• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

The semianuual 18% lecture

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
We often hear that "exposure meters are (should be) calibrated to 18%." (Sometimes we hear, "18% gray".)

Of course, that doesn't describe any technical arrangement. But it is a "code phase" for a certain situation; unfortunately most people don't really know what it is.

I'll talk a little about that.

**********
Reflected light metering

A reflected light exposure meter (or the "metering" portion of an integrated automatic exposure control system) recommends, or sets, an exposure (in the sense of an aperture and shutter speed) using an equation with two inputs:

• The measured average luminance of the scene

• The exposure index, which we can think of as being what we (or the camera) tells the exposure meter is the ISO sensitivity of the film or digital imaging chain.

The exact way that equation works can be said to be the calibration of the exposure meter.

International standards

International standard ISO 2721 prescribes a recommended calibration for integrated exposure control systems.

International standard ISO 12232 defines how to determine the "ISO speed" (a measure of sensitivity) of a digital camera.

Their implication

If we have a camera:

• The metering portion of whose exposure control system follows ISO 2721, and

• In which the assignment of "ISO speed" values for the various "ISO" choices follows ISO 12232

then we should have a situation that can be described in two ways:

• If we take a metered exposure of a uniform-luminance scene, the photometric exposure (that's the product of illuminance and exposure time) on the sensor should everywhere be 12.8% of the saturation photometric exposure, which is defined as the photometric exposure that would (just) lead to the highest possible digital representation in the "developed" image.

• If we take a metered exposure of a scene, the average photometric exposure on the sensor should be 12.8% of the saturation photometric exposure.

This in turn could be looked at in two ways (among others):

• If we have a uniformly-illuminated scene whose average reflectance is 12.8%, then an object in the scene with a reflectance of 100% will have a photometric exposure in the image that is just at saturation.

• If we have a uniformly-illuminated scene whose average reflectance is 18%, then an object in the scene with a reflectance of 100% will have a photometric exposure in the image that is 1/2 stop down" from saturation.

So that's where the "18%" number comes from. It's the average reflectance of a scene that would give us "1/2 stop headroom" with respect to any 100% reflectance objects in the scene.

Is that situation well described as "18% calibration of the exposure meter"?​

Canon cameras

Over the years, Canon cameras (especially the dSLRs) have produced an exposure almost 1/2 stop "hotter" than what was described above. They evidently found that this gives a good result in many cases.

They could have done this in either of these ways:

a. Making the calibration of the exposure meter part of the automatic exposure control system "1/2 stop hotter" than that recommended by ISO 2721.

b. Reckoning of the ISO sensitivity of the camera at about 71% that which would be determined per ISO 12232 ("1/2 stop understated").

Had they done (a), then users with external exposure meters would have noticed a discrepancy between the exposures they recommended and those enacted by the camera's automatic exposure control system, and that would have caused some consternation. So they did (b).

New ISO measures

Based on recommendations by the Camera and Imaging Products Association (Japan) (CIPA), the latest edition of ISO 12232 (ISO 12232-2006) introduces two alternative measures of digital camera sensitivity:

The ISO standard output sensitivity (SOS). This is for all practical purposes defined in the same way as the ISO speed defined by ISO 12232, except that the value is 0.713 times the ISO speed (essentially "1/2 stop" lower).

A rationale for this is that modern exposure metering systems, being more sophisticated than "scene average metering systems", makes the "1/2 stop headroom" unnecessary.

Of course we only had 1/2 stop headroom for a scene whose average reflectance was 18%. But if you believe that 18% average reflectance is somehow representative of real scenes, you'll believe that there was 1/2 stop of headroom.

The ISO recommended exposure index (REI). This is the exposure index the camera manufacturer recommends be used in making exposure determinations. There is no objective basis for its determination. The assumption is that the manufacturer would establish it based on extensive empirical testing, perhaps with user preference rating. And nobody could accuse a manufacturer's values of being "wrong".

Now, about Canon

Firstly, we can say that the introduction of the ISO SOS measure essentially "legitimatizes" Canon's practice all the years regarding the matter we discussed here. That is, Canon has been very nearly rating the "ISO sensitivities" of their cameras as defined for the ISO SOS measure.

But, rather than officially adopting the ISO SOS, rather than the traditional "ISO speed" measure, as the premise of their ISO ratings, they have decided to "advertise" the sensitivity of their cameras as being on the basis of the ISO REI. Now, they can't possibly be "wrong".
 

Doug Kerr

Well-known member
A little follow-on:

How can one express the calibration of an exposure meter? (Note that I did not say, "characterize the operation of an integrated automatic exposure control system", which is a broader issue.

The "calibration" of an exposure meter is described by stating the applicable value of the parameter "K" which scales the "equation" followed by the exposure meter in delivering its "exposure recommendation".​

For the metering equation implied by the "calibration" of an integrated automatic exposure control system according to ISO 2721, that value of K is about 12.7 (stated for use with the exposure equation having luminance in SI units).

Note that this is not dependent on how, in some situation, the "ISO speed" of the film or digital imaging system should be determined.

One of the inputs to the exposure meter is what is best called the "exposure index" (usually labeled "ISO"). The meter does not know how we determined this. The meter knows nothing about the film (if any) that will be used, nor about the digital imaging system (if any) that will be used.

And the calibration of the exposure meter does not, by itself, tell us what will happen on the developed film, or in the "developed" image in a digital system, in the aftermath of an exposure based on the exposure recommendation of the meter.

This is why, in my basic essay, I emphasize the interaction of:

• The calibration of the exposure meter (or the "metering" component of an integrated automatic exposure control system)

• The premise used for "rating" the ISO sensitivity of the film or digital imaging system being used.

Now, one way to numerically characterize the result of that overall relationship is to visualize a metered exposure of a uniform-luminance scene, and describe the ratio between:

• The photometric exposure on the sensor, and

• The "saturation" photometric exposure

As mentioned in my essay, if we assume:

• The meter portion of the automatic exposure system is calibrated in accordance with ISO 2721, and

• The "metering equation" is fed an exposure index that is the ISO speed of the digital imaging system as defined by ISO 12232

then that ratio would be approximately 0.0125 (12.5%).

If instead we have a camera with these characteristics:

• The meter portion of the automatic exposure system is calibrated in accordance with ISO 2721, and

• The "metering equation" is fed an exposure index that is the ISO SOS rating of the digital imaging system as defined by ISO 12232-2006

then that ratio would be approximately 0.018 (18%).

In Canon cameras consistent with the former Canon guideline for a "quick field credibility check" of the automatic exposure control system, that ratio is approximately 0.0173 (17.3%)

So how is a "standard" (reflected light) exposure meter calibrated? "K=12.7 (SI units)".

Doug
 
Top