• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / A possible ETTR exposure algorithm

A possible ETTR exposure algorithm

February 25, 2013 JimK 4 Comments

The following is at best half-baked. I need to experiment with it to see how good it is. I thought I’d share it with you anyway, since I often get good advice from you all.

When figuring out an exposure strategy based on ETTR and the effect of in-camera ISO settings on signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), one of the first things to do is to identify two points on the curves that I derived in the preceding posts. I don’t have a catchy name for these curves – let’s call them “ISO Improvement” curves for now —  but what they’re showing is the relative improvement in SNR that’s available for the specified tonality by changing the camera’s ISO setting vs making an equivalent change with the Exposure slider in Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw.Here’s an example:

In my tests, I picked a light and a dark gray similar to Zone VI and Zone III of a normally-exposed scene using the Zone System.

DxO posts curves showing SNR vs ISO setting for Zone V (which they call 18%), but the resolution of their curves is too low to figure out the relative benefits of increasing the in-camera ISO setting vs boosting Exposure in LR of ACR. DxO does not subtract out the Poisson Noise component of the SNR, as I do in my ISO Improvement curves, so, even with increased resolution, you’d be reduced to eyeballing slopes in the DxO curves. As far as I know, the only way to get the information that the ISO Improvement curves provide is to make them yourself. I will be posting the Excel spreadsheet I use to generate these curves together with instructions on how to make the exposures.

I’ve had a reader point out that the fact that the five cameras that I’ve tested offer little benefit from boosting in-camera ISO doesn’t mean that that situation obtains for all cameras. The reader says that Canon cameras usually can benefit from in-camera ISO settings well above the base ISO. I have no way of verifying that since I don’t have access to any Canon cameras, but also no reason to think that it’s untrue.

The way that I suggest using the ISO Improvement curves is as follows. Look at both the Zone VI and the Zone III curves, and for each find the point nearest the base ISO where the curve gets close to its maximum. Call that point the Peak ISO. Then find the point after which there is a substantial drop in the curve. Call that point the Max ISO. Then take the smaller of the two numbers representing the performance in each tonality (this is a judgement call on my part, and I could easily be convinced that the average (or the geometric mean, or something else) is the right number; the point is to reduce the number of ISO values that you need to think about when making an exposure). Here’s the way I see the curves I’ve created for the five cameras I’ve tested:

So now, for each camera, you only have two ISO numbers to think about, the Peak ISO and the Max ISO. Here they are for the five cameras I tested:

With that in mind, here’s an exposure algorithm calculated to give you near-optimum SNRs:

  • Use ETTR at base ISO if you can manage it. Everything that follows is about how to best manage the loss in image quality you’ll get if you can’t do this.
  • When circumstances force you to make exposures under the ETTR/base ISO exposure, start turning up the ISO. When you get to the Peak ISO, stop. If the Peak ISO is the same as the base ISO, skip this step.
  • When you’ve reached the peak ISO, stop changing it. Let the histogram slide to the left until it starts to be hard to see the image in the electronic finder or the chimping screen, then start increasing the ISO. You have a lot of latitude here; there are only small penalties in increasing ISO early (loss of headroom) or late (harder to judge the shadows in the histogram, or see the undeveloped images in Lightroom).
  • When you get to the Max ISO, stop increasing the ISO and let the histogram continue to slide to the left.

The Last Word

← ETTR and ISO settings “In Motion” interview →

Comments

  1. John Scherer says

    August 31, 2014 at 5:16 pm

    Hi Jim,

    One are of photography I would like to experiment with is the milky way night scape shots you see all over now. How do these methods work in these VERY low light situations. Is your exposure algorithm still the way to go?

    Reply
    • Jim says

      September 2, 2014 at 3:13 pm

      A friend did a series of deep sky tests with the Nikon D800E, and found that there were very slight improvements from increasing the ISO setting up to 1250. After that, you were better off pushing in post. That’s about two stops over the unity gain ISO. So, the answer to your question is, “Pretty much, but stop a little sooner.”

      Jim

      Reply
  2. John says

    March 12, 2015 at 7:08 am

    I have difficulty understanding the last two steps, I’d appreciate it if you could shed some light on it. Let’s say I have a D800E paired with the Zeiss 135/2 and I am 2 stops short of achieving ETTR at IS0=100, f2 &1/160. I think you suggest not to increase ISO to 400 to ETTR but lower the shutter speed first and increase the ISO afterwards. Can you expatiate on the method a little more.

    Thanks

    Reply
    • Jim says

      March 12, 2015 at 8:32 am

      In that situation, I’d just take the picture, let it be two stops under, and fix it in post. If it were more than two stops under, I’d consider increasing the ISO setting.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.