tack sharp images - help needed to save sanity.

[tomorrowstreasures]

subject: tack sharp images.


Those of you who are active on here know that I am yearning to take tack sharp images.

This is what I have to work with.
Canon 5D, Canon 40D
some off brand memory cards (will fill in brand name when i get home)
Canon L series lenses - prime 85mm f/1.2; zoom 70-200mm f/2.8 IS; zoom 70-200mm f/2.8; 10-?mm f/3.5? wide angle
Canon 50mm f/1.8
canon 70-300? f 4.5
canon 2x580II flash heads + sensor thingie for remote wireless flash
tripod

(I am terrible at remembering what i have.)

Psp X2
Picasa
PS Cs3

books, books, books, did i mention books on all of the above minus the lenses.
scott kelby training videos (4 of those puppies) titles?

any way -

the point is, i read, read, read, but am not getting the results i want.
i want to pp like Ed- my new bff, and have tack sharp output like Michael.

I am not asking too much am i????

any one who may want to make and upload training videos to link from here to youtube - PLEASE, PLEASE do!!!!

[tirediron]

Sharpness isn't something that happens in post; sharpness is captured in the original image. You've definitely got the gear, no question, so if you're not getting sharp images, it's either a fault with the gear (Unlikely IMO) or an issue with technique. Can you post one or two of yours which you feel aren't sharp enough for viewing?

[Travis]

Yes... you definitely have the gear...

If you are mostly shooting soft the problem is either -

1. Your hand holding technique

2. Your selection of aperture/shutter/iso

3. Your focal selection

and if your still shooting jpeg then also -

4. Your in camera sharpness settings are too passive

Post some examples with exif if you really want if pinned down..

[Marko]

My instinct is shutter speed and how you are holding the camera.
BOTH make a monster difference.

I've said this several times but in my experience I was able to shoot slower on film. I find that 1/60 is often too slow for shots I had no trouble with with film.

I'd recommend experimenting with faster shutter speeds to see if it helps.

[Iguanasan]

...This is what I have to work with.
Canon 5D, Canon 40D
some off brand memory cards (will fill in brand name when i get home)
Canon L series lenses - prime 85mm f/1.2; zoom 70-200mm f/2.8 IS; zoom 70-200mm f/2.8; 10-?mm f/3.5? wide angle
Canon 50mm f/1.8
canon 70-300? f 4.5
canon 2x580II flash heads + sensor thingie for remote wireless flash
tripod...

Drool, drool, slurp, slurp, drool. ;)

[tomorrowstreasures]

ok. so it IS me - THAT is a a huge relief!!!! i would MUCH rather it be my fault than the gear!!! with the amount i have invested in equipment, i was terrified that i went the wrong direction. i will upload some images here in a bit to see if they can be pp to clean them up.... at which point, maybe a few more hints? :o

[kat]

ok. so it IS me - THAT is a a huge relief!!!! i would MUCH rather it be my fault than the gear!!! with the amount i have invested in equipment, i was terrified that i went the wrong direction. i will upload some images here in a bit to see if they can be pp to clean them up.... at which point, maybe a few more hints? :o

You are not alone! I'm glad you asked this question!!! Can't wait to see how this thread progresses because it will be great info to me!!! :highfive:

[tomorrowstreasures]

how do i do that >>>>> Post some examples with exif if you really want if pinned down

[tirediron]

how do i do that >>>>> Post some examples with exif if you really want if pinned down

Best thing would be to post a couple of hi-res examples (full resolution images) on say PhotoBucket or Flickr and just post the links here. That way we can look at them in detail.

[GregL]

You are not alone! I'm glad you asked this question!!! Can't wait to see how this thread progresses because it will be great info to me!!! :highfive:
I was also going to raise a question about this. It's really one of the things that I want to try to achieve this year in my photography. Tack sharp images.

I don't have the gear that tomorrowtreasures has (just jealous...really I am :D) but I think my gear is good enought to make the issue - me.

One question I have right now is, I use auto focus completely. Is that part of my problem? I do try to be selective about the autofocus points.

Not trying to steal your thread tomorrowtreasures - I think you've hit on a issue dear to the heart of many of us.

thanks

[Travis]

how do i do that >>>>> Post some examples with exif if you really want if pinned down

exif is the shooting details of each shot, they are usually embedded in the image when you import it from your camera/card. Sometimes the EXIF is tossed out when the image is compressed down the point where it can be posted here.

At the very minimum the exif required would be Shutter speed, Aperture, ISO setting and focal length of each individual shot you post. However more detailed exif would show other useful items like these

-metering method
-flash used/not
-camera mode (av, tv, m, p, auto)
-lens description
-colour space
-white balance (kelvin temp)
-picture control settings

etc.

Whatever you use to import the images you can usually get the exif by right click the image and select properties.

Good Luck!

[JAS_Photo]

Not sure about photobucket but flickr shows all the exif data. For example:

All that happened with this old truck (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jas_photos/3265000933/meta/)

[Travis]

I was also going to raise a question about this. It's really one of the things that I want to try to achieve this year in my photography. Tack sharp images.

I don't have the gear that tomorrowtreasures has (just jealous...really I am :D) but I think my gear is good enought to make the issue - me.

One question I have right now is, I use auto focus completely. Is that part of my problem? I do try to be selective about the autofocus points.

Not trying to steal your thread tomorrowtreasures - I think you've hit on a issue dear to the heart of many of us.

thanks

Most focus servos select the closest point with contrast in your frame. So, if you are taking a picture of a person with their arm/hand/finger pointing toward the camera it will most likely choose that point. Depending on your aperture setting and distance from subject this may throw the subject face way outta focus.

I don't trust auto focus selection much. It's just another thing you can blame the camera on when a good image goes wrong. A better method is control the focus by using fixed point. Use it and select the eyes of you subject (assuming portraiture).


EDIT: Sorry, I just reread your post and it looks like you do select your focus points. This means you are just using the focus motor to get you there. This is totally common practice(excluding macro work) and you should generally be able to trust your camera to correctly focus on the point you selected.

If you are selecting focus points and images are not sharp it's -

1. Shutter speed is too slow
2. ISO value too high
3. Aperture is too wide to render the entirety of your subject in focus

[tomorrowstreasures]

Best thing would be to post a couple of hi-res examples (full resolution images) on say PhotoBucket or Flickr and just post the links here. That way we can look at them in detail.

http://flickr.com/photos/34356955@N08/3310020296/

http://flickr.com/photos/34356955@N08/3310020232/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34356955@N08/3310019994/

i uploaded person, animal and thing... no plants .... these are all shot camera raw - and no pp... i want them to look like michael's do. would some one be willing to make a tutorial video to help the rest of us out? i tried to pick one's that were reasonably sharp. sigh.

thanks in advance for help! this has been a huge issue for me - i have spent countless hours, $$$$, books, videos and i still do not get it. :o

a prize goes to the person who can break through tt's daft mind! Hmmm what should that prize be????:rolleyes:

[tomorrowstreasures]

by the by -
please contribute heavily to this thread!!! none of us want to look at blurry pictures, right? LOL :D AND this is exactly what the forum is about!!! sharing and learning!!! abuse this thread so that we can all improve and those who have the know how can feel good about that end of things!

Thanks for the nice compliments about the gear! I have a tendency to second guess my decision making on things of that nature, so it is soooo good to know that it is ok! Phew!

[tomorrowstreasures]

Not sure about photobucket but flickr shows all the exif data. For example:

All that happened with this old truck (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jas_photos/3265000933/meta/)

hmmm - i just checked the truck link and then my 3 - the data from mine does not show up at all.

anyone know how to get that there?

[kat]

Yes..under the Taken with Canon is a "more properties" click on that!!! :)

[tomorrowstreasures]

hang on - i removed the images that i uploaded to flickr b/c they were the resized ones - i will go in and upload new ones. i will also try to figure out how to include the exif file.

[kat]

the exif information should come up just with the download. You should be fine with your images!!!

[tomorrowstreasures]

the exif information should come up just with the download. You should be fine with your images!!!
nope it didn't .. i just tried to pull up the raw files and no can do....hmm. will keep trying and checking back here for help.

ok - i got three images uploaded to flickr - files intact - for those of you who do not know - (like me) on the right panel, there is a blue hyper link by where it tells the camera body that says "properties" ... this link will take you to the exif file. now, i am tired. plop.

[Michaelaw]

I think in the shot with the woman I would have kicked the ISO up to 400 or even 800 so as to increase my shutter speed. I think the 1/80 here is what's causing the image to soften a tad in the hand held approach. Failing that, I would try an external flash on the hot shoe and try some bounce with a shutter speed as high as will allow. I am fairly new to this stuff myself but that's what I would try.

[Travis]

The first image (person in shade with blinds)

This was shot in shutter priority mode. You selected a speed of 1/80 and the camera had to correspond with an aperture that would get you a correctly exposed image. Only problem is you don't have a wide enough aperture to shoot 1/80 with the ambient light in this room.

Your camera elected to use the widest aperture available (in this case F4). This is why the image is under exposed.

To answer the question about sharpness for this image. Lenses are never as sharp at their widest apertures. They are sharpest a stop or two down from widest. This lens is most likely sharpest at f7-f11.

Was you intention for this shot to be a silhouette? or did you want the persons face properly exposed? if it's a silhouette I wouldn't worry so much about sharpness, if it's supposed to be exposed and razor sharp than you can -

A - Use flash to increase the amount of light in the room and increase the aperture to F7

or

B - Increase the ISO (which will bring some noise) and increase aperture.

This is a sharpness to signal to noise ratio trade off.

Flash and Increased aperture would be my choice


The 2nd picture (kitty)

This looks pretty sharp to me. In this case you kept the shutter at 1/80 and shot it at 100mm. The iso was increased to 1200 but the camera is handling it well. Mostly because the image is correctly exposed. The aperture was F4.5 is is the widest for this lens at this range (100mm).

If you are referring to the out of focus areas under kittys chin this is the effect of depth of field when shooting both at 100mm and a relatively wide 4.5 aperture. This effect is often desirable. However if you wanted all of kitty in complete sharp focus you would have to

A - Stop the aperture down to F7. This will force you to either increase your ISO (which will increase the noise) or use a slower shutter speed (which may introduce motion blur). You can't really move the shutter speed much further down because your're shooting 100mm. This would suggest 1/100 for the appropriate shutter speed. You are already pushing it at 1/80 (unless you have IS lenses in which case you might be able to go a touch slower but if your subject moves it's over).

B - Use flash and stop down to F7. Decrease the ISO back down to base.

EDIT: The are three links on the post but two of them lead to the same kitty so I can't comment on the third image.

[kat]

The first image (person in shade with blinds)

This was shot in shutter priority mode. You selected a speed of 1/80 and the camera had to correspond with an aperture that would get you a correctly exposed image. Only problem is you don't have a wide enough aperture to shoot 1/80 with the ambient light in this room.

Your camera elected to use the widest aperture available (in this case F4). This is why the image is under exposed.

To answer the question about sharpness for this image. Lenses are never as sharp at their widest apertures. They are sharpest a stop or two down from widest. This lens is most likely sharpest at f7-f11.

Was you intention for this shot to be a silhouette? or did you want the persons face properly exposed? if it's a silhouette I wouldn't worry so much about sharpness, if it's supposed to be exposed and razor sharp than you can -

A - Use flash to increase the amount of light in the room and increase the aperture to F7

or

B - Increase the ISO (which will bring some noise) and increase aperture.

This is a sharpness to signal to noise ratio trade off.

Flash and Increased aperture would be my choice


The 2nd picture (kitty)

This looks pretty sharp to me. In this case you kept the shutter at 1/80 and shot it at 100mm. The iso was increased to 1200 but the camera is handling it well. Mostly because the image is correctly exposed. The aperture was F4.5 is is the widest for this lens at this range (100mm).

If you are referring to the out of focus areas under kittys chin this is the effect of depth of field when shooting both at 100mm and a relatively wide 4.5 aperture. This effect is often desirable. However if you wanted all of kitty in complete sharp focus you would have to

A - Stop the aperture down to F7. This will force you to either increase your ISO (which will increase the noise) or use a slower shutter speed (which may introduce motion blur). You can't really move the shutter speed much further down because your're shooting 100mm. This would suggest 1/100 for the appropriate shutter speed. You are already pushing it at 1/80 (unless you have IS lenses in which case you might be able to go a touch slower but if your subject moves it's over).

B - Use flash and stop down to F7. Decrease the ISO back down to base.


:eek:

[kat]

I have books that explain f-stop, ISO and Shutter speed. I can read them and think I understand until 10 mins later I try to use it and it's out the window. I'm back to the books now.. blessed aperture and it's mixed up numbers!!!

[Michaelaw]

That's a pretty informative post Travis, wish I had that kind of technical understanding. I'm with Kat sort of in one ear and out the other. So I think my reply was somewhat on the mark but you really flushed it out...I thank you:)

[Marko]

That info was amazing Travis:highfive:. Thanks!

What I'd like to do though is isolate 1 element completely if possible.
Here's what I'd like to see.

3 shots - a portrait. get pretty close/tight if possible - we'd like to see the eyes loom large in the shot.
Focus on the eye (dammit the eye) :D
- Shutter priority 1/60, 1/125, 1/250.
I want to see the effect of shutter here.
Do this exercise twice.
One series you hand hold the camera.
One series - that's right - tripod all the way baby.

Different setups will be able to vary the output of the light (like when you are controlling studio lights) to match the F-stop and aperture combination. Others won't; like with natural light in some cases.

OR just get as close as you can - manipulate the ISO or F-stops to match the shutter speed for correct exposure. At F- stops like 4.0-5.6 and smaller you can tell easily tell if an image is tack sharp side by side.

Hope that makes sense, it should reveal a lot if you're up to the task - try not to be conscious of handholding. Make an effort to emulate your natural shooting pattern.
Love the thread!
Marko

[tomorrowstreasures]

Travis - i fixed the links - that is what happens when I am trying to sneak this in in between classes..... :p

another issue i have is that d#*n focus screen... in the days of the cross hairs - no problemo...i am ready for my aarp card folks - and i can' tell if i am on or not. so then - i rely on the auto setting for focus- still thinking of it as a pot shot of luck that i get focus .... the prime 85mm focusing ring has no grab to it. it spins really freely.

what i have learned so far is:
-the better you nail the exposure the better chance you have a fine tuned focus.
-larger aperture - better focus - but i love bokeh - and want to use it on a pretty regular basis in my images - so how does one avert that?
- the lower the iso - the sharper
- the faster the shutter speed the better chance for clarity
-fill flash works miracles so don't shy away from it
-as does a tripod -

and how exactly does one use a tripod, low iso, lg aperture when wanting bokeh, fast shutter speed when one is chasing around a toddler who is 36" or less to the ground in a dark room? sigh.

[tomorrowstreasures]

That's a pretty informative post Travis, wish I had that kind of technical understanding. I'm with Kat sort of in one ear and out the other. So I think my reply was somewhat on the mark but you really flushed it out...I thank you:)
not buying it Michael - nope - your images are amazing so start 'splaining how you got them:D

[tomorrowstreasures]

My bad and rude too - Travis - thank you so much for taking the time to sort through the images!!!! I am going to try the suggestions put forth in this thread....Marko - great exercise, too! The grandson is now home 1500miles away now, but I will find something else to practice on and post in this thread. Come along with me fellow learners! practice and post results!

Kat - i about wet my pants with your :eek: after Travis's explanation. i am still giggling!

Wonderful community here.... Marko, I bet you feel like a proud dad!

[Michaelaw]

not buying it Michael - nope - your images are amazing so start 'splaining how you got them:D

I just shoot using what I think I understand about photography and there's lot's of evidence in the form of very bad pictures to show I'm still very much a learning animal:) I don't do well with books but seem to thrive with hands on experimentation. In the case of toddler shots my answer is this...I shoot my girlfriends grandson using an external flash bounced off the ceiling (white) with a diffuser cup mounted. I generally shoot at 100 ISO 1/100 and set the flash to fill in. Using this method, I get 80% good results and tack sharp. Hope this helps. Again I don't fully understand to the levels of Travis why this method works but have a basic idea:) The other thing I'm prone to doing is a lot of experimentation because this is how I learn as I said. One of the methods I used to learn going back a bit was to set my old E-500 on auto and then go over the exif data to see what choices the camera made then I sort of back engineered it to try and figure out why. Where I want to be is at a point where I always get good shots because I totally understand the medium and in that I think I'm making some headway....

[baddness]

Ok, I think that I have the drool cleaned up off of my face and keyboard after reading TT's gear list. Holy Moly!!!!
I've been trying to get tack sharp images taken in natural light. I have the rebel xti and find that bumping up the iso above 400 makes for noise, lots of it. I've been going for exposure so I chimp the histogram and when I think I got a good clear image, I download to my computer and see that it's so OOF. It's pretty discouraging.

[tomorrowstreasures]

I just shoot using what I think I understand about photography and there's lot's of evidence in the form of very bad pictures to show I'm still very much a learning animal:) I don't do well with books but seem to thrive with hands on experimentation. In the case of toddler shots my answer is this...I shoot my girlfriends grandson using an external flash bounced off the ceiling (white) with a diffuser cup mounted. I generally shoot at 100 ISO 1/100 and set the flash to fill in. Using this method, I get 80% good results and tack sharp. Hope this helps. Again I don't fully understand to the levels of Travis why this method works but have a basic idea:) The other thing I'm prone to doing is a lot of experimentation because this is how I learn as I said. One of the methods I used to learn going back a bit was to set my old E-500 on auto and then go over the exif data to see what choices the camera made then I sort of back engineered it to try and figure out why. Where I want to be is at a point where I always get good shots because I totally understand the medium and in that I think I'm making some headway....

Yikes! You are going to be wicked good when you "get it"!!!! LOL - seriously, you are very,very talented and I can't wait to see how you grow!!! I think it is so true for the arty types - hands on over books. I work with kids that have learning disabilities - funny thing - most of them have skill in talent in area that are art, music, mechanical. They are so amazing.... then there are the types who can get it by reading it once or twice and acquire their skill that way. and then there are types like me who read, read, read, hands on, hands on, hand on and still struggle. BUT not give up.

Again - thanks for your feedback!

[edbayani11]

Ok, I think that I have the drool cleaned up off of my face and keyboard after reading TT's gear list. Holy Moly!!!!
I've been trying to get tack sharp images taken in natural light. I have the rebel xti and find that bumping up the iso above 400 makes for noise, lots of it. I've been going for exposure so I chimp the histogram and when I think I got a good clear image, I download to my computer and see that it's so OOF. It's pretty discouraging.

hi, i also use the xti and kit lenses. the first time i used it, i was disappointed and i thought it was the lens, because i was comparing my shots to my old photos shot on film and noticed that it was really sharp when i view it in the enlarger. i read the xti manual and learned that i can still adjust the sharpness levels (up to 7) aqnd when i adjusted the camera's sharpness levels and tested it, i noticed a marked difference. now, the only problem is me.

[edbayani11]

i think they have said everything to improve the sharpness of your photograps. very good advice.
may i add, try testing the slowest shutter speed that your hand can handle and then go one stop higher and maybe try to use a shorter focal length to add dof

[baddness]

hi, i also use the xti and kit lenses. the first time i used it, i was disappointed and i thought it was the lens, because i was comparing my shots to my old photos shot on film and noticed that it was really sharp when i view it in the enlarger. i read the xti manual and learned that i can still adjust the sharpness levels (up to 7) aqnd when i adjusted the camera's sharpness levels and tested it, i noticed a marked difference. now, the only problem is me.

Do you shoot raw or jpeg?

[edbayani11]

Do you shoot raw or jpeg?

for shots i think important, i shoot raw

[baddness]

for shots i think important, i shoot raw

I shoot raw + jpeg. I read somewhere that you can bump up the in camera sharpening, contrast etc. but it only affects the jpeg files. Does nothing to the raw files. So you find that even shooting raw with the in camera sharpening bumped up that your pictures are sharper?

[edbayani11]

I shoot raw + jpeg. I read somewhere that you can bump up the in camera sharpening, contrast etc. but it only affects the jpeg files. Does nothing to the raw files. So you find that even shooting raw with the in camera sharpening bumped up that your pictures are sharper?

yes, you can shoot raw or jpeg and sharpens both formats.

[kat]

How do you bump up camera sharpness? I'm slightly confused....

[baddness]

in the menu where it says picture style is where you can change the sharpness, contrast, saturation and color tone. But I thought that it was only for the jpegs not raw.

[edbayani11]

when i shoot jpegs, it is always large.

[kat]

in the menu where it says picture style is where you can change the sharpness, contrast, saturation and color tone. But I thought that it was only for the jpegs not raw.

Ohh..you mean the "vivid" mode. You know I've never even tried that out..only went into that menu for b&w..didn't like it and never went back again!!! Gonna have to give it a whirl!!! :D

[Travis]

[QUOTE=baddness;12496]I shoot raw + jpeg. I read somewhere that you can bump up the in camera sharpening, contrast etc. but it only affects the jpeg files. Does nothing to the raw files. /QUOTE]


This is correct because raw files are still basically 1's and 0's with no processing algorithms (sharpness, colour profile, noise reduction, saturation levels) attached to it.

The in camera settings only apply when the camera converts the RAW image to jpeg after you take the shot. So yes.... if you shoot JPEG+RAW you can adjust your camera settings without affecting the RAW file.

If you shoot RAW only your camera picture control settings are pretty much irrelevant. The reason for some confusion is that when you shoot a RAW image a tiny little jpeg is embedded into the file. This is so you can see the image on your cameras LCD. The camera will use the picture control settings to create the little jpeg and sometimes people interpret this as the RAW image. Same goes if you import the RAW file using the manufacturer software.

[Travis]

Ohh..you mean the "vivid" mode. You know I've never even tried that out..only went into that menu for b&w..didn't like it and never went back again!!! Gonna have to give it a whirl!!! :D

If ur a jpeg shooter, and know a bit about post processing (which i see from you images that you do) , it's always best to keep your in camera settings relatively flat and do your extra sharpening and colour adjustments in your editing program. This will prevent the camera from over sharpening and/or over saturating the image. You can always add a little in the end.

[baddness]

[QUOTE=baddness;12496]I shoot raw + jpeg. I read somewhere that you can bump up the in camera sharpening, contrast etc. but it only affects the jpeg files. Does nothing to the raw files. /QUOTE]


This is correct because raw files are still basically 1's and 0's with no processing algorithms (sharpness, colour profile, noise reduction, saturation levels) attached to it.

The in camera settings only apply when the camera converts the RAW image to jpeg after you take the shot. So yes.... if you shoot JPEG+RAW you can adjust your camera settings without affecting the RAW file.

If you shoot RAW only your camera picture control settings are pretty much irrelevant. The reason for some confusion is that when you shoot a RAW image a tiny little jpeg is embedded into the file. This is so you can see the image on your cameras LCD. The camera will use the picture control settings to create the little jpeg and sometimes people interpret this as the RAW image. Same goes if you import the RAW file using the manufacturer software.

That is what I thought, but at times can get a bit confused :)



If ur a jpeg shooter, and know a bit about post processing (which i see from you images that you do) , it's always best to keep your in camera settings relatively flat and do your extra sharpening and colour adjustments in your editing program. This will prevent the camera from over sharpening and/or over saturating the image. You can always add a little in the end.

It also helps to have a calibrated monitor. I'm looking at getting something for mine but there is so many calibrators out there. Not sure what to get