Live data from Hacker News

Photography for geeks

lcamtuf.coredump.cx

41–50 of 150 posts

Re: Photography for geeks

#41

Somewhat related but if anyone is looking to get into photography Fuji is putting out digital cameras that emulate their film stocks. The results are pretty incredible. Also they have manual dials on the top so you're not trying to program a computer to use it. It's like driving a manual transmission vs an automatic.

Any specific recommendations?

Re: Photography for geeks

#42
post #41

Somewhat related but if anyone is looking to get into photography Fuji is putting out digital cameras that emulate their film stocks. The results are pretty incredible. Also they have manual dials on the top so you're not trying to program a computer to use it. It's like driving a manual transmission vs an automatic.

Any specific recommendations?

If you want interchangable lenses look at the X series, XT-3, XT4, XT5 (just released). X100V is sold out to eternity due to popularity. XPro3 is popular too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujifilm_X_series#X_series_chr...

Re: Photography for geeks

#43
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ISO is basically a linear gain that's done on the sensor. As long as you aren't blowing out your photo and loosing information, it basically makes not difference if you do it in sensor or later while editing This is true for some cameras, but certainly not all. Many cameras, especially pro or pro-sumer grade, have non-linear ISO. That is, there are ranges for which it behaves linearly, but typically there will be som…

"then the next setting up from that will reset to a lower snr" How does it magically make more photons fit the sensor..? And why wouldn't you use that same magic at lower iso gain factors?

No magic and the same photons, but you can have the hardware sensor read them out differently. Specifically using varying amounts of analog gain / amplification before doing analog-to-digital conversion, minimizing noise. This varies based on camera design.

See the "ISO-Invariance and Downstream Electronic Noise" part here for a better explanation: https://www.lonelyspeck.com/how-to-find-the-best-iso-for-ast...

The article mentions the Sony A7S as an example, with the sensor showing marked improvements in SNR when reaching ISO 100, 200, 1600 and 3200, while behaving ISO-invariant wrt. noise in between those values.

Re: Photography for geeks

#44
post #24

The main thing about photography is your first 10,000 photos will likely be bad. Modern technology makes it possible to get through 10,000 snaps much faster and much cheaper than when using film. But taking those photos is not enough — it’s in the editing of those first 10,000 photos that you will find the hidden photographer in you. Photography is a lot like writing code: you can create something that does the job,…

If you take a workshop or two, you'll better understand the thought process of a photographer, leading you to start taking descent photos within 1000 snaps.

I agree with the need to edit for improvement - meditating on your composition and lighting will ingrain better camera habits for the next round of snaps.

Personally, taking analog photos with an exposure meter taught me about good exposure. Measuring exposure takes time, but it's a great learning process.

Re: Photography for geeks

#45
post #38
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great resource for finding out which ISO ranges various cameras are linear over: https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm

Taking one of the few recent-ish mainstream phones on this list since the subthread is about smartphone sensors: Samsung Galaxy S7 has an ISO range of 50–800 and basically all the noise values (measured in log2(electrons)) are between 2 and 3. There is a downward trend from 50 to ~300, above that it's all around 2. Other phones have similarly shaped graphs with different absolute values. That sounds like the opposite…

I'm not an expert, but I think phone camera sensors really are that different from camera camera sensors, presumably (going out on a limb) because of tradeoffs they make to get good quality from small sensors. The sensors in top phones are about the same size as in the smallest cameras, and way smaller than in the cameras GP is thinking of.

Re: Photography for geeks

#47
post #28
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think when you break down all the variables there is really very little to play with bc no phones have variable apertures. ISO is basically a linear gain that's done on the sensor. As long as you aren't blowing out your photo and loosing information, it basically makes not difference if you do it in sensor or later while editing So the only variable left is the shutter speed - which is basically directly dictated b…

If you underexpose too severely, the JPEG compression will eat up all the detail in the shadows.

You can push shadows in Lightroom before exporting jpg

Re: Photography for geeks

#48
post #39
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oops, sorry!

The word "Levoy" does not occur on the page. Perhaps the site's author should have put their name in the page title instead of, ironically, embedded in a picture on the page's header!

It is in the URL cited.

Re: Photography for geeks

#49
post #34

The things I’m drawn to in life is where art meets science. In hindsight, so much of the secret is knowing how to avoid failure. Baking bread? Build the intuition over time and you’ll realize baking is forgiving so long as you don’t do these “5 bad things.” Gardening/farming? Yeah, there’s a big list of bad things. Brewing beer? Another list of things to avoid. The basic rules (rooted in science) are like guardrails…

Another list of things to avoid. The basic rules (rooted in science) are like guardrails and everything else is the art.

Too many guides and educational material in general fail to do this. I'd try a lot more new things if along with the "how to replace your transmission" book there was "the top ten ways you could screw up replacing your transmission and their consequences" section.

Re: Photography for geeks

#50
post #38
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great resource for finding out which ISO ranges various cameras are linear over: https://photonstophotos.net/Charts/RN_e.htm

Taking one of the few recent-ish mainstream phones on this list since the subthread is about smartphone sensors: Samsung Galaxy S7 has an ISO range of 50–800 and basically all the noise values (measured in log2(electrons)) are between 2 and 3. There is a downward trend from 50 to ~300, above that it's all around 2. Other phones have similarly shaped graphs with different absolute values. That sounds like the opposite…

> That sounds like the opposite of what GP (CWuestefeld) described. Am I misinterpreting the graph?

No. I was stupid in what I said above, getting the direction wrong. Where I said, "...will reset to a lower snr", I should have said HIGHER.

Post reply on HN