>>4373115
P=camera control everything
A=user controls aperture, camera adjusts shutter+ISO
S=user controlls shutter, camera adjusts aperture+ISO
M=user controls everything

you use M 99% of the time and P is for handing the camera to idiots if they need to take a snapshit

>>4373151
>Gets fucking PASM wrong
/p/, everyone

why even bother explaining someone will probably just post a map and say "CIRCLE IN RED WHERE THE CAMERA DIDNT CONTROL ISO"

>>4373115
P = professional
A = amateur
S = sports
M = midwit

>>4373115

That’s only half of it, you also need to set if you are spot metering, centre weighted metering or metering the entire frame.
Those selections are meaningless until you figure this part out first.

P = "Say cheese" dad-ographers who offer to shoot your wedding for 1/10th an actual photographers rate and deliver something like this https://kenrockwell.com/weddings/
S = Relic from film cameras, no one ever uses this unless they were already used to using it. Functionally replaced by manual+auto ISO.
A = Normal shooting
M = Flash and shooting sports/action with auto ISO (or treating the camera as ISOless)

File: 076_std.jpg (116 KB, 618x400)

116 KB JPG

>>4373164
>and deliver something like this https://kenrockwell.com/weddings/
uh, kino?

>>4373166
shoulda shot in aperture priority stuck at f1.8 so he wouldnt have to remember his wife was a lesbo

>>4373164
My hot take is aperture priority + auto iso is better than manual + auto iso for sports action, PROVIDED you can set the shutter speed at which it'll start increasing iso (my camera can do this). The problem with manual + auto iso is that if you're swapping from daylight to shadows for action shots it'll either overexpose daylight photos or you'll be using a shutter speed that's faster than you need, which results in degraded quality in the shadows. With aperture + auto iso, you avoid the overexposure problem because your camera will just increase the shutter speed, so you set the lowest acceptable shutter speed as when your camera should swap to increasing iso. The only problem with this setup is that often the "lowest acceptable shutter speed" changes, e.g. going from shooting a bird on a perch to a bird in flight. My dream is being able to program a camera's main wheel to change the auto iso shuter speed cutoff point, and have the back wheel change the aperture priority for artistic effect.

>>4373115
I use "P," Professional, automatic exposure mode, formerly called "program" in the 1980s. In this mode the camera chooses the f/stop and shutter speed for you. Done.

The standard combinations are f/4 at 1/60, f/5.6 @ 1/125, f/8 @ 1/250, f/11 @ 1/500, and so forth.

It's easy to get to any aperture or shutter speed you prefer in this mode: simply move the rear dial to shift them! This selects alternate combinations of f/stops and shutter speeds, all of which give exactly the same exposure. Nikon calls this "Program Shift." A *P symbol appears on the bottom left of the viewfinder, to the left of the shutter speed

>>4373179
Just shoot manual+auto iso and turn the clicky wheel faster. Skill issue.

If they made a clicky wheel for ISO you don't need auto ISO either

>>4373180
Why do you post exactly like Ken Rockwell? Is that you Ken? I like your wedding photos >>4373166

>>4373182
I know, and I do this. It's not hard, but the problem is that overexposure completely ruins shots. So in highly variable situations where I'm often using this style of shooting I have to remember to keep an eye on how the exposure's doing and swap to a faster shutter speed if I'm overexposing. Which is the issue: overexposure completely ruins shots. With a bad "lowest acceptable shutter speed" I might get some motion blur but at least 50% of the shot isn't pure white. I just think it's somewhat more preferable but cameras are stuck with what people find familiar rather than what's optimal.

>>4373183
Thank you for supporting my growing family

>>4373187
>Using a camera is hard I have to pay attention to the numbers and change them
Yeah ok but I just shoot in A mode and use auto ISO sometimes

With that exposure dial with all the + and - numbers to stick it brighter or darker. Its cool. Never had a problem. Just pay attention to the numbers and turn the wheels to change them real quick. Simple as.

>>4373162
Accurate

>>4373198
for the 80s, yeah, when photography was just inaccessible enough for GWACs like rockwell to still be professionals

File: Photographing_People_(1).jpg (389 KB, 1024x2818)

389 KB JPG

>>4373199

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop 21.0 (Macintosh)
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	4267
Image Height	20188
Number of Bits Per Component	8, 8, 8
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2020:02:26 22:09:11
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	1024
Image Height	2818

File: unnamed.png (1.07 MB, 1100x733)

1.07 MB PNG

>>4373202
>The professionals and press photographers!
have you seen this press photography tho?

it's just not very good

File: 8o7zop867zg.jpg (1.13 MB, 2400x1600)

1.13 MB JPG

>>4373115
A(perture) lets you control your aperture and ISO, the camera adjusts the shutter speed until it reaches your set exposure value.
With this you can isolate the subject using depth of field, or get optimal sharpness from your lens. Best for stills.
I almost always shoot in this mode unless I want to do some gimmick stuff.

S(hutter) lets you control your shutter and ISO, the camera controls the aperture to reach your set EV.
This is for moving subjects or something moving around the subject and lets you choose if you want to freeze that motion in sharp image or let it become a soft blurry veil.

P(rogram) lets you control ISO, the camera controls shutter speed and aperture to reach your set EV.
This is pretty much auto mode but doesn't fuck with your metering or focus.
It's if you need to act fast or hand the camera to a noob while not trusting the auto mode

M(anual) lets you control all aspects of your exposure triangle (Aperture, shutter, ISO) with the EV only serving you as guide.
People will tell you that this is the cool kid's mode that should always be turned on no matter what and that is true for beginner's since you will learn what is important the hard way, by fucking up photos.
When you know what you are doing, you can let the camera do some work for you.
If you can take your time and want the perfect photo, you use this mode.

All these modes are useless if you chose the wrong metering mode though.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T20
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T20 Ver2.10
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	38 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2024:09:13 02:36:12
Exposure Time	1/4000 sec
F-Number	f/0.0
Exposure Program	Aperture Priority
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Brightness	7.6 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash
Focal Length	25.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	6000
Image Height	4000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Hard
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Unknown
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Unknown
Focus Mode	Manual
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Aperture Prior AE
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	Over Exposed

>>4373115
You might need to look into the retaionship between; shutter-speed, aperature, ISO-sensitivity and how these 3 key settings interact with what you are shooting and the way the scene is lit, and why (if at all) you might want to automate that setting.

>>4373228
More AI slop

>>4373204
Professional photographers are usually bad because their audience are people who both know nothing and don't care about photography. It's the easiest possible bar to clear. The real skill involved in professional photography is the ability to market yourself.

>>4373390
It goes for most things... it's one of the reasons why I do all of my own home improvements now matter how specialized the task. I look around for "pros" and one look at their sample photos tells me all I need to know: everyone's a retard and nobody cares.

>>4373391
yup. Just do to the profit motive professional anythings cannot be concerned with doing the best possible job, they just need to do a good enough job that people who don't know anything about the skill can't tell it's mediocre and won't bring it back or want their money back. Anything beyond that and your suffering from opportunity cost. The client won't notice the increase in quality because they are uninformed and you could have sold that time to another client, increasing your wages

just remember that the exposure triangle is not real. ISO is gain and if you cope hard enough it's film-like grain not noise.

>>4373407
>ISO is like, fake bro
If I underexpose at 400, I have highlight data that I would not have exposing +1 at 800, while shadow noise looks the exact same. If ISO is fake why is the highlight data lost? And why do the shadows actually look slightly cleaner getting it right in camera when its more than 1 or 2 stops away?

perhaps, ISO isnt fake and "just like gain" because the amplification is happening at a stage before the photon counts are being written to the raw and there's more than just simple amplification involved.

>>4373412
ISO is fake though. The number isn't consistent between brands or even between models inside of a brand. The numbers are completely made up and don't matter except that every doubling needs to be 1 stop.

>>4373416
>The number isn't consistent between brands
In camera comparison land, this matters, but inside your camera, ISO actually does something. If you ignore it you do lose highlights or end up with slightly uglier shadows. If you push exposure past the ISO where the sensor switches to another gain circuit you can actually get weird shit like banding and extra hot pixels, so in fake gearfag tests like +6ev pushes from base ISO (no one ever needs to protect 6ev of highlights, wtf) single gain sensors enjoy the one single situation where they have better IQ than dual gain sensors.

>>4373423
>ISO actually does something
I didn't say that it didn't do anything. I said it was a fake standard. I do agree with the other guy that you can effectively think of it as gain, even if it's not technically correct, it's close enough

>>4373428
>It was a fake standard
No one ever claimed it was a standard. It's just a loan word from a different age.

You can't even think of it as a gain knob, because most cameras have more than one gain stage now, and basically all of them do ISO setting dependent processing.

>>4373431
>You can't even think of it as a gain knob
I can and I do and it hasn't caused me any problems

>because most cameras have more than one gain stage now
So? Just take a note of what ISOs to skip over and treat it like a gain knob. It's not complicated and it doesn't really matter. If you notice an extra 1/3rd stop of noise, your photo sucks anyway

>>4373431
>You can't even think of it as a gain knob
What?
Yes you can, that's literally (LITERALLY) what the ISO setting is.

It applies a configurable amount of GAIN to the data captured by the sensor before it gets DIGITIZED.
Just like turning GAIN up on a microphone, too much GAIN will clip your loud noises/highlights and the quiet/shadows will be mostly the same.
One important part though.

The signal becomes DIGITIZED.
This means the original signal is gone and you're left with a capture of the capture, and that's where gain comes in. This is also where dual gain stages come in. Same with microphones, it's common for there to be multiple amplification stages and to get different results. For loud stuff or bright stuff (gunshots, sunlight) you need very little amplification but quiet stuff or dark stuff (whispers or shadows) needs more and amplification can be designed to perform better at specific tasks like fine/small amplification vs huge amplification.

For example with a mic you might want a knob to adjust on the fly, but you might also want a permanent +20db gain delivered by a pre-amp before you get your knob.
With dual gain ISO in cameras it's kind of similar, you use the little amp for low base-400/800 ISO then anything higher uses the beefier amplification method. Often a combination of both, beefy amp for the big jumps and a little fine tuning by the more precise low gain amplification hardware.

>>4373412
Literally just turn up the brightness in Lightroom? I don't get it

Why isn't there a digital photo equivalent of 32 bit audio recording?

>>4373571
I believe that's what raw files are

>>4373115
A - 99% of what I shoot with my main is on A, aperture has the most drastic effect on the image (depth of field), so it's the deciding factor. I almost never shoot "action" kind of shots, and when I do then I just watch the shutter speed reading and open the aperture as needed.
S - I effectively use shutter priority on my Kodak Tourist because 1/100 is the only speed that works kek. And very rarely on my main camera, when I want to make sure to freeze (or blur) some motion in a very specific way.
M - for long exposures, timelapses and shit like that. For everything else in everyday shooting exposure compensation is sufficient.
P - that's what my 5 year old kid uses on his beater DSLR.

>>4373571
Very expensive cameras digitize at 16 bits per photosite.
Since bayer interpolation is a thing and it's not uncommon for channels to be severely differently exposed (white balance compensates for this in post-processing) this means only one color channel will be reasonably well exposed at a time, and due to sub-sampling the bit depth is battling diminishing returns to begin with.

Pro level cameras do 14-bits in their RAW.
$10,000+ bodies like some hassleblads and larg(er) format studio cameras do 16-bit RAW.

People think cameras are good and will talk about memes like quantum efficiency and shit but that's all a meme. These sorts of things are usually in reference to the raw sensor sensitivity BEFORE bayer filter shit gets added in, you lose performace from bayer in both sensitivity and in accuracy from the readings so super high bit depth digitization yields little gains. ISO/gain adjusments are the practical solution for digital photography and if you find yourself in a situation where you need more you can probably shoot an HDR sequence with gradual EV steps (-4, -3, -2, -1, 0, 1, +1, +2, +3, +4) and combine them into a 32bit HDR composite file.

For most real use cases outside of stationary macro shots of objects (not breathing moving people) cameras are currently practically limited by their signal to noise not the bit depth, but higher bit depth is more forgiving for "fixitinpost" fags who refuse to use autoISO or set their settings right in camera.

The $10K+ bodies that offer 16-bit do so not out of necessity but out of convenience, letting studiofags keep more of their lazily taken shots with a bit more forgiveness but for anything properly exposed there's very little real world benefit to anything higher than what we've got now. Most modern cams do 14-bit. Even $500 cams.

>>4373579
No, you're wrong.
I'd say you're a certified retard but you said "I believe" so you get a free pass. You simply thought wrong, nothing wrong with that.

>>4373571
lol 32bit audio is such a dumb meme. I write audio editing software for a living and the only time where 32bit is of any use is during editing. but guess what: every modern editing software will convert data to 32bit when reading it in and then keep working on 32bit values till you decide to export it again.

>>4373416
ISO = increasingly shitty outcome
that's the standard

File: cod1.png (42 KB, 160x147)

42 KB PNG

>>4373706
Noice. Keeping that.