Great video 😀 Really clear explanation. I am going to give my thoughts on the subject of ISO below, but I think your explanation keeping it simple is more suited to the audience. But for the people that want to understand what is really going on under the hood.... maybe this contribution can help. If you like clear explanations....please listen to Vanessa😀 You brought the sensitivity analogy from the film days into the digital era: With digital sensors you can think of ISO as the amplification of the incoming signal. In the old days it was true that the the actual film was more sensitive to light, but a digital sensor mainly has a fixed sensitivity: it just basically counts the photons coming in. The ISO setting then just multiplies that number to emulate sensitivity. Say you have a 200 photons at ISO 100 hitting a particular pixel....and 145 photons on the next pixel...you have a pretty decent gradient. If you bump your ISO to 6400 though, you will have a 128 times multiplication. Lets say a 100 times for ease of calculation. You will get 2 photons and 1.45 photons for the next. Since half photons do not exist, you'll either get value 1 or value 2 based on luck. You then multiply that by 100 and get either 200 and 100 or 200 and 200. This is how noise is born...... through amplification of a weak signal. This is why dark sections of a photograph have more noise. You can clearly see that when you lighten them in post. So it's not the ISO setting that is creating the noise....it's the lack of lighting on a particular area. The ISO setting merely amplifies the problem so you can better see it. Convenient 😀 The R5 does have a step in the ISO noise performance though. At ISO 400 it basically performs better at noise and dynamic range than at ISO 200 and everything in between. Not sure how they do it, but you can take advantage of it by skipping ISO 200-320.
To take this a step further, increasing ISO does not actually increase noise. The noise is already there - even at ISO 100. What happens when you increase ISO is that the signal/noise ratio drops, and the noise (the part you don’t want) becomes more apparent relative to the signal (the part you want), thus appearing to increase noise.
This is a brilliant explanation. But, rather than worrying so much about ISO setting, we should put more effort towards a proper exposure for the scene. ISO is only a factor in that equation.
I always explain ISO like the gain on an amplifier. The higher the gain, the more sensitive it is to the plucks on the guitar strings. But it also comes with more electric hums, or ... noise. Same thing with ISO and grain.
I always describe it as “it takes one bucket of light to take the picture.” Think of light like water and filling that bucket is what you need to do. Shutter speed is how long the hose is on. Aperture is how big around the hose is. And ISO is how much dirt is in the bottom of the bucket. It takes less water to fill the bucket, but the image isn’t as clean, but you want the bucket to be full either way.
Imho you can only use Iso 100 if there is a lot of light (outdoors), in a studio (where you are in control of the light), on a tripod and with long shutter speeds. My to go setting outdoors is iso 400.
The biggest mistake new photographers are tought is staying at iso 100. You should drop your iso as low as you can but go as high as needed ! With my first Rebel in 2008 I didn't dare to go above iso 1600 but with my new R6 I often use Iso 10.000 at concerts and weddings. Off course I'll try to go to f1.4 and 1/100th of a second and after that I'll raise my iso.
I recall that lightbulb going off for me thanks to a Simon d'Entremont video on how much shutter speed you really need to capture a bird in flight, leaves you no choice but to explore the higher ISO levels. That 'ah ha' moment definitely improved my night/concert shots too (even though I'm still a noob).
@@bruce-le-smith I photographed flying seagulls against a bright sky. I needed +2 ev and 1/3200th of a second. I choose f 11 to get enough dof. The result was I needed Iso 2000 on a bright sunny day ! But as it was a bright picture, you didn't see any noise. Noise only shows in the darker parts
Attitudes towards noise vary widely. My feeling is our eyes don't see it, so I don't want it in my photo output either. One must get familiar with their camera and know at what point it becomes obtrusive or damaging to the detail in the image. There is NO question having used every software package out there, that DXO Photolab provides the finest RAW processed image and in almost all cases you end up with a noise free image with detail remaining. Worst case, a hit of Topaz DeNoise properly adjusted gets great results as well.
I use a Canon M6 mark II in FV mode with ISO set to "Auto". Once I set my Aperture, I can get my shutter speed where I want it. I set those on the touchscreen. I used to use Manual or Aperture Priority, but FV just makes it easy for me. It is good to understand ISO but newer cameras are very good at ISO auto.
Cameras like the R6 Mark II are so insanely good at higher ISOs that I no longer think about it... especially now with the new AI noise removal tools like those found in the new Photoshop/LR. I've shot for 18 years and compared to what I had to put up with back then it's night and day. My 20D, 1D III I used to have to be under ISO 3200 (3200 was last resort). Now I routinely shoot ISO 12,800 and don't think about it. In fact, R6 II at ISO 12,800 and with a bit of the new LR/PS AI noise removal is cleaner than ISO 400 on my original cams.
I SOoooooo liked this video. I understand the use/adjusting of ISO but really want to understand how it works. With so many sensors out there makes me wonder if one day ISO will be controlled so well by new sensors that it will almost be non existent.
Iso as we know it today is just signal amplification. It will never actually go away, the closest you would get is just being hidden behind automatic algorithms as we're seeing with phone photography. A camera is said to have a native iso(usually around 100, but dual iso sensors are becoming more common with a secondary native at around 400 or 800) which is the gain the physical circuitry/signal amps are set for, all the rest of the iso is just digital gain, maths(× or ÷) done on the native iso values to approximate the output.
I really enjoyed this video and thought it contained a lot of good content. (In spite of the left-handed Sony Shooter/ Canon Fangirl comment to start things off). Speaking of the exposure triangle, photographers drive the ISO up because they want a proper exposure without reducing the shutter speed too much below their comfort range. This shutter speed comfort range comes from experience from shooting and comparing the results, just like the higher ISO comfort experience. A little grain in the image beats a blurry anytime. But the shutter speed needs to be higher if you use poor camera mechanics and have difficulty holding your camera still while capturing the image. IBIS and stabilized lenses go a long way toward counteracting poor technique if you are not using a tripod or monopod. Using the viewfinder in place of staring at the screen while tucking your elbows in goes a long way toward sharper images. Additionally, using the lens hood, especially when shooting outside as a "natural light" photographer, will really control unwanted or uncontrollable lighting flares. If you are wearing a baseball cap with a visor so you can see your screen, you already understand the need for a lens hood on your set-up.
Yeah let’s get it right ISO is the sensitivity of the chip in your Cameraso it’s also called ASA in the film language which is also the sensitivity of the film some films are more sensitive than others whereas the chip in your camera can be adjusted to the sensitivity but just remember the higher the ISO the more noise it might produce in the finish image. Today’s digital cameras all set for somewhere in the region of 200 ASA or ISO which will give you a great reproduction.
some cameras has anti aliasing filter on the sensors witch is extremally annoying and no one talk about it , i tried to cancel my noise reduction on my camera and boy its so bad , the grain is red and magenta . thanks for the new ai Denoise on Lightroom i removed it with no problem , toke forever but its so worth it . budget Nikon and Sony handle iso better than budget camera Canon . i have nikon z6ii btw
Most important point is find out what the native ISO range is for your camera, anything more or less is just digital trickery. Have to agree with everything she says. Go as low as you can but push it as high as you need. Any shot is better than no shot.
Ha true BUT would you be able to look at an image or video and know it was shot in native ISO? I admit, I would not be able to. But I suppose it helps capture better in the circumstances
@VanessaJoy what I mean is knowing the point where "expanded" ISO starts keeps you out of the cameras algorithm processing zone. For my old mark II, that was 6400, which was the limit of the senser beyond that it was all just image processing. However you are correct who can tell looking at a photo, it is just my practice.
Nice work Vanessa. I can only hope to have 93,000 subscribers someday. I appreciate you bringing more exposure, ha ha, to ISO. Your video kept it relatively simple and easy to understand for newbies. I hope people view this as an entry point to the subject and dig a little more, but that's the nerd in me. :) It's all about overwhelming your bad light (noise) with good light! Edit: You may be interested in this approach to lighting... Exposure triangle gone! Blah! that's so confusing, glad to hear you say it. For me, I teach it's all about the flow of light from your front element to your sensor. At every point (front element, aperture, and shutter) you get to make a creative decision. It gets deeper into it, but ISO doesn't change the amount of light hitting your sensor. The creative decisions you made along the flow of light do. I think there are a great many folks out there who think ISO changes the amount of light. Forget about ISO until you've processed the creativity portion of your desired image.
I shoot a lot of video and sometimes leave for stills. I get the aperture and shutter speed I want, which is usually wide open and low (60/120). I set my ISO to auto and control over exposure with a Peter McKinnon VND filter. Camera mounted on a Ronin RS3 usually for extra stability.
Depending upon the camera, I find that each model has a useful ISO range in which the images it produces are good. Once I determine this, I adjust the ISO along with the shutter speed and aperture to get the exposure I want.
The only time I pump-up my ISO is when I want more "natural light" (ambient) to appear in the background when I'm using a flash to light up the main subject. Higher ISO & a slower shutter speed will reveal more ambient light.
Grain only applies to film and denotes the size of the silver halide crystals. ISO in the digital world denotes GAIN. Raising ISO increases the gain of the pixel values, also increasing the inherent noise of the sensor; it doesn't increase the sensitivity of the sensor, that parameter is basically fixed in the manufacturing process. Camera manufacturers really need to change ISO markings/menu items to GAIN.
You can call it digital grain I would say. They act in similar way. It just that on film, photo chemical create random grains while on digital sensor, it creates grain according to photo receptor's grid.
@@munarong it's NOT grain. Film grain is the visible metallic silver particles in processed photographic film caused by the structure of the emulsion. What you see in digital photographs is a result of a poor S/N ratio which is exacerbated by higher ISO (GAIN) values.
@@bme7491 That's why I used the word "similar" and I've zoomed in to my own photos from DSLR, those dots are almost look the same as grain in photo from film camera. So I prefer to call it digital grain. And image noise, to me, it acts differently from (digital) grain, so I wouldn't call it the same thing.
As you know better than I, those lighting variances at wedding receptions tempt pushing ISO way up. I almost never go past 6400 because I couple it with flash, indoors. What are your thoughts on pushing ISO to about 10,000, using my Canon R6 Mk2?
6400 is a comfortable spot for me too because regular traditional light room denoising will help you out of it in post if needed, too much further past that and I’m probably going to want to use AI denoise and that definitely takes a lot longer. If you’re using flash, though, you will probably not so much noise in the properly exposed areas that your flash is hitting, it tends to be seen more in shadows and under exposed areas where It’s basically searching to find light.
@@VanessaJoy Hey, the only people that don't make mistakes don't do anything. And, after watching the recent video that showed how much you are involved with, I feel guilty for taking the time here to tell you something you already know.
Awesome video Vanessa. Raise your ISO for as much or as low for the image to look great. Noise is ok and some times adds to the overall feel of the photo. Break the rules. It’s all about the end result not praising the exposure gods 😂
DXO Deep PRIME is the best noise reduction there is even restoring loss colors. My Olympus OMD E-M1ii is clean at ISO 3.200 and just a very small amount of noise at ISO 6,400. I've seen a Sony A73 use DXO Deep PRIME at 25,600 and was as clean as ISO 100. I would not use DXO xD Deep PRIME on extreme high ISO as it can have artifacts. With DXO I export to DNG raw so I can edit in any other editor. Topaz is garbage next to DXO. Don't believe me try it for yourself for free.
When I shot 35mm film, we didn't have the luxury of these intermediate ISO's like ISO 320, for example. It was 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200. Most of us didn't feel it was worth going over 800 ISO because image quality suffered. Today, I can push my camera to 3200 and still get very acceptable images in the digital age. Digital is superior in almost every way, so why do I miss 35mm film? LOL
International Organization for Standardization; International Standards Organization. How ISO as photographers know it came to be associated with the aforementioned organization is a mystery I'd love for someone like you to investigate. 💜
Although I really don't dig on Simon and Garfunkel, I really wish I could get my kodachrome back! Sure do miss my ASA 64 film. 25 was just too slow for me most of the time... I had no luck with Squarespace when I tried the free trial... might need a tutorial video on that
Agreed. But until then I’m going to use the name that the dial says as to not confuse the majority of people watching this video and learning ISO at a basics level ☺️
1:25 this is not how you compare the ISO outcome. To do this properly one should keep the aperture and the shutterspeed the same. Now these images are all shot at f/4.5 but the shutterspeed is increased with every shot. So, is the extra grain a result of the increased ISO or of the increased shutterspeed? Because opinions do vary on this matter....
Variance in shutter is not affecting noise, only iso since its an effect of the signal processing. The change in shutter was to maintain an equivalent exposure, which was appropriate for the noise comparison.
firstly it isn't I.S.O. but ISO (all in one go). Secondly is not the ISO the cause of the noise as it has extensively proven and documented, but rather the lack of light. In a situation where there's lack of light the ISO will go up (if one has the ISO set on auto) and therefore there is the false impression that high ISOs are the cause of noise - which is not the case. But it's true the opposite, noisy images do happen thanks to lack of light which (in turn) will cause the ISO to go up (to bridge that gap).
Not quite. I can get a beautifully clean image in low light with a long exposure, open aperture and low ISO while if stay in the same environment and redo my exposure to have a fast shutter speed and high ISO the one with a higher ISO will be show more noise. The noise IS however most noticed in the low light areas (i.e. shadows)
@@VanessaJoy it makes sense what you're reporting but the ISO is the consequence that you're working with not enough light. For instance ISO 6400 tests have been conducted with flashlight and the noise puff... is gone! Magic? nope, it's the light starvation caused by faster shutter speed or small aperture (F11 or higher) that will lead to noise, however do not take my word for it. Let me send you a couple of links. ISO is just a reaction to the fact you're working with insufficient light - that's it. It's not the cause of noise. And by the way is ISO from Greed ISOS (i.e. equals to) and not I.S.O. as it's clearly explained on the ISO website. I'll post the links as this confusion should end on RUclips frankly.
@@VanessaJoy We need to get the concept of cause-effect right here. In these two videos (both are very competent people - Tony is an engineer of all things!) you it's easily understood as to why this confusing involving high ISOs comes about. here's one ruclips.net/video/qYm2Mt9cEn8/видео.html and here are the tests ruclips.net/video/2jkf31w7fwU/видео.html
@@VanessaJoy I love your videos because I learn a lot, but when I see her, even if it’s for a few seconds my heart stops! Thank you Vanessa for your great videos! And can you say hi to Juliana from me, please?! 😅😁
You got one thing wrong: changing the ISO on a digital camera does not change the sensors sensitivity to light. It doesn't gather even one more photon. Digital ISO is gain. The signal being output by the sensor goes through an amplifier, and the signal gets boosted. That's why a "high iso" image has more noise. The noise already present from the sensor gets amplified as well, and the amplifier adds some noise of its own to the signal.
Sensor Sensitive is ISO. ISO is almost dead just look at the iPhone ! iPhone is the new family camera. DSLR is less than 10% of the photo market. Panasonic and Olympus are 10 years ahead of the pack. They have been in mirrorless for ten years before the late comers ! Lumix has the money to compete !
@@VanessaJoy light saturation of the sensor which does affect color. Yes I do know most of these gurus. Can’t retouch or edit high end if their life depended on it. They are just photographers. Not photographers and editors/retouchers. They have forgotten about the other half.
@@wendystumbaugh695so you make fun of people’s mistakes then? Cool. You do you boo. PS my teeth are moving thanks to grinding them at night and I’ve been developing a lisp occasionally. Thanks for bringing it to the attention of all, making fun of me for it, and then calling me a liar. Why are you here?
@@VanessaJoythe title is “don’t set your iso to THIS” implying there’s an amount so people would click.. a much better title, a less clickbaitey one, would be “this is why you shouldn’t raise your ISO too high!”
Great video 😀 Really clear explanation. I am going to give my thoughts on the subject of ISO below, but I think your explanation keeping it simple is more suited to the audience. But for the people that want to understand what is really going on under the hood.... maybe this contribution can help. If you like clear explanations....please listen to Vanessa😀
You brought the sensitivity analogy from the film days into the digital era: With digital sensors you can think of ISO as the amplification of the incoming signal. In the old days it was true that the the actual film was more sensitive to light, but a digital sensor mainly has a fixed sensitivity: it just basically counts the photons coming in. The ISO setting then just multiplies that number to emulate sensitivity.
Say you have a 200 photons at ISO 100 hitting a particular pixel....and 145 photons on the next pixel...you have a pretty decent gradient. If you bump your ISO to 6400 though, you will have a 128 times multiplication. Lets say a 100 times for ease of calculation. You will get 2 photons and 1.45 photons for the next. Since half photons do not exist, you'll either get value 1 or value 2 based on luck. You then multiply that by 100 and get either 200 and 100 or 200 and 200. This is how noise is born...... through amplification of a weak signal.
This is why dark sections of a photograph have more noise. You can clearly see that when you lighten them in post. So it's not the ISO setting that is creating the noise....it's the lack of lighting on a particular area. The ISO setting merely amplifies the problem so you can better see it. Convenient 😀
The R5 does have a step in the ISO noise performance though. At ISO 400 it basically performs better at noise and dynamic range than at ISO 200 and everything in between. Not sure how they do it, but you can take advantage of it by skipping ISO 200-320.
Love this! Pinning this ❤️
To take this a step further, increasing ISO does not actually increase noise. The noise is already there - even at ISO 100. What happens when you increase ISO is that the signal/noise ratio drops, and the noise (the part you don’t want) becomes more apparent relative to the signal (the part you want), thus appearing to increase noise.
This is a brilliant explanation. But, rather than worrying so much about ISO setting, we should put more effort towards a proper exposure for the scene. ISO is only a factor in that equation.
I always explain ISO like the gain on an amplifier. The higher the gain, the more sensitive it is to the plucks on the guitar strings. But it also comes with more electric hums, or ... noise. Same thing with ISO and grain.
I always describe it as “it takes one bucket of light to take the picture.”
Think of light like water and filling that bucket is what you need to do.
Shutter speed is how long the hose is on.
Aperture is how big around the hose is.
And ISO is how much dirt is in the bottom of the bucket. It takes less water to fill the bucket, but the image isn’t as clean, but you want the bucket to be full either way.
Love!!
N I C E
Imho you can only use Iso 100 if there is a lot of light (outdoors), in a studio (where you are in control of the light), on a tripod and with long shutter speeds. My to go setting outdoors is iso 400.
Agreed! I get a lot of crap on YT for not being at ISO 100 all the time… but it’s just not always realistic
The biggest mistake new photographers are tought is staying at iso 100. You should drop your iso as low as you can but go as high as needed ! With my first Rebel in 2008 I didn't dare to go above iso 1600 but with my new R6 I often use Iso 10.000 at concerts and weddings. Off course I'll try to go to f1.4 and 1/100th of a second and after that I'll raise my iso.
I recall that lightbulb going off for me thanks to a Simon d'Entremont video on how much shutter speed you really need to capture a bird in flight, leaves you no choice but to explore the higher ISO levels. That 'ah ha' moment definitely improved my night/concert shots too (even though I'm still a noob).
@@bruce-le-smith I photographed flying seagulls against a bright sky. I needed +2 ev and 1/3200th of a second. I choose f 11 to get enough dof. The result was I needed Iso 2000 on a bright sunny day ! But as it was a bright picture, you didn't see any noise. Noise only shows in the darker parts
It doesnt matter what iso you use. Look at the past photos they most of all have grain. And no one complains about that. But now its a big mess.
👍🏼
@@errole back in da days i loved grain, now I dont, but you are so right.
Attitudes towards noise vary widely. My feeling is our eyes don't see it, so I don't want it in my photo output either. One must get familiar with their camera and know at what point it becomes obtrusive or damaging to the detail in the image. There is NO question having used every software package out there, that DXO Photolab provides the finest RAW processed image and in almost all cases you end up with a noise free image with detail remaining. Worst case, a hit of Topaz DeNoise properly adjusted gets great results as well.
👏
I use a Canon M6 mark II in FV mode with ISO set to "Auto". Once I set my Aperture, I can get my shutter speed where I want it. I set those on the touchscreen. I used to use Manual or Aperture Priority, but FV just makes it easy for me. It is good to understand ISO but newer cameras are very good at ISO auto.
Great tip! Thanks for sharing! Would love if you subbed!
@@VanessaJoy sub done.
Cameras like the R6 Mark II are so insanely good at higher ISOs that I no longer think about it... especially now with the new AI noise removal tools like those found in the new Photoshop/LR.
I've shot for 18 years and compared to what I had to put up with back then it's night and day. My 20D, 1D III I used to have to be under ISO 3200 (3200 was last resort). Now I routinely shoot ISO 12,800 and don't think about it. In fact, R6 II at ISO 12,800 and with a bit of the new LR/PS AI noise removal is cleaner than ISO 400 on my original cams.
So so true. I’m obsessed with the r6ii
I SOoooooo liked this video. I understand the use/adjusting of ISO but really want to understand how it works. With so many sensors out there makes me wonder if one day ISO will be controlled so well by new sensors that it will almost be non existent.
I would venture to say you’re probably right
Iso as we know it today is just signal amplification. It will never actually go away, the closest you would get is just being hidden behind automatic algorithms as we're seeing with phone photography.
A camera is said to have a native iso(usually around 100, but dual iso sensors are becoming more common with a secondary native at around 400 or 800) which is the gain the physical circuitry/signal amps are set for, all the rest of the iso is just digital gain, maths(× or ÷) done on the native iso values to approximate the output.
I really enjoyed this video and thought it contained a lot of good content. (In spite of the left-handed Sony Shooter/ Canon Fangirl comment to start things off). Speaking of the exposure triangle, photographers drive the ISO up because they want a proper exposure without reducing the shutter speed too much below their comfort range. This shutter speed comfort range comes from experience from shooting and comparing the results, just like the higher ISO comfort experience. A little grain in the image beats a blurry anytime. But the shutter speed needs to be higher if you use poor camera mechanics and have difficulty holding your camera still while capturing the image. IBIS and stabilized lenses go a long way toward counteracting poor technique if you are not using a tripod or monopod. Using the viewfinder in place of staring at the screen while tucking your elbows in goes a long way toward sharper images. Additionally, using the lens hood, especially when shooting outside as a "natural light" photographer, will really control unwanted or uncontrollable lighting flares. If you are wearing a baseball cap with a visor so you can see your screen, you already understand the need for a lens hood on your set-up.
Lol 😂 you’ll get used to my NJ snark. It’s all in love ❤️
Yeah let’s get it right ISO is the sensitivity of the chip in your Cameraso it’s also called ASA in the film language which is also the sensitivity of the film some films are more sensitive than others whereas the chip in your camera can be adjusted to the sensitivity but just remember the higher the ISO the more noise it might produce in the finish image. Today’s digital cameras all set for somewhere in the region of 200 ASA or ISO which will give you a great reproduction.
Good additional info!
I always love your videos!
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for watching!
some cameras has anti aliasing filter on the sensors witch is extremally annoying and no one talk about it , i tried to cancel my noise reduction on my camera and boy its so bad , the grain is red and magenta . thanks for the new ai Denoise on Lightroom i removed it with no problem , toke forever but its so worth it . budget Nikon and Sony handle iso better than budget camera Canon . i have nikon z6ii btw
Definitely haven’t heard that being talked about at all!
Most important point is find out what the native ISO range is for your camera, anything more or less is just digital trickery. Have to agree with everything she says. Go as low as you can but push it as high as you need. Any shot is better than no shot.
Ha true BUT would you be able to look at an image or video and know it was shot in native ISO? I admit, I would not be able to. But I suppose it helps capture better in the circumstances
@VanessaJoy what I mean is knowing the point where "expanded" ISO starts keeps you out of the cameras algorithm processing zone. For my old mark II, that was 6400, which was the limit of the senser beyond that it was all just image processing. However you are correct who can tell looking at a photo, it is just my practice.
For this discussion, I say "native" ISO I mean the range before extension. Not the true IOS as described so well in the pinned comment.
Nice work Vanessa. I can only hope to have 93,000 subscribers someday. I appreciate you bringing more exposure, ha ha, to ISO. Your video kept it relatively simple and easy to understand for newbies. I hope people view this as an entry point to the subject and dig a little more, but that's the nerd in me. :) It's all about overwhelming your bad light (noise) with good light!
Edit: You may be interested in this approach to lighting... Exposure triangle gone! Blah! that's so confusing, glad to hear you say it. For me, I teach it's all about the flow of light from your front element to your sensor. At every point (front element, aperture, and shutter) you get to make a creative decision. It gets deeper into it, but ISO doesn't change the amount of light hitting your sensor. The creative decisions you made along the flow of light do. I think there are a great many folks out there who think ISO changes the amount of light. Forget about ISO until you've processed the creativity portion of your desired image.
ooooo I like that method of thinking!!!
Important to mention high iso is not just noise but as Important it results in a substantial loss of dynamic range
👏
I shoot a lot of video and sometimes leave for stills. I get the aperture and shutter speed I want, which is usually wide open and low (60/120). I set my ISO to auto and control over exposure with a Peter McKinnon VND filter. Camera mounted on a Ronin RS3 usually for extra stability.
love it!
Hey I worked with Julianna in NJ. Great video BTW! Love the I-S-O OR is it ISO. Great simple explanation overall! Subbed
Isn’t she amazing?!?! Thanks for subbing!
Depending upon the camera, I find that each model has a useful ISO range in which the images it produces are good. Once I determine this, I adjust the ISO along with the shutter speed and aperture to get the exposure I want.
Good method!!
Do you have a method for this "calibration"? Maybe a standard image to shoot with repeatable lighting? Or just pure judgement?
@@panhandlejake6200 I don’t have a standard method. I determine over time just by trial and error but I like your suggestion
The only time I pump-up my ISO is when I want more "natural light" (ambient) to appear in the background when I'm using a flash to light up the main subject. Higher ISO & a slower shutter speed will reveal more ambient light.
Great!
Grain only applies to film and denotes the size of the silver halide crystals.
ISO in the digital world denotes GAIN. Raising ISO increases the gain of the pixel values, also increasing the inherent noise of the sensor; it doesn't increase the sensitivity of the sensor, that parameter is basically fixed in the manufacturing process. Camera manufacturers really need to change ISO markings/menu items to GAIN.
You can call it digital grain I would say. They act in similar way. It just that on film, photo chemical create random grains while on digital sensor, it creates grain according to photo receptor's grid.
@@munarong it's NOT grain. Film grain is the visible metallic silver particles in processed photographic film caused by the structure of the emulsion. What you see in digital photographs is a result of a poor S/N ratio which is exacerbated by higher ISO (GAIN) values.
@@bme7491 That's why I used the word "similar" and I've zoomed in to my own photos from DSLR, those dots are almost look the same as grain in photo from film camera. So I prefer to call it digital grain. And image noise, to me, it acts differently from (digital) grain, so I wouldn't call it the same thing.
As you know better than I, those lighting variances at wedding receptions tempt pushing ISO way up. I almost never go past 6400 because I couple it with flash, indoors. What are your thoughts on pushing ISO to about 10,000, using my Canon R6 Mk2?
6400 is a comfortable spot for me too because regular traditional light room denoising will help you out of it in post if needed, too much further past that and I’m probably going to want to use AI denoise and that definitely takes a lot longer. If you’re using flash, though, you will probably not so much noise in the properly exposed areas that your flash is hitting, it tends to be seen more in shadows and under exposed areas where It’s basically searching to find light.
Very informative! Canon might want you to spell the product name correctly? 4:11 in. All good. Just having fun.
Lol 21k people didn’t notice that so let’s hope Canon doesn’t either
@@VanessaJoy Hey, the only people that don't make mistakes don't do anything. And, after watching the recent video that showed how much you are involved with, I feel guilty for taking the time here to tell you something you already know.
Awesome video Vanessa.
Raise your ISO for as much or as low for the image to look great. Noise is ok and some times adds to the overall feel of the photo. Break the rules. It’s all about the end result not praising the exposure gods 😂
preach!!! I never liked those exposure gods ;-)
capture one does a good job
it does!
Vanessa when comparing the two images side by side why did the higher ISO image zoom in too?
Emphasizing the grain in that part of the video ☺️
DXO Deep PRIME is the best noise reduction there is even restoring loss colors. My Olympus OMD E-M1ii is clean at ISO 3.200 and just a very small amount of noise at ISO 6,400. I've seen a Sony A73 use DXO Deep PRIME at 25,600 and was as clean as ISO 100. I would not use DXO xD Deep PRIME on extreme high ISO as it can have artifacts. With DXO I export to DNG raw so I can edit in any other editor.
Topaz is garbage next to DXO. Don't believe me try it for yourself for free.
When I shot 35mm film, we didn't have the luxury of these intermediate ISO's like ISO 320, for example. It was 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200. Most of us didn't feel it was worth going over 800 ISO because image quality suffered. Today, I can push my camera to 3200 and still get very acceptable images in the digital age. Digital is superior in almost every way, so why do I miss 35mm film? LOL
haha bc 35mm is so nostalgic along with the smell of the chemicals we used!
You can sniff chemicals with me any day. Just say'n.@@VanessaJoy
If you shot film, it easy to learn!
Quite true
International Organization for Standardization; International Standards Organization. How ISO as photographers know it came to be associated with the aforementioned organization is a mystery I'd love for someone like you to investigate. 💜
already made a video on it ;-)
@@VanessaJoy What's the title of it, I'll watch. Or I can do a search over on your channel.
@@TC_Connerit’s shown with the thumbnail at the beginning of this video ☺️
Although I really don't dig on Simon and Garfunkel, I really wish I could get my kodachrome back! Sure do miss my ASA 64 film. 25 was just too slow for me most of the time...
I had no luck with Squarespace when I tried the free trial... might need a tutorial video on that
really? did you go from a template and just replace with your content? I find that's the easiest for me
@@VanessaJoy I think so. It couldn't load portrait and landscape of the same page and there was some other issues too
@@truthsayers8725interesting
Looking forward to another photo competition with Sal. Will you reprise your role as a judge?
Haha no not this time but looking forward to watching it!
Great Video!
Appreciate you saying so! ❤️
Technically in digital cameras its called gain. It would be easier to understand if they dropped the film reference.
Agreed. But until then I’m going to use the name that the dial says as to not confuse the majority of people watching this video and learning ISO at a basics level ☺️
just lovely
thanks!
the Gimp also does a good job at removing noise , blessing
Gimp??
Gimp is basically a free version of PS.
yes, are you aware of it? @@VanessaJoy
@@cosmo0080no! Never heard of it. Will have to check it out
When shooting in bad weather at baseball game I do auto ISO
that'll do!
1:25 this is not how you compare the ISO outcome. To do this properly one should keep the aperture and the shutterspeed the same.
Now these images are all shot at f/4.5 but the shutterspeed is increased with every shot.
So, is the extra grain a result of the increased ISO or of the increased shutterspeed?
Because opinions do vary on this matter....
Variance in shutter is not affecting noise, only iso since its an effect of the signal processing. The change in shutter was to maintain an equivalent exposure, which was appropriate for the noise comparison.
what Bran said ;-)
I like grain especially in large prints.
It can be beautiful
Great video but people should also know about “native ISO”. The lowest iso isn’t the best iso.
Quite true
So the take home is buy a more expensive camera 😂😜
_* immediately showing this to my wife_
Lol I’m here for ya 😜
Thank goodness for Adobe Denoise AI in Miky way 4000 ISO shooting at F1.8
Haha the denoise is AWESOME
People that fight over "ISO" vs "I.S.O." just makes me shake my head. They are both CORRECT! lol
Not to mention that 99% of today's (self-proclaimed) "photographers" have no idea what the letters ISO stand for. 😢😂
@@mark.gallaher3193 we can Google that... its the defining of how to say it as if it matters for me. Lol potatoe/potato
Yeah I don’t care what you say as long as you know what you’re talking about 😜
Originally called asa
firstly it isn't I.S.O. but ISO (all in one go). Secondly is not the ISO the cause of the noise as it has extensively proven and documented, but rather the lack of light. In a situation where there's lack of light the ISO will go up (if one has the ISO set on auto) and therefore there is the false impression that high ISOs are the cause of noise - which is not the case. But it's true the opposite, noisy images do happen thanks to lack of light which (in turn) will cause the ISO to go up (to bridge that gap).
Not quite. I can get a beautifully clean image in low light with a long exposure, open aperture and low ISO while if stay in the same environment and redo my exposure to have a fast shutter speed and high ISO the one with a higher ISO will be show more noise. The noise IS however most noticed in the low light areas (i.e. shadows)
@@VanessaJoy it makes sense what you're reporting but the ISO is the consequence that you're working with not enough light. For instance ISO 6400 tests have been conducted with flashlight and the noise puff... is gone! Magic? nope, it's the light starvation caused by faster shutter speed or small aperture (F11 or higher) that will lead to noise, however do not take my word for it. Let me send you a couple of links. ISO is just a reaction to the fact you're working with insufficient light - that's it. It's not the cause of noise. And by the way is ISO from Greed ISOS (i.e. equals to) and not I.S.O. as it's clearly explained on the ISO website. I'll post the links as this confusion should end on RUclips frankly.
@@VanessaJoy We need to get the concept of cause-effect right here.
In these two videos (both are very competent people - Tony is an engineer of all things!) you it's easily understood as to why this confusing involving high ISOs comes about.
here's one
ruclips.net/video/qYm2Mt9cEn8/видео.html
and here are the tests
ruclips.net/video/2jkf31w7fwU/видео.html
I love Juliana 🥰
Me too!
@@VanessaJoy I love your videos because I learn a lot, but when I see her, even if it’s for a few seconds my heart stops! Thank you Vanessa for your great videos! And can you say hi to Juliana from me, please?! 😅😁
You got one thing wrong: changing the ISO on a digital camera does not change the sensors sensitivity to light. It doesn't gather even one more photon. Digital ISO is gain. The signal being output by the sensor goes through an amplifier, and the signal gets boosted. That's why a "high iso" image has more noise. The noise already present from the sensor gets amplified as well, and the amplifier adds some noise of its own to the signal.
👏
It's ISO not I S O it's short for International Standardization Organisation. They should've called is ASA, think that was better....
Sensor Sensitive is ISO. ISO is almost dead just look at the iPhone ! iPhone is the new family camera. DSLR is less than 10% of the photo market. Panasonic and Olympus are 10 years ahead of the pack. They have been in mirrorless for ten years before the late comers ! Lumix has the money to compete !
ugh yeah... but blow up a picture on the iphone, especially in the dark 🤢
@@VanessaJoy The market is gone !
She forgot sensor saturation. You. Can get cleaner crisper images at higher isos with proper lighting. The video was mostly made to market not teach.
no, it wasn't but so cute that you think you know me. Also I did mention saturation ;-)
@@VanessaJoy light saturation of the sensor which does affect color. Yes I do know most of these gurus. Can’t retouch or edit high end if their life depended on it. They are just photographers. Not photographers and editors/retouchers. They have forgotten about the other half.
@@000CloudStrifeuhh say whah?
@@natestain7103 exactly
iso 100??... A7siii Left the chat...
lol
2:20 sTRaight. Not sHtrait.
Are you making fun of a speech impediment? Wow. Pat yourself on the back.
@@VanessaJoy nope. You are way too perfectly articulate to pull the “speech impediment” card.
@@wendystumbaugh695so you make fun of people’s mistakes then? Cool. You do you boo.
PS my teeth are moving thanks to grinding them at night and I’ve been developing a lisp occasionally. Thanks for bringing it to the attention of all, making fun of me for it, and then calling me a liar.
Why are you here?
ISO one syllable. 😂
awwww there he is!! the one that cares ;-) made a whole video about that
@@VanessaJoy am I missing his joke? "ISO" is still 2 syllables even if said as 1 word (vs. "I-S-O" as 3 syllables)
@@ForeverBrooklynNYCno it’s just an ongoing crazy debate that heats ppl up in the industry 😂
I’ve listened to this and does she ever actually tell you an actual amount to NEVER set your ISO to? Clickbait much
Yeah, I did. don’t set it too high for YOUR camera’s capabilities
@@VanessaJoy … 😂 alrighty
That’s sort of a given but ok
@@NileSWPhotographyfor YOU it is. For more beginners, who I made this video for, it absolutely it not ❤
@@VanessaJoythe title is “don’t set your iso to THIS” implying there’s an amount so people would click.. a much better title, a less clickbaitey one, would be “this is why you shouldn’t raise your ISO too high!”