7 FACTS For Better Image Quality - Megapixels, Resolution, Image Sensor Size, Photosites???

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Hi guys, just a correction to note please - at 13:50 I explain how to calculate megapixels by dividing by one million but at 14:09 when I repeat the calculation I accidentally say one thousand instead of one million. Sorry my bad 😬. Thanks to a couple of our viewers for pointing it out.

[@messylaura]

thank god you made a mistake, i was thinking you were a God....................:)

[@ChannelAA]

Shoudn't this number be 1,024 as opposed to 1,000? Thanks.

[@returntohome330]

This is a great video for those new to photography, it took me a few years to put all this information together for me to draw on when needed. This video is pure gold as a learning tool great job saves me explaining it to new photographers!.

[@cottonbomb8272]

It's cool, I've noticed that during watching and I actually felt relieved because of that: this guy is still a human 😂 phew

[@OccultDemonCassette]

Also, there were APS film cameras available before digital crop APS-C became mainstream. "Advanced Photo System Type-C (APS-C) is an image sensor format approximately equivalent in size to the Advanced Photo System (APS) film negative in its C ("Classic") format"

[@donschiffer7400]

I think the law of diminishing returns plays a roll in most aspects of photography. Megapixels were a huge factor when going from 3 to 6, or 6 to 12. But the improvements from 50-100 aren't anywhere near as dramatic. The same is evident in lens improvements, noise performance, sensor size and other areas. For most people the sweet spot for most of these things is somewhere in the middle.

[@MJ-uk6lu]

Same with sensor sizes. Past one inch type sensors there massive diminishing returns. APS-C is definitely better, but much less obviously than going from 1/2.3" to 1". And going from APS-C to full frame offers even lower gains.

[@GenX_in_the_wild]

My very first compact camera, a Casio had 3 MP.. These pictures are just as good as from my 20 MP compact cameras viewed on a Monitor. My Nikon D40 with 6 MP, which is considered super low still rocks.. Nobody would look at any of these pictures and say: OH.. not enough pixels, why do I see pixels? 🙂

[@TheKillingTreeTT]

Wow. What a well delivered, in-depth video about the topic. Very well done. I felt like I went back to university :).

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Cheers Denis 😂

[@jotablen5978]

Same!!!

[@backfilms1953]

My university is all about student to teacher sex incidents. I didn't leave much cos of that

[@lornanjanja6837]

I will get back to this in the morning. Equipped with a notebook and pen😂

[@takundachitakatira5319]

Lol😂

[@peter9962]

Yes, I will be doing the same thing.

[@pattyhertogh9294]

As always, great information Karl!! I don’t know how you remember all of that information. I had to stop and rewind a couple of times to process what you were saying. 😆 Thanks for sharing!!

[@jozefgeusens44]

Well, Patty, remember though that Karl's work is solving problems that customers have and that he has a career as a photographer for many decades. Knowledge builds up while you work and what you do often is printed in your memory, I'd say. You know that too.

[@matteodemattia]

absolutely the clearest and most complete introduction to digital photography I have ever heard. Congratulations!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@wallymikhu]

Seriously the best photography video series on KZbin that is full of great information. I look forward to every video. Thank you Karl!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

My pleasure

[@kymcainday6677]

Karl is my only dictionary in photography. Thanks Karl.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Cheers!

[@kreygscott]

My head literally exploded watching this. Now I'm going to need to get an ice pack and watch it 3 more times to fully understand it. That being said this has been the best explanation I've seen thus far on image quality. Cheers Karl.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you.

[@thomastuorto9929]

Everything comes into account. Camera processors ,software/firmware lens choose. But the pixel design, size & pitch mean so much., & is what really makes the difference. Somewhere out there there is a comparison chart of all the Nikon & Canon cameras with the features & individual pixel size & pixel pitch. If you look at the cameras that were performers, the closeness of the larger pixel size &, the pitch numbers is what they had in common.

[@messyfilms6325]

If you’re a newb you should be watching and reading some more introductory stuff.

[@darylnd]

Several years ago, I showed a co-worker a recent portrait I'd made of my wife. The following conversation ensued. She: "That's beautiful! You must have a really good camera!" (The greatest compliment any photographer can receive.) Me: "Yes, I do." She: "How many megapixels does it have?" Me: "None" She: "None? What do you mean?" Me: "It's a film camera from 1952 or 1953." (Zeiss 6cm x 6cm folding camera)

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Brilliant

[@khikaru7846]

Which is still technically incorrect, maybe you should've honestly answered as it wasn't the 6x6 strip you've actually brought there right, it was either a print or a file from a scanned film :) edit: well, maybe it was a chemical print though in which case it's "none" but you may still calculate resolution of the particular film and lens and "somewhat" convert that into mp number.

[@cmichaelanthonyimages2197]

Great explination. Much to know. Where as one time the mantra was "its not the equipment but the photographer"...but in the digital world, it is equipment as well, in where the knowledgeable professional will make much better use of the higher end equipment.

[@speterlewis]

As always, this was top-notch. Your knowledge and ability to deliver it so we can all understand it is as good as it gets. My only caution for viewers would be to not dismiss smaller sensors out of hand because of perceived lower image quality. While technologically and mathematically true, in practical terms, it isn't always relevant. Case in point is my own 30+ year career as a photographer, which, for the last 15 years has been done successfully using digital APS-C cameras. For the type of work I do, my clients have been overjoyed. Are there limitations? Sure. But I've learned to work within them and have been able to consistently produce, not just "good enough" images, but excellent images. I may well get cameras with larger sensors in the future, but not because I want to "upgrade," but just because I want to be able to do different kinds of work. Keep up the excellent training, Karl. You are absolutely one of the best teachers out there!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Yes good points Peter and there were photojournalists even using film formats smaller than 35mm back in the day, however my main point was that as we see an advance towards mirrorless and less expensive sensors we may see a reduction in demand for that format and at that time the camera manufacturers may choose to drop that format in favour of 35mm FF mirrorless. As always with everything it's will come down to a supply/demand/cost equation.

[@speterlewis]

@@VisualEducationStudio Thanks, Karl. Appreciate the response. I'm excited to see where technology leads us!

[@afalco54]

A little correction: the Olympus Pen series used half of the 35mm film, that is it was a "cropped sensor camera". And there are more sensor sizes. The most prominent sensor sizes today are the ones used in phones and they are much smaller than these. And there is the four-thirds sensors.

[@ACitizenOfOurWorld]

And APS format was actually created as a film format

[@BarryCarlton]

And let us not forget 110 film, as well as the Minox camera.

[@zackvowell]

Thanks for the information! Extremely helpful stuff.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

A pleasure Zack

[@sgroadie6367]

The OM-D you show is micro four thirds, and smaller than APS-C sensors. And half frame 135 film cameras exist, and there were numerous crop film cameras like 110, 126 format.

[@thethirdman225]

The OMD body is also smaller than an APSC body. A Canon EOS 7 D is physically the same size and roughly the same weight as a 5D and uses the same lenses. The OMD lenses are much smaller and lighter so your bag ends up being about a quarter of the size and weight.

[@chrispatmore8944]

And the APS film format from which the sensor size was derived.

[@elevationmoto6208]

Also, both Olympus and Panasonic offer very high quality lenses, which are used by professionals.

[@valueforvalue76]

The megapixel race reminds me of the early 2000s when intel convinced everyone that the more GHZ your processor had the faster your computer ran. The general public like nice round simple numbers to equate to higher or lower quality. 3GHZ is obviously better than 2.6GHZ unless you take into consideration processer design and efficiency. :)

[@frostybe3r]

IPC.

[@sebastiang7183]

This is brilliant. This is the best honest overview I have ever seen.

[@iSleepDoc]

In such a short time you did an amazing job of explaining the best info about the most important aspect of photography… Image quality!!! Bravo 👏 👏👏

[@renoholland7090]

Thank you. Excellent information.

[@thaitopfitness]

What an amazing video. I'll be sharing this with all my friends who want to know how to take better images!

[@returntohome330]

Photography is really an Allice in Wonderland rabit hole, when you think you have leant all one can possibly know a mentor appears revealing a whole new world to explore within...

[@tanweercaa]

Superb video Karl, excellent collection of information in an excellent way, great job🌷

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you Tanweer 📸

[@gb4639]

Fantastic information, thank you for sharing your expertise!

[@abdulhasibtamim6905]

Very thorough and informative with no wrong info at all. Only mistake would be in 14:15 you divide the numeric value by 1000 instead of 1M to calculate the Megapixel counts. As an electronics engineer I would like to point out some overlooked yet powerful factor behind image quality that you'd missed to mention. (i) In electronics we call photosite as photodiode. Quality of photodiode is the most important factor when it comes to image quality. And photodiode quality is determined by quantum efficiency and saturated current/dark current. In short quantum efficiency is the efficiency to convert the photon to electric current whereas dark current is the leakage current during no photon hitting the photodiode. So higher quantum efficiency with lower dark current yields higher quality of the photodiode. As the technology is getting better and better every day the photodiode quality is also getting better. One perfect example would be nikon D700 and nikon Z6. Each photosite size in D700 is somewhat double the photosite size of Z6. If we only consider the size of the photosite in these case, then it would make D700 sensor much better - but in reality the experience is quite opposite. As Z6 has latest generation of photodiode that makes the D700 a rookie in comparison with Z6. (ii) The circuitry is important. With the advancement of the technology circuit reaches in nano level and as a result consume less power while producing less heat. So with the elimination of heat, dark current and heat noise become negligible which render much better image quality. (iii) The quality of a digital image varies from device to device when viewing them. While an image in 10bit Adobe RGB LED display looks perfect, the 8bit sRGB LCD display could make the same image less dynamic with some pixel clipping and banding. So even though quality of the digital image file was good but poor quality monitor presents the file badly. The same is true for printed image. Better printer with better quality of ink in a better paper produces better images. As simple as that.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Ahh yes, maths was never my strong point 🤣 I think people get the idea.

[@plre2030]

IIRC crop sensors came about way before ff sensors due to technology limitations. BTW, price is not the only drawback of larger image sensors: larger sensor requires larger and heavier lenses. This is why I'm considering switching to m43 for my urban/street photography: it's 70-200 equivalent is much smaller and lighter than a regular full frame 70-200 lens.

[@TechnoBabble]

I don't know why you think this, but the lenses are not smaller. There's not even a full frame 70-200 f/4 equivalent for M4/3. Lenses that are actually equivalent for smaller sensors are just as big and expensive.

[@NeonShores]

@@TechnoBabble this is hilariously wrong. Many of the lenses are tiny in comparison, and much cheaper. The 35-100mm f2.8 is small, optically amazing and half the price of most F4 zooms.

[@TechnoBabble]

@@NeonShores ​ Hilariously wrong? So the 35-100mm f2.8 is equivalent to what on full frame? A 70-200 f5.6. You might think it's equivalent to a 70-200 f/2.8, but that's what would be hilariously wrong. On average, when using similar levels of sensor technology, a M4/3 sensor produces images with 4x the amount of noise of a Full Frame sensor when at the same ISO. This means that to produce an image with the same level of noise the M4/3 camera needs to be at 1/4 the ISO value, needing a lens that is 2 full stops brighter. That 35-100 would need to be f1.4 to match a full frame f/2.8 zoom. Why do you think it's half the price? It only allows the camera to gather half the amount of light. Smaller sensors are not magic and they don't get to break the laws of physics, unfortunately.

[@diybatterypower]

m4/3 is awesome. I have an EM1 ii and Sony A7iv, while I love the more powerful Sony the Olympus is my favorite for travel and street photography.

[@diybatterypower]

@@TechnoBabble The lenses are smaller, this is a fact. I have an array of m4/3 and full frame lenses.

[@martynphillips6646]

Not one um one er, so not only is Karl a master photographer but a consummate speaker. Superb tutorial.

[@jotablen5978]

How did I miss this one? Mr Karl!! I'm going to show off a little bit now: my PhD in Optics is coming back in ways you'd never understand! Every MASTER-CLASS you provide in your channel is a blessing. I really hope sometime somebody can explain the new generations in this way every single matter! Welcome back to reality! It's just Karl Taylor doing it again! Regards

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you. Damn I wish I'd done a PhD in optics!

[@jenniledford1280]

Amazing detail! Very Knowledgeable! I’m subscribed! Love your stuff...thank you!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Welcome

[@PerEng2405]

Thank you! for explaining and elaborating on in particular sensors. Much appreciated.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful!

[@GaWajn]

That was refreshing. Actual knowledge sharing as opposed to opinions sharing. Very informative. Thank you

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks but I have to say I also share my opinions from time to time too 🤣

[@jozefgeusens44]

That was indeed educating and good to hear it all in one place, Karl! To give an example: As an amateur who has been photographing since the 70's, I have (at some point) finally decided to buy a 24 megapixel full frame to digitalise my slides and black and white negatives. Why 24 MP? Because my older DSLR with 12 megapixel didn't reproduce all details from the fine grain b/w negatives and even some from my Kodachrome 25 slides (possibly 21 MP would be enough, but that camera didn't provide the needed dynamic range). To capture the whole dynamic range from those slides without losing on highlights or deep shadow areas, the full frame took care of both because of the larger photosites. Also, because I already had an expensive macro bellows and slide duplicating system, I could re-use it with my digital camera. Of course I also get excellent - technical - results in conventional photography because of that camera, but I am happy to use my older gear with older lenses because they still give me that much pleasure in photographing. Which I think is a tad more important than having the newest, highest technical quality - especially because I don't have to work towards a customer's goal. And that is what you, Karl, have mentioned quite often in your videos: you choose your gear in function of the result, which is of course replying to the needs of your clients. I thought I might emphasise this one more time ;-)

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks Jozef.

[@Tonkybro3]

This is probably the best informational video i have seen on youtube. Thank you for this!! Subscribed!!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks for the sub!

[@Dannysubliminal]

Hi Karl, I haven't seen many of your videos in a while, I forgot how detailed and unbiased you are, as always, your videos are straight to the point, informative and easy to follow. You are still one of the great masters. I felt this this video in areas was a bit of a rant, but rightly so, a great argument and made so much sense, yet again, from the thousands of videos I've watched, I learnt from yours the most. Cheers, Danny.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks Danny much appreciated

[@sunsettaye4820]

Your gift of knowledge is appreciated. Thanks for sharing with us!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

My pleasure!

[@howeryuen]

This is gold in regarding to photography knowledge, thank you so much.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

My pleasure!

[@ctretta]

Brilliant description of so many concepts. Thank you Karl.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@himalayanmonk3350]

sir , you explained everything with sheer brilliance. hats off !

[@meghanadganpule]

Perfect point to point discussion , great examples shown to clear all the clutters . shared with so many professionals in photography .

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you

[@koroshghanbarzadeh1360]

Very informative, thanks for sharing.

[@nilofido411]

Another great no nonsense tutorial.... the way I put it to use the right tool for the job, and in order to do so you need to understand the tool, maximise its strengths whilst controlling its weaknesses. As it’s true that most cameras of the last 5-10 years are capable to do most jobs, it’s also true that the perfect camera doesn’t exist, finding the perfect compromise for the situation is the secret ingredient. Great explanation of diffraction, I would have also mentioned the losses in quality at the other extreme, wide apertures, not directly related to sensors, still affecting quality though. Great job keep it up.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Cheers

[@IvanMaras84]

Fantastic and great value information Karl. So well put together too! Best wishes and stay safe.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks Ivan

[@gpdoyon]

Mind blown!! Thank you very much for the excellent way you presented this material. I learned a lot!!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@bhaskardevkonwar]

Nice rendition of the concepts.Thanks and wishing you a happy new year 2021.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Same to you

[@thekrewfan1235]

This is the best explanation i've seen so far on image quality vs resolution

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you.

[@solomonunya9700]

Thanks Karl for an awesome delivery

[@VisualEducationStudio]

My pleasure

[@rickkoloian4179]

Thank you so much for taking such challenging topics & making them easy to follow. Outstanding.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

You're very welcome!

[@davids8766]

Excellent presentation. Very clearly put across.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you kindly!

[@helisoma]

I'm in scientific and medical imaging and I'd have to say that your presentation is lucid, thorough, and that you would make a good scientist 😁

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank's Tom, I love science, read New Scientist every week and lots of science papers!

[@stepseldinski]

As few as possible words for transporting the information. Nice production. I did‘t learn much new, but still watched the video until the end, because of the overall quality. Keep going! Thumbs up!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks.

[@MadsPeterIversen]

Very great video, Karl!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Many thanks

[@jaypoly]

14 minutes in and Karl is just after a job on Countdown.....alias clear and concise information as always. Brilliant. Lens wise is interesting to note that in cinematography these days a lot of DP’s are using older lenses such as K 35’s, usually re-housed. These illicit diffractions and aberrations are sometimes wonderful.

[@RiaKnight]

VISUAL EDUCATION, This was most instructive, thank you. 👏

[@johanacardenas4546]

What an amazing video. All of the information you presented is so helpful, detailed and easy to understand! Thank you.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@LebronPhoto1]

In the days of film, they had something called the Olympus Pen, half frame camera. Cope sensor could be a little deceptive because in the case of Olympus, the camera was built around the sensor size, unlike the first digital DSLRs from Canon and Nikon and even Kodak, that were modified 35mm film bodies. Those were actually cropped because you had a 35mm camera body and lens, but used an APSC sensor. But where the camera body and lens is designed for a specific format, it isn't really a crop sensor camera. nobody calls a 35mm camera a crop sensor camera given that Medium format is larger. Great video.

[@carlvalle8539]

except that isn't what it means

[@paulyoung4998]

Thank you for clearing up all my doubts.

[@Luigi13]

Very, very useful indeed? I have enjoyed the clarity of all the issues on the photographic medium being discussed here. Thank you very much. Happy New Year 2021

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful. Cheers.

[@ILOVEMFEO]

karl, this is really super helpful (even though i may need to watch the vid 3 times to let all the info sink in :) ) just subscribed!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@terryjones6049]

Thanks Karl for a brilliant video, just saved me a pile of pocket money. Happy new Year.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it helped

[@michaellekas27]

Fantastic video. thank you so much. You summarized everything elequently and precise. Your explanation of the subject matter helped fully grasp the concepts fully. Thank you again

[@VisualEducationStudio]

You're very welcome!

[@LeopoldoManuelRamirezMena]

Very good explanation 🎉... It is incredible how many photographers don't understand difraction, aberration, etc... 😅

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you liked it!

[@Paul_Wetor]

This week I learned a *big* lesson about sharpness. My amateur cameras are mostly point-and-shoot and Micro 4/3. After disappointing results with two full-frame cameras, I discovered that: 1) For full-frame, aperture is important. With smaller zoom cameras, I would look at shutter speed and let aperture take care of itself. I did some tests with my FF cameras and found the "sweet spot" of sharpness. 2) A book I found yesterday said that *point-and-shoot cameras will give you much more depth of field* than a larger-sensor camera. No wonder I took aperture for granted! There should be videos to train people like me who are going from smaller cameras to bigger ones. Real photographers start with bigger cameras and don't have to learn this hard lesson.

[@61republic]

This is the best explanation about the crop and full frame difference. Thank you!

[@gray10111]

Thanks Karl, really informative and easy to understand explanation.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you.

[@HDEFMAN1]

Some very solid information here. thanks Karl

[@zenaxproductions7927]

Nr. 1 influence on image quality - light!

[@RS-Amsterdam]

Okay Karl, this was your promised video and it is close to perfection (I agree 95% but let's forget the 5% ;-) What made me happy is the fact you rather have a 80 MP FF sensor, but then in the size of the HB H 6 - 100 (not the 50) and I understand that you need that MP for your big size prints. For magazine size I would go even further and would be satisfied with something around 40-50 MP in H6 100 sensor size format. (less noise) BUT WITH A BETTER DYNAMIC RANGE ! (and I missed that) What did I miss, the fact that ISO is applied after the shot is taken, application of the signal (or gain) instead of sensitivity of film. - And I am glad you pointed out the color array cause I want to make something clear (bit out of your field of work but in addition to this good video on topic). As you know Leica has Monochrome camera's(and they are great) and there are people who strip down an old camera's and let the color array filter be removed to pretend they have an equal Monochrome camera. But that is not completely true. Because ......, the color filter array not only filters color but it also weakens the light intensity a bit (1 or 2 stops , depending on the color), and not equal. So there is an extra attenuation (gain) per color afterwards to get it even again. Removing the color area, the attenuation per photo-diode is still there so you have a monochrome image but with different photodiode gain where as the real monochrome camera's don't have that difference per photo-diode. It can also not be altered cause it is backed into the firmware. So removing the color array with not give you a 1 tot 1 equal to a Monochrome camera. Thanks for sharing the wisdom !!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you liked it and many thanks for the additional info.

[@arielc2010]

BEST educational clip about sensor-size and image-quality that there is. Thnx Karl :)

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you.

[@remmsteinslove]

Rare to find so many useful information in one video. Thank you.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful

[@ladonnasims1756]

You are the elite expert on photography.

[@Luigi13]

It is a photographic school at its best. Thanks Karl, I enjoyed it and it is refreshing to hear it again. This format requires some good attention too.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@georgetrimmer3077]

2/23…excellent presentation Karl!

[@beanghosh3195]

Just awesome this video and your knowledge!!!!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you liked it!

[@glennmiller2103]

At last ! finally complicated information I can understand. Well delivered, easily understood and clear. Thank you ...I have subscribed and will use you as my "go to" youtuber.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Awesome, thank you!

[@rajeshpandey4131]

So so so useful. Thank you

[@andrefelixstudio2833]

Great video Kal, but I bet it went way over the top of many heads, super packed with information! Who said you don’t have to be a rocket scientist! Nicely done!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@janisbb6418]

Dynamic range is NOT number of steps. It is ratio between largest and lowest value. Number of steps used to split dynamic range is called tonal range.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

In practical terms 'tonal range' is the resulting quality of 'dynamic range' and this video is about the contributing factors to image quality, if you think the audience watching this video wouldn't have understood what I meant by 'steps' when it comes to dynamic range contribution to image quality then please give up some of your time to make a video that explains it more clearly.

[@viktorpaulsen627]

​@@VisualEducationStudio > "In practical terms 'tonal range' is the resulting quality of 'dynamic range' " These two concepts are different. The teaching is confused. "...please give up some of your time to make a video that explains it more clearly" It's easy. 1. Dynamic range is the difference between the brightest and darkest that can be registered. Show two illustrations, one with high contrast and one with low contrast. 2. Tonal range is how many steps the scale can be divided into. Show the illustration that you used for dynamic range. (he-he)

[@klausschuster2855]

outstanding overview of image quality factors to take into account. Love your professional and analytic style of providing key point knowledge

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Much appreciated!

[@alanplatt888]

A very comprehensive explanation of things I think I need to consider, to improve my comprehension of capturing a better image. Thank you.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful Alan

[@dannycastro1826]

Very well delivered Karl. Thank you for this detailed explanation.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks Danny.

[@Daytondoesstuff]

Love this! Just found your channel and my girlfriend is just starting the process of becoming a professional photographer. I am definitely going to recommend she binges your videos :) Very clear and helpful!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks, I hope she enjoys it too. She can check out my work on karltaylor.com

[@Daytondoesstuff]

@@VisualEducationStudio Dope! I'll check out the free course, too! Cheers :)

[@prosunsport1]

Excellent overview.

[@theren8311]

FYI for anyone watching this video, waves of diffracted light does not converge, they spread out when passed through an opening. They only "converge" (not really convergence) when passing an obstacle. So diffracted light does not interfere or superposed unless there are two or more openings. What actually happens is the information reaching a section of the sensor is different or "less" than the information reaching another point at the _same instant_.

[@unalozmen526]

APS stands for Advanced Photo System. This is a film format that was introduced in 1996.

[@BenoitLamarche]

Right, and the APS-C sensors r are the same size than the film used in APS Kodak cameras.

[@elmoqbobo]

excellent video instruction manual. i w ll go over it again to learn more. thank you!!

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

Great video, but I think there's a mistake at 18:15, the dynamic range is not the number of steps between the darkest black and the whitest white, but it's the RATIO of the whitest white divided by the blackest black. The bit depth will tell you how many steps you have, so if you get 8 bits, you have 256 steps, 10 bits => 1024 steps, and so on. Examples: - you can have a DR of 12 stops (whitest/blackest = 4096), and only 8 steps with a bit depth of 3, you will see huge posterization, but at least you will have "strong" highlights and strong shadows. - you can have a DR of 3 stops (whitest/blackest = 8) and 65536 steps with a bit depth of 16, you won't be able to have both strong highlights and shadows at the same time, but at least if you do just the shadows for example, you will have a nice gradient there.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks for your comments. If an image has 18 f-stops of dynamic range then it has 2 more f-stops of dynamic range than a 16 stop image. That's double the amount of exposure and then double it again. It therefore has a greater amount of 'steps' between the brightest and describable recordable white and the darkest recordable and describable black. The process of explaining something like this to an audience in a video requires descriptions and visual graphics that people can understand to more easily absorb the information. That is the art of education and for me as an educator it's most important that the audience absorb and understand a concept.

[@viktorpaulsen627]

​@@VisualEducationStudio The commenter is right. The dynamic range is a description of the range of light (white / black) (physical reality) that can be registered and can be quantified as a number of "stops". The number of steps of that range is divided into is numerically determined by the number of bits in the recorded digital value (numerical representation). These concepts are VERY different. Since it is important that the audience understands a concept, it would have been much better to not mix the two concepts together as if they were the same. In the video they are presented as the same. Also in Karls' comment above, these two concepts are muddled together, like: if you have more stops, then you have more steps. The graphics in the video shows two grayscales with approximately the same dynamic range, but with a very different number of steps. And this was presented as different dynamic ranges. I bet that many viewers got the wrong 'knowledge' about dynamic range after watching that.

[@TechnoBabble]

@@VisualEducationStudio The lengths you go to to defend being wrong instead of just saying "thanks for the correction" is nuts.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

On this one @technobabble I'm 100% correct that there is no need to put information across in a way that just makes the information more complicated for people to absorb the same principle. However to satisfy your requirements for accuracy I concede that the original comment is a factually more accurate description.

[@philfyphil]

Bloody ‘ell, I bet your courses are good :-) you have a great gift of getting information across in a way it can be retained.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you and yes they are!

[@NeilCorke]

No 1 photography educator!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Cheers

[@terjebrattelid7574]

Amazing tutorial. Thanks very much for sharing your knowledge.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

thanks

[@pvandck]

An easy way to explain pixels in relation to sensor size is with signal to noise ratio. The smaller and more densely pack the pixels are, the more their electrical signals interfere with each other, creating noise visible particularly in low light situations.

[@sideeffectsstudios]

Extremely useful details 👍

[@garymorrow9324]

That is the best training video I have ever watched. Just terrific. Thanks you!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@glennsak]

Most images are shared on the web and on social media apps - thus crop sensors (including smartphones) are much more practical and affordable with acceptable results.

[@Dannysubliminal]

Bang on the money there. Absolutely no need for an expensive camera with a crazy Sensor, you'll barely noticed any difference on social media sites.

[@thomaskoukouris4070]

@@Dannysubliminal ive recentrly bought a sony a7iii. I uploaded a few images on my instagram oage. There is quite a difference (if you care to look closely) but who does these days? The smartphone camera will get you 3/4 the way there for a lot less money so yeah not worth it if youre not a professional or have a lot of disposable income.

[@kennethjonesphotography]

This is the most relevant information I've ever found to help me better evaluate my next camera and lenses. Thank you very much for such a very comprehensive explanation.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful

[@josephchan4198]

I just used high resolution jpeg for non profit work since it is volunteer work, and it save spaces on hard drive. Good enough for now for social media. The non- profit is happy with my work!! Thanks for the classes. My photography is much better.

[@bonsaibob8253]

As always Karl gives us a plethora of information. Easy to understand, remember and put to use. Thank you Karl!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thanks Bob.

[@necrotat2]

Thank you, I learned a few things watching this that I had no idea I even wanted to know... Now I need to learn even more!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful!

[@tracyleepitre6079]

Thanks so much for sharing this info!

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad it was helpful!

[@MA-jm3fu]

Nikon D700. 8+ micromtre Pixel pitch. Still a champ after all these years.

[@emanuelschimpfossl5919]

Congrats to 500.000 subs! :)

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Thank you.

[@danilogarcia4406]

Thanks for sharing great information always. Definitely your videos are the best in photography formation.

[@VisualEducationStudio]

Glad you like them