Changing the ISO appears to scale the noise differently from the rest of the image.
Yep, just like a real camera.
Exposure Simulator
21–30 of 83 posts
Re: Exposure Simulator
#22For me it's missing something to illustrate the relationship between shutter speed and motion blur. If the subject was a running fan instead of of lightbulb that would have been ideal.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#23that's an insane amount of noise at 200 ISO.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
And that's what exactly confused me :) With my mnemonic, I say low *number = blur I should have been more specific
The aperture size is usually described as e.g. f/32, where f is a camera-specific constant. Denominator, not numerator. That's why larger number = smaller aperture.
To be a little more precise, f is not a camera-specific constant. It's the focal length of the lens. It's a formula that tells you the diameter of the entrance pupil. So at a focal length of 50mm, an aperture value of f/2 means an entrance pupil diameter of 25mm.
But photographers generally just say "f2", meaning an aperture value of two set on the dial of the camera/lens. It's one stop faster (twice as much light) as f/2.8. It'll give you a relatively shallow depth of field, but not as shallow as e.g. f/1.4.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#25that's an insane amount of noise at 200 ISO.
Probably Foveon sensor.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#26That does a fairly good job. I'm sure that image nerds would poke holes in it, but it seems to work pretty much exactly the way it does IRL. The noise at high ISO is where it can get specific. Some manufacturers make cameras that actually do really well, at high ISO, and high shutter speed. This seems to reproduce a consumer DSLR.
With the disclaimer that I am comparing to the memory of some entry-level cameras, I would still say that it's way too noisy. Even on old, entry-level APS-C cameras, ISO1600 is normally very usable. What is rendered here at ISO1600 feels more like the "get the picture at any cost" levels of ISO, which on those limited cameras would be something like ISO6400+. Heck, the original pictures (there is one for each apertur…
Yeah, I don't think that it's easy to reproduce noise (if it was, noise reduction would be even better). Also, bokeh/depth of field. That's not so easy to reproduce (although AI may change that).
Re: Exposure Simulator
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a pretty good demo! Very limited camera choices, though.
Yeah, it would be interesting and useful to see this across many more cameras.
Some of the new Nikon cameras have excellent high-ISO performance. Also, they now own RED, so we should see some interesting stuff, down the road.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#28I know that modern systems like aperture priority or full auto make things easier, but I maintain that the many photos I took with a fully manual film camera (Canon AE-1) were simply better than those taken with any subsequent DSLR. The simple act of calibrating the shutter speed, aperture size, and manual focus before and during shooting helps you slow down and think about composition and framing, making the end result more valuable. Same goes for the limited number of shots on a roll of film.
Nowadays it’s easier to just take lots of shots and fiddle with the setting and do bracketing and such. But I maintain something important was lost by the move to automatic cameras.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#29That does a fairly good job. I'm sure that image nerds would poke holes in it, but it seems to work pretty much exactly the way it does IRL. The noise at high ISO is where it can get specific. Some manufacturers make cameras that actually do really well, at high ISO, and high shutter speed. This seems to reproduce a consumer DSLR.
It needs to be updated to do its calculations in linear light, but it's probably useful for getting an intuitive sense of what the different levers of photography do to an image.
Re: Exposure Simulator
#30That does a fairly good job. I'm sure that image nerds would poke holes in it, but it seems to work pretty much exactly the way it does IRL. The noise at high ISO is where it can get specific. Some manufacturers make cameras that actually do really well, at high ISO, and high shutter speed. This seems to reproduce a consumer DSLR.
Camera ISO and noise can be really complicated and even contentious topic. One complication is that some cameras are "ISO invariant" and on those cameras afaik it is beneficial to stick to the one or two native ISO values. There is also the whole discussion around ETTR etc