Is ISO invariance really important, should I worry about it or should I buy a new camera that has it because my current one isn’t ISO invariant?
I get asked these questions A LOT because there’s a lot of talk about new camera sensors and ISO invariance on the bigger YouTube photography channels.
If your camera is NOT ISO invariant is it therefore an inferior camera – OF COURSE IT ISN”T!
ISO invariance is becoming something of a ‘buzz-term’ touted by the bigger photography influencers as if it’s the Holy Grail of camera sensor performance, and this is something I find somewhat annoying.
Why?
Because there are plenty of other sensor attributes that are FAR MORE important, such as dynamic range for instance!
The only real advantage of a true ISO invariant sensor is that it would give you a ‘get out of jail free’ card if you screw up your shot by massively under exposing it.
But the necessity for it is easily avoided if only folk would learn how to use their equipment properly in the first place.
Correct exposure is everything in photography, and ISO invariance – for the most part – is just a way of circumventing it!
Like it or not this video compares the real usable dynamic range of Nikons’ three most used cameras for landscape photography. Everyone bangs on endlessly about dynamic range when in fact most of them have no clue what they’re talking about. If you want to see the truth about dynamic range improvements since 2012 then the results of this video may well come as a shock!
If you want to see the tonal response curves of the three Nikon models AND the Canon 5DMk3 then click the image below to view at full size:
Sensor Size Myth – “A bigger sensor gathers more light.”
If I hear this crap one more time either my head’s going to explode or I’m going to do some really nasty things to someone!
A larger sensor size does NOT necessarily gather any more light than a smaller sensor – END OF!
What DOES gather more light is BIGGER PHOTOSITES – those individual light receptors that cumulatively ‘make up’ the photosensitive surface plane of our camera sensor.
Above we have two fictional sensors, one with smaller physical dimensions and one with larger dimensions – the bottom one is a ‘larger sensor size’ than the top one, and the bottom one has TWICE as many photosites as the top one (analogous to more megapixels).
But the individual photosites in BOTH sensors are THE SAME SIZE.
Ignoring the factors of:
Micro Lens design
Variations in photosite design such as resistivity
Wiring Substrate
SNR & ADC
the photosites in both sensors will have exactly the same pixel pitch, reactivity to light, saturation capacity and base noise level.
However, if we now try to cram the number of photosites (megapixels) into the area of the SMALLER sensor – to increase the resolution:
we end up with SMALLER photosites.
We have a HIGHER pixel resolution but this comes with a multi-faceted major penalty:
Decreased Dynamic Range
Increased susceptibility to specular highlight clipping
Lower photosite SNR (signal to noise ratio)
Increased susceptibility to diffraction – f-stop limiting
And of course EXACTLY the same penalties are incurred when we increase the megapixel count of LARGER sensors too – the mega-pixel race – fueled by FOOLS and NO-NOTHING IDIOTS and accommodated by camera manufacturers trying to make a profit.
But this perennial argument that a sensor behaves like a window is stupid – it doesn’t matter if I look outside through a small window or a big one, the light value of the scene outside is the same.
Just because I make the window bigger the intensity of the light coming through it does NOT INCREASE.
And the ultimate proof of the stupidity and futility of the ‘big window vs small window’ argument lies with the ‘proper photographers’ like Ben Horne, Nick Carver and Steve O’nions to name but three – those who shoot FILM!
A 10″x8″ sheet of Provia 100 has exactly the same exposure characteristics as a roll of 35mm or 120/220 Provia 100, and yet the 10″x 8″ window is 59.73x the size of the 35mm window.
And don’t even get me started on the other argument the ‘bigger = more light’ idiots use – that of the solar panel!
“A bigger solar panel pumps out more volts so because it gathers more light, so a bigger sensor gathers more light so must pump out better images………”
What a load of shite…………
Firstly, SPs are cumulative and they increase their ‘megapixel count’ by growing in physical dimensions, not by making their ‘photosites’ smaller.
But if you cover half of one with a thick tarpaulin then the cumulative output of the panel drops dramatically!
Also, we want SPs to hit their clip point for maximum voltage generation (the clip point would be that where more light does NOT produce more volts!).
Our camera sensor CANNOT be thought of in the same way:
We are not interested in a cumulative output, and we don’t want all the photosites on our sensors to ‘max out’ otherwise we’ll have no tonal variation in our image will we…..!
The shot above is from a D800E fitted with a 21mm prime, ISO 100 and 2secs @f13.
If I’d have shot this with the same lens on the D500 and framed the same composition I’d have had to use a SHORTER exposure to prevent the highlights from clipping.
But if bigger sensors gather more light (FX gathers more than DX) I’d have theoretically have had expose LONGER……….and that would have been a disaster.
Seriously folks, when it comes to sensor size bigger ones (FX) do not gather more light than smaller (DX) sensors.
It’s not the sensor total area that does the light gathering, but the photosites contained therein – bigger photosites gather more light, have better SNR, are less prone to diffraction and result in a higher cumulative dynamic range for the sensor as a whole.
Do NOT believe anyone anywhere on any website, forum or YouTube channel who tells you any different because they a plain WRONG!
Where does this shite originate from you may ask?
Well, some while back FX dslr cameras where not made and everything from Canon and Nikon was APSC 1.5x or 1.6x, or APSH 1.3x. Canon was first with an FX digital then Nikon joined the fray with the D3.
Prior to the D3 we Nikon folk had the D300 DX which was 12.3Mp with a photosite area 30.36 microns2
The D3 FX came along with 12.1Mp but with a photosite area of 70.9 microns2
Better in low light than its DX counterpart due to these MASSIVE photosites it gave the dick heads, fools and no-nothing idiots the crackpot idea that a bigger sensor size gathers more light – and you know what……it stuck; and for some there’s no shifting it!
Hope this all makes sense folks.
Don’t forget, any questions or queries then just ask!
If you feel I deserve some support for putting this article together then please consider joining my membership site over on Patreon by using the link below.
Alternatively you could donate via PayPal to tuition@wildlifeinpixels.net
If you are not yet a member of my Patreon site then please consider it as members get benefits, with more membership perks planned over the next 3 months. Your support would be very much appreciated and rewarded.
Before I go, there’s a new video up on my YouTube Channel showing the sort of processing video I do for my Patreon Members.
You can see it here (it’s 23 minutes long so be warned!):
Please leave a comment on the video if you find it useful, and if you fancy joining my other members over on Patreon then I could be doing these for you too!
Two Blend Modes in Photoshop EVERY Photographer Should Know!
The other day one of my members over on my Patreon suggested I do a video on Blending Modes in Photoshop.
Well, that would take a whole heap of time as it’s quite a big subject because Blending Modes don’t just apply to layers. Brushes of all descriptions have their own unique blend modes, and so do layer groups.
There is no need to go into a great deal of detail over blend modes in order for you to start reaping their benefits.
There are TWO blend modes – Multiply and Screen – which you can start using straight away to vary the apparent exposure of your images.
And seeing as my last few videos have been concerned with exposing for highlights and ETTR in general, the use of the Multiply Layer Blending Mode will be clear to see once you’ve watched the video.
Hope the video gives you some more insight folks!
My Members over on Patreon get the benefit of being able to download the raw files used in this video.
Landscape Photography Exposure, ETTR and Highlight Spot Metering Accuracy
CLICK ME to watch the Video!
In this short(ish) video I want to show you why your camera spot meter can be something of a ‘let down’ in exposure terms when you are trying to obtain an accurate highlight reading for your scene.
Most ‘in camera’ spot meters are a lot more imprecise than the user imagines.
Nikon spot meter ‘spots’ are generally 4mm wide. That means 4mm ON THE SENSOR!
On an FX camera the sensor is roughly 36mm wide, so the ‘spot’ actually has a ‘window’ or ‘measuring footprint’ that is 1/9th of the viewfinders horizontal field of view.
And don’t think that because you use a Canon you’re any better off – in fact you’re worse off because Canon spots are a tiny bit BIGGER!
In this example I use a shot taken with a Zeiss 21mm – this lens has a horizontal angle of view of 81 degrees.
So the 4mm Nikon spot has an angle of view equivalent to 1/9th the frame and hence 1/9th the horizontal AoV of the lens, in other words 9 degrees.
Aimed at the brightest highlight in the sky its footprint takes in sky tones that are dramatically less than highlights. So the reading it will give me is ‘darker’ than it should be.
My D800E has it’s highlight clipping/blow point 3.6 stops above its mid tone.
If I then apply ETTR to this reading by exposing at +3 to +3.3 stops it will result in blown highlights.
But if I use a 1 degree spot meter aimed at exactly the same place its much narrower angle sees ONLY THE BRIGHT AREA I’m aiming at. This gives me a much BRIGHTER reading, allowing me to push the exposure by +3.3 stops without blowing any of my highlights.
Hope this all makes sense folks.
Don’t forget, any questions or queries then just ask!
If you feel I deserve some support for putting this video and article together then please consider joining my membership site over on Patreon by using the link below.
Alternatively you could donate via PayPal to tuition@wildlifeinpixels.net
I recently uploaded a video to my YouTube channel showing you an easy way to find the ‘usable dynamic range’ of you dSLR:
The other day I was out with Paul Atkins for a landscape session in the awesome Dinorwic Quarry in Llanberis, Snowdonia. Highly dynamic clouds and moody light made the place look more like Mordor!
Looking towards the top of the Llanberis Pass from the middle level of Dinorwic Quarry and Electric Mountain.
Here are the 6 unedited shots that make this finished panoramic view:
As you can see, the images are are shot in a vertical aspect ratio. Shooting at 200mm on the D800E this yields an assembled pano that is 16,000 x 7000 pixels; the advantages for both digital sales and print should be obvious to you!
As you can see, the bright parts of the sky are a lot brighter in the captures than they are in the finished image, but they are not ‘blown’. Also the shadows in the foreground are not choked or blocked.
In other words the captures are shot ETTR.
Meter – in camera or external.
Any light meter basically looks at a scene (or part thereof) and AVERAGES the tones that it sees. This average value value is then classed by the meter is MID GREY and the exposure is calculated in terms of the 3 variables you set – Time, Intensity and Applied Gain, or shutter, aperture and ISO.
But this leads to all sorts of problems.
All meters are calibrated to an ANSI Standard of 12% grey (though this gets a bit ambiguous between manufactures and testers). But you can get a good idea of what ‘light meter mid grey/mid tone” looks like by mentally assigning an RGB value of 118,118,118 to it.
However, we – humans – find 18% grey a more acceptable ‘mid tone grey’ both in print and on our modern monitors.
NOTE: 18% grey refers to the level of REFLECTANCE – it reflects 18% of the light falling on it. It can also be reproduced in Photoshop using a grey with 128,128.128 RGB values.
So problem number 1 is that of mid tone perception and the difference between what you ‘see’ and what the camera sees and then does in terms of exposure (if you let the camera make a decision for you).
128RGB grey versus 118RGB meter mid grey
Click on the pano image from Dinorwic to view it bigger, then try to FIND a mid grey that you could point your camera meter at – you can’t.
Remember, the grey you try to measure MUST be exactly mid-grey – try it, it’ll drive you nuts trying to find it!
This leads us to problem number 2.
Take your camera outside, find a white wall. Fill your frame with it and take a shot using ZERO exposure compensation – the wall will look GREY in the resulting shot not WHITE.
Next, find something matte black or near to it. Fill your frame with it and take another shot – the black will look grey in the shot not black(ish).
Problem number 3 is this – and it’s a bit of a two-headed serpent. An exposure meter of any kind is COLOUR BLIND but YOU can SEE colours but are tonally blinded to them to some degree or other:
Simple primary red, green and blue translate to vastly different grey tones which comes as a big surprise to a lot of folk, especially how tonally light green is.
Scene or Subject Brightness Range
Any scene in front of you and your camera has a range of tones from brightest to darkest, and this tonal range is the subject brightness range or SBR for short. Some folk even refer to it as the scene dynamic range.
If you put your camera meter into spot mode you can meter around your chosen scene and make note of the different exposure values for the brightest and darkest areas of your potential shot.
You camera spot meter isn’t the most accurate of spot meters because its ‘spot’ is just too big, typically between 4mm and 5mm, but it will serve to give you a pretty good idea of your potential SBR.
A 1 degree spot meter will, with correct usage, yield a somewhat more accurate picture (pun intended) of the precise SBR of the scene in front of you.
Right about now some of you will be thinking I’m hair-splitting and talking about unnecessary things in todays modern world of post-processing shadow and highlight recovery.
Photography today is full of folk who are prepared to forego the CRAFT of the expert photographer in favour of getting it half-right in camera and then using the crutch of software recovery to correct their mistakes.
Here’s the news – recovery of popped highlights is IMPOSSIBLE and recovery of shadows to anymore than a small degree results in pixel artifacting. Get this, two WRONGS do NOT make a RIGHT!
If the Mercedes F1 team went racing with the same attitude as the majority of camera users take pictures with, then F1 would be banned because drivers would die at an alarming rate and no car would ever make the finish line!
So, one way or another we can quantify our potential scene SBR.
“But Andy I don’t need to do that because my camera meter does that for me…….”
Oh no it does NOT, it just averages it to what IT THINKS is a correct mid tone grey – which it invariably isn’t!
This whole mid tone/mid grey ‘thing’ is a complete waste of time because:
It’s near impossible to find a true mid tone in your scene to take a reading off.
What you want as a mid tone will be at odds with your camera meter by at least 1/2stop.
If you are shooting wildlife or landscapes you can’t introduce a ‘grey card’.
Because of the above, your shot WILL BE UNDER EXPOSED.
“Yeah, but I can always bracket my shots and do an exposure blend Andy so you’re still talking crap….”
Two answers to that one:
You can’t bracket shots and blend if your MAIN subject is moving – de-ghosting is only effective on small parts of a scene with minimal movement between frames.
The popular “shoot and bracket two each end” makes you look like total dickhead and illustrates that you know less than zero about exposure. Try doing that on a paying job in front of the client and see how long you last in a commercial environment.
By far the BEST way of calculating exposure is the ETTR method.
ETTR, Expose to the Right.
If you meter for a highlight, your camera will treat that as a mid tone because your camera ASSUMES it’s a mid tone.
Your camera meter is a robot programmed to react to anything it sees in EXACTLY the same way. It doesn’t matter if your subject is a black cat in the coal house or a snow man in a snow storm, the result will be the same 118,118,118 grey sludge.
Mid tones are as we’ve already ascertained, difficult to pin down and full of ambiguity but highlights are not. So let’s meter the brightest area of the image and expose it hard over to the right of the histogram.
The simplest way to achieve this is to use your live view histogram with the camera in full manual mode.
Unlike the post-shot review histogram, the live-view histogram is not subject to jpeg compression, and can be thought of as something of a direct readout of scene tonality/brightness.
Using your exposure controls (usually shutter speed for landscape photography) you can increase your exposure to push the highlight peak of the histogram to the right as far as you can go before ‘hitting the wall’ on the right hand side of the histogram axis – in other words the camera sensor highlight clipping point.
Of course, this has the added benefit of shifting ALL the other tones ( mids and shadows) to the right as well,resulting in far less clipping potential in your shadow areas.
So back to Dinorwic again and here’s a shot that has been exposed ETTR on the live view histogram using spot metering over what I deemed to be the brightest area of the sky:
The red square indicates the approximate size of the spot meter area.
I was a naughty boy not recording this on video for you but I forgot to pack the HDMI lead for the video recorder – I’ll do one shortly!
The problem with using the Live View Histogram is that it can be a bit of a struggle to see it. your live view screen itself can be hard to see in certain light conditions outside, and the live view histogram itself is usually a bit on the small side – no where near as big as the image review histogram you can see here.
But looking at the review histogram above you can see that there’s a ‘little bit more juice’ to be had in terms of exposure of the highlights because of that tiny gap between the right end of the histogram and the ‘wall’ at the end of the axis.
Going back to the video the maximum ETTR ‘tipping point’ was centered around these three shots:
Clipped
Not Clipped (the one we allocated the star rating to). Exposure is -1/3rd stop below clipped.
Safe, but -2/3rd stop below Clipped.
The review histogram puts the Dinorwic shot highlights firmly in the same exposure bracket as ‘Safe, but -2/3rd stop below Clipped, and tells us there is another 1/3rd stop ‘more juice’ to be had!
So lengthening the exposure by 1/3rd stop and changing from 160th sec to 1/50th sec gives us this:
The red square indicates the approximate size of the spot meter area.
Live View Histogram ETTR
Live View Histogram plus 1/3 stop more juice! Highlights STILL below Clipping Point and shadows get 1/3rd stop more exposure.
That’s what it’s all about baby – MORE JUICE!
And you will not be in a position to confidently acquire more juice unless you find the USABLE DYNAMIC RANGE of your camera sensor.
The whole purpose of finding that usable DR is to discover where your highlight and shadow clipping points are – and they are very different between camera models.
For instance, the highlight clipping point value of the Nikon D850 is different from that of the Nikon D800E, but the shadow clipping point is pretty similar.
There is an awful lot more use to discovering your cameras usable dynamic range than a lot of folk imagine.
And if you do it the precise way then you can acquire a separate meter that will accept camera profiling:
You can create a dynamic range profile for your camera (and lens combo*) and then load it into the meter:
and then have your cameras usable dynamic range as part of the metering scale – so then you have NO EXCUSE for producing a less than optimum exposure.
(*)Note: yes, the lens does have an effect on dynamic range due to micro-contrast and light transmission variables – if you want to be super-picky!
AND THEY SAY HANDHELD METERS ARE DEAD, OLD TECH and of NO USE!!!
Anyone who says or even thinks that is a total KNOB.
Your camera dynamic range, the truthful one – FIND IT, KNOW IT, USE IT.
And don’t listen to the idiots and know-nothings, just listen and heed the advice of those of us who actually know what we’re doing.
NOTE: The value of grey (gray) cards and how to use them for accurate measurement is a subject in its own right and provides the curious with some really interesting reading. Believe me it’s far more expansive than the info I’ve given here. But adopting an ETTR approach when exposing to sensor that you KNOW the physical behavior of (dynamic response to light/dynamic range) can alleviate you of all critical mid-tone concerns.
This article has taken me over 8 hours to produce in total, and is yours to view for FREE. If you feel I deserve some support for doing this then please consider joining my membership site over on Patreon by using the link below.
Alternatively you could donate via PayPal to tuition@wildlifeinpixels.net
When faced with a high contrast scene like this most photographers would automatically resort to bracketing shots.
Sometimes you will be in a situation where shooting a bracketed sequence is difficult or impossible.
But a single image exposed to the right of the histogram – ETTR – where highlights are recorded at their maximum level of exposure can allow the camera sensor to capture far more detail in the darker areas than Lightroom will allow you to see at first glance.
Exposing to the right (of the in-camera histogram) correctly means that you expose the brightest scene highlights AS HIGHLIGHTS.
But it’s a balancing act between exposing them fully, and ‘blowing’ them.
Getting the ETTR exposure correct invariably means that the sensor receives MORE exposure across all tonal ranges, so you end up with more usefully recoverable shadow detail too.
In this video I show you a full Lightroom and Photoshop workflow to produce a noise-free image from a raw file exposed in just such a way.
Members of my Patreon site can download the all the workflow steps together with the raw file so that they can follow my processing, and perhaps come up with their own versions too!
Just to keep you up to speed on my video channel, here’s my previous video from last week which illustrates how I do my dust-spot and blemish removal in Photoshop:
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.