 Alethea Hawley |
Are my images properly focused?
Alethea
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
W. |
Hi Alethea, practically ALL digital photos require/need sharpening in PP. Some more than others. It 'comes with the territory' of digital photography. It's 'normal'. BTW: sharpening is the very last action to perform on a photo file before saving. After all the other PP, and resizing actions have been done. have fun!
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
What W said, and I would add that DOF (Depth of Field) plays a part of image focus as well. I notice that the nose/eyes are sharper than the back foot and the DOF is the reason why. If you want the whole image to be sharp throughout, you will need to use more DOF (like f/16), but if you want to purposefully have the face focused and the background blurred, a shorter DOF will accomplish this. It also depends on your distance from the subject and the lens because each one performs differently. Example - with my 100-400mm lens set at about 275mm, my subjsct is 50 feet away and the background is another 50 feet behind the subject, I would use about f/7.1 and this would put my subject nicely in focus and provide a nice (bokeh) blurred background. If I wanted focus throughout, I would select f/18 or f/22. With more DOF, you will also need a longer shutter speed to let in enough light to capture the image. Using a tripod or monopod is essential and it gives you so many more options. And after all of this - a little unsharp mask is still usually needed when you are finishing the image in PS.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
Alethea Hawley |
Thank you both of you. However I think the image I provided has been misleading. I'm aware of the DOF issue. I should've used a different example, where the whole image, upon first examination looks in focus.Imagine I had taken this shot at about f16. When I then view it as 'actual pixels' it all looks slightly blurry, including the most 'in focus part'. Surely this can't be fixed with sharpening and even if it can be helped, isn't there something else I can do while taking the photos? Do you think there might be camera shake involved? The bit that confuses me is the difference between viewing it as it originally appears on screen and when viewed as 'actual pixels'.
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
W. |
I'm not sure what you mean by that 'actual pixels' setting. But if you have that image on-screen before you, and it appears blurry, and you then apply some Unsharp Mask (USM), doesn't it get better? (In Photoshop, goto Filter in the menubar –> sharpen –> unsharp mask).
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
- Carlton Ward Contact Carlton Ward Carlton Ward's Gallery |
Hi Alethea, Are you handholding and using the IS ? What is your shutter speed ? Even with IS you cant use too slow of a shutter speed or you will get some blurring. Also, if the critter moves, it will blur with slow shutter speed. Using a tripod, the IS will actually cause some blurring due to the vibration of the IS although I read the newer IS lenses are better at preventing this. I have had good success using my IS lenses with my monopod, but still use at least 1/60 to 1/125 speed shutter when possible. And I always prefer using my tripod. I lug mine around with me everywhere and have been rewarded for my efforts many times. You may also do some test shots and see if your lens is a little soft. And as W asked, doesn't the Unsharp mask work ?
|
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
|||||||||||
