SD card in two different cameras, that does not affect the exif data for Lightroom. Lightroom reads the exif directly from the file, regardless if the card was put in multiple cameras. I also own the D750, and it is a magnificent camera in low light, but the problem here was, as Jared mentioned, that the image was underexposed 3 stops of light, which is too much to recover noise free in Lightroom, even for the D750.
raduionut78 God point, but as he talked about what he should've done instead, for example that the ISO should not go up to 8000. But you have a point about the 3 stops, its hard to recover exposure.
I'm new to photography.. for a long time I was a point and shoot guy. Decided to by my first real camera.. (by real I mean something other then a point and shoot.) Purchased a Cannon eos m50. I am currently in a photography class and so far I'm pretty happy with my camera choice.. (except for the shitty battery life.) I have been watching alot you your videos... I would like to thank you for your video blogs.. they are a huge help.. keep those videos coming..
Isn't the d500 iso invariant? If that's the case, shoot at 8000 iso, it will look the same as "cheating the system" and you'll have better highlights out of camera.
Yep, the D500 is essentially ISO invariant, so if somebody is manually locking in the shutter and aperture speed, the ISO setting on the camera doesn't matter.... as long as one is using the RAW file. www.dpreview.com/news/4939144988/nikon-d500-studio-and-dynamic-range-tests-published
Michael Chandler - Cliff note version... there is no difference in noise if you brighten a photo in post rather than increasing your ISO in-camera. So in this case you will have the same amount of noise if shot at 8000 iso as you would if you shot at 4000 iso and corrected exposure in post. I'd shoot it right in camera.
Thanks! Your comment sent me down the rabbit hole and I learned something new and developed a deeper understanding into why I was having success exposing to the right so not to clip the highlights and using correction for the shadows on my D850.
Hi Jared, yes, everything make sense to me. Very helpfull..so from now on (cause I never done this) I will make sure I'll do the right thing. Being big fan of you're posts is motiveting me to improve my photos...cause I love to learn from the professionals. Thank you for that. Have a good day.
Jared, why would you want to underexposed when it has been proven over and over that underexposing for ISO produces more noise and grain then just raising the ISO in camera to match a proper or even slightly over exposed value and then lowering in post? When dealing with a lowlight beast like the D500 or similar camera where 6400-8000 ISO are not only native but also relatively clean, why would you not want to preserve the best capabilities? It seems your logic is just a slight improvement over the fear people have to actually shoot the proper ISO for the best result.
TheTechnoPilot thats a broad statement. It can do this. But as you said it,it is untrue. My a7s produces the same noise whether i brighten up any file from 3200 onwards, or use Something like12800-51200 right away
Assume D500 has iso invariant sensor, changing ISO won't affect noise level. It all depends on how much light hit the sensor. In this case, the shutter speed and aperture were set and can't let more lights coming in, so bump up ISO should be the same by pull up exposure in LR.
You can try it with your camera(if it's ISO invariant), really interesting. Keep shutter speed and aperture the unchanged, and use different ISO to take multiple shoots. Using LR to match the exposure, you will find the noise level is identical.
Cool! I take a lot of "low light" shots of figure skaters for our club using my EOS 7Dmkii. I keep thinking about a full Frame, but really like how the 70-200 f/2.8 gives me 300 mm of reach down the rink on a crop sensor. Not so great when they are close, but . . . . Anyway, after much experimentation, I settled on a slightly different approach because skaters are often under spotlights that can create blow out reflections off the ice, and skin. What I do is set my camera to manual, with shutter somewhere around 1/400th and aperture a click smaller than 2.8 (might be 3.2). I dial in a -1 stop exposure compensation to give me a bit more contrast, and turn the ISO to automatic. I then lock those settings with the slider on the camera and let the camera do the work. It works great!
I never knew that, lol. I still watch live clips in amazement and sheer listening joy of Jimi and his lineups, even just informal jam sessions seem other worldly. I think Billy Cox played with him too and of course Mitch Mitchell always on drums, another great musician. I don't want to sound like an old fart and say new music sucks, I love a lot of it and go to live shows all the time but when it comes to guitar something about Jimi is just in another room all together for me and sacred.
Thanks Jared! I went from a D7000 to a D850 this past week. I panicked when I realized there was no sports mode. But I put it on Shutter Priority and set my shutter at 500 and got acceptable, recoverable results with ZERO motion blur. I was proud of myself. After watching this vid I want to try full manual next time and bump the iso. I appreciate your videos.
Wie heißt es immer so schön lieber ein verrauschtes Bild als gar keins. Und am Ende des Tages stört das Bildeauschen meist eh nur den Fotografen selbst, Leute die nicht aus der Fotografie kommen stören sich daran so gut wie nicht, also kann man auch ruhig mal etwas am ISO Schrauben. Zumindest ist das meine Erfahrung
Genau so ist es. Und zum Thema deutsch, ich habe einen deutschsprachigen Kanal über Fotografie. Wenn also nun ein deutscher dieses Video sieht und dann auf einen deutschen Kanal stößt schaut er vielleicht mal vorbei. Es ist also eine Art der Schleichwerbung nur nicht zu offensichtlich 😜 Und ein paar mal haben auch größere englischsprachige Kanäle trotzdem geantwortet 😉
Hey Jared, a suggestion for this gentleman. I used to use a pair of zoom's for basketball (24-70 under the basket and 70-200 for mid court and far basket) both of which were f/2.8 lenses. At some point I began to think about the distances involved when sitting under the basket, did the computations for 35 and 50 mm lens and realized a 50 mm f/1.8 would work great. The 50mm lens has a great field of view under the basket while still maintaining a shallow depth of field and you can shoot at f/2.0 to gain a complete stop. I also use an 85mm f/1.4 (set at f/2) if I am out on the corners. The best news - you can buy a Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8 on eBay (used) for under $100. Gaining a stop in these conditions is a lot!
Wouldn't it be better to just crank the ISO another stop? That's what you're doing in editing, isn't it? Even with an ISO invariant camera, cranking it after the fact isn't any cleaner than just exposing properly in the first place
had the same problem, fixed it about the same way but I shoot at 320, getting the ball a bit blurry is not that bad I think if it makes your pictures better. Great video, wish it was there when I started shooting basket !
Outdoors obviously, day or night and in all weather conditions. I was stating that you can easily capture a sharp person with a slower shutter than 1/500.
I wouldn't be so sure and that's why: f-16 are bigger and easier to track than some erratic movement from different players in action. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its impossible, but you would constantly have arms or legs or both in motion and maybe that's not what you're looking for. A plane doesn't have a lot of moving parts....
E.g. When photographing racing cars or motorbikes you may go with a 1/600 because it's ok to see the wheels spin. For a perfectly still footballer (plus the ball) you may need 1/1250 if they're close to you. The speed of the object is not everything
FrancescoScaccianoce agreed, as someone who shoots a lot of burlesque, I'll go as low as 1/250 for a slow act, but one in which the performers are truly moving needs 1/500 to get sharp photos especially in hair.
Thanks for all of the great info in your videos and guides. To start, I'm a super noob. Like, I borrowed my wife's old 6D, and bought a 100-400mm lens to shoot football. It was my first season, and it was quite the learning experience. Now, I'm shooting basketball for a high school and local college. I was having the same problems here. I brought up the exposure in post, but I felt like I was sacrificing sharpness for lower noise, or visa versa. I know that I should probably not use my 100-400, and get a 70-200, but I don't get paid for this stuff and well, it's expensive. I'll likely have a 70-200 by next volleyball season, but for now this video helps me a lot with my 100-400. It won't be perfect, but it will be better. Thanks a ton
YUP, I'm pretty sure I alluded to that in the video. The secret is know what you're doing. Clickbait YES 100 percent chose the title to make people click it so they CAN LEARN. I rather have you tell me I used a clickbait title because you saw it then have no one see it because it had a title called "how to expose your photo".
TruBBQtv John Foley - I am a beginner..... it’s awareness to guys like me . I am happy you are at a higher level, kudos. With vids like these, Hoping to reduce the learning curve, THANK YOU 🙏 JARED !
It's almost like every photographer out there is an expert and doesn't need to learn anything!? Amazing! Seriously though, this was interesting and helpful for me as a beginner so thank you Jared for your click bait :)
You're missing the point if you want Jared's lesson to be something OTHER than correctly exposing the photo. What did you think the answer would be? Magic beans? Using a flash? lol. The whole point is Jared teaches you how to get correct exposure. If you thought the answer and the process to getting there was going to be different you are a bad photographer in addition to being a know-it-all. Luckily, Jared is neither!
Dude, I know this is an old video but I really love the way you explain shit. I’m just an amateur photographer just getting back to shooting but I want to thank you for the years of great videos!
Jared, This is the best explanation of how to capture more light I have found on RUclips! I am a visual learner so the diagram/table comparing ISO, shutter speed, and aperture adjustments was very helpful to me. Thank you! I have an 8th grade basketball play with many practices, games, HS dances and award ceremonies ahead of me - all of which will be in gyms, auditoriums, and other venues with very high ceilings. Thus, this video is the perfect lesson for me at this stage of my photography hobby. Have a great weekend.
The fact you take time out to help one of your 764k subscribers to help others make their photography better says a lot about you. Thanks for your insights.
Jared, excellent advise. I shoot a lot of basketball in all sorts of gyms. I also talk to many professional photographers that shoot high school basketball for Chicago newspapers. f2.8 is the only aperture used. I try to shoot at 1/1000 but depending on the gym, I might reduce that a little. My principal variable is the ISO. For newspapers or the web, graininess is not too big an issue. Newspaper print quality is not good anyway and small website images look good enough at higher ISOs. I regularly shoot at 3200 ISO but I will go to 4000 or higher if necessary. My typical settings for high school basketball are 1/1000, f2.8, ISO 3200/4000. I have a full frame Canon cameras so ISO performance is pretty good but these setting also work on my Canon 7D which is not full frame. The drawback on the 7D is that the images are a little grainier than on a 1Dx or a 5D mark IV. Nevertheless, the 7D images but still quite usable. When in a new gym, I test the settings by taking images of the players dribbling before the game. If the image catches the ball depressing into the floor with a good exposure, then we are good. And I always plan to bring the RAW photo back a stop in post anyway.
This is a good video! I had some really bad issues with grain and sharpness and overall image quality on my Sony a6000. I did a photoshoot outdoors in the California sun, with my 50mm f1.8, but I was around ISO 200-400, with shutter speeds 1/60-1/120, and everything looks like garbage once I got the on my computer. I was so frustrated, trying to figure out why my photos looked like someone dumped sand on them. They were showing as exposed properly, eye AF was locking on, and the ISO was not even close to being high. Spent months trying to figure out what went wrong. I know it's not the camera, it's the photographer, so I watched every RUclips video on photography and read so many books while sitting on the floor of Barnes & Noble... Finally, I took my camera to Best Buy for warranty repair. The shop said they replaced the sensor and calibrated everything. Now, I'm getting sharper images than ever before. I just wish it took me less than a year to give up hope and realize the camera actually was faulty.
Loved this video. I’m shooting a non-profit event, indoors for free to build a portfolio. I’m using a Canon Rebel SL3 with a 50mm f/1.8 lens. Now I have a much better understanding of staying in Manual Mode, turning the Ap to f/2.8 because of movement, set the ISO in the 1000-2000 range and just keeping the shutter speed above 1/50.
Great video. Good explanation. One thing noticed. Looking at the Raw image info. The guy was shooting with D750 which is a FF DSLR. Still that much Noise.
Hi, thank you so much for this video. Even if it is fairly old (in RUclips years), it is still very relevant. In fact, not sure if you intend to go back on similar style videos where you get photos from your subscribers to give them your insights on how to address specific problems.
If you would like my free guide to capturing motion in low light situations just look for the orange box over on the website, put your name, emails address in it, hit send it and I will send you my Free Guide to Capturing Light In Low Light Situations. froknowsphoto.com/the-secret-to-sharp-images/
It is very interesting, but my camera max iso is 3200 (with extended iso) :D
Jared Polin thanks Jared. Absolutely fantastic explanation.
GREAT TEACHING. Please what about using 1/800s and f2.8 and auto ISO, would that not also solve the problem?
Артём Байдала if your cameras highest iso is 3200 most likely you don’t have a camera with a good enough fps to stoping action into a picture
@@laurenabk4782 In the video Jared recommended underexposing the image by one stop because he didn't want to go above 4000-5000 ISO and then he would recover the rest in post. Auto ISO would most likely set you at about 8000-10000 ISO and for most cameras (even high end) that is almost unusable range.
It's better to be in control of your settings, especially when the lighting conditions are staying consistent and you can keep your settings the same. There's also a lot of other variables that can affect your AutoISO metering that could gives you inconsistent results.
Ultimately, you need to know how far you can push your camera while out shooting and in post. That way you can make smarter decisions while on location.
"when the light is not changing, dont use aperture priority"....it's good lesson for me. thanks man!
I have to say Jared, this is one of your best videos. You took a complicated issue, simplified it, and educated your viewers like a good teacher would. Kudos, best video I've seen all day.
He gave the rational so no need to nitpick. once you get the factors and their influence you can move the settings up and down and watch your screen and then adjust accordingly. the point is not 1/320 or 1/500 the point is seeing the screen and fixing your exposure before getting back home.
Or just accept that not every image has to be free of any noise and suitable for extreme professional paid use cases. Maybe we just make videos only tailored to people who can afford D850s or 5D4s?
johan bauwens Oh I certainly think there's a place where limitations come in and your advice needs to be taken. If you want printable professional results, you are going to have to gear up for it
Like Jarod said, it's not that bad. It's not fine art, it's a basketball game.
johan bauwens D500 is known for it’s low light and high ISO capability, better than most full frame cameras at it :)
You're always cranking that contrast, lol. Jared's like, "We'll add a little contrast." (cranks it to 70) lol
too fuckin right man!
This 😂
@@Zirwahkrillz BOOMIFY
Well, I think because the image was under-exposed, the contrast smooths out the gain to make it look smoother.
He learned it from Rockwell.
Being recently retired from 42+ years of computer programming, your use of the Exposure Triangle and the associated logical math involved to get the shot as close a possible in camera prior to post is the main reason I started following you and buying your videos. You were the first , and so far only person, who employed logic to getting it as close as possible in camera. Thank you.
PS -- I really missed not having the Raw Talk fix from last week but understand feces occurs as well as multiple "Nor-Easters'.
thanks man!!!
This was a very useful video. I'm a dinosaur who was a newspaper photographer in the 70's and generally have used digital cameras only as convenience tools for snapshots in recent years, making mild corrections using the built-in photo editor n Windows.. To be honest, I didn't really understand what Lightroom or Photoshop were for. Now I get it, at least partially. It looks to me like you are getting your last stop of light electronically using a computer program, like we used to get ours with chemicals when we "pushed" our film. Correct?
I can't get over the fact that modern digital cameras can be set to ISO 6400 or even higher, and can shoot at 10 frames per second. When I think about us shooting basketball with thumb-wind Nikon F's loaded with Tri-X and doing manual focus, I wonder how we brought home any images at all, much less enough to run one or two keepers in the paper every day. I'd love to go back in time with a modern DSLR and a good lens and see some of the old photographer's reactions to it. I remember guys who were still using TLRs back then.
Modern pro basketball photographers are still using stadium strobes, and alot of remote triggered cameras. Strobe still takes time to recycle so 10fps useless. Other than loading film, there not much difference to how it was shot with film cameras 20 years ago
That’s what I wanted to know, how much did you push and what were your regular exposure settings and lenses for those events?
Mike Chin have you shot sports on film? jw
@@alvareo92 I interned for a pro photographer who was the official photographer for the Clippers when they were in San Diego. Mike Chin is correct He hung large strobes in the rafters and triggered them electronically. Since the strobes were so powerful and fast around 1/800 second there was no reason to "push" the film.
Respect!!
Awesome explanation Jarred. Watching your method to figure out the settings was so very helpful !!!!
This is a great video. I can’t tell you how self conscious I am when it comes to shooting action in low light and inevitably having to deal with noise in my images. Especially when it seems everyone else is shooting these clean/pristine photos. Glad and relieved to know I’m not crazy!
I came (back) here because I'm shooting an event in low light in a couple days. It's not sports so I'll likely set my camera on aperture priority. This was a great refresher since I've been lazy, shooting with my iPhone for most of my photos these past 2 years. I know the principles but the way you ran through this in this video realigned my mind quickly. Great job Jared, thanks so much!
Well done video, helped me with my manual settings so much I built a chart I carry that compares ISO, SS and Aperture starting at High Noon Sunny Day F16, ISO 100 and 1/125 (10,000 fc) down to very dimly lit room (10 fc) and surprised to discover these two scenes are only 10 light stops apart. I can now estimate exposure quickly and then rock in by 1/2 and 1/3 stops. Thanks.
Just started taking pictures and I appreciate you taking the time to do this.
Very helpful.. Seeing the setting written down like that is extremely helpful. Thanks.
I'd just like to point out that it depends on the camera - some more expensive full frame cameras have near perfect ISO invariance, meaning it doesn't impact the photo much to increase the ISO vs increasing the exposure in post. I believe the Pentax K-1 and Nikon D750 are some examples of ISO invariant cameras.
I just got a camera a few days ago and since then, I'm watching all your videos. I must say, this video made me finally understand the aperture/shutter speed/iso connection and how to work around a problem. Thank you for this. Brilliant.
The best tip in here was setup your camera fully, the light doesn't change. As many have said pushing the photo later will likely produce the same results as exposing correctly in camera due to iso invariance. I don't think underexposing slightly will help much with noise on most new cameras, however it may help guard against blown highlights. Adding more light, getting a faster lens or larger sensor all weigh in heavily towards a better result. Also filling the frame with your subject, spot on focus and smooth subject tracking and finding the absolute minimum shutter speed you can get away with.
This is one of the best videos I have seen on handling exposure in low light. I've watched it several times and it's really helped me. Thanks Fro!
Just a quick story for some encouragement for anyone struggling with learning photography, or did not understand this video: I fell in love with photography about a month-and-a-half ago, and I saw this video about a month ago for the first time, and I was so lost. I have watched many, many videos to learn about photography, and have read many articles too. My knowledge has increased exponentially (all free, because of RUclips and photography websites), and, thanks be to God, I now understand what Jarred is saying in this video! It's truly amazing. :D I really didn't think I would ever come to know photography.
Fall in love with something, or someone, and you will care.
Keep at it, folks. :)
Thank you! Thank you! For saying that the light is the light and not really changing. I shoot a lot of youth hockey and have migrated from auto ISO to full manual with great results. So often we forget that it’s all about the light first. Then the triangle is all about the environment.
very nicely done, Jared. 1/500 f2.8 ISO 5000 is what I would go with, as you pointed out. With some proper post editing the photographer can get a good image. I do a lot of low light shooting myself. I'm the house photographer at a music club in New York. I started with a couple of crop sensor bodies but eventually moved to full frame. I think for low light full frame is pretty much a necessity. As you know it handles high ISO much better. Excellent video!
This is Jared's genius at full power. There are a lot of really good photography youtube channels but very few rise to the level of actual output that Jared executes. His photos are killer! Others are good for sure, but Jared takes images that connect - then he takes the time to help us learn how to do the same. Understanding theory is one thing (and important) but the artistry is what sets photographers apart, and Jared has both at master levels.
honestly, out of all your vids that I have seen this is the best. It is a problem that I think a lot of people have and you were able to teach the method that would get rid of that issue in a simple form, as well as teaching a "cheat" to the system when it would maybe not be possible to follow perfectly. Thanks for this one!
I miss this kind of tutorial from you. I say it's never wrong to go back to basics and re-visit the things you've learned before.
Thank you, Jared! 🤘
I have been following Jared for a long time.He is an iconic man.Like noone else and one of the best youtube channels ever !
Unless I'm way off in my technology and physics knowledge you could as well have increased the ISO another 0.875 stops (to 9375 or whatever the closest amount the camera allows) and have the same result. As far as I know you are doing the same thing in post production, simply adding gain. You only have to watch out for clipping highlights.
Underexposing in camera and bringing back in post should theoretically get the same results as increasing the camera gain (ISO) the same amount.
I'm glad this video is here, take what I normally do on the field and explains it a crap ton better than I ever could.
I shoot with a Nikon D750 with a F2.8 and those numbers are spot on with little to no adjustments, in an "Arena" lighting, pro basketball. Incandescent lights flickr so that is my challenge, shooting in 3+ multiples & all are slightly diff in color
Just bought my first camera today and this video gave me an understanding of how to set my aperture, shutter speed, and iso to adjust to different lighting conditions. None of the other videos made sense until I saw this! thanks alot I seriously apprechiate it
It's been over five years and still learning new things from you all the time.
What would have happened if you just lowered the shutter speed to 1/500 second and kept the same ISO and aperture??
shadyninja1 it would be over 2 stops of light off which is still a bit for postprocessing.
One stop of light is from 1/800 to 1/400 but with 1/500 thats 75% difference out of full 100% to gain one stop of light. So about 2.25 stops of light off (still noticeably dark and minimal improvement)
Too be fair, that would've not made much difference with Jared's solution. Increasing the exposure during the post-processing afterwards would have the (almost) same effect as changing the ISO during the shot. I'm basing of the recent discussions of what ISO actually does (bumping up exposure in pre-processing is not too different to increasing ISO during shooting in low light scenarios). Sources: photographylife.com/iso-invariance-explained and ruclips.net/video/QVuI89YWAsw/видео.html and note: not everyone is agreeing on this.
Thanks man. I'm shooting another swim meet for my daughter's high school. The photos turned out "okay" last time but it took a lot of post work. Probably more than it should. The lighting at the natatorium is total crap. This has helped immensely. I was trying get the perfect exposure. Now I'm comfortable being 1 or 2 stops off.
Jared, it’s great to see you finally do a short tutorial of types and especially about this subject. I myself have been having the exact same issue photographing my son’s baseball games that just started for the season. Thank you for the tut and keep ‘em coming, we need more tuts!! Thanks!
I totally agree with Jared. I've encountered a lot of these issues since I started shooting films, especially B&W. Taking that knowledge to this modern technology, I admit Jared's thoughts will be very helpful to newbies and photography enthusiasts.
Love your Nan she was awesome and bet she is smiling down on you for achieving 1 Million and how you help us all thanks Jared cheers n gone H
I can not even believe this. You explained this so clearly that even a beginner (like me) can understand it.!!! Thank you!!!
Basketball at the high school and college level can be a pretty fast-paced sport. Using a shutter speed slower than 1/800-second to capture more light will reduce noise in the image...but at a cost. Rather than capturing the athletes frozen in mid-motion, the slower shutter speed may add too much blur for your liking.
As Jared states, you're f-stop isn't getting any faster than f/2.8 so, that's locked in. Use pre-game warmups to make some test exposures to select the slowest shutter speed that adequately freezes the action. I think the choice of 1/800 was probably solid. 1/500 would be too slow for my taste...but that's a personal choice.
With your shutter speed and f-stop set, your exposure is set. Regardless of the ISO you use, you're not capturing any more light or adding more noise.
You've got a couple of options for managing ISO when shooting sports. One, is to use the pre-game test exposures to select an ISO and lock that in. Another option, is to shoot manual (shutter speed and aperture) plus auto-ISO. The reason you might choose to go with auto-ISO is the possibility of inconsistent lighting in the venue.
The light level on the court will be consistent at professional and top tier college/high school arenas. It's not uncommon for there to be inconsistent light at lower tier college/high school venues. During pre-game, ceck the lighting from the 3-4 locations you're most likely to use during the game. If lighting is consistent, do as Jared suggests and lock in an ISO. If it's inconsistent, use auto-ISO to allow your camera to adjust to a darker area.
Keep in mind that adjusting brightness in Lightroom (or your image editing app of choice) is basically the same as using a different ISO in the field. You're not changing exposure. That's set when you choose the shutter speed and f-stop for the shoot. Whether adjusting ISO or "Exposure Comp" in Lightroom, all you're doing is changing post-exposure brightening.
If you're not happy with the visibility of noise, there are tools in Lightroom that can mitigate this. In the Develop module, go to the Detail panel and increase "Masking" in the Sharpening tool. If you press the Alt button while adjusting the "Masking" slider, more of the image will look dark as you increase masking. The dark areas won't be sharpened. Increase the mask until the out-of-focus background is black and only the featured athlete is outlined in white.
Adding this mask should reduce the visibility of noise in the background and lower the visibility of noise a skosh on your subject. It's a useful tool to de-emphasize noise in photos that, by their nature, don't capture an abundance of light.
I know this was posted forever ago, but I wanted to add on for anybody that could still benefit. What Bill is saying is very useful and correct... however, when saying that bumping the exposure in Lightroom in post production is essentially the same as boosting ISO in the field, that statement is only accurate for most Nikon/Sony users, not for most Canon users. Nikon/Sony sensors tend to be fairly ISO invariant (some say ISO-less, meaning that taking the image at ISO 100 and bumping it 3 stops in post would result in essentially the same product as taking the image at ISO 800 in the field). However, Canon sensors (in my research and experience) are generally NOT ISO invariant. The 5D Miii specifically is the furthest from ISO invariant I've ever seen, in that the increased voltage on the hardware produces a significantly cleaner image than one bumped in post production at a later time. You should be able to research your individual camera (or the one you're wanting to buy) to find if it is ISO invariant or not. So, Canon users, make sure you're getting the exposure right out of camera. Nikon/Sony users, you have a lot more leeway.
@@RobTiff0818 I'm still figuring this out myself but my experience so far on my 6Dii matches what you're saying. I got much better results letting the camera increased the ISO than trying to crank up exposure in Lightroom.
Camera noise drives me crazy but there doesn't seem to be a free lunch option here without adding more light to the subject.
I was just shooting kids playing basketball at 1/250th and it wasn't that bad, but I was going to go up to 1/500th the next time I try. Honestly, if I could get away with f/4 that would probably help with focus but that is probably not realistic so I'll stick to 2.8.
@@RichFreeman yes, the 6Dii is definitely not an ISO invariant sensor. The ISO invariant point on the 6Dii is apparently around ISO 3200 (in other words, you benefit from using the hardware ISO up through ISO 3200, but anything higher than that would be the same as boosting in post.)
Fortunately, there's not a lot of advantage of ISO inariance in practical use in dark environments. The real benefit is the ability to expose for highlights and pull back the shadows to the same quality as if you exposed for the shadows (where you wouldn't be able to bring back the blown out highlights). The only advantage in a dark room (of ISO invariance) is brightening up in post if you under exposed. If you're having trouble exposing in a dark room (because the screen looks brighter, and you usually can't tell until you pull it up on your screen) just check your histogram.
And finally, noise in indoor basketball photos is to be expected. Especially at a young age. It doesn't bother anybody as much as the photographer. So don't fret. But I would DEFINITELY try to shoot at at least 1/500 shutter. It's worth the noise to not have the motion blur. (unless that's the style you're going for...)
Can you explain why f/2.8 is locked in? I don't understand why you couldn't use an f/2, 1.8, 1.4 etc
@@scrumpoxjnr You generally won't find a zoom faster than f/2.8. You could of course shoot with a prime, but if you're shooting sports that probably means a lot of cropping or missed shots, which isn't ideal.
I have been round and round with this topic and was extremely frustrated about my images from a recent evening soccer match. Tried again after watching your video and I have some shots I'm extremely proud of. Thank you!
Hi, Jared! Thanks for the video. This is one of the best videos I've seen in a while. I came here looking for a solution regarding the noise in my photos, for my Cropped Sensor Camera (an old Fuji X-T1) which I'll have to use it (as a favor to a friend) at a wedding, next week . I do not own a flash for it, and I don't wanna invest in one, just for this future event (I'm a landscape and street shooter, so a flash for me is not yet a priority) . Therefore, your advice is priceless for me, especially that I don't have to shoot indoors at very fast shutter speeds, just like the Photographer from your example . Thanks again and have a nice day!
THIS has been the best most informative video I ever seen on low lighting. The concept of "stops" and using shutter speed, ISO and Aperture to balance to find the best exposure was awesome. You just took a magical game and applied math to solve the issue. I'm an engineer, I'm a master a math. THIS i can do !
Thorough breakdown!
At what point would you say its generally better (in terms of minimizing grain and noise) to go ahead and raise the ISO, instead of bringing it back in post?
If you get your exposure right, it almost doesn't matter.
From my experience getting a good exposure in camera is always better than underexposing and bringing it back in post. The “grain”/ imperfections due to “bringing back” an underexposed image in post is worse than grain from high iso (in my opinion). :) I’d say, personally, as Jared said, if you’re off by more than one stop raise the iso 👍 also bare in mind Lightroom/ photoshop have really sophisticated noise removal software. I know many photographers hate that. But it’s an option to consider if you really can’t stand the grain
Depends on the camera, sony, Nikon, and fuji cameras are largely "iso invariant" meaning you get identical results brightening in post. Canon cameras suck at this.
It largely depends on what kind of camera you have, and if it's considered to be ISO invariant (you can google if yours is or not). For example, I have a Nikon D750, which is considered to be ISO invariant. Let's assume I can take a photo at, say, 1/800 f2.8 ISO 3200 and properly expose my shot. I can also achieve the same image quality (in terms of grain and noise) if I use 1/800 f2.8 ISO 800 and later raise the exposure in post. In fact, there may be reasons why I choose to do this on purpose - and one such reason would be to retain highlight details (a night scene with some neon signs for example). I could raise the exposure in my shot on only the areas I wanted (leaving the bright signs alone) and get a semi-HDR like image.
Yes but your base color is awful.. I don’t like the 750 colors
Thanks Jared for this workflow. It indeed helps to look into and mix each of the 3 variables.
I'm currently photographing stage music bands in summer evening festivals.
I use an EOS 90D and the same 24-70mm lens from Tamron. There too, flash is not allowed.
I always presume that I can fix noise and sharpness in post with e.g. Photo AI. I also think that using the latgest aperture of a lens is risky, especially as the lens sweet spot is usually at a higher f value. Also, you have to make for the microphone and other instruments in front of the mouth. You have some space for lower shutter speed, i.e. if they do not shake too much with their dancing moves.
I might start with Aperture priority when the light is still fine, and evaluates the result. Then I switch to Manual with Auto (but limited) ISO. Settings (especially the shutter speed) depend on the zoom and the APS-C crop factor as well. I end up photographing at around 1/250, f/5, ISO 100-6400.
It might be useful to address this with a follow-up video on this one, isn't it?
ironically I had came across this situation last night.. I had less action so I did go down to 1/100 of sec, f4 @ minimal ISO and did okay... somehow one of my shots the speed got moved up to 1/250 and came out a little grainier than I liked. Thanks.. this video is so handy and it reminds us of the basics..
I shoot in low light often inside a club this is great !
Absolutely love these videos, if you ever run out of video ideas, do more of these!!
Jared we are really blessed to have such a wonderful person like you 💓
lol are you his mum?
Nice video! im agree with you! Some times you need to think out of the box a little bit.
Finally, I have the answer why my 'prize photos' from the air show were so grainy... Terrific video - thanks, Jared.
20 years in the business and I never heard it explained this quickly and well. I well done!
Fro...I like a lot of what you say, but there is NO WAY to "cheat the system" to get less noise in the image. I've shot 1000's of indoor high school sports photos, which, because of poor high school gym lighting, is, IMHO, the hardest place to shoot sports photos (OK, night high school football games are right up there).
There's only three things a person can do...buy a faster lens, buy a camera with the next larger sensor size (or a more modern, and probably better sensor of the same size (if your APS-C camera is 5 years old, get a new one...check the "low light - sports scores" at DXO Mark), or get better noise reduction software. That's it...there are NO shortcuts.
Shutter speed...
HAS to be high...esp when using focal lengths of, say 100mm or higher...the more zoomed the image is, the more camera shake will be an issue AND of course a person is ALSO trying to freeze the action. All that said, 1/800th is a minimum (perhaps at wide angles that can be reduced to 1/500th...maybe). Because if there's motion blur in the image from too low a shutter speed, the image is tossed out no matter how well noise was controlled. Believe me, I've tried to eek out a 1/2 stop here or there to fight noise...slowing the shutter down is a bad idea...unless the action is slow, and/or the focal length is wide...then MAYBE 1/500th will be OK.
Focal ratio...
As fast as possible, anything slower than 2.8 is pretty much worthless. I shot with an 85/1.8 and 135/2 for a while...that helped.
ISO...
With the above two set, use whatever ISO you have to to get proper exposure. Like you said, you could under expose some to try to reduce noise, but really, when you raise the exposure in post so the image looks properly exposed, the noise is gonna come right back. I think this is what reviewers call "ISO invariant sensors"...the noise is there no matter the ISO a person uses in the actual exposure, as when the image is brought to proper exposure in post, the noise makes itself known.
Shooting indoor high school sports is VERY hard on a camera...which means it's expensive to get really good images...full frame sensor, fast glass, and good noise reduction software (DXO's "prime" noise reduction, is IMHO, the best out there).
This is exactly what I thought...
Exactly. This is one of the most challenging shooting situations. The D500 is fairly ISO invariant, so setting the ISO to 4000 is pretty much the same as raising a stop in post. Lowering the shutter speed is fine. But that noise is going to be there at that ISO with aps-c. To get a stop and a half of light back, full frame is the way to go.
Agree. I shoot flag football in FL at schools with 4 stadium lights and hot spots at the 35 yard line and darkness in the end zone. I use a 6D, 70-200. I have tried f4 when I started years ago but now know that aint happening. I do get away with 640ss at times (game speed is slower than tackle football) but 800ss and that ISO cranked is the low edge I can do unless I want to drop $10 grand. Perfectly said. Thanks
I couldn't agree more, hopefully many read the comments. I don't shoot sports but do shoot live musicians all the time in beyond poor light with no flash allowed, buying a better camera and gear helped immensely. Cameras vary though how they work in regards to iso and noise, with my sony A7 the voltage applied across the sensor changes at somewhere around 640 iso so often I'll bump up to that rather than use 400 or 500, etc. Don't underestimate the skill of the photographer as well in panning along with the subject or following action smoothly, surprised Jared didn't talk about image stablization.
This is the right answer. There is nothing that can be done in that situation, given that hardware. He just need better gear.
Love the video I have made this mistake in the past it was nice to see how to help correct it. Thanks
Fantastic ! Loved your low light theory Jared .
Great video. I had to use flash back in film days when shooting indoor HS basketball games for local papers. All manual film cameras, manual flash. Somehow we made it work..
If you play with Sharpening and Luminance in Lightroom it can really help with the grain and noise. I have a formula that works with my Canon’s and Fuji’s. I shoot a great deal of unit photography and DP’s are lighting their sets with less intensity than they did 10 years ago due to the better sensors in the high end studio cameras. Great for them but not great for still photographers so when I shoot indoors I have to live with high ISO’s. Good tip to tell people to learn to shoot manual and always in RAW. I rarely shoot with an on camera flash but when I do I never use TTL. I always shoot it in the manual mode.
Super useful video clarifying a common problem - and doing it in a very clear manner.
"Now this is what i call cheating the system, i like to cheat the system" Subbed!!! The info in this vid alone will up your photography game regardless of camera system.First vid i've watched of yours and it's pricless,Thank you.
glad it helped.
Excellent video Jared. Learned quite a bit and have just subscribed to the channel. Look forward to more how to's.
Good video!
My experience, when in low light, you are going to produce grain. The most you can do is mitigate it. Learning the tradeoffs in settings is absolutely key.
As a photographer in crappy lighting conditions, you can't be afraid of using iso.
The parts I agree with. Manual settings, the selected numbers, and shooting RAW
The part I disagreed with. Shooting sports less than f/2.8. Again, it's all about tradeoffs. If an 85mm f/1.8 is available to use, that is 1 stop of light just by lens selection, which is in a focal range that is probably being used anyway. Sure, you sacrifice some DOF, but that's the tradeoff. To get a 3/4 body shot at 70-85 mm from the baseline, I bet you are a good 15-20 feet away (for a teen/adult). At that distance and setting focal length to 85mm, going from f/2.8 to f/1.8 only sacrifices about half a foot of DOF, but you get one of your stops of light back, without sacrificing precious iso or shutter speed.
Question, what about "exposing to the right"? Use a higher iso/f stop to intentionally over expose then correct in post. Like in your example, shoot at iso 8000 and 1/500 s, especially if you can use f/1.8.
This is a great video! No one else teaches you how to do this balancing between shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and post.
If you're using an ISO invariant camera, there is theoretically no IQ disadvantage to shooting at low ISO and boosting it in post.
Going from 1/800 to 1/500th is clawing back 2/3rd of a stop at the expense of not freezing the action quite as much. You could have stopped there. The rest won't affect IQ.
The advantage of getting closer in camera is less work in post. These days you can get that back by editing one image and applying exposure edits to the rest. So it's not that big a deal.
Whether 1/500th would have cut it would depend on how fast the action is. If you're getting blur, you might be better off staying at 1/800th and keeping the noise over the motion.
To improve the IQ further you really have to start taking control of noise and sharpening when you're shooting in low light and the exposure requires you boost or use high ISO. What you need to do is going to depend on how you're using the final image. It'll be different for print, vs small screen (social media) vs large digital display. Pixel peeping is useful for getting that output to its best but no one is going to sit next to you while you zoom 1:1 at the computer.
This
Thanks Jared for simplifying video. It make more sense when you put it into figures
Hahaha i look your video's so much and my kids if they hear the starting sounds of the clip they go like "Fro Knows Photooooooooo" hahahaha and sometimes i say it and then they say STOOP DADYYY STTOOOPPP ahhahahahaha so funny 😆
Spot on. How many times do people have an issue with artificial lighting. Great explanation especially for beginners
What would be the difference between shooting the photo at 8000iso and shooting at 5000 and bringing it back in post? Would these not grant the same results or very similar?
On nikon yes kinda, but on canon very different. Depends on sensor/camera.
DarksteelTV I can understand that there would be a difference in this between sensors but for the most part would it not just be applied gain same as iso? Both are happening after the image is captured and both are using the same data to change exposure.
Depends on camera... I love ETTR but if you're raising the iso you're loosing DR, so if you need DR then lower the iso (if you have an iso invariant sensor). So really there should be 2 different versions of this depending on your sensor.
Well done! A clear example of problem solving. And maybe an example of why pros shoot full frame, with a bigger dynamic range to allow shooting at higher ISOs.
in light room the camera says D750?
Only thing I can think of is he used the card in two cameras. My D750 doesn't fall to pieces like that especially with a my VRII.
CJ Majesty I agree. And the d750 can easily go up to 8000 ISO
No guys! Jared actually made a mistake. The camera used was a D750. Even if you use the SD card in two different cameras, that does not affect the exif data for Lightroom. Lightroom reads the exif directly from the file, regardless if the card was put in multiple cameras. I also own the D750, and it is a magnificent camera in low light, but the problem here was, as Jared mentioned, that the image was underexposed 3 stops of light, which is too much to recover noise free in Lightroom, even for the D750.
raduionut78 God point, but as he talked about what he should've done instead, for example that the ISO should not go up to 8000.
But you have a point about the 3 stops, its hard to recover exposure.
Exactly!
I'm new to photography.. for a long time I was a point and shoot guy. Decided to by my first real camera.. (by real I mean something other then a point and shoot.) Purchased a Cannon eos m50. I am currently in a photography class and so far I'm pretty happy with my camera choice.. (except for the shitty battery life.) I have been watching alot you your videos... I would like to thank you for your video blogs.. they are a huge help.. keep those videos coming..
Helped me out a lot! Thanks Jared. 📸
Brilliantly explained! Great advice! Thank you!
Isn't the d500 iso invariant? If that's the case, shoot at 8000 iso, it will look the same as "cheating the system" and you'll have better highlights out of camera.
Yep, the D500 is essentially ISO invariant, so if somebody is manually locking in the shutter and aperture speed, the ISO setting on the camera doesn't matter.... as long as one is using the RAW file. www.dpreview.com/news/4939144988/nikon-d500-studio-and-dynamic-range-tests-published
Please tell me more about ISO invariant?
Michael Chandler - Cliff note version... there is no difference in noise if you brighten a photo in post rather than increasing your ISO in-camera. So in this case you will have the same amount of noise if shot at 8000 iso as you would if you shot at 4000 iso and corrected exposure in post. I'd shoot it right in camera.
Thanks! Your comment sent me down the rabbit hole and I learned something new and developed a deeper understanding into why I was having success exposing to the right so not to clip the highlights and using correction for the shadows on my D850.
Excellent logic for this situation. I would also suggest a few test shots. I sometimes shoot booth jpg & RAW on Nikon. Correcting as I go.
Great video Jared!
Hi Jared, yes, everything make sense to me. Very helpfull..so from now on (cause I never done this) I will make sure I'll do the right thing.
Being big fan of you're posts is motiveting me to improve my photos...cause I love to learn from the professionals.
Thank you for that. Have a good day.
Jared, why would you want to underexposed when it has been proven over and over that underexposing for ISO produces more noise and grain then just raising the ISO in camera to match a proper or even slightly over exposed value and then lowering in post? When dealing with a lowlight beast like the D500 or similar camera where 6400-8000 ISO are not only native but also relatively clean, why would you not want to preserve the best capabilities? It seems your logic is just a slight improvement over the fear people have to actually shoot the proper ISO for the best result.
TheTechnoPilot thats a broad statement. It can do this. But as you said it,it is untrue. My a7s produces the same noise whether i brighten up any file from 3200 onwards, or use Something like12800-51200 right away
exactly my thoughts
Assume D500 has iso invariant sensor, changing ISO won't affect noise level. It all depends on how much light hit the sensor. In this case, the shutter speed and aperture were set and can't let more lights coming in, so bump up ISO should be the same by pull up exposure in LR.
Haoxiang Qin dude what
You can try it with your camera(if it's ISO invariant), really interesting. Keep shutter speed and aperture the unchanged, and use different ISO to take multiple shoots. Using LR to match the exposure, you will find the noise level is identical.
Cool! I take a lot of "low light" shots of figure skaters for our club using my EOS 7Dmkii. I keep thinking about a full Frame, but really like how the 70-200 f/2.8 gives me 300 mm of reach down the rink on a crop sensor. Not so great when they are close, but . . . . Anyway, after much experimentation, I settled on a slightly different approach because skaters are often under spotlights that can create blow out reflections off the ice, and skin. What I do is set my camera to manual, with shutter somewhere around 1/400th and aperture a click smaller than 2.8 (might be 3.2). I dial in a -1 stop exposure compensation to give me a bit more contrast, and turn the ISO to automatic. I then lock those settings with the slider on the camera and let the camera do the work. It works great!
I love your hair, Jimi Hendrix hired Noel Redding to play bass guitar because Jimi dug his hair ..
I never knew that, lol. I still watch live clips in amazement and sheer listening joy of Jimi and his lineups, even just informal jam sessions seem other worldly. I think Billy Cox played with him too and of course Mitch Mitchell always on drums, another great musician. I don't want to sound like an old fart and say new music sucks, I love a lot of it and go to live shows all the time but when it comes to guitar something about Jimi is just in another room all together for me and sacred.
Thanks Jared! I went from a D7000 to a D850 this past week. I panicked when I realized there was no sports mode. But I put it on Shutter Priority and set my shutter at 500 and got acceptable, recoverable results with ZERO motion blur. I was proud of myself. After watching this vid I want to try full manual next time and bump the iso. I appreciate your videos.
Wie heißt es immer so schön lieber ein verrauschtes Bild als gar keins. Und am Ende des Tages stört das Bildeauschen meist eh nur den Fotografen selbst, Leute die nicht aus der Fotografie kommen stören sich daran so gut wie nicht, also kann man auch ruhig mal etwas am ISO Schrauben. Zumindest ist das meine Erfahrung
Toby Horn warum schreibst du hier auf Deutsch lol
Toby Horn die heutigen Kameras können wirklich gut mit hohen ISO Werte umgehen
Genau so ist es.
Und zum Thema deutsch, ich habe einen deutschsprachigen Kanal über Fotografie. Wenn also nun ein deutscher dieses Video sieht und dann auf einen deutschen Kanal stößt schaut er vielleicht mal vorbei. Es ist also eine Art der Schleichwerbung nur nicht zu offensichtlich 😜
Und ein paar mal haben auch größere englischsprachige Kanäle trotzdem geantwortet 😉
Toby Horn ich werde dir dann folgen
Danke dir!
Hey Jared, a suggestion for this gentleman. I used to use a pair of zoom's for basketball (24-70 under the basket and 70-200 for mid court and far basket) both of which were f/2.8 lenses. At some point I began to think about the distances involved when sitting under the basket, did the computations for 35 and 50 mm lens and realized a 50 mm f/1.8 would work great. The 50mm lens has a great field of view under the basket while still maintaining a shallow depth of field and you can shoot at f/2.0 to gain a complete stop. I also use an 85mm f/1.4 (set at f/2) if I am out on the corners. The best news - you can buy a Nikkor 50 mm f/1.8 on eBay (used) for under $100. Gaining a stop in these conditions is a lot!
I am reluctant to think that someone who cannot fix his exposure, will be able to nail focus with a 85mm at f/2.0 on a target moving towards him.
Your hair is my goal
Awesome! Thanks for the details feedbacks and advice!
Wouldn't it be better to just crank the ISO another stop? That's what you're doing in editing, isn't it? Even with an ISO invariant camera, cranking it after the fact isn't any cleaner than just exposing properly in the first place
had the same problem, fixed it about the same way but I shoot at 320, getting the ball a bit blurry is not that bad I think if it makes your pictures better. Great video, wish it was there when I started shooting basket !
I photograph F-16 fighters at 1/500 and 1/800 lol You can definitely get away with 1/200 or 1/250 with a basketball player. :D
you shoot F-16s indoors? Impressive! ;-P
Outdoors obviously, day or night and in all weather conditions. I was stating that you can easily capture a sharp person with a slower shutter than 1/500.
I wouldn't be so sure and that's why: f-16 are bigger and easier to track than some erratic movement from different players in action. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying its impossible, but you would constantly have arms or legs or both in motion and maybe that's not what you're looking for. A plane doesn't have a lot of moving parts....
E.g. When photographing racing cars or motorbikes you may go with a 1/600 because it's ok to see the wheels spin. For a perfectly still footballer (plus the ball) you may need 1/1250 if they're close to you. The speed of the object is not everything
FrancescoScaccianoce agreed, as someone who shoots a lot of burlesque, I'll go as low as 1/250 for a slow act, but one in which the performers are truly moving needs 1/500 to get sharp photos especially in hair.
Thanks for all of the great info in your videos and guides. To start, I'm a super noob. Like, I borrowed my wife's old 6D, and bought a 100-400mm lens to shoot football. It was my first season, and it was quite the learning experience. Now, I'm shooting basketball for a high school and local college. I was having the same problems here. I brought up the exposure in post, but I felt like I was sacrificing sharpness for lower noise, or visa versa. I know that I should probably not use my 100-400, and get a 70-200, but I don't get paid for this stuff and well, it's expensive. I'll likely have a 70-200 by next volleyball season, but for now this video helps me a lot with my 100-400. It won't be perfect, but it will be better. Thanks a ton
So the "secret" is to correctly expose your shot and not underexpose by 3 stops... What a revelation! Clickbait much?
YUP, I'm pretty sure I alluded to that in the video. The secret is know what you're doing. Clickbait YES 100 percent chose the title to make people click it so they CAN LEARN. I rather have you tell me I used a clickbait title because you saw it then have no one see it because it had a title called "how to expose your photo".
TruBBQtv John Foley - I am a beginner..... it’s awareness to guys like me . I am happy you are at a higher level, kudos. With vids like these, Hoping to reduce the learning curve, THANK YOU 🙏 JARED !
It's almost like every photographer out there is an expert and doesn't need to learn anything!? Amazing!
Seriously though, this was interesting and helpful for me as a beginner so thank you Jared for your click bait :)
At least the man goes into detail and teaches people how to think about these processes
You're missing the point if you want Jared's lesson to be something OTHER than correctly exposing the photo. What did you think the answer would be? Magic beans? Using a flash? lol. The whole point is Jared teaches you how to get correct exposure. If you thought the answer and the process to getting there was going to be different you are a bad photographer in addition to being a know-it-all. Luckily, Jared is neither!
One of the best video i've seen so far from any photo youtuber, that help a lot.
Thank you
Thank you! Exactly what I need! Love you love you, love you!
Great Jared! Thank You for this video. Super tips for me.
Dude, I know this is an old video but I really love the way you explain shit. I’m just an amateur photographer just getting back to shooting but I want to thank you for the years of great videos!
Jared,
This is the best explanation of how to capture more light I have found on RUclips! I am a visual learner so the diagram/table comparing ISO, shutter speed, and aperture adjustments was very helpful to me. Thank you! I have an 8th grade basketball play with many practices, games, HS dances and award ceremonies ahead of me - all of which will be in gyms, auditoriums, and other venues with very high ceilings. Thus, this video is the perfect lesson for me at this stage of my photography hobby. Have a great weekend.
This is literally THE MOST INFORMATIVE video. Great job!
The fact you take time out to help one of your 764k subscribers to help others make their photography better says a lot about you. Thanks for your insights.
Thanks again. Venturing into night time baseball with grand daughter. First night images a disaster. But this video should help with next weeks game
Jared, excellent advise. I shoot a lot of basketball in all sorts of gyms. I also talk to many professional photographers that shoot high school basketball for Chicago newspapers. f2.8 is the only aperture used. I try to shoot at 1/1000 but depending on the gym, I might reduce that a little. My principal variable is the ISO. For newspapers or the web, graininess is not too big an issue. Newspaper print quality is not good anyway and small website images look good enough at higher ISOs. I regularly shoot at 3200 ISO but I will go to 4000 or higher if necessary. My typical settings for high school basketball are 1/1000, f2.8, ISO 3200/4000. I have a full frame Canon cameras so ISO performance is pretty good but these setting also work on my Canon 7D which is not full frame. The drawback on the 7D is that the images are a little grainier than on a 1Dx or a 5D mark IV. Nevertheless, the 7D images but still quite usable. When in a new gym, I test the settings by taking images of the players dribbling before the game. If the image catches the ball depressing into the floor with a good exposure, then we are good. And I always plan to bring the RAW photo back a stop in post anyway.
This is a good video!
I had some really bad issues with grain and sharpness and overall image quality on my Sony a6000. I did a photoshoot outdoors in the California sun, with my 50mm f1.8, but I was around ISO 200-400, with shutter speeds 1/60-1/120, and everything looks like garbage once I got the on my computer. I was so frustrated, trying to figure out why my photos looked like someone dumped sand on them. They were showing as exposed properly, eye AF was locking on, and the ISO was not even close to being high. Spent months trying to figure out what went wrong. I know it's not the camera, it's the photographer, so I watched every RUclips video on photography and read so many books while sitting on the floor of Barnes & Noble...
Finally, I took my camera to Best Buy for warranty repair. The shop said they replaced the sensor and calibrated everything. Now, I'm getting sharper images than ever before. I just wish it took me less than a year to give up hope and realize the camera actually was faulty.
you're a real good teacher. That's why I bought your film making course! Thanks
Loved this video. I’m shooting a non-profit event, indoors for free to build a portfolio. I’m using a Canon Rebel SL3 with a 50mm f/1.8 lens. Now I have a much better understanding of staying in Manual Mode, turning the Ap to f/2.8 because of movement, set the ISO in the 1000-2000 range and just keeping the shutter speed above 1/50.
Great video. Good explanation. One thing noticed. Looking at the Raw image info. The guy was shooting with D750 which is a FF DSLR. Still that much Noise.
Hi, thank you so much for this video. Even if it is fairly old (in RUclips years), it is still very relevant. In fact, not sure if you intend to go back on similar style videos where you get photos from your subscribers to give them your insights on how to address specific problems.
Getting the white balance right in camera will help thing a LOT too! Great video Jared, great way of breaking things down.
This is great content. Wish more channels did this kind of content. Very informative.
great video explaining how to compensate in low light! you rock!