Autobraketing?

[KmH]

No, it's 3 times harder. 3x3=9

I don't see a reason why an EXPEED processor could do better than a EXPEED 2.

I guess that means you don't know much about how processors, or electronics in general, work?

BTW - 3x3=9 was a tongue-in-cheek reply.

EXPEED does 12-bit A-D conversion. EXPEED 2 does 14-bit A-D conversion.

 

[EchoingWhisper]

But it is simple. It can do those complicated image processing algorithms, why not auto bracketing?

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Also be aware though that by doing this you are in fact effectively lowering the ISO used to capture the image, requiring slower shutter speeds and/or larger apertures. If you are hand-holding the camera, or shooting moving objects, the tradeoff may not be worth the reduced noise level. - Luminous Landscape

I don't understand this. Aren't we increasing ISO to get higher SNR?

 

[MTVision]

Also be aware though that by doing this you are in fact effectively lowering the ISO used to capture the image, requiring slower shutter speeds and/or larger apertures. If you are hand-holding the camera, or shooting moving objects, the tradeoff may not be worth the reduced noise level. - Luminous Landscape

I don't understand this. Aren't we increasing ISO to get higher SNR?

Was this meant for auto bracketing or ETTR?

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Also be aware though that by doing this you are in fact effectively lowering the ISO used to capture the image, requiring slower shutter speeds and/or larger apertures. If you are hand-holding the camera, or shooting moving objects, the tradeoff may not be worth the reduced noise level. - Luminous Landscape

I don't understand this. Aren't we increasing ISO to get higher SNR?

Was this meant for auto bracketing or ETTR?

ETTR. I didn't notice. Lol...

 

[MTVision]

Also be aware though that by doing this you are in fact effectively lowering the ISO used to capture the image, requiring slower shutter speeds and/or larger apertures. If you are hand-holding the camera, or shooting moving objects, the tradeoff may not be worth the reduced noise level. - Luminous Landscape

I don't understand this. Aren't we increasing ISO to get higher SNR?

Was this meant for auto bracketing or ETTR?

ETTR. I didn't notice. Lol...

You don't HAVE to raise your ISO for ETTR. The way I understand it you just want to expose for the highlights (low ISO or high ISO) because the first (brightest) stop has the most data. From what I've read ETTR helps reduce noise in all shots (ISO 100 and up). Some people get confused and think they just need to overexpose the picture which isn't completely accurate. I can honestly admit that I haven't mastered ETTR yet. It seems to be kind of hard since the histogram and the image on the back are not for the RAW photo. Did you check out the other article on that website? The one that was linked to was written in 2003 but there is another one written this year about it.

 

[MTVision]

The ETTR Myth

I'm trying to find a link to this article I just read called ETTR is stupid or something like that. This above article is similar. You should read it - reading both sides (good and bad) always helps me better understand something.

 

[MTVision]

http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Vy86


http://schewephoto.com/ETTR/index.html


Jeff Schewe , Mar 10, 2010; 09:57 p.m. It would be useful to fully understand the principles behind ETTR if you wish to debunk them...
ETTR has NOTHING TO DO with the amount of levels in the shadows...it has nothing to do with the base ISO (vs altered ISO) is has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that more photons equals less perceptible noise (which means a better signal to noise ratio).
Your test is fine...it proves what you want to prove., but it does NOT prove that ETTR is wrong (or dangerous).
ETTR has EVERYTHING to do with the screen contrast range and the dynamic range of your sensor...if your scene contrast range is equal to or greater than your sensor, ETTR doesn't apply...forget about it and deal with trying to figure out what is the most important tones in your image and expose for them.
However, if the contrast scene of within the dynamic range of your sensor (or lower–as is often/usually the case with soft overcast light) then you are a fool to ignore ETTR...
More photons=better noise
That's the basis of ETTR, has nothing to do with "shadow bits.
You should also test out the fact that HTTR can also actually benefit when "modest" increases of ISO are used...with today's cameras you can prolly go upwards of ISO 800 and STILL take advantage of ETTR if the scene contrast range is below the sensor...

 

[BlairWright]

Good article on ETTR Megan, thanks

 

[paul85224]

Huh?
What?
Who?

 

[paul85224]

ETTR: Expose to the Right......

Ahhhhhh....now it makes sense!!!!

 

[EchoingWhisper]

Lol, sorry dude.