Why shooting portraits at ISO 100 may not always be the best choice
Sep 5, 2019
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Share:
Increasing the ISO value increases the amount of noise in your images. So, you may want to shoot at the lowest ISO possible. But is it a good idea to shoot at ISO 100 whenever you can? Michael Sasser believes it isn’t always the best choice, and in this video, he gives you his reasons why. Let’s see if you agree.
Considering that Michael shoots boudoir, the video is slightly NSFW, so keep that in mind before playing it. But make sure to watch it because it’s educational and pretty fun.
Michael normally attaches camera settings to his images when he shares them in his videos. And he’s noticed plenty of comments calling him out for shooting at relatively high ISO. He typically shoots at ISO 400 even when he could be shooting at 100. But, he explains why ISO 100 isn’t always the best idea for this type of photography. Although Michael shoots boudoir, this applies to other commissioned work, too, such as portrait or wedding photography.
As Michael puts it, in this kind of photography, the ISO is the least important setting. For example, on an overcast day, shooting with natural light in his studio would require him to bring the shutter speed down to 1/50s if he wants to shoot at ISO 100, and that’s not fast enough. So, he would need to change two out of three parameters: raise the ISO and adjust the shutter speed accordingly.
Instead, Michael prefers setting the ISO to 400 even though his studio is usually bright enough to shoot at 100. This way, he can only change the shutter speed if the light changes. It means less fiddling with settings and more focusing on the model: are their comfortable, are they doing the pose correctly, and so on.
But what about the noise? Well, first, the difference between the ISO 100 and 400 isn’t really that big in modern cameras. A little bit of noise can even add to the photo, especially if you convert it to black and white. And if you’re really concerned about the noise, there’s a slider in Lightroom that reduces it, and it works fantastic with photos shot at ISO 400, because they won’t lose a lot of detail.
According to Michael, the bottom line of all this is: if your client isn’t concerned about some noise in the photos, then you probably shouldn’t be either. Other photographers are pixel-peepers, and clients usually aren’t. Except if you’re shooting another photographer, maybe?
Joke aside, I find Michael’s approach logical in some situations. Personally, I often use this technique when photographing gigs. I set the ISO and the aperture, and change the shutter speed as the stage lights change. I don’t think it always works, but for commissioned work like portraits or boudoir, doing this can simply make your life easier. It allows you to focus on the model and still doesn’t add too much noise to the photos.
What do you think? Do you have the same approach, and when does it work for you? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
[Why I Shoot at Bizarre ISO’s for Boudoir via FStoppers]
Dunja Đuđić
Dunja Djudjic is a multi-talented artist based in Novi Sad, Serbia. With 15 years of experience as a photographer, she specializes in capturing the beauty of nature, travel, concerts, and fine art. In addition to her photography, Dunja also expresses her creativity through writing, embroidery, and jewelry making.
Join the Discussion
DIYP Comment Policy
Be nice, be on-topic, no personal information or flames.
21 responses to “Why shooting portraits at ISO 100 may not always be the best choice”
Agreed, portraits are about more than clarity
If you can see noise at 400 ISO on a digital camera there’s something wrong with the camera or the file is way underexposed.
400 iso on any camera will give you noise. Especially in a non well lit scenario. It’s nothing to do with the camera and more so to do with lighting. I’ve used a few of the best lowlight cameras and every single one of them got noisey around 300 in dark spaces. Between 100 and 200 iso your blacks are pretty much pure black. But anything above that you’ll see noise if you pixel peak and 400 you’ll see noticable noise right away unless your camera had noise reduction which in that case you’re good until about 800/1200. If during a sunny day and you’re shooting and you get noise.. then yeah your camera sensor likely has a issue. But if you’re shooting in the shade or inside without a flash / strobe and you see noise in the darker areas… that’s completely normal.
Sean Michael VanDeusen sorry disagree and I’ve been shooting digital for years . If there’s noise then the exposure is wrong. The difficulty with digital it’s like shooting transparency film Blacks are black and whites are white and like you said you need fill flash. Unfortunately newcomers who start using digital have no idea that the contrast latitude is narrow compared to colour negative film . With a professional full frame digital and a no enlargement of the file there still shouldn’t be any noise though
Trevor Olner sorry you’re wrong, there is noise past 200 iso on every camera unless is has a higher native iso. I have an a7iii currently one of the best low light cameras and there is still noise, it’s at a pixel peep level but it’s there.
But can you see it at normal file size ? Obviously if you magnify any digital image file you’ll start to see image break up . Analogue film is the same with grain size . The mantra was the larger the negative the better the print a 20×16 print from a 10x8inch neg has less enlargement than a 35mm neg . So to the eye the 10×8 neg appears better. I found that most people using photoshop enlarge the image on screen way beyond what the output size will be . A monitor screen has a resolution at 72 DPI yet the eye doesn’t see the dots . I worked in professional photo lab so had a steep learning cure with digital out put . For a test I took a 5×5 in file at 72dpi of the internet and printed it at that size . There was no pixelation or noise on the print .
My Pentax K100D with the f/3.5 gives me noise at iso 400 in shade.
Sometimes the issue is the camera, especially if it’s particularly old. However, like the video mentions, noise isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Most print photographers end up adding grain in the end anyway for texture
Trevor Olner I’m sure you’re great at what you do. But every single sensor ever made will give you grain over 200. You can literally google it. No sensor is noise free. 100 iso will give you crushed blacks and once uploaded will give you artifacts if compressed by youtube, vimeo and even Netflix. I’m not doubting your skill in anyway! But you are 100% wrong. At least with digital shooting. I wont lie and say I know anything about the real film because I don’t. But when it comes to digital cameras I’m like a dictionary of information. Mainly because I extracted grain from pretty much every digital camera worth owning to add to photos later. I have a whole library. For fun… send me a file of your camera shooting at 200 iso with the lens cap on. Could be a dng. And I will prove my point.
Is it 100% noticable? Nah. But it’s there. Once you hit 400 iso its noticable. That’s my go to iso. And on the following cameras you get grain at 200+ iso
Canon 1dx
Canon mark 3
Canon 7d
T2i
T3i
Nikon… literally all nikon including their ones known for being great at night like the infamous d800 series.
Sony a7 series
All of which I got grain and or noise at between 200 and 400. Not bad noise or anything even worth mentioning. Just noise. Could be a digital thing?
However it’s very easy to avoid this noise and make it so youd really have to pixel peep in dark areas. It’s also very easy to remove noise from anything under 800 iso in most cameras. Even at 1200+ if you’re using a professional camera.
Newcomers often run and gun it. They use natural lighting and get home wondering why they have noise. It sorta comes with that type of shooting. Its gritty… especially if you dont use a ND filter. But in most cases its fixable.
Again I’m sure you’re work is great and I’m sure you can bury me in a debate about actual film cameras. I just want to sure who ever reads this doesnt think they have a broken camera because they are getting some form of noise at 400.
Ps. If you have noise reduction built in. Which I highly recommend to never ever use.. you can push to around 400/800 and lose the noise. But you also lose sharpness and details.
I love all photographers and videographers so I’m not trying to upset anyone. I’m just saying.. noise at 400 is 100% there. Anything above 200 iso seems to be when you start to see noise in a un lit area or dark shadows.
Also anyone reading this.. you may even experience noise at 100 iso even if you did everything right. Perhaps it’s a bright day and you exposed perfectly but noticed some slight grain in the trunks or shadows. If you use lightroom you’ll likely never see this seeing they automatically use minor noise reduction. However some photo applications don’t do this. Especially if you’re a mac or edit mobile via a chrome book or a windows stop app on Windows S.. or even via your phone. Noise is always present. There is literally no way around it. Every chart will show no camera produces a perfect 0 noise pattern. GOOGLE your camera iso chart for proof and further information. Literally no camera is noise free. However lightroom will automate fix minor noise. You may notice detail in your shadows via your camera screen but then notice when the image is on your display “even if your monitor is fully rgb accurate and adobe certified” your shadows and dark areas will appear slightly darker. This is why I mentioned at iso 100 the blacks are crushed. This is all done via lightroom and photoshop. Which is why this guy may think hes getting noise free footage. When using a digital camera. Hes likely getting noise reduction via his camera and again during lightroom / photoshop.
Google your camera and noise chart.
So what is the percentage of enlargement of the files on the noise chart ?
Test report for Nikon D700 which I have . https://www.camerastuffreview.com/en/imatest-results-camera/test-report-nikon-d700 . I’m yet to test my camera as you suggested but I’ll grant you all digital sensors have some noise some lower than others . With some so low it’s negligible
Trevor Olner as you can see even your camera has noise at it’s lowest iso. Nothing will ever hit that 0 mark. Is it noticeable on a 8 by 10 print? Probably not lol. Especially seeing lightroom already denoises photos just by opening them and anything between 100 to 200 tends to show no real noise issue with out ridiculously pixel peeping in a raw viewer. Your camera also offers noise reduction. So I can see why you may assuming avoiding noise is easy when in reality it’s impossible on any digital camera. I cant say the same for film because I would have no idea. However 400 iso is where most cameras start to see noise in darker areas. This is where a flash or natural light comes in handy. My argument is at 400 its common for noise no matter how well your camera settings are. Especially seeing even at 100 iso no camera flat lines at 0 noise on any chart. With the help of noise reduction via your camera and when importing to lightroom however you may see no to little noise between 100 and 400 iso.
I just dont want anynone whos getting noise at 400 iso to panic lol.
I shoot ISO 200-400 minimum depending on the available light and depending if I am shooting indoors or outdoors. Usually outdoors where I have very little shade or shadows to work with, I shoot 200 but if I am indoors or somewhere with a lot of shade outdoors, I shoot 400 or higher and adjust my aperture or shutter speed accordingly, especially if I am using off camera flash
Michael Bray 400 for me indoors too. Captures more details without getting grainy.
Jeff Hayward exactly
IF the image is well lit, you can get away with a very high ISO. I’ve been a concert photographer for a while now, and this is something I realised quite early : light beats noise almost every time.
he just could use flashes… I don’t care about anything up to 1600, but with older cameras, everything above that gets bad grain. BAD grain. And studio photography to me means *I* make the light, so I can go easily to ISO100 (or 50 on FF). The video talks about homeshootings, something completely different, and even there I take some Systemflashes with modifiers with me. No reason to up the ISO
I am shooting with an older camera, I get too much noise at anything over 200 and it makes compositing hell…
Kristy Slicker the older and earliest cameras were bad for noise so is a small sensor compared to full frame . Even for a magazine that’s A4 the majority of today’s cameras with little cropping are fine . There’s over kill by some magazine companies . Most images are broken up into tiny rosettes for CMYK printing machines at 300dpi which the eyesight can not resolve
Use whatever settings make you and your client happy. Other people’s opinions are irrelevant.
In a large number of current cameras the sensor native/base ISO is 200. All other up or down ISO adjustments are performed by amplification or unamplification, which impairs the signal-to-noise ratio. In a case of native ISO 200 lowering to 100ISO may mean quality loss and smaller dynamic range…