Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Digital Image Processing => Topic started by: David Sutton on October 03, 2014, 03:17:36 am
-
It's not an acronym. I didn't know that. I assumed it stood for "International Standards Organisation" but when I looked that up found there is no such thing. There is an "International Organisation for Standards".
From their website:
"Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek isos, meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO."
So why do they capitalise "ISO"? I haven't a clue.
Interestingly, Willy Kuert (the Swiss delegate to the 1946 London Conference which founded ISO) recalls:
"The first question that had to be settled in London was that of the name of the new organization. There were different proposals. The English and the Americans wanted “International Standards Coordinating Association”, but we fought against the word “coordinating ”. It was too limited. In the end ISO was chosen. I think it is good ; it is short. I recently read that the name ISO was chosen because “iso” is a Greek term meaning “equal”. There was no mention of that in London!"
David
-
Interesting. I had as well always assumed it stands for 'International Standards Organization'. I now stand corrected. Thank you for sharing this with us!
With best wishes,
Larry
-
They must be the ones that invented the ISOsceles triangle. ;)
-
I recall the acronym TWAIN, which identified a protocol used to interface a scanner with a computer. The story goes that no one could think of a cool name for the protocol, so some wag came up with Technology Without An Interesting Name, hence TWAIN.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_speed#Current_system:_ISO
-
It is sometimes said that the country just across the English Channel from Britain tends to object to standards organisations (or anything else, for that matter) having English names, and so they try to go for abreviations that work in English and French, use the French abreviation or use different abreviations in English and French documents. I could not possibly comment.
I was at one standards meeting, and in the plenary session I was the head of the UK delegation. We were discussing a meeting summary document that the Canadian Chairman had drafted. The grammar was a bit sloppy, but the document didn't matter that much, so I had not made any comment. The French head of delegation, whose English was immaculate, proposed a series of minor improvements to the English. All his proposed changes were correct, but were increasingly annoying the Canadian Chairman.
At the end of the list of changes, the Chairman said "I assume this document now has the approval of the French delegation?" The French head of delegation said "Naturally I can't say that until I've seen the official French translation"
-
Knowing this, I can take much better pictures now.
-
This site that uses the name "ISO" doesn't appear to be about nothing...
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/about.htm
I know a relative who worked at Shell Oil Research Labs in Houston, TX back in the '80's was constantly having to work overtime analyzing and updating their pneumatic and cooling systems to ISO standards that seemed to be similar to what's mentioned in this quote...
Finally, the LIMS makes it possible for Pearl GTL to meet an increasingly crucial requirement of oil and gas laboratories: regulatory compliance. ISO 17025 established an international standard for how sampling labs manage data collection, security, instrumentation, traceability, personnel and more. By collecting complete data records, the LIMS ensures that Pearl GTL is always in compliance with ISO 17025 and other standards. The solution also guarantees that compliance can be easily proven in the case of an audit.
...from this site... http://www.oilandgastechnology.net/downstream-news/shells-pearl-worlds-largest-gtl-facility
My relative did get a raise afterward...ergo I'm having to assume ISO insures some kind of increase/improvement in standard of living through regulation.
-
It used to be that film was rated ISO or ASA. And the rating was given a number on a scale for whichever standard was being used. It was really a film sensitivity rating and throughout the years there have been different scales for rating film speed/sensitivity. The problem is that today we don't use film in our digital cameras so it would seem awkward to mention film speed. It's kind of the digital camera version of Ebonics.
While I agree it is a bit of a misnomer it seems as if the street slang alphabet abbreviation is here to stay.
-
It's a Windows disk image , isn't it?
-
It's a Windows disk image , isn't it?
Nah... I think it's a terrorist organization or Geehad thing
-
This site that uses the name "ISO" doesn't appear to be about nothing...
http://www.iso.org/iso/home/about.htm
I think the point of the OP was more about the fact that the term ISO is not an acronym of International Standards Organization, (or International Organization of Standards for that matter), but is simply a name that was created by the group. Yes the name refers to the International Organization of Standards, but ISO was not derived from that name ... and should probably be spelled Iso.
Interesting information, and I myself am guilty of teaching that ISO means international standards organization ... I’ll have to modify that part of the class ...
-
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Organization_for_Standardization
-
I think the point of the OP was more about the fact that the term ISO is not an acronym of International Standards Organization, (or International Organization of Standards for that matter), but is simply a name that was created by the group. Yes the name refers to the International Organization of Standards, but ISO was not derived from that name ... and should probably be spelled Iso.
Interesting information, and I myself am guilty of teaching that ISO means international standards organization ... I’ll have to modify that part of the class ...
Then you need a citation of some sort or this thread is just meaningless supposition and serves no one who might be seeking useable and/or valued information such as your class.
With regards to photography as in high/low ISO what does the I, S and O stand for or is it just shorthand for some Greek term?
And thanks for the belated response to my post. You must be real busy teaching.
-
Thanks, David! I didn't know that either. Since ASA was for American Standards Association, I assumed ISO was for, well, you know...
Mike.
-
According to Wikipedia
-Photographic film's sensitivity to light (its "film speed") is described by ISO 6, ISO 2240 and ISO 5800. Hence, the film's speed is often referred to as by its ISO number.
-As it was originally defined in ISO 518, the flash hot shoe found on cameras is often called the "ISO shoe".
-
Then you need a citation of some sort or this thread is just meaningless supposition and serves no one who might be seeking useable and/or valued information such as your class.
With regards to photography as in high/low ISO what does the I, S and O stand for or is it just shorthand for some Greek term?
And thanks for the belated response to my post. You must be real busy teaching.
Sorry if I didn’t make the comment in a timely enough fashion for you. the reason for the belated post is pretty simple, the original post and follow ups were while on a trip shooting with little internet access, when I got back it had moved down far enough I didn’t notice it, then a few others responded this week (9 days after your post) which bubbled it back to the top and I noticed it and decided to check out the thread . Pretty simple. And yes, like yourself and most people I am pretty busy doing many things, among them teaching classes offered by my store as well as other groups. Nothing special about that, my only point was like a few others mentioned, I have incorrectly referred to ISO as the “international standards organization”, assuming ISO was derived as an acronym. Important? perhaps not, but interesting.
to be honest I’m still a little confused as to what your point was in your first post, but I read it as you thought the OP was sort of demeaning the work of ISO. sorry if I misinterpreted what you were trying to say. The OP clearly stated the full name of the organization which you then link , and as far as a citation, the first quote in the original post is a direct quote from the home page of the link you provided. Here it is again from the home page of ISO.org ...
"Because 'International Organization for Standardization' would have different acronyms in different languages (IOS in English, OIN in French for Organisation internationale de normalisation), our founders decided to give it the short form ISO. ISO is derived from the Greek isos, meaning equal. Whatever the country, whatever the language, we are always ISO.”
The only point to the thread and the original post was that ISO is not an acronym for “international standards organization” but is in fact a “name” (or short name as they refer to it) chosen so it would be universal in every language (similar to why George Eastman chose Kodak), not from using the letters of the english version of the organizations name which is international organization of standards.
-
The only point to the thread and the original post was that ISO is not an acronym for “international standards organization” but is in fact a “name” (or short name as they refer to it) chosen so it would be universal in every language (similar to why George Eastman chose Kodak), not from using the letters of the english version of the organizations name which is international organization of standards.
Yes, I understand all that.
I still don't see any evidence by which ISO is defined specifically as in reference to film speed over the ISO standard used for establishing commercial press print viewing conditions which both fall under the subject of photography and imaging in general but also is used in the oil research industry.
There's so much conflicting, non-specific and vague information in all those links including mine that I still haven't gotten the answer to how ISO relates and is defined in photography.
I read in one of the links that ISO comes from the greek word for "equal" (as in "equal" standards? film speed?) which indicates it's not meant to be read as an acronym. So which is it and what industry does ISO apply to?
-
Yes, I understand all that.
I still don't see any evidence by which ISO is defined specifically as in reference to film speed over the ISO standard used for establishing commercial press print viewing conditions which both fall under the subject of photography and imaging in general but also is used in the oil research industry.
There's so much conflicting, non-specific and vague information in all those links including mine that I still haven't gotten the answer to how ISO relates and is defined in photography.
I read in one of the links that ISO comes from the greek word for "equal" (as in "equal" standards? film speed?) which indicates it's not meant to be read as an acronym. So which is it and what industry does ISO apply to?
It's easy.
ISO is the International Organisation for Standards. As I quoted at the beginning from the ISO website, ISO is derived from the Greek isos, meaning equal. It is not an acronym.
There are ISO standards for most things.
The documents that describe the criteria for determining the ISO standards for film and digital sensors are copyrighted, so if you want to read them you have to purchase them through the ISO website. I believe the film standards are covered by ISO 6:1993, ISO 2240:2003 and ISO 5800:1987. The digital is ISO 12232:2006.
So when you are setting the sensitivity of your camera to ISO 100, what you are really doing is setting the digital sensor to a setting of 100 as detailed in the document "Photography – Digital still cameras – Determination of exposure index, ISO speed ratings, standard output sensitivity, and recommended exposure index; ISO 12232:2006".
Phew
-
I read in one of the links that ISO comes from the greek word for "equal" (as in "equal" standards? film speed?) which indicates it's not meant to be read as an acronym. So which is it and what industry does ISO apply to?
The reference to “equal” I assumed was about creating standards that are equal throughout the nations which are represented by the organization. ISO is prevalent through most industries. It would seem most engineers run into ISO standards frequently, but then I’m not an engineer. But certainly the scope of film/sensor sensitivity is but a drop in the bucket of all the standards ISO is involved in.
As far as how it relates to photography, not enough sleep for me it seems as I’m still struggling trying to understand exactly what you are asking. Regarding film and sensors, the standard applies to the manufacturers who are required to measure their particular devices sensitivity according to the ISO standard, and then pass that on so the end user has a common reference between devices or films. I assume the document referenced is pretty explicit in how that measurement is to be determined. In the case of film, the test actually determines the ISO number. In the case of a sensor, I assume they use the ISO spec to determine base sensitivity, and design and program the gain controls of the camera for the sensor so that the ISO settings on the camera match the ISO specification.
I’ve always felt digital camera design were saddled to an archaic reference system as it seems when creating the digital ISO standard, they did so in the context of current film standards. I guess at the time the two had to coexist so it made sense. wouldn’t it be easier just having a base ISO standard of 1, equivalent to ISO 100, and everything is just a multiple of that. So if I set my camera sensitivity at +2, I’v adjusted it two stops. Maybe a bad idea ... don’t know and certainly too late now.
-
In the case of a sensor, I assume they use the ISO spec to determine base sensitivity, and design and program the gain controls of the camera for the sensor so that the ISO settings on the camera match the ISO specification.
I’ve always felt digital camera design were saddled to an archaic reference system as it seems when creating the digital ISO standard, they did so in the context of current film standards. I guess at the time the two had to coexist so it made sense. wouldn’t it be easier just having a base ISO standard of 1, equivalent to ISO 100, and everything is just a multiple of that. So if I set my camera sensitivity at +2, I’v adjusted it two stops. Maybe a bad idea ... don’t know and certainly too late now.
Yes, the idea was that light meters and exposure techniques (like the sunny f/16 rule) that worked with film would still be useful for digital. I recall it was some years before I really got my head around the concept of a histogram.
The base (or native) ISO is just the point that gives the lowest noise and largest dynamic range. AFAIK, neither Canon nor Nikon publish this, so if it is around 200 then their ISO 100 setting is achieved by under-exposing and so some dynamic range will be lost. I'm speculating, but I suspect this is not uncommon in with Canon.
-
Perhaps DxOmark would indicate the "base" ISO by finding the point of the greatest dynamic range and/or best signal to noise ratio (which logically would be the same)?
-
OK, now I got what this thread was about. Thanks for the clarification from David and Wayne.
It's about whether ISO is an acronym or a word derived from the Greek word "isos".
I already knew about the ISO standards as it applies to industry including photography and digital imaging. It's just from the wording of the thread title and questions about what new was to be learned from this discussion gave me the idea that there was some other ISO or that there wasn't a clear understanding of the standards organization purpose or meaning. But then I also started thinking it was just a simple question over what I-S-O meant or whether it was an acronym for something.
ISO does stand for something. Or it means something.
Well, got that sorted out... and now onto figuring out what the letters E-B-O-L-A standards for.:o
-
Hi,
They actually do.
Best regards
Erik
Perhaps DxOmark would indicate the "base" ISO by finding the point of the greatest dynamic range and/or best signal to noise ratio (which logically would be the same)?
-
Well, got that sorted out... and now onto figuring out what the letters E-B-O-L-A standards for.:o
Ebola was named after a river.
-
Hi,
They actually do.
Best regards
Erik
Hello Erik. Alas, I've switched to Fuji and I hear DxO would rather profile a dead fish than look at the X Trans sensor. Thanks for the screen shot though.
-
It's just from the wording of the thread title and questions about what new was to be learned from this discussion gave me the idea that there was some other ISO or that there wasn't a clear understanding of the standards organization purpose or meaning.
The thread title can certainly be interpreted two completely different ways, and certainly interpreting it as the organization of ISO stands for nothing (so a pretty derogatory comment) could easily be one way to read it.
I was pretty sure that was the reason for your first comment, just a misinterpretation of the intent of the thread title.
-
The thread title can certainly be interpreted two completely different ways, and certainly interpreting it as the organization of ISO stands for nothing (so a pretty derogatory comment) could easily be one way to read it.
I was pretty sure that was the reason for your first comment, just a misinterpretation of the intent of the thread title.
Heavens, I never thought of that other interpretation Wayne. I've altered the thread title and put ISO in inverted commas.
-
Heavens, I never thought of that other interpretation Wayne. I've altered the thread title and put ISO in inverted commas.
The thread title remains the same in my Firefox browser, David. Maybe I have to log in and log out, but it's not something I'm motivated enough to do.
-
The thread title remains the same in my Firefox browser, David. Maybe I have to log in and log out, but it's not something I'm motivated enough to do.
In my browser (safari/mac), the thread title only shows the change in the forum list view, but not in the individual messages in the thread itself.
And unrelated (and unimportant) wondering if this means we’ve been pronouncing this wrong all these years. If indeed ISO is a “name” and not an acronym, seems instead of saying “I S O” 100, spelling it out, maybe we should say “I-so” 100 ... as a word?
Nah, too late now. ;D
-
In my browser (safari/mac), the thread title only shows the change in the forum list view, but not in the individual messages in the thread itself.
And unrelated (and unimportant) wondering if this means we’ve been pronouncing this wrong all these years. If indeed ISO is a “name” and not an acronym, seems instead of saying “I S O” 100, spelling it out, maybe we should say “I-so” 100 ... as a word?
Nah, too late now. ;D
Oddly (perhaps), I have never heard anyone spelling it out as I-S-O. Rather, it is always a word pronounced, roughly, as "I-so".
Maybe that is a difference between America and the rest of the English-speaking world. (A bit like the American "Nye-con" rather than the more usual "Nick-on".)
-
Maybe there should be an ISO Standard for thread titles?
-
In my browser (safari/mac), the thread title only shows the change in the forum list view, but not in the individual messages in the thread itself.
Screengrab of my list view in "Digital Image Processing" forum...
-
Perhaps DxOmark would indicate the "base" ISO by finding the point of the greatest dynamic range and/or best signal to noise ratio (which logically would be the same)?
Also logically the same as the point at which exposure just fills the sensor pixels. I think this is the simplest and most common definition.
-
Oddly (perhaps), I have never heard anyone spelling it out as I-S-O. Rather, it is always a word pronounced, roughly, as "I-so".
Maybe that is a difference between America and the rest of the English-speaking world. (A bit like the American "Nye-con" rather than the more usual "Nick-on".)
i’m not sure sure i’ve ever heard it pronounced as a word.
It could easily be a holdover of pre ISO days, as then we had ASA which was an acronym for American Standards Association and was always spelled out. So when everything moved from ASA to use just ISO, we just switched the letters, (and assumed it was an acronym for International Standards Organization). Those too young to know about ASA still learned from those of us who referred to it by spelling it.
And I had no clue others pronounced it Nick-on. I’ve never heard anyone pronounce it that way.
-
i’m not sure sure i’ve ever heard it pronounced as a word.
It could easily be a holdover of pre ISO days, as then we had ASA which was an acronym for American Standards Association and was always spelled out. So when everything moved from ASA to use just ISO, we just switched the letters, (and assumed it was an acronym for International Standards Organization). Those too young to know about ASA still learned from those of us who referred to it by spelling it.
That's interesting Wayne, because I've never spelled DIN, nor ASA, nor ISO. I thought the main point of most acronyms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym) (or capitalized words for that matter) to make it easy to pronounce as a single word, but according to the Wikipedia reference that apparently is not the case, and there are cultural differences as well. WYSIWYG comes to mind, but also NATO and UNESCO, but there are also examples that are spelled out rather than spoken as a single word, such as USA or UK.
BTW (! ;) ), DARPA seems to be a prolific creator of so-called 'contrived acronyms' to name projects.
And I had no clue others pronounced it Nick-on. I’ve never heard anyone pronounce it that way.
Same thing here, never pronounced it different than something between 'Nick-on' and 'Nee-kon'.
Funny thing, language is.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Same thing here, never pronounced it different than something between 'Nick-on' and 'Nee-kon'.
Funny thing, language is.
Bart,
This has already been touched on in another thread, (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=94352.0) and 'Ray' (God-bless-his-sweet-little-socks) has expressed his shock horror (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=94352.msg771302#msg771302) at the declining standards of this once-serious forum.
So from now on - no levity, no smileys and no nuance of language, please !
M
[/sense-of-levity required even if Ray doesn't approve]
-
So from now on - no levity, no smileys and no nuance of language, please !
Hi M,
I'd say LOL, if that linguistic escapade were not frowned upon ...
Cheers,
Bart
P.S. I'd agree that this entire thread is more appropriate for the Coffee Corner forum...