Originally Posted by Timur Civan
Yup...
The tricjk is a bit of contrast, even in low light...
|
|
08-18-2012, 11:04 PM
Yup...
The tricjk is a bit of contrast, even in low light...
08-18-2012, 11:34 PM
Seems to work fine at higher ISO's with lighter skin subjects, but I have a really hard time with dark skin subjects and higher ISO's. The noise really seems apparent then.
08-19-2012, 02:20 AM
The noise also depends on color temperature. With daylight you get more signal in the blue channel and can go to higher ISOs than with tungsten.
08-19-2012, 03:20 PM
Absolutely. In the example i posted earlier, i had her use practically white makeup. It really helps in low light.
08-19-2012, 04:04 PM
Good to know that's a very useful tip.
08-20-2012, 02:23 PM
800. ;)
08-20-2012, 06:14 PM
800
I usually stick to 320 or 640
I have worked with old school DP who treat it like film never really trust the monitor but a meter and he used 250 EXT and 500 INT all amazing results
08-20-2012, 06:32 PM
320 looks cleaner. 800 if you want to protect the highlights. 800 pretty much forces you to stop down a bit in bright light situations which keeps you from clipping RAW data, but seems to have a little more noise, still clean, but not as clean as 320.
08-21-2012, 11:16 AM
Keeping it at 320 also means you are allocating far more of the exposure range to the shadow half of the frame. At 800, it means you are seeing your grey point lower, and making the exposure above and below grey equal.
11-07-2012, 09:22 AM
This info is good and what I've been looking for. So given the consensus is anywhere from 320-500ISO for a clean image, and 800ISO ok too and even as high up as 1600... how would one go about shooting with streetlight lamp lighting in the neighbourhood of 6400ISO @ f2.8?
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
