A&P 30D + bored Isaac = ISO comparo

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by isaac86hatch, Jun 20, 2008.

  1. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Well in my boredom of the day I was trying to explain ISO to someone so I did this quick comaparo that I figured I would post on here. Forever I have been telling people about the power RAW and that my favorite thing about them is the ability to overexpose on purpose in order to lower noise levels in post. Anywho on to the boredom.

    Here's the first shot, looks decent for a 30D @ 3200. Over exposed by a stop and brought back in ACR + 25 noise reduction.
    [​IMG]

    3200 and exposed right on the money (according to the meter :greddy:) did not really have to do anything in post except add the same +25 noise reduction.
    [​IMG]

    3200 and underexposed and "recovered" with same + 25 NR :barf:
    [​IMG]

    Things were going good so I stepped it up a bit. ISO 3200 +1 stop and bumped the aperture to f4 from f2.8 and even better.
    [​IMG]

    Today's lesson was brought to you by the letter H.
     
  2. g33k

    g33k OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    2,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    or you can just shoot at iso 1600 :hsugh:
     
  3. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    Can't always control the lighting. Either way I was more explaining methods of being able to get the shutter speed you want and not worry about noise.
     
  4. Dwight Schrute

    Dwight Schrute New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    8,616
    Likes Received:
    0
    Cliffs: expose to the right, as they've been teaching since the advent of digital photography.
     
  5. Pants

    Pants New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    1,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    :werd:

    Maybe I missed something, but isn't overexposing 1 stop at ISO 3200 and pulling it 1 stop in post the same as shooting at 1600?
     
  6. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    You'd also be losing three clicks on your shutter wheel, which could be the difference between a blurry shot and a still shot.
     
  7. Yoritomo

    Yoritomo dad's jar chimer

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2001
    Messages:
    20,472
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DFW
    Shutter speed would be the same. 3200 + 1 and 1600 would have the same shutter speed.
     
  8. g33k

    g33k OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    2,079
    Likes Received:
    0
    :uh:
     
  9. isaac86hatch

    isaac86hatch This thread sucks

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2005
    Messages:
    27,892
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oregon
    So what you're telling me is that you think ISO 1600 is fine to shoot -/+ o stops and you wont see noise? What I am saying is this: no matter what ISO you shoot at, if you shoot raw you should always expose to right. That is all I was showing in this thread. I understand completely that 1 stop plus 1600 is 3200. I could have done this with ISO 100 and proven my point, I just chose 3200 to make the point clearer.
     
  10. turbodude

    turbodude Just a photographer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2002
    Messages:
    10,118
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ehh in print that nominal difference wouldnt mean shit. I have sold some of the noisiest photos. Most of teh time its the content of teh shot not how noisy it is.

    BTW Noisy shots sell, blurry shots do not... Do what you need to do not to get a blurry shot.
     
  11. nine

    nine OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    16,249
    Likes Received:
    12
    Location:
    so. cal.
    how about a comparo between 3200 overexposed and 1600 normal exposed?
     
  12. ericande

    ericande Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    1,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    +1, I was scrolling down waiting to see that.
     
  13. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Id rather shoot at 1600, keep the highlight headroom, and deal with the minimal amount of noise.

    Exposing to the right and pulling it down is pretty useless IMO. The only people that get super anal about noise are the people online who dont have anything better to do.

    As has been said, noisy prints sell. Ill take more noise and more headroom over less noise and less headroom.
     
  14. IntheWorks

    IntheWorks windin film.. takin pics Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2001
    Messages:
    16,928
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    earth
    I really think people get to caught up in noise.... I've printed pics that looked noisy as hell on my PC, but perfect in print..... but again.. most people don't print anymore :hs:
     

Share This Page