• 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 / Fake ISOs, ETTR, & WYSIWYG

Fake ISOs, ETTR, & WYSIWYG

August 27, 2015 JimK 2 Comments

I posted my test results and conclusions on the a7RII’s fake ISO settings on the DPR alpha 7 forum. To put it mildly, a lively discussion ensued.

The SNR was not particularly high, but even so, as is usual in Internet discussions, I learned a couple of things. In my original post, I took the same stance I took on this blog: don’t even think about using the fake ISOs. But, based on the discussion, I am reconsidering, at least for sophisticated photographers and two corner cases. One is a possible symbiotic relationship between ETTR and  fake ISOs.

The particular fake ISOs I’m talking about are ISO 50 on the a7RII, and presumably on the other alpha 7 cameras, and L 0.3, L.07, and L 1.0 on the Nikon D810. It doesn’t apply to ISO 80 and ISO 64 on the a7RII, because those ISOs actually reduce the dynamic range from that achievable at base ISO.

Let’s say you are using the spot metering technique for ETTR. You find a significant highlight, meter it, and, to use Zone System terms, place it on Zone VIII. You note that, since the subject was fairly low contrast, that your intended exposure is a stop over what the gray card exposure would be for the subject at base ISO. The normal ETTR technique would be to set the exposure at base ISO the way your highlight on Zone VIII meter reading said to, expose at base ISO, and pull the image a stop in post.

However, there is another alternative. You could use the same exposure and set the camera to ISO 50 in the case of the a7RII, or ISO L 1.0 in the case of the D810. the values in your raw file would be the same. However, when you opened the image in Lightroom, the 1 stop pull would have already been performed for you. Certainly not a compelling advantage, but it may be worth something to some people.

If you use the in-camera histogram, the benefits are less clear, since you trade in-the-field complexity for post-processing simplicity. You’d set the camera at base ISO, take a picture and examine the three-channel histogram (tweaked or not). When you found an exposure to your liking, and you noticed that the exposure was a stop over the gray card exposure, you could set the camera to ISO 50 or L 1.0 and make your real exposures. If you’re using he a7RII, and adjusting the exposure with the exposure compensation wheel, then noticing that you’re giving the picture a stop more than the meter reading is easy, but you have to remember to dial the exposure compensation back a stop if you switch to base ISO.

My own personal opinion is that these games aren’t worth the candle, but you may have a different opinion.

Another issue that was brought up on DPR is that the fake ISOs are useful to preserve what you see is what you get (WYSIWYG) in situations where you are intentionally overexposing  relative to the gray card exposure. An example is balancing natural light and flash.

I think this has merit in some situations as well, although I am not a big fan of using the camera’s EVF or review function to judge image quality in general.. The one place where I do find it useful is in flash balancing. In the old days, I used to use Polaroid back for this. Now, I use the LCD display. Sure, the colors are wrong, and the image is too punchy to show you what you can do in the shadows in Lr, but you can get the flash ratios dialed in well.

Now let’s say that you’ve picked a wide aperture to get the background ou of focus just the right amount, and you can’t crank up your shutter speed far enough to get a proper exposure at base ISO without getting above the camera’s maximum synch speed. You’ve also noticed that you can give the exposure a stop more without clipping the highlights. If you followed my earlier suggestions, you’d set the camera to base ISO, the shutter speed to max synch speed, overexpose by a stop, and pull the image a stop in post.

But you could also set the camera to a fake ISO setting a stop down from base ISO and use the same exposure. Then your preview image would not reflect the overexposure, and you could more easily judge the flash ratios. You’d also have the advantage that the one-stop pull in post would happen automatically.

I’m not going to use either of these techniques myself, but in the interest of explaining the limitations of my previous recommendations, I felt it desirable to write this post.

 

 

The Last Word

← Nikon D810 fake ISOs How to judge a camera’s imaging →

Comments

  1. Rory says

    September 5, 2015 at 1:38 pm

    Typo

    Aug 27 blog: “I’m not going to use either of these techniques myself, but in the interest of explaining the limitations of my precious recommendations, I felt it desirable to write this post.”

    I agree your recommendations are precious, but I know you meant previous. :*)

    Reply
    • Jim says

      September 6, 2015 at 5:57 pm

      Fixed. Thanks. Jim

      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.