How to CHEAT at Photography (Shutter Speed, Aperture, ISO)

[@froknowsphoto]

I love taking it back to the basics. Photography is more then about just gear. I know I talk about gear a lot, but if you don't understand how to use that gear, the gear doesn't matter. It's about the basics and fundamentals. It took me more then 10 years of shooting to start to understand the cause and effect of shooting manual. It takes time.

[@hk530]

Do you have any free camera for lazy and poor people who are to tried to work? If you, please send me one

[@youknowwho9247]

Writing this a third time because KZbin really doesn't like linkage to external websites: You're surprising wrong about the fundamentals here. At best, you're getting the same noise level by bumping exposure in post as you'd have gotten by raising ISO in camera - this is true for the a1 above ISO 400, since it's ISO invariant above that threshold. With a more entry level camera that's not ISO invariant you'd actually get *worse* noise by employing your "cheat". I do like your channel for the humoristic presentation, but in this particular case you're doing a disservice to new photographers who might actually wreck their images by trying this.

[@davidenloe]

Talking the basics is always a good thing. Being an electrician and explaining basics to people keeps it fresh in my mind. Sometimes things being second nature allows small things to slip through the cracks. Thank you for helping people like me who only have places like this to learn this art.

[@froknowsphoto]

@@hk530 no

[@froknowsphoto]

​@@youknowwho9247 I don't agree.

[@AllgoodthingsTv]

Bringing common sense back into photography (e.g., customer doesn't recognize noise, just good image).... I love it!

[@ryanjm]

I would have appreciated seeing a "correctly set ISO" example so you could see the difference between raising it in post vs in LR. Guess I'll have to experiment with this on my own. Thanks for the tip videos!

[@jmich5123]

Same thought, I would have liked to see same type of shot at 25600. It’s either Better or worse…. With backlighting it might be worse so my first thought would be to do what he did, boost in post.

[@truenoong]

It would be dope if you could let us know what you ended up with!

[@LarsLarsen77]

It looks way worse to under-expose and bump it up.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@jmich5123 It would be pretty much the same, since the a1 is ISO invariant above ISO 400.

[@youknowwho9247]

@@LarsLarsen77 Not if your camera is ISO invariant, which is true for the a1 above ISO 400. What he suggests is still a bad idea though, since doing it will never get you a cleaner image than bumping ISO up in the field. At best you get the same, at worst (with a non ISO invariant camera) you get more noise.

[@Augnos]

Straight up. Some of the photos people tell me they like the most are ones where the exposure was off and have a ton of grain and noise, and even shots that missed focus slightly but got caught an iconic moment. Catching the shot under less-than-ideal circumstances is better than not getting it at all

[@JMainesUSMC]

Your page is so refreshing. Im an amateur practicing photographer. Still getting the grasp of what settings to do at what times and such...this is super informative, and I think I've been watching too much KZbin because I've caught myself "pixel peeping" my photos too often, and not realizing that certain circumstances (such as my low-light test shot I was proud of) will inherently have noise introduced regardless. I try to avoid it, obviously, but this is a refreshing take.

[@uvp5000]

I find you are at your best when you present like this: neutral enough, very informative, results to illustrate your point. In other words, my highest compliments on your work here as a presenter. Much like a couple of your other videos where you demonstrate exposure, I picked up a lot of understanding from this. This is why I click on your new offerings rather quickly; it's very easy for me to follow your thoughts and you present very well.

[@victorkulkosky1184]

Thanks, Jared. This video offers some liberating info. I fret about noise, but nobody who's seen my school sports photos has ever said: "Great pix, Vic, but why does it look somebody sprinkled pepper on everybody?" The way most people actually see the photos, they don't notice. I'll put this into use with tonight's game and see how it goes.

[@OttoLP]

I have do disagree with you in a way. It's totally possible to underexpose to get a lower ISO, BUT it doesn't give you cleaner images in ANY way when compensating for the underexposure in post. I've had this argument with someone before and tested it and yes the ISO does not change the noise! (at least on the D850 which i tested it on)

[@Lumpiluk]

Doesn't this depend on the camera and the specific range of iso levels? I vaguely remember seeing a video on iso invariance in the context of the X-T4 that went into some detail on the electronics…

[@armanuki38911]

@@Lumpiluk There are cameras with 2 native ISOs. Basically they have two variants of the analog circuits that read the sensor. In this case going up with the ISO to the second native ISO can reduce noise. On the A1 this seems to be at ISO 500. In all other cases increasing the ISO and increasing the exposure in Lightroom will usually have the same effect regarding noise.

[@youknowwho9247]

At best you'd get the same noise level by doing this - if your camera is ISO invariant. If it's not, you're actually introducing *more* noise by doing what this video suggests.

[@ramanmono]

Yup, this is what I think as well. If you have a low signal (dark location), amplifying in camera before written to raw file is better (with jpeg much better). If you digitalize a low signal there is less information to digitalize so to speak. Same mistake is often made, even by pros, in audio. Saying that if you set a weak signal at the correct gain and have a lot of noise, just lower the gain and boost it in post. This is obviously bad because you don't just lower the noise, but the actual signal as well. And will have a lower quality signal when boosted and the noise will also be boosted.

[@keensoundguy6637]

@@ramanmono Which is why S/N ratio is such a useful concept.

[@michaelchapman4887]

Fro, really enjoyed this video. One of the reasons I started watching your videos years ago is your ability to teach the basics.

[@angeloiscruzen]

I think you'll have a lot of critics pointing out the lack of camera flash use but I can imagine the clients not wanting a flash going off while they're bowling. It was clearly a tough (extreme as you mentioned) situation to shoot in so I'm with you on having the shutter high for the action shots and just dealing with things in post. Great video and example of a low light situation!

[@mikeconnor3602]

I asked the question about flash also, and concluded it was due to the potential to disturb the bowler

[@donquique1]

They would throw you out of the alley if using flash.

[@kaleff75]

Bravo Jared! There are so many things holding us back to take good images and warring about noise should not be one of them.

[@PostMeridianLyf]

Got my sl2 stolen and a buddy let me borrow his d5100. Your words on clients not understanding what noise is really makes me reconsider some of the photos I've taken but never used. Going to revisit them now and not worry so much about noise when shooting in the future. Thanks!

[@ultrasynthetic]

It also really helps to have nearly 10 THOUSAND dollars worth of equipment in your hand. To be fair, the true gem of advice for me, is when you talk about the approach and say "I did what I needed to do to get the shots." and "They don't sit there and go 'Hey...' because they don't care. All they care about is, I went out and took pictures of them bowling. 'Wow, these are awesome shots.' and that's what they said."

[@Skipsul]

Fantastic video! Truly. Ever thought of adding another shirt to your lineup? "I shoot manual"? - I did a lot of shooting at my church during Holy Week, when things are dark and candle-lit, and the techniques you used here are pretty much was I used - though I could go a bit slower on the shutter speed and ISO because I wasn't needing to capture motion. When you master manual control, the world's your oyster.

[@glennwainman6396]

Great teaching moment, thank you so much.This reminds me of the Nikon school of photography that I did in 1983. 40,000 slides in 8 hours of good better and best composition. A primer on camera settings is always good.

[@davekal]

Most important part is simply capturing the moment through a good photo. Well said at the end.

[@pictureeyecandy]

Refreshing no doom and gloom. Sadly too many ppl worry about noise but when you print out an image is not noticeable. A flash or strobe is a photographer friend!

[@JimSefton]

Not sure the guy throwing the bowling ball would have appreciated a strobe in his face.

[@pictureeyecandy]

@@JimSefton AMF use to have a DJ night. with Strobe lighting and music.

[@wm9742]

I love the professional photographers coming out to critique this video lol. Jared, you have been doing this for so long and i'm sure you have forgotten more about photography than I will ever learn, so I thoroughly enjoy these videos when you go back to basics. I would love a series of you doing these types of videos for different functions (sports, portraits, events, etc).

[@davidbentley8848]

I have missed your "Teacher Fro" vids Jared, brilliant to see a return !!

[@LandscapeJoe]

I’ve purchased your courses, I enjoy your teaching. I love your photography. Part of me does wish you’d lose the “fro” intro and gig. You’re so good you don’t need a gimic. You alone is great, just a thought from a fan. All the best!

[@LarsLarsen77]

That's where you're wrong, Joe.

[@StandardYoutuberExcellent]

Shots fired?? 🤔🤔

[@WilliamJohnston]

I always skip past the intro in these videos, great content, annoying branding.

[@svendrastrupandersen5866]

Thanks for keeping the focus on the physics of light and photography, and not on "smart" gimmicks like noise reduction software!

[@Twobarpsi]

Agreed

[@yersonpedraza]

That’s what I wanna hear! “This just are great!!” Clients don’t pinpoint that when they have beautiful pictures 👏🏻 Good video

[@Menosfilms]

Whole lots of yes Jared! This is really important information for people starting out shooting in low light. I shoot low light because I work graveyards so I always go out at night during my nights off. I even made a video from what I experienced so far to help others looking to shoot night street photography.

[@julius4858]

Jared, can you show a comparison of the „right“ exposure in camera vs in post? I’ve seen a different video some time ago that was pretty technical which explained that there is basically no difference.

[@MonroesArtStudio]

I kinda dig the look before adding the adjustments. Looks more like a dim light bowling alley aesthetic. I dig what you caught just out of the cam

[@LukeZalvino]

Ya id roll with the original exposure, n i don't think it looks horrible to add a little bit of artifical brightening on the person with a brush too

[@Ramage7070]

Jared, you have a real talent for taking more complex subjects and making them easy to understand and relatable. Big thumbs up as always!

[@ZakDeadlight]

Great video. Wish I'd watched this a few years back. The sharpening and noise reduction in Lightroom is actually really good once you know how to use it properly. Thank Jared.

[@bryan67thomas]

"When I deliver these photos they have no idea what noise and grain is" I do live music band photography in bars and local clubs and deal with the same lighting challenges and I tell myself this all the time. I also find that with band photography the darker(underexposed) shots often do a better job at telling the story and keeping that live performance feeling

[@caltobias5080]

Never though of it like this! Tonight I've got a high school night football game to shoot, I think I'll try jacking the ISO up.

[@Augnos]

Same! Some of the people I shoot prefer the grainy photos, because it reminds them from the rock star photos in the magazines we had as kids

[@404Anymouse]

This is such a true sentiment. I recently got praise for my excellent photography skills when half of the photos were from kids who I handed my A7 II with vintage glass to and who then spent happily snapping away at everything. Most pictures weren't level, they rarely nailed the manual focus, and they were only out-of-camera JPGs, but the pictures were of memorable moments and, from a full frame with fast glass, looked like nothing that they're used to from phones and cheap compacts.

[@jonnybondphoto]

I think your perspective on de-noise software is interesting and practical. However, it seems ON1 and Topaz have introduced de-noise software which is advanced beyond PS and LR. It would be interesting to see your review of the new software and see if that influences your current stance on whether you can push hardware tech into the higher ISO ranges, 10K+ and end up with good outcomes. If it does, it begins to open additional options of trying to get the exposure closer in camera and lessens the required “cheat” techniques in post.

[@dbcvisuals]

Jared was on-point in this video. The recent advances in imaging software, ie Camera Raw / Ps (+ Ai) make sense to keep the ISO low in-camera and bring it back up in Post. Personally, I would have set up one or two battery-powered strobes with softboxes to shoot this scene, if permissable.

[@GOAP68]

As someone who shoots 2.8/25,600+ with DXM3 most weekends, I've always shoot for right side curve exposure. Thought the rule of thumb was dropping exposure in post resulted in lower noise than raising in post.

[@harvymckiernan93]

Yup! That would be my logic too, at least you know the information is there in raw before you edit. I remember the massive debate a couple of years ago in the Fstoppers and Northrup camps. They tried to claim you might as well just shoot at the base iso regardless and correct in post. There's some truth to it, but if the image is clipped either in highlights or shadows, then nothing is going to save it. You can't amplify signal gain it it doesn't exist. Yep! Iso is amplification. It's like comparing a tiny chunk of solid chocolate to an aerated bubble bar that's 5 times the size. It's 5 times bigger but it's still the same amount of chocolate. God I'm rambling again..you know this already! Excellent video...see ya!

[@kbellanger4140]

Great content brother. Shot my kids Birthday party, used a flash and was immediately was told to stop. No flash Used Topaz all clear

[@JS-wz3km]

I understand from your comments that you didn't have supplemental lighting. If this had been a paid shoot, what supplemental lighting would you use to improve the images? Where would you put a speed light and how would you determine the settings?

[@barkan86]

What I take from your video is to shoot series of pictures at 1/100 of second and choose the pictures that were captured at the end of the motion (after the ball release). The player would be stationary and the ball will be seen moving..

[@darrinyo-mamakimble7002]

This is good information I’ve been Using the same technique as you however I haven’t done any printing yet and didn’t even think about that aspect, I’ve been using the noise slider now you’ve given me something else to think about thanks.

[@BAYWATOFFICIAL]

I really like watching your video before i sleep , thank you

[@wilismatrix9847]

You remind of my past boss at the agency when I spent a lot of time on enhancing small details, he tells, stop, just to stop wasting time because general people won't notice any difference.

[@paras6TEEN]

General public will never be able to see grains because most likely there are going to see their photos on their smartphones which have small screens and are more pixel dense than our desktop screens and hence finner grains. And when you print the photos, grains make your pictures looks sharp, so it's a win win. I personally use external flash with a soft box on it, which makes the subjects' skin look more beautiful (obviously in low light party/events situations)

[@davidsinde3820]

Thanks for the tip, once I get my camera back from repairs I’m going try this out. I’m into aviation photography, I have been scratching my head on how to get sharp and clean shots in low light and even night time photos while the planes are landing or taking off. I have had success with shutter or aperture priority when doing long exposure at night and the camera is on the a tripod and the plane is parked.

[@Twobarpsi]

Buy a really good low light capable lens.

[@Micah-Woods]

Appreciate the perspective on noise and grain for photos!

[@Azergoth]

Hi Jared! First let me say I really appreciate your videos! Thanks for it. I think you should be more careful with this quite techy topic. Some points: 1) Your method is valid for iso invariant (or iso-less) cameras (or close): Sony and Nikon. (There’s a great article on dpreview) 2) This is not true for other cameras (less recent Canon), better use the right gain (iso to start with) 3) For iso invariant cameras, this is equivalent to raising iso in camera, so not really helpful (but is for protecting highlights by gaining DR) 4) The noise obtained (for iso invariant sensors) is due to the amount of light gathered: aperture and shutter speed, but NOT iso 5) note: A big improvement in iq can be obtained by choosing the iso where the second gain amplifier kicks in (which would be iso 640 on the a1 but could be higher on other cameras such as A7). Better choose 640 than 400, which is off topic in this specific case but good to know 😉

[@nelsono4315]

I think what you got looks perfectly fine. I think some people that use full frame cameras are hesitant about bumping up the ISO to say 6400. One of the reasons you shoot full frame is to be able to do that when needed. If your end result is going to be an 8x10 image in a magazine, 6400 ISO is not going to kill it. If you're going to make a billboard, yeah, it matters. If you're going to use a full frame camera then take advantage of what it does.

[@levantq5972]

but why underexpose in the first place if you are going to add +2 exp in post? why not shoot at a higher ISO bec the a1 might suffer from a lack of ISO invariance

[@youknowwho9247]

ISO invariance isn't a bad thing, just something to be aware of.

[@LarsLarsen77]

You shouldn't. In fact you should overexpose and then darken it in post.

[@levantq5972]

@@LarsLarsen77 but you might clip the highlights

[@froknowsphoto]

This is what i've done since film days to compensate. Some people can't raise their ISO past 6400. Can't you just take the tip for what it is?

[@levantq5972]

@@froknowsphoto i definitely could jared, i didnt mean to be rude in any way, just asking…

[@tshev]

I like applying noise reduction for the background when using high ISO because we are blurring the background anyway. The noise reduction amount depends on situation.

[@plusrunning]

My good friend told me, who Is currently shooting for Alice Cooper, always shoot 2 stops under, that way color balance and highlighting will allow you to bring attention to the places you want. It doesn't work in all situations, but most and its been 5 years applying that concept and Ive had great success.

[@patrickmolloy6994]

wonderful getting back to basics. thanks Jared

[@MattBanks14]

Jared - do you think the Canon R5/R6 are capable of being off by 2 stops and getting that full level of recovery? I have an EOS R and have some some trouble in the past being off by a couple stops and losing detail in shadows/highlights. I'm thinking of upgrading to an R5 since I'm already invested in RF glass (24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8), but seeing how much dynamic range you get on the Sony cameras has me questioning things. Thanks for the great video and all of the tutorials over the years! You've been a tremendous help and inspiration!

[@furonwarrior]

I’m confused… you said that by shooting at a high ISO, it will look like Swiss cheese, but at the same time it’s better to get the right exposure before post-production.

[@ramanmono]

This guide seems like it's really meant for older cameras that don't have that high of an iso. Since that Sony is super, setting it at 25600 iso would be better. I mean my old D7000 can barely do iso 6400, but it wouldn't be better to shoot 2 stops lower at iso 1600 when I actually need that extra exposure.

[@nickstanislawski]

I have delivered photos at 20k iso as a wedding photographer on a canon 5dm3, actually my profile photo was shot at 12800 the full size looks way better than the bowling image he used, I have found it is better to shoe ISO and even if I over expose it looks better because noise always In the shadows

[@Okl9618]

He meant to raise the iso until you start to get grain. Then if u shot in raw, you can easily make the image more bright in lightroom

[@mikeconnor3602]

@@ramanmono I have a D7000 also, I try not to go beyond 1600. Just bought a D850, can't wait to see its dynamic range

[@silvercruze2191]

I agree. Especially if you shoot raw with the modern cameras ( I use a 5D mark III that I choose not to go above 12,800 ISO though it is still usable). The flexibility a 9 year old full frame camera’s raw file can give me a better/cleaner file if I bump up the exposure in post than go to those level of ISO’s.

[@kennethlui2268]

Nice. I thought you would compare the image result of ISO 25600 vs ISO 6400 but pushed two stops in Lightroom.

[@rio197]

Thanks for this video! I always think about the ISO first.

[@TheOrlandoGuy]

Another great lesson, Jared. Can you do one on cheating for video in low light sometime?

[@tobiensam]

I think the darker looks better, it's the bowling hall feeling, it's always dark in there

[@tomhawkes1818]

I shoot 2 stops under a lot for low light, best way I find to bring it back up in post is push them shadow up in Lightroom - noticed you haven’t done that here

[@lucascnlp]

For those special occasions where there´s not enough light and I need to bump the iso I've been doing it on camera (even up to 51200) and then applying the dxo pureraw noise reduction, it really feels like magic because you barely lose detail (especially compared to the cameraraw/lightroom NR) and the noise it's just gone

[@chrispeden979]

I liked it better darker as shot. No bowling alley I have ever been to was as bright as you made the final image so it’s unrealistic to me.

[@daniel635biturbo]

Maybe +0,7 would be my preferred setting, from original image. Seems that many people are scared of loosing details both in shadows and highlights. Photos at night -1,5 EV and let there be black parts.

[@chrispeden979]

@@daniel635biturbo yeah 2/3rd of a stop would probably be great. Certainly not 2 full stops. And yes you are right. So many people are afraid of shadows, low light and noise. Ironically these same people add a bunch of contrast in post (ahem Jared). How about just taking it that way to begin with. 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@StevenAlvarez]

Exactly ! 🙏

[@graham68ktm]

I liked the original shot as well , I might of just lightened the bowler slightly with an adjustment brush !

[@Nathan.1882]

Agreed ! Its fine to have it a lil dark but more realistic

[@lewisowens4]

Yes, 100% on NOT using noise reduction! It just takes away all detail, I never use it!👍

[@broketostoke]

I love that I can relate to the moods of your hair SOO MUCH.

[@Joseph-iu6ip]

This is good for someone using a camera from 2015. He learned photography on film so ISO Invariance is a newer concept for camera sensors.

[@markwenning2216]

I really like that photo, well done sir

[@squiggmonster1495]

A video where I actually learned something. There should be more of these.

[@princetarun]

Awesome tip 👍 I'll keep that in mind to tackle the situation. 🧐

[@SolamenteVees]

Thanks, Jared. It's not an unusual situation in bird & wildlife photography, especially when shooting with cloud cover...

[@thesharpercoder]

I use a different approach to get the same result. Jared dislikes using ISO Auto in Manual shooting mode, but I like it under varying lighting conditions. Instead of dialing down an ISO setting, I just use Exposure Compensation to capture all of the shots, the level of which gets recorded in the EXIF. In post, I can see how much negative EC I used, so I can dial it back in, no problem. The photos are self documenting in post.

[@Michal-ow1zi]

If I shoot sports in a dark place and can't use the flash, then I don't think about parameters other than shutter speed. For example, swimming or gymnastics competitions, I usually shoot either in shutter priority or in manual mode. And shutter speeds can go up to 1/1500 of a second to freeze motion. And I set the photosensitivity to auto mode with a limit that the camera allows. Modern cameras can easily shoot up to 6400. The manual mode is only needed to control the depth of field: when, for example, you need several athletes in sharpness. A little secret is to take the exposure compensation to minus 1 or more.

[@stuartsmith3429]

What timing...I just just this to photograph a hot air balloon evening glow in South Dakota...R5...24-105 f/4 wide open 1/400 sec @ ISO 4000...happy with the results 🤙

[@Digmen1]

Hi Jared The end result of the bowling guy looks great (aside from his hairy legs) I get how you decided on 1/400th and wide open at 1.8 But how did you decide the ISO? Was it just experience or did you use the camera to guide you.

[@christophercardoza6364]

I'm curious if you ever noticed lower grain when shooting jpeg rather than RAW on a Nikon D500 and D850?. I noticed a big difference. I tried an experiment and noticed this to be the case when shooting lowlight at 6400 with both cameras.

[@tklami]

The jpeg file has noise reduction built into the file. The raw file does not

[@JEDINITE30]

The new noise reduction software that is out like DXO and On1 doesn't soften the noise in images. They actually de-mosaic and reverse the noise in the raw file. They really do get rid of the noise. They can make a 12,800 ISO image look like it was shot at ISO 800.

[@marcosuozzi]

Just thank you Jared 👍

[@jdawg63000]

I am learning that we as creators/artists are the worst at critiquing ourselves. But like you said, the general public doesn't know or care

[@dondomingo4685]

Thanks Jared! Informative as usual!

[@mohannadmalik5373]

I am no expert but at similar situation I'd pop the built in flash and bounce it and with more light iso on auto will drop to give better quality but ofc as you said it's not a big deal and I like the printout and the result.

[@Chemy.]

you are doing it for the client not other photographers

[@pbsnoosk13]

Thank you, Jared!!!! This was very helpful!

[@UrbaneHobbit]

Sometimes I think the best feature that photo apps could add is a little text label that shows you the equivalent-size print and approximate viewing distance, as you zoom in to peep those sweet, sweet pixels. Wouldn’t help sell noise reduction features, I guess…

[@GaryFerrao]

well, to get your exposure right, you did try asking them to turn on all the lights. but they didn't have more. the first part of exposure is light, before you can even begin to think about the camera settings.

[@plonk2plonk]

I think your vids are really informative. How did you know you were 2 stops off. Is that from the software?

[@JoshMainka]

I started using DXO Pureraw for my high ISO concert photos and it cleans them up a treat.

[@david.stachon]

I like the photo. I think I would have liked better a directed 'dodge' (as in dodge and burn) at the subject as opposed to bringing up the exposure globally.

[@KTWilliams]

Great video and trick! I use this all the time when shooting in darker areas.

[@bobrose2777]

Another great video, Fro!

[@richardosesphotography9619]

Nice to see the education side of things again

[@IRK-pd7lc]

Maybe back in the day this would have been the META, would love to see what you shot that day at 25,600iso cause I don't believe for one second that this is still the way to go.

[@Akulion1]

I had to go through this while photographing a beautiful sunset and viola the cutest duck emerges from the lake and literally starts walking up to me looking for food (or trying to chase me off haha) I got some good shots of the buddy against the sunset but they were dark as heck and some had motion blur and even after increasing exposure I was disappointed 👀 so thanks for these tips 🙏 I'm a new photographer as a hobbist so greatly appreciate your advice .

[@martharetallick204]

Working through the same issue with a nature photo. Really had to crank the ISO to bring out the subject. Got some hot pixels, but my post processing software removed them.

[@penguin_edits]

LOVE UR VIDS MAN!!

[@karenfuson6426]

Hello Jared I love watching your videos and just wanted to ask you about the next Nikon camera I should invest in right now I shoot with a Nikon d3200. I shoot family’s, newborn and some weddings. So Studio and outside. I’ve been doing photography for about a year now just would like to see what I should upgrade to or stay with my d3200? Thanks

[@ramanmono]

Interesting, What is the highest normal iso of that camera? If you shoot RAW (which you obviously do), I would assume that if not overexposed going to the max normal ISO (so no high boost iso) would be best. This seems the same as in audio production, if you need to amplify a weak signal and at the correct gain level you hear a lot of noise, a lot of people, even professionals, will tell you to record at lower gain and boost in post. This is never the correct way to do it, because not only do you reduce your noise, but your actual signal as well. And boosting in post is just software and is like those extra High iso setting options. So you might be losing on actual color information. (But I guess, since that Sony has such a high end sensor it's still very useable). A comparison between iso 6400 boosted in post vs iso 25600 would be great. (It doesn't have to be that bowling ally, can be a test shoot).

[@JamesKellyWickerman123]

Has Jared tried Topaz software? I used to avoid noise correction too because the results from Photoshop and Lightroom did as he said and made the image fuzzy and less sharp. Since using Topaz Denoise and Sharpen my images are less noisy and sharper - I use a Sigma 150-600 which is a pretty soft lens anyway but the AI tools really help recover some of the detail lost from a lower-end lens and noisy images. I'd love if he did a video on them - even if he drew the conclusion that they weren't for him. It's frustrating to see someone shoot down something new without (seemingly, he's never provided examples) trying it when you've had such a good experience with it.

[@Ursicinus27]

Tank you ! Can you review an app like Topaze Denoise ?

[@muziqfreek]

maybe if you watched the video - you'd realise why that wasn't the smartest question

[@Ursicinus27]

@@muziqfreek yeah, but it depends on the situation. When you need to crop the image, it can be useful ! (I Speak french, and I dont understand 100% of his videos)

[@RR-bd4bm]

Hi Jared, this was very useful, thanks. One question: in your experience, how feasible is it to ask your client to switch on more lights (like in the bowling alley) or let you use a speedlight/strobes or an LED panel to help you, Thanks.

[@jakoblainer2186]

Hey Jared, I tried it out and i think you're kinda wrong, its better to shoot at 25.600 than bring it back in Lightroom. And some other YT videos showed that too, that bringing it back gives you a worse Image than shooting it right. (NO HATE, just wanted to inform you. I love your work and you're the best Photographer in my opinion)

[@froknowsphoto]

Some people can’t do it with their cameras. I say this in the video.

[@Davion474]

Hey Jared great video as usual. I notice you were using your iPad for the retouching. Are you using a specific app to connect it Lightroom?

[@guhhhhh9032]

One solution is an infrared camera and an infrared flash. Not super easily available to everyone though. But it is a potential niche one could pursue.

[@IgorKlajo]

A few years ago when I had the Canon 400D I used this "magic trick" to have fast shutter speeds and get some decent photos.

[@davidenloe]

Awesome, thank you!

[@michaelplathphotography8537]

Maybe use a zoomed flash to get the ball and subject in more light while letting the background be darker

[@OracleTestlab]

Good example, I did the same recently, my image was literally dark. But I could bring up the shadow and detail so much that it was a great photo at the end. I made it my Facebook cover pic. My body was Nikon D7500.