highest ISO for advertising work on a 5D mark 2 ?

<p>Hello.<br>

I currently use a 400d. I have head that, if I am shooting for advertising / commercial work, I should have my ISO set to 100. <br>

Can someone tell me, how much is the highest ISO I can go upto in a 5D Mark 2, to shoot for advertising / commercial work ? Thank you very much. </p>

 

<p>I'd say that if you have to ask that question, you're probably not qualified to be doing commercial shooting.</p>

<p>There is no single number anyone can give you. FAR too many variables.</p>

It depends, but usually advertising places more importance on resolution than ISO, because they have to sometimes blow up the images to incredible sizes, such as on a billboard. In my opinion, the lower the ISO the better when it comes to advertising, but then there are those images that look better with a little noise. It all depends on what the Art Directors want.

<p>if I'm shooting commercial/editorial I can use 1600, generally for stock I'll keep it at 200 so I can retain the highlights with highlight priority mode on.</p>

<p>For serious jobs, where they blow up the images very large and quality is important, you may need to use a negative ISO, maybe something like -200. The option is in the custom settings somewhere, give it a try.</p>

<p>

Thank you very much everyone.

 

<blockquote>

<p >I'd say that if you have to ask that question, you're probably not qualified to be doing commercial shooting.</p>

</blockquote>

 

I know the grains (noise) has to be very fine with advertising images. However I am not sure how to recognize the fineness of the noise yet. I am a beginner. :)

 

 

 

<blockquote>

<p >There is no single number anyone can give you. FAR too many variables.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

 

Please can you tell me of a few variables.

<br />

 

<blockquote>It depends, but usually advertising places more importance on resolution than ISO, because they have to sometimes blow up the images to incredible sizes, such as on a billboard. </blockquote>

 

In your experience whats the minimum resolution they demand ?

<br />

 

 

 

<blockquote>

<p >if I'm shooting commercial/editorial I can use 1600, generally for stock I'll keep it at 200 so I can retain the highlights with highlight priority mode on.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

 

Is it ok if the highlights get blown out for commercial/editorial work ? Do I need to retain details in the shadows (for advertising/commercial work0?

<br />

 

 

 

<blockquote>

<p >For serious jobs, where they blow up the images very large and quality is important, you may need to use a negative ISO, maybe something like -200. The option is in the custom settings somewhere, give it a try.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

 

I have never heard of negative ISO. Negative ISO will mean I need more light ? or is there something else to it. If I need more light then negative ISO is out, since I am always struggling with light.

Thank you very much everyone.

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I know the grains (noise) has to be very fine with advertising images.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />This isn't true at all. Check out the work of Ellen von Unwerth. She did ads that appeared in Vogue for many years (and editorial also) that was extremely high grain. Otherwise, I agree with Bob, you should be thinking about other things if you want to be successful.</p>

<p>Dry photography humor fail.</p>

<p>Thank you. I am a beginner. I request you guys to please have patience with my questions. Thank you very much once again.<br>

So the issue about being fine grain is just not an issue. At a local photography group which I am a part of, the top photographers always make it (noise) out to be an issue. God knows why.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Otherwise, I agree with Bob, you should be thinking about other things if you want to be successful.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Please can you tell me of some of the things are you referring to. From the discussions of a local photography group, the top photographers always talk about the technical part (preserve shadow details, no clippings etc) being very important for advertising work.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Dry photography humor fail</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am a beginner. I did not mean any humor. It was a serious question.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>if I'm shooting commercial/editorial I can use 1600, generally for stock I'll keep it at 200 so I can retain the highlights with highlight priority mode on.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am sorry I forgot to ask you this question in my earlier reply. A lot of times, stock photographs will be used for commercial/editorial work. For commercial/ editorial use you go upto 1600, why do you shoot at 200 ( for stock ) ? Do highlight details get lost at higher ISO's ? If yes, after which ISO do the highlights start to loose details ?<br>

Thank you very much.</p>

<p>DPReview.com does detailed camera reviews, where they compare noise and quality loss at various iso settings. I'd recommend you find the test for your camera there to get a feel of the quality difference.</p>

<p>Better yet, shoot a series of photos with your camera at various iso settings under typical lighting conditions for you, then compare the results on your computer to see what is acceptable to you.</p>

<p>Here is my stab at a response. I agree with what others say. It is not really the right question to be asking, but if it's any help, I suggest that 100-800 is quality that you should use whenever you can. Up to 3200 is adequate for most jobs in demanding lighting. You should be wary of using above 3200.</p>

<p>So you know nothing about photography and want to jump straight into commercial shoots? Good luck... but don't quit your day job. There are a lot of starving "artists/writers/photographers" (note the quotations) out there who thought that making it was simply a matter of having a "vision" (again note the quotations) and the proper equipment. </p>

<p>Here's a couple hints:<br>

1) Quit your local camera group as it sounds like a camera club rather than a photography club and you aren't going to learn much from a camera club</p>

<p>2) Most of your commercial shooting is going to be at low ISO because you are in control of the lighting... you do have lighting equipment don't you?</p>

<p>3) Commercial shoots are about what you can deliver to the client. If they want grain, you give them grain. If they want full page glossy magazine spreads, you use the lowest ISO possible and probably shoot digital medium format in any case.</p>

<p>So can the 5Dii deliver... well that depends on your skills and what the client wants. It's a fine camera capable of doing fairly serious work so you should be just fine with it. As for what ISO you can get away with, as others have said, it really depends. It especially depends on what the client wants.</p>

Thank you everyone for your response and patience with my questions.

 

I know a little about photography. I have done a few jobs. Mostly portraits for people. Nothing great. I have some lighting equipment. But I am still a beginner.

I have a lot to learn.

 

Yes I should quit the local photography group. Its not a place I can learn about photography. It has some top photographers who shoot big advertising campaigns. But they just misguide, are diplomatic in their replies (so a beginner never gets an answer to his/her questions), keep beginners busy with

bullshit (things like iso).

 

Looking forward to buying the 5D mark ii! Thank you everyone one again. I appreciate your time.

<i>But they just misguide, are diplomatic in their replies (so a beginner never gets an answer to his/her questions), keep beginners busy with bullshit (things like iso)</i><P>

So what, exactly, do you expect them to do? Spend hours and hours of their time to walk you through the basics of photography and business even though you have no relevant experience and absolutely nothing to offer them in return?<P>

On photo.net, when people have asked you for more specific information and examples of your work (so they can provide you with better advice), all they get are excuses and additional basic questions. You're fortunate to be getting diplomatic replies (so far).

<blockquote>

<p>So what, exactly, do you expect them to do? Spend hours and hours of their time to walk you through the basics of photography and business even though you have no relevant experience and absolutely nothing to offer them in return?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I do not expect them to spend hours of their time. Its a photography group they started themselves. The purpose of the group is to "share knowledge". Every month 5 photographers sit on the panel and the audience (mostly beginners and upcoming photographers) can ask them questions. They are on the panel to "share knowledge". So questions are thrown at the panel and any of them who wants to answer can answer. Why can't I ask them my questions (whether my questions are basic or advanced)? They have the liberty to not answer. Sometimes it happens that the panel does not reply. Being on the panel to share knowledge and misguiding, giving irrelevant replies etc , do you think is wrong? I think its wrong. I expressed what I think about their behavior. I did not say I expect them to do this/or that. I did not ask them to be on the panel. All business related (clients, business contacts, business secrets etc) questions are declined by the panel. We are not talking of them answering business related questions. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>On photo.net, when people have asked you for more specific information and examples of your work (so they can provide you with better advice), all they get are excuses and additional basic questions. You're fortunate to be getting diplomatic replies (so far).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Its my mistake I have not yet uploaded my work. With my limited knowledge and skill, I do not know the answers to specific questions they ask me. Anything wrong in asking basic questions? Anything wrong in being a beginner? Is this forum only for established professionals ? If yes, I will leave, since I am not a established professional. I am sorry about my basic questions. I appreciate the time of everyone who has replied to my basic questions. Thank you very much. </p>

<p>If you haven't already, you may benefit greatly by reading the tutorial material here on photo.net: http://www.photo.net/learn/.</p>

 

<p>Thank you. </p>