I think this all gets explained by the fact the dynamic range distribution above and below neutral grey changes based on ISO. Typically there are more stops below neutral grey in lower ISO's and more stops above neutral grey at higher ISOs. You're test backs that up as well.
Shooting at a higher ISO means you are feeding the sensor less light. Which in turn means you have more highlight range before clipping, but this also means less shadow range before hitting the noise floor. So, when you expose for a lower ISO you feed the sensor more light. Therefore you get more detail in the shadows, but you end up losing highlight range. More light means your sensor is more likely to clip in the highlights.
Yes. A higher iso will make you react to the image you see by reducing exposure. Here, there was a scenario that it was beneficial to shoot at a higher iso with a LUT though.
@@Bordsteinpflaster not always! Depends on the camera. I did some tests with my BMPCC 6K Pro and I found that the noisefloor of the second Base (ISO 1250 and up) produces around 2 stops less noice. So if you let in more light than you’d actually need in the shot and then bring it down later, you get a much cleaner result in terms of noise. On the flip side, the higher ISO of the BMPCC clips earlier in the highlights (contrary to the Alexa LF apparently) So if rather shoot “low light” scenes with a higher ISO and bright scenes (with uncontrollable highlights) with a lower ISO (although going lower than 400 also reduces highlight range)
If you are shooting raw then the only iso that matters is the base. All other ISOs are essentially just technical LUTs, which helps to expose for either highlights or shadows. If you are shooting to a compressed codec you would see a bigger difference in noise as more gain would be baked in.
yes. in this video I did not shoot raw. but, I found that when reducing the exposure of a clip shot at 3200 to match a shot shot at 200, the noise levels matched, but you have a little more detail in the highlights with the 3200. essential the shots are the same, but the way that you can work with them in post allowed for an easier time with the highlights with the 3200.
Very informative. I remember I was blown away by the concept of lowering ISO for darker scenes. Too bad that having more light is not always an option.
yep having more light is not always an option. and, in a lot of low light scenes that I am designing, it is typically a night interior where there are light sources in the frame, so I find myself still operating at 640 or 800 and just lighting to one of those ISOs.
Love this explanation! That's super interesting that the highlights roll off smoother at 3200 even with the same exposure! Definitely a good test to do with any digital sensor. I also have some minus 1 stop LUTs that I've been using and I love the results!
The shot with which you finished looks like a good test for this (interior with light to one side, exterior/windows to the other and you on the middle (for skin tone), interesting for a highlight rolloff and noise test with all that tonal range
FX3 user here. Currently trying to get my head around Cine EI. The stop reduction LUT you mentioned, is this effectively what the different Cine EI values are doing in the Sony? I know they're different cameras but just wondering if this is the same principle being applied and if you'd even recommend cine EI. Great video man, super interesting way to approach and not just trying to keep the ISO as low as possible.
In the same way, it is beneficial to shoot at low ISO to better describe shadow details, because more stops are allocated bellow middle grey. That's one of the reason dual ISO is working great, the second base ISO shifts the dynamic range with more details in the shadows, keeping the sensor quite sensitive in low light scenarios.
@@BlaineWestropp1 indeed, just saying that dual ISO, when available, is closely related to how the dynamic range is distributed around middle grey. In general, even with a single base ISO, lowering the ISO can be beneficial for night scenes to retain more details in the dark areas of the image.
@bastienchill yep! I find that I am much more often raising iso in bright scenes rather than lowering iso in dark scenes, unless I really have control over the lighting. Mostly I am between 640 and 1600.
@@BlaineWestropp1 that's right, this comes in play when we can control the light on set to feed the sensor just a bit to catch those shadow details. And yes shooting at higher ISO on daylight outside is a good practice.
After your earlier video I did some tests on my BMPCC 6K Pro. I’ve found that the second ISO Base (3200) has significantly less noise (about two stops), yet it clips easier in the highlights than the lower Base ISO (400) I guess it’s all about the amount of light that hits the sensor (without making it clip) When shooting a dark scene, it matched my eyes at ISO 400. Yet going to ISO 3200 (without changing anything else! - no ND, no shutter, no aperture changes) it felt way to bright, however, as long as I don’t clip, it gives much cleaner results when bringing it back down later
would also love to see a video about false color. There are already many videos out there, but I like your way of depicting things, so I would gladly appreciate it
@@BlaineWestropp1 OK, I watched it several times and still do not see where it was clipping, you mean clipping the darks? OR is Pink Clipping on an Arri? Pink in my false colors Is about exactly where I want to be? Sorry for the confusion, but still do not get where you were clipping unless it was clipping the blacks in the background?
Well, every camera is different. Mostly i am observing what happened when pushing things around on the Alexa. As you change the iso on the Alexa it changes the image that is recorded, but it’s a post processing thing. So you can reduce the exposure on a 3200 clip and have it look like a 200 clip but there’s some scenarios where it’s better to shoot a higher iso but that totally depends on your scene and your lighting approach.
different on any camera, mostly looking at cameras that shoot in log. also, cineEI is similar but not the same as this, as cineEi changes do not get recorded into the footage.
Well it’s a little different than raw. What I’m looking at here is just the difference in ISOs on the Alexa, and how they compare when pushed around in post. Cine EI on Sony cams is like a monitor LUT!
And iso on most cameras is… kind of like a monitor LUT. But there are some complexities. In the end of the day, you can shoot at your native iso and be looking good! I hope I’m answering your question. It can be confusing at times.
In all seriousness, the higher ISO resulted in more range in highlights and the same amount of noise in the shadows as a low iso when brought down in post. Am I understanding these results correctly?
Yes. If you shoot a scene at iso 200, and then don’t change a thing, and shoot it again at 3200, and then in post, bring down the 3200 by 4 stops, or bring up the 200 by for stops, the images will look very similar. In my case in this video, the 3200 had better highlight range, and same noice as 200 (once brought down 4 stops). Also keep in mind this assumes you are not clipping anything in either settings.
Correct, but you lose the highlight advantage if you go to the second noise floor of the camera. So if the second Native ISO is 4,000, you will have more latitude in the highlights at 3200, but not at 4000.
I have a video about the Komodo on my channel that gets into this a little bit. I also have one with the fx3 and the c70, but would love to test again with both.
Amazing video bro! i love all the tests you’re doing! I’d love a video about false color as it relates to cameras that don’t have it built in. I primarily use a Fuji XH2S for my simple stuff but it doesn’t have false color in camera so what is the best way to get accurate false color through a monitor?
I’d be interested. I’m also interested to learn about using false color with a log image vs false color from the conversion lut image, and what to think about when exposing the log image with false color. :)
Isn't the 'rule' to shoot at your camera's base ISO (or one of the base ISO's if there are dual ones) - exposing as bright as possible until you hit clipping (I do this when shooting by using zebras to show me if I am clipping anything I want detail in) - and using ND filters to keep your F stop/shutter where you want them? That is what should preserve as much dynamic range as possible, and allow darkening in post as needed to create a 'look', decreasing noise at the same time in the shadows.
yes that is the rule. a lot of times I am at the native. I recently shot on fx6, and sometimes I would set my exposure at native, then lower the EI to make the image look more like what I know I wanted it to look like in the end, but wanted brightest image as possible recorded for detail and cleanness. on Alexa or red I will pick an EI/iso and keep it there for the scene.
Thanks for the video. I am using SONY so I am familiar with EI(Cine EI) So I understand when u expose with high ei value it means u distribute ur DR to highlight more than shadow, When u expose with low EI, it means u distribute ur DR to shadow more which means lower noise. But I wonder How can the clip has similar level of noise in 3200EI and very low EI in the video
remember every camera bahaves a little differently. if you take exactly what I did in this video, and do it with your camera, you will see how it performs. with sony.. when you change the EI it is kind of like the "stop reduction luts." changing the ei makes you react. example. you are in cine ei, at base 800. you move EI to 3200, and your image looks bright, so you reduce your exposure, this will help protect highlights, bc you lowered the exposure. the key really is to test, and make sure you are night clipping information that you dont want clipped. does this make sense?
Do we have to shift our mindset when viewing false color with the log image? Like the clipping point is different between log and rec709, so how do we think about this properly? Anyone know any good resources that explain this topic?
Yes you need to think a little bit differently. Every shooting scenario is different and sometimes I find it beneficial to view the exposure tools (false color or zebras) on the log image, and sometimes on the rec 709 image.
Interesting. Before watching this i had concluded that all that mattered was set light, iris, and shutter angle, and that iso could always be equated in post. Your example obviously shows otherwise. Would the results be the same if you had captured arri raw and adjusted iso in post?
well ISO can influence how you expose the camera. that is where the differences come into play. shooting arriraw will give the same results as shown here, except you can change it in post. so shooting a shot at 3200 in arriraw will be the same as shooting a shot at 200, if you change it in post. 99% of the time I am not changing the EI in post with arriraw, I still consider it an important thing to set when shooting.
@@BlaineWestropp1 So if I understand correctly, if you debayer arriraw at 200 and and then expose that up four perfect photometric stops with the HDR zones tool or similar, you will get a different reproduction in the highlights then if you had debayered at 3200? In other words, unlike iris and shutter angle, the EI is actually altering the tone curve itself? (Thanks for your patience!)
@@ChampagneRhubarb its a little confusing, and matters more when you are using it to influence your exposure. here is a quick look: ua-cam.com/video/A7RDLJjV0AQ/v-deo.htmlsi=UyFOf2mWXGzGJtvR
what's wrong with having the highlights clipped, if there's no information in those particular highlights? i mean, if there's nothing to protect, why not clip?
highlights are fine to clip, like a light bulb, or out the window of an airplane, like we see in movies and commercials. but, in certain cases the clipped info can look very harsh. it can have a harsh transition from not clipped to clipped, so it is wise (sometimes) to not clip anything in the log image (outside of specular highlights), and then let it blow out in rec709 if you want. that way you have a smooth rolloff.
@@BlaineWestropp1 just checked the Arri DR whitepaper, I was wrong, I thought on the ALEV4 sensors before 3200iso you're not shifting your middle grey at all. FYI: Page 20, www.arri.com/resource/blob/295460/e10ff8a5b3abf26c33f8754379b57442/2022-09-28-arri-dynamic-range-whitepaper-data.pdf
Jimmy on Film did a great video about this recently. Essentially, ISO is just the gain setting of the sensor. It doesn't actually increase or decrease the amount of noise in the shot. Noise gets more or less obvious depending on the exposure of the scene set by your aperture, shutter speed, and where the values end up on the waveform/histogram. So you could use ISO to make different shutter and aperture values produce an equivalent exposure, and the cleanest image will be whichever exposed more to the right on the histogram. Jimmy's full video is well worth a watch ua-cam.com/video/RRIsYSC-EDU/v-deo.html
Yep! This video is great thanks for sharing! It’s interesting bc even though the iso change is baked into the image, you can bring it down to match what the shot would have looked like at a lower iso. As long as you don’t clip, you’re good.
@@BlaineWestropp1 idk man this seems like a counter intuitive lab experiment. Maybe I missed the why. The first important miss is that DR doesn’t scale linearly to ISO. back to the drawing board.
I think this all gets explained by the fact the dynamic range distribution above and below neutral grey changes based on ISO. Typically there are more stops below neutral grey in lower ISO's and more stops above neutral grey at higher ISOs. You're test backs that up as well.
Yes :)
How would this work with a camera that uses dual gain and a base iso of 2000?
Shooting at a higher ISO means you are feeding the sensor less light. Which in turn means you have more highlight range before clipping, but this also means less shadow range before hitting the noise floor. So, when you expose for a lower ISO you feed the sensor more light. Therefore you get more detail in the shadows, but you end up losing highlight range. More light means your sensor is more likely to clip in the highlights.
Yes. A higher iso will make you react to the image you see by reducing exposure. Here, there was a scenario that it was beneficial to shoot at a higher iso with a LUT though.
Would it make sense to shoot bright scenarious with a higher iso and low light situations with lower iso? Generally speaking ofc.
@@Bordsteinpflaster Correct.
@@Bordsteinpflaster not always! Depends on the camera. I did some tests with my BMPCC 6K Pro and I found that the noisefloor of the second Base (ISO 1250 and up) produces around 2 stops less noice.
So if you let in more light than you’d actually need in the shot and then bring it down later, you get a much cleaner result in terms of noise.
On the flip side, the higher ISO of the BMPCC clips earlier in the highlights (contrary to the Alexa LF apparently)
So if rather shoot “low light” scenes with a higher ISO and bright scenes (with uncontrollable highlights) with a lower ISO (although going lower than 400 also reduces highlight range)
Welcome to Blaine's Film School
😂😂 next video has got to be a simple one
but this is such great content tho, im here for ALL of it@@BlaineWestropp1
😂🙏🏻
If you are shooting raw then the only iso that matters is the base. All other ISOs are essentially just technical LUTs, which helps to expose for either highlights or shadows. If you are shooting to a compressed codec you would see a bigger difference in noise as more gain would be baked in.
yes. in this video I did not shoot raw. but, I found that when reducing the exposure of a clip shot at 3200 to match a shot shot at 200, the noise levels matched, but you have a little more detail in the highlights with the 3200. essential the shots are the same, but the way that you can work with them in post allowed for an easier time with the highlights with the 3200.
Very informative.
I remember I was blown away by the concept of lowering ISO for darker scenes. Too bad that having more light is not always an option.
yep having more light is not always an option. and, in a lot of low light scenes that I am designing, it is typically a night interior where there are light sources in the frame, so I find myself still operating at 640 or 800 and just lighting to one of those ISOs.
Love this explanation! That's super interesting that the highlights roll off smoother at 3200 even with the same exposure! Definitely a good test to do with any digital sensor. I also have some minus 1 stop LUTs that I've been using and I love the results!
It’s quite interesting. Love the stop reduction luts. I’ve had great results using them as well!
The shot with which you finished looks like a good test for this (interior with light to one side, exterior/windows to the other and you on the middle (for skin tone), interesting for a highlight rolloff and noise test with all that tonal range
this is definitely not for every scenario, but it's good to know what is going on with the different values!
FX3 user here. Currently trying to get my head around Cine EI. The stop reduction LUT you mentioned, is this effectively what the different Cine EI values are doing in the Sony? I know they're different cameras but just wondering if this is the same principle being applied and if you'd even recommend cine EI.
Great video man, super interesting way to approach and not just trying to keep the ISO as low as possible.
hey thanks! yes in cine EI, the different EI values are just like stop reduction luts (when you lower it), but make sure you are not clipping.
In the same way, it is beneficial to shoot at low ISO to better describe shadow details, because more stops are allocated bellow middle grey. That's one of the reason dual ISO is working great, the second base ISO shifts the dynamic range with more details in the shadows, keeping the sensor quite sensitive in low light scenarios.
There is not a dual iso on this camera. Base on Alexa is 800. There’s a dual native on an fx3 for example which is nice to have!
@@BlaineWestropp1 indeed, just saying that dual ISO, when available, is closely related to how the dynamic range is distributed around middle grey.
In general, even with a single base ISO, lowering the ISO can be beneficial for night scenes to retain more details in the dark areas of the image.
@bastienchill yep! I find that I am much more often raising iso in bright scenes rather than lowering iso in dark scenes, unless I really have control over the lighting. Mostly I am between 640 and 1600.
@@BlaineWestropp1 that's right, this comes in play when we can control the light on set to feed the sensor just a bit to catch those shadow details.
And yes shooting at higher ISO on daylight outside is a good practice.
Great video. Steve Yedlin would be proud.
thank you! haha nothing like diving deep on a Steve Yedlin video!
Most interesting person on YT
😇
After your earlier video I did some tests on my BMPCC 6K Pro. I’ve found that the second ISO Base (3200) has significantly less noise (about two stops), yet it clips easier in the highlights than the lower Base ISO (400)
I guess it’s all about the amount of light that hits the sensor (without making it clip)
When shooting a dark scene, it matched my eyes at ISO 400. Yet going to ISO 3200 (without changing anything else! - no ND, no shutter, no aperture changes) it felt way to bright, however, as long as I don’t clip, it gives much cleaner results when bringing it back down later
That’s they key.. bringing it down later. And if your image looks too bright, that’s where the stop reduction luts on the monitor come into play!
Thanks brother!! Please do a good false color videos.
And where were you clipping ? The light was clipping but the bottle looks like it wasn’t?
I could talk about false color. also, the clipping was in the back behind the bottle. once we got rid of clipping, there was no clipping in the scene.
would also love to see a video about false color. There are already many videos out there, but I like your way of depicting things, so I would gladly appreciate it
@@BlaineWestropp1 OK, I watched it several times and still do not see where it was clipping, you mean clipping the darks? OR is Pink Clipping on an Arri? Pink in my false colors Is about exactly where I want to be? Sorry for the confusion, but still do not get where you were clipping unless it was clipping the blacks in the background?
Red is clipping on Arri, and I wasn’t clipping in any of the shots. I exposed just under clipping. Nothing was clipped!
I could arrange for that to happen :)
The highly anticipated ISO video is here!!
Haha 😇 I’m still doing some late night tests over here..
I need to do the same with my kit. I’m one thought closer to doing so.
Great informative video..
may I ask what type of Smallhd screen you use?
thank you. it is a smallhd cine7 with bolt 500 built in.
So. What you’re saying is that image sensors aren’t linear,m?
and essentially respond differently at different ISO’s?
Well, every camera is different. Mostly i am observing what happened when pushing things around on the Alexa. As you change the iso on the Alexa it changes the image that is recorded, but it’s a post processing thing. So you can reduce the exposure on a 3200 clip and have it look like a 200 clip but there’s some scenarios where it’s better to shoot a higher iso but that totally depends on your scene and your lighting approach.
So this applies only on Cine EI or is the same for normal ISO? Amazing video as always!
different on any camera, mostly looking at cameras that shoot in log. also, cineEI is similar but not the same as this, as cineEi changes do not get recorded into the footage.
@@BlaineWestropp1 Ohhhhhhh Now I get it. Thanks! cineEI its like RAW for example?
So its literally like a exposure LUT on set
Well it’s a little different than raw. What I’m looking at here is just the difference in ISOs on the Alexa, and how they compare when pushed around in post. Cine EI on Sony cams is like a monitor LUT!
And iso on most cameras is… kind of like a monitor LUT. But there are some complexities. In the end of the day, you can shoot at your native iso and be looking good! I hope I’m answering your question. It can be confusing at times.
Where did you buy the LUT or power grade that you use for your videos? Looks great!
its look that I made. in most of this video though, it is just the standard rec709 lut built into the camera!
Oh nice!
In all seriousness, the higher ISO resulted in more range in highlights and the same amount of noise in the shadows as a low iso when brought down in post. Am I understanding these results correctly?
Yes. If you shoot a scene at iso 200, and then don’t change a thing, and shoot it again at 3200, and then in post, bring down the 3200 by 4 stops, or bring up the 200 by for stops, the images will look very similar. In my case in this video, the 3200 had better highlight range, and same noice as 200 (once brought down 4 stops). Also keep in mind this assumes you are not clipping anything in either settings.
Correct, but you lose the highlight advantage if you go to the second noise floor of the camera. So if the second Native ISO is 4,000, you will have more latitude in the highlights at 3200, but not at 4000.
@@BlaineWestropp1 that's the most important thing to keep in the back of your mind. NO CLIPPING!
Interesting. You could consider doin this again with other cameras like c70 Komodo x fx3 and maybe mirrorless to see.
I have a video about the Komodo on my channel that gets into this a little bit. I also have one with the fx3 and the c70, but would love to test again with both.
Amazing video bro! i love all the tests you’re doing!
I’d love a video about false color as it relates to cameras that don’t have it built in. I primarily use a Fuji XH2S for my simple stuff but it doesn’t have false color in camera so what is the best way to get accurate false color through a monitor?
hey thank you! I can definitely help you out with that. maybe a false colors video needs to happen!
I’d be interested. I’m also interested to learn about using false color with a log image vs false color from the conversion lut image, and what to think about when exposing the log image with false color. :)
@@BlaineWestropp1 I’d watch it for sure!
Isn't the 'rule' to shoot at your camera's base ISO (or one of the base ISO's if there are dual ones) - exposing as bright as possible until you hit clipping (I do this when shooting by using zebras to show me if I am clipping anything I want detail in) - and using ND filters to keep your F stop/shutter where you want them? That is what should preserve as much dynamic range as possible, and allow darkening in post as needed to create a 'look', decreasing noise at the same time in the shadows.
yes that is the rule. a lot of times I am at the native. I recently shot on fx6, and sometimes I would set my exposure at native, then lower the EI to make the image look more like what I know I wanted it to look like in the end, but wanted brightest image as possible recorded for detail and cleanness. on Alexa or red I will pick an EI/iso and keep it there for the scene.
I like this
☺️
Thanks for the video. I am using SONY so I am familiar with EI(Cine EI) So I understand when u expose with high ei value it means u distribute ur DR to highlight more than shadow, When u expose with low EI, it means u distribute ur DR to shadow more which means lower noise. But I wonder How can the clip has similar level of noise in 3200EI and very low EI in the video
remember every camera bahaves a little differently. if you take exactly what I did in this video, and do it with your camera, you will see how it performs. with sony.. when you change the EI it is kind of like the "stop reduction luts." changing the ei makes you react. example. you are in cine ei, at base 800. you move EI to 3200, and your image looks bright, so you reduce your exposure, this will help protect highlights, bc you lowered the exposure. the key really is to test, and make sure you are night clipping information that you dont want clipped. does this make sense?
masterclass
😇
I appreciate those view counts ;) your stuff is brilliant & those numbers will be it soon enough!
Thank you 😇
Do we have to shift our mindset when viewing false color with the log image? Like the clipping point is different between log and rec709, so how do we think about this properly? Anyone know any good resources that explain this topic?
Yes you need to think a little bit differently. Every shooting scenario is different and sometimes I find it beneficial to view the exposure tools (false color or zebras) on the log image, and sometimes on the rec 709 image.
Is there a 4 stop reduction lut for sony? If so, where can I find this?
yes. DM on ig.
Does this applies to the Red Helium 8K? Or is this a Arri only thing
Applies to red as well!
Interesting. Before watching this i had concluded that all that mattered was set light, iris, and shutter angle, and that iso could always be equated in post. Your example obviously shows otherwise. Would the results be the same if you had captured arri raw and adjusted iso in post?
well ISO can influence how you expose the camera. that is where the differences come into play. shooting arriraw will give the same results as shown here, except you can change it in post. so shooting a shot at 3200 in arriraw will be the same as shooting a shot at 200, if you change it in post. 99% of the time I am not changing the EI in post with arriraw, I still consider it an important thing to set when shooting.
@@BlaineWestropp1 So if I understand correctly, if you debayer arriraw at 200 and and then expose that up four perfect photometric stops with the HDR zones tool or similar, you will get a different reproduction in the highlights then if you had debayered at 3200? In other words, unlike iris and shutter angle, the EI is actually altering the tone curve itself? (Thanks for your patience!)
@@ChampagneRhubarb its a little confusing, and matters more when you are using it to influence your exposure. here is a quick look: ua-cam.com/video/A7RDLJjV0AQ/v-deo.htmlsi=UyFOf2mWXGzGJtvR
@BlaineWestropp1 that's really interesting... thanks for that clip. I guess there's no substitute for learning a camera's specific behaviours!
Yep. Gotta know the camera. In the end of the day I think you can shoot at any iso close to the native and be totally fine with any modern camera.
what's wrong with having the highlights clipped, if there's no information in those particular highlights? i mean, if there's nothing to protect, why not clip?
highlights are fine to clip, like a light bulb, or out the window of an airplane, like we see in movies and commercials. but, in certain cases the clipped info can look very harsh. it can have a harsh transition from not clipped to clipped, so it is wise (sometimes) to not clip anything in the log image (outside of specular highlights), and then let it blow out in rec709 if you want. that way you have a smooth rolloff.
thanx for the explanation
Does that mean it doesn't apply to alexa 35 before it kicks into "low light Mode"
Can you clarify, what doesn’t apply?
@@BlaineWestropp1 just checked the Arri DR whitepaper, I was wrong, I thought on the ALEV4 sensors before 3200iso you're not shifting your middle grey at all. FYI: Page 20, www.arri.com/resource/blob/295460/e10ff8a5b3abf26c33f8754379b57442/2022-09-28-arri-dynamic-range-whitepaper-data.pdf
Cheers pal
Cheers 🙂
Can you test this with the Red Komodo?
Yes. I get into it a little bit with the Komodo here: ua-cam.com/video/6jYdZztJTfs/v-deo.htmlsi=5crlMUGoOiFHXvoO
You’re a cinematic samurai
haha thank you Tony 😇
This all doesn't matter when shooting raw tho?
It matters when your iso/EI is influencing how you expose the image.
that camera has a lot of doughnamic range
im a clean shadows guy now
Jimmy on Film did a great video about this recently. Essentially, ISO is just the gain setting of the sensor. It doesn't actually increase or decrease the amount of noise in the shot. Noise gets more or less obvious depending on the exposure of the scene set by your aperture, shutter speed, and where the values end up on the waveform/histogram. So you could use ISO to make different shutter and aperture values produce an equivalent exposure, and the cleanest image will be whichever exposed more to the right on the histogram. Jimmy's full video is well worth a watch ua-cam.com/video/RRIsYSC-EDU/v-deo.html
Yep! This video is great thanks for sharing! It’s interesting bc even though the iso change is baked into the image, you can bring it down to match what the shot would have looked like at a lower iso. As long as you don’t clip, you’re good.
you set false color with a light in frame? I paused at 1:18.
What do you mean? Can you clarify!
@@BlaineWestropp1 idk man this seems like a counter intuitive lab experiment. Maybe I missed the why. The first important miss is that DR doesn’t scale linearly to ISO. back to the drawing board.
and from my reading the comments this video is a miss.
love your work otherwise.
@@durbanpuls I dont understand! on some cameras, like I showed here.. different things happen at different ISOs
class is in session
👨🏻🏫😂
Video still processing club
hahah that was quick
id film in your studio
my balls and shaft
😇
My previous video "1.2M 4 days ago" 😂 bruh..
😈😂