BetterPhoto.com - Become a better photographer today!
EMAIL:
PASSWORD:
remember me:     
     


Photography QnA: Problems with Images

Browse by Category | All New Questions | All New Responses | Q&A Home

Category: What's Wrong With My Photographic Technique? : Problems with Images

Have questions regarding resizing photos for websites? How about taking pictures without shadows? Check this section out to find some answers.

Page 5 : 41 -50 of 2289 questions

<< Previous 10 skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | >> ...229
Next 10  >>
     
 
Photography Question 
Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
  41 .  Critique, please
 
  A Friendly Face
A Friendly Face
© Pat Harry
Nikon D80 Digital ...
 
For those of you who shoot people, would you mind giving me some critique on this image. I'm not looking for "oh, it's good", or "oh, it's just not that good". :) I'd really like some suggestions on what to do to improve.

10/25/2011 4:31:17 PM

  Pat, I'm not a people shooter, but can give critiquing your image a try as a generic shot.

Overall, you have a pleasing pose, and the face is well framed by the hair. And yes, oh, it's good ;-)

However if this were mine, I'd do something about the black vertical line in the background because if you enlarge the thumbnail, it becomes quite dominant.

I'd also darken the shoulder where it hits the bottom of the frame because it's quite bright, and my eye keeps dropping down out of the picture. I'd give the earring a bit of a sharpen since it's so shiny. Finally I'd do some levels/curves work on the whole as I find it a bit muddy.

I hope that's what you were looking for. If not, you can take aim at anything in my gallery ...

10/26/2011 6:11:33 AM

  Pat....it's a lovely image, but needs some brightening and overall editing. It can go from decent to really good I think! Let me know if you want more information and take a look at the people images in my gallery. Oh, if you send me your e-mail address I will send you an image I just edited for someone...I didn't takt it but it's such a great example of going from nice to WOW.

Sandy :-)

10/26/2011 7:45:18 AM

Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
 
 
   
 
Kay, Sandy - thank you very much! You both have gorgeous galleries. Here's another pass at editing. I cropped it a bit more to eliminate some of the bright chest and shoulder - although I think I should have cropped from the camera right, rather than camera left.

Sandy, I'll send send you my email address. I would love to see the image you mentioned. Thank you!

10/26/2011 6:08:45 PM

Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
  ooh - the colors look much better in Photoshop than they do in this uploaded version.

10/26/2011 6:10:01 PM

  Thank you, Pat...oh my e-mail address is HisSparow@aol.com...make sure you only put one R in sparow...AOL would only let me have one R. I would also love to see the original unedited version of your image. It could really be great I think.... :-)

10/26/2011 6:12:24 PM

Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
 
 
   
 
Here is the original unedited version.

10/26/2011 6:26:30 PM

  Hi Pat,
I have learned from Jim Zuckerman and my own experience with shooting portraits is that "Background can make or break an image". A beautiful background - uncluttered / flattering color / no roads.hulu-hoopers or port-a-johns behind a nicely lit person will make your subject look all the more beautiful.
When I set up to shoot, I look for the direction of the light, then the best background area to place them in front of and then select my DOF, distance & framing - in that order. Sometimes I move a couple of steps to one side and have the person turn to me and in just a couple of seconds I have created a better background or more flattering lighting for the subject.
I like your portrait and even prefer the darker exposure you used.
I had a beautiful senior girl that could not relax her face (she would smile but her forehead would scrunch up) but when I became pre-occupied about the background and lighting, it kind of loosened her up & drew her attention away from her camera shyness and I was able to get the shots with a relaxed expression.
220 / 221 whatever it takes... (Mr. Mom)
Carlton

10/26/2011 8:46:20 PM

Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
  Thanks, Carlton! Excellent advice.

This was an unplanned shot, un-staged shot. She walked out as I was setting up, I asked if I could take a test shot for lighting, she tilted her head and smiled. I didn't not expect to keep the shot.

I know I really do need to work more on analyzing the background in all my shots. It's something I tend to forget when I'm rushed or nervous. Thanks for the reminder!

10/27/2011 5:49:14 AM

  Hi Pat,
This is a very effective shot. I like the changes you made to the background, especially in the last version. The catch lights in the eyes work very well, bringing the eye to the eye, if you will. I like the pose, particularly the way you can see the subject’s left eye brow. The eye make-up is a little harsh. Make-up for still photography needs to be subtle, and make-up for the street is often too harsh. Since this was a sort of grab shot this is expected. The light does a good job of defining the face, particularly the cheeks. You might want to use the shadow tool to define the chin a little more, it might help. Good work on the image. Thanks, John Siskin

11/2/2011 8:43:01 AM

Pat Harry
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Pat
Pat's Gallery

member since: 11/26/2006
  John, thank you very much for your comments. I'll work on the shadow under the chin. I have to agree with you about the makeup. :)

11/7/2011 7:16:25 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
FERNANDA KINGSLEY-THOMAS
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/27/2010
  42 .  problems with sharpness-lens canon 55-250
I have got a canon 500 D that comes with 18-55mm kit lens. It took me 6 months to decide on what extra lens to buy and finally after reading so much and having great comments about the 55mm-250mm I decided to buy it. I am struggling to get sharp pictures with it. At 55mm I can just about get them sharp but not at 100% but if I go higher than 135 mm the quality gets worse, not really sharp even at 50%. I am talking about handholding the camera. I tried taking a picture of my mother with a camera on a tripod at 250mm with the IS turned off and it was sharp at a 100% . The problem is that I cannot carry a tripod with me when I am with people because they get annoyed having to wait. Do you experience the same problem? If I take a picture at 50mm with my 18-55mm I can get sharp pictures but never as clear as many other people and then I have to crop it to get it enlarged.I would like to do it with the 55-250mm but either the lens are bad, or they are too heavy for me to hold with steady hands. I don't know what I am doing wrong. If I try to get the speed real fast to avoid camera shake but if I get the aperture to 8 or 11 then the shutter speed goes down to 125 and if I get it to 600 then the aperture sometimes goes to 5.6 which is not what I want. I don't seem to be able to set the correct aperture with a fast shutter speed to avoid camera shake. I was wondering what I am doing wrong. I thought maybe I will get a 24-105mmL because they are better lens. All I want is sharpness. Your input would be so appreciated. I can upload some pictures if you think might be helpful Fernanda

10/17/2011 4:22:56 AM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  I think you need more practice more than anything. Try different hand/arm positions first to see if you can get steadier. Try your left hand under the lens, with your left elbow up against your side, making a triangle shape from your shoulder down to your elbow, up to your hand. Turn your body sideways a little with your left shoulder towards your subject. Almost like holding a rifle.
You don't like using a flash? That would help. If you can get it to 600 at 5.6, you should be okay at 300 f/8. That sounds like outside numbers, not inside.
There isn't that much of a difference in depth of field between f/5.6 and f/8. Is it in the pictures that makes you avoid f/5.6, or is it what you've heard or read about always using the smallest aperture that makes you not want to use f/5.6?

10/17/2011 10:21:42 AM

  Unless I missed it, you never mentioned iso. Have you up'd the iso to increase shutter speed and keep the aperture where you want it?

10/17/2011 11:33:18 AM

 
 
  Happy Duck
Happy Duck
December 2005 - Canon 20D & Canon 70-200mm f/4L lens.
 
 
Hi Fernanda,
Gregory & Bob are right on.
If you do decide to get an L lens, you will be setting yourself up for more $$ investments in the future. L glass is so sharp & can be a bit addictive - its all I shoot with.
The 24-105mm f/4L IS lens is fantastic - lighter than my 24-70mm f/2.8L (no IS) and it is a great lens. Its about $1000 US. Another great lens is the 70-200mm f/4 L (non-IS) & sells for $650 US. This is the best L lens for the price you will find. I had one and it was fantastic. I later sold it to get the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (which is considerably more $$ & much heavier) as I shoot a lot of low-light concerts & portrait photos. The f/4 version is lighter and I have lots of sharp & beautiful photos I took with that lens.
Practice your technique and if you have the ability to rent lenses locally, try out a couple and see for yourself if they are worth the $$ to you.
Here is a pic I took when practicing my panning technique with the 70-200mm f/4L lens. The face of Happy Duck is sharp while I was using a slow enough shutter speed to show the movement of her wings. The background fall colors reflecting on the water adds a nice look to the image as well :) Its one of the 1st images I shot with my new Canon 20D and its still a favorite.
Love in Light,
Carlton

10/17/2011 11:19:42 PM

  The lens is not the main problem. The problem you have is understanding what settings you need. Make sure that your shutter speed is 1.6 times the focal length you are using. If you are at a focal length of 135 mm, that would give you a shutter of 1/216 sec., so anything from 1/200 sec. up would be good. This will cure the camera movement problem. Make sure the aperture is at f-8.0 and you will clear up the sharpness factor for almost any decent lens. Raise the ISO until thse settings are possible. If the ISO gets too high, you will have to use a tripod or use supplemental lighting. If you are still confused, use Auto ISO and put the camera in program. It will do the rest. Good luck.

10/18/2011 1:53:52 PM

FERNANDA KINGSLEY-THOMAS
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/27/2010
 
 
 
Hi Gregory thanks for the suggestion about positioning. I never thought about it. You are absolutely right about my needing more practice. I have only been doing it for 8 months and very infrequently and most of the time with people who are not interested in waiting while you fiddle with the camera. I never thought about using the flash. Will try to use your ideas.
~Bob, most of the time I forget to check the shutter speed and avoid to up the ISO which I know would avoid camera shake because my teachers have always mentioned trying to have lower ISO to avoid noise.
There is one lady in better photo who uses this lens and her pictures are so sharp and have a clarity that I have never managed. I also saw pictures taken buy another photographer on this site who uses only a Canon powershot G9 and the clarity in his pictures are amazing. What gives this extra clarity?
Carlton, thanks so much for your input on the 24-105 mm lens. You also wrote to me when I was thinking of getting the Tamron 18-270mm which I still have not decided because opinions are so varied and sharpness is not great. I just don't want to walk around changing lens. Do you think there is a massive difference between the 18mm and the 24mm. I will try your suggestion of renting different lens. there are shops in London that rent L lens for £50.00 for 3 days. Really good. I am posting some photos I took with the 55-250mm.
Randy I love your very clear and straight to the point suggestion. I will go to the zoo in the next few days with my tripod and spend the day alone practising.
Thanks you so much for your help


10/19/2011 2:08:19 PM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  The duck is just blurred a little from movement. One quick thing you can do is use some sharpening with photoshop, or whatever program came with your camera.
Digital cameras has what's called a high pass filter that's in front of the sensor that causes a little softness to photos. Every photo needs a little sharpening added to it. You photo of the bird feeder and the mother looks like the basic sharpening that every photo needs, wasn't done.
So start doing that to your finished photos and you'll see some improvement. If you do ever use another lens, you may see an improvement in sharpness, even if you don't try a L lens. Zoom lenses that have a very wide range of focal lengths like a 55-250, aren't the sharpest anyway. They're convenient because of the range, but it's hard to get a lens with that wide a range to be very sharp. Zooms that have a narrower range, relatively speaking, are usually sharper. It's part of the give and take that happens to practically everything in photography.

10/19/2011 3:40:51 PM

  It's just as I thought. The images where your shutter speed is near or above your focal lenghth are sharp. The one with the cat where the shutter speed is a lot slower than the focal length is blurred due to camera movement. The duck is blurred because it's moving. It's movement at that focal length requires a higher shutter speed. Keep an eye on the focal lenghth and shutter speed relation and you should be good to go.

10/19/2011 5:26:32 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Fax Sinclair
BetterPhoto Member
fax-sinclair.com

member since: 1/3/2004
  43 .  combine layers
How do I combine images in PS, same shot different focal lengths.

9/18/2011 9:36:01 PM

  Use Auto-Align Layers under the Edit tab if you want the subjects to register on top of one another.

9/19/2011 8:41:07 AM

Fax Sinclair
BetterPhoto Member
fax-sinclair.com

member since: 1/3/2004
  Thank you Randy, I could not remember that or where I read it!

9/19/2011 10:34:57 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  44 .  Some Photos Still Not Crisp
I have a Nikon lens 80-200mm F/2.8D without VR. When I go to post-processing my photos, the last thing I will do is sharpen a little. On some of my photos they are very crisp/sharp, and on al ot of them they are so far off when you go in to sharpen it looks way out of focus. Do you think my problem is in movement of camera (I use a monopod) or could I still not have shutter speed where it should stop all motion. Not real sure if there is a difference from 80mm and photos I shoot at 200mm. Help, I want my photos to be real sharp as I sell online to football parents. Can send some photos if that would help. Thanks Tom

9/12/2011 7:23:05 AM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  Sharpening really isn't intended to make an out of focus picture look in focus. It can't do that. If it's out of focus, it's out of focus. Sharpening is for the slight edge softness that comes from the filter inside the camera that covers the sensor. Or it can make something with slight motion blur look better.
There's a difference in motion blur and something being blurry because it's out of focus. Put some photos in your gallery or add them to the discussion instead of sending them. Offhand, I think your problem could be you're just not getting things in focus.

9/12/2011 7:38:22 AM

  Tom..what are you shooting? Sounds like football shots. For that you would need two things in order for them to be sharp..a fast shutter speed and an smaller aperture for better/sharper depth of field. However, with that smaller aperture you lose light, so you need that too! Confused yet? I shoot Nikon too..send me any photos so I can see better what you are not happy with....my e-mail is HisSparow@aol.com.

Sandy :-)

9/12/2011 8:49:05 AM

Dennis Flanagan
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/31/2005
  They are out of focus due to either camera shake, bad focusing, or too slow of a shutter speed to stop motion. Do you have auto focus? Do you have it set to "C" for continuous? Is the lens diopter set for your eye if using manual focus?

9/13/2011 9:07:09 PM

Gretchen Yengst
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 3/24/2007
  Hi Tom -- I am a Nikon shooter of events -- lots of action. I have D300, D7000 and the 80-200. One of the best focusing tips that I have received was from Paul Gero who teaches the wedding course here at BP. He suggested a helpful tip for better work is designating your AE-L/AF-L button on the back of the camera as your focusing agent, pressing it with your thumb to focus -- especially as you are tracking action, like sports etc. Then you finish the shot off with the shutter release. Go To: Menu>Settings>Controls>Assign AE/AF button>AF ON. This has really worked for me as I can track the subject visually maintaining focus with my thumb then fire the exposures in a non-jerky motion. BIG difference then doing it all half way down with the shutter button which can create a jerk -- especially when we see moment we want to take. This may take a wee bit of practice, but soon it will feel good. Hope this helps and improves your shooting -- AND thank you Paul, forever. Gretchen, Loving Focus Photography, www.gretchenyengst.com

10/4/2011 5:05:34 AM

  Hi Tom. I have shot ballet for several years, and agree with Sandy's comments. I get the best results by shooting in shutter priority, 1/160 if possible, with an f/2.0 prime. I started out shooting wide open, but the depth of field is too narrow, often resulting in the subject being just slightly out of focus. By using shutter priority, the aperture varies according to available light, usually giving you a bit more depth of field. You can also pump up the DOF by increasing the ISO.

10/4/2011 5:47:18 AM

Tammy L. Bevins
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 10/10/2003
  movement and action require a very quick shutter to stop action. You should be shooting at least 1/500 shutter to stop action. Also check the sharpness of your lens choice. Different lenses have varying degrees of sharpness. Also make sure your focus point is correct and I always use a tripod. It will take camera shake out of the equation as you investigate this.

10/4/2011 6:31:28 AM

Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  I want to thank all of you this has helped very much and my photos reflect that. Gretchen you said to change button for focusing. I did that and it really made a difference on my football photos. Thanks again.

Tom

11/30/2011 10:41:59 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Alicen Holmes
BetterPhoto Member
Contact Alicen
Alicen's Gallery

member since: 1/2/2006
  45 .  What am I doing wrong?
I rented a Canon 70-200mm f.2,8 L lens (no IS) to take shots at a night football game (specifically my daughter during the halftime performance). The sole reason for renting the lens was to get much crisper shots using a faster lens. My Canon 7D camera was set on Aperture-Priority, f/2.8, ISO 400, auto white balance, AI Servo and every single photo came out blurry! These are the exact settings I used in years past with my 75-300mm lens and at least many of those shots were good. I have one more game to shoot before I have to return the lens next weekend. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

9/10/2011 9:53:11 AM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  One thing is you aren't using the exact settings as before because a 75-300 doesn't have f/2.8, even at 75mm. So more than one thing is different than what you did before, I'm sure. You could be zooming in closer this time, since you do have f/2.8, maybe making the blur that was there last time, more noticeable.
You could've had the camera on program the previous time, and zooming out with the 75-300 made the camera choose it's highest iso.(I don't know what the 7D goes up to)
Good light at a high school stadium will give you 125th with iso at 400, f/2.8. And there aren't many that have good light. You need to put the iso all the way up.

9/10/2011 11:43:31 AM

  In addition to what Gregory said, you might consider using a tripod or monopod. It gets shaky at 200 mm without IS.

9/11/2011 2:02:34 PM

Dennis Flanagan
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 12/31/2005
  Bump your ISO to at least 800 and shoot on either manual or shutter priority at 1/125 or 1/250, depending on how fast of action you are trying to stop. Use a monopod or some other stable base to reduce shake. If you shoot in RAW, you have added latitude in Photoshop to correct for being under exposed.

9/13/2011 9:13:24 PM

  One option is to go manual, set the shutter to 1/250 sec. or whatever you require to combat camera shake, set the f-stop you want, 2.8 or whatever gives you enough DOF and then set the cameras ISO to AUTO. This technique allows you to control camera shake and DOF. The newer lower noise cameras make this a handy tool. A lot of people ridicule AUTO ISO but they haven't changed their thinking to match their equipments abilities. I started using this a couple of months ago while shooting macro. It has worked out very well for me.

9/14/2011 1:10:27 PM

  Hi Randy,
I have the 5D Mk II and hope it has the "Auto ISO" setting as it would be real handy - Can you tell me how you set this on your 7D ?
Thank you,
Carlton

9/14/2011 2:14:24 PM

  Hi, Carlton. I don't have a 7D. I'm a Nikon shooter. The 5D Mark II and the 7D has it. I'm not sure how you set it on a Canon, but I think it's really worth looking into and is a idea whose time has come in a lot of situations. All my macro shots for the last few months were done this way as well as my sports shots. See my gallery for results and that's with a fairly noisy D200. Check out AUTO ISO and let us know what you think.

9/14/2011 2:35:12 PM

  Thanks Randy, its a matter of selecting the ISO and dialing it to "A" - I didn't even know I had this feature - maybe I should re-read my manual :)
I'll be using this a lot this weekend for another festival, laserlight-show & SeniorPortrait shoot (and possibly as a last minute replacement for a wedding shoot) Friday night as well.
Thats it - I am too busy to read my manual - lol...
Cheers,
Carlton

9/14/2011 2:52:56 PM

  Thanks, everyone, for your help. I boosted the ISO up to 800 and set the shutter speed to 1/250 and every shot was picture perfect! I am thrilled! Thank you again.

9/17/2011 9:18:10 AM

  And a thank you Randy from this humble 50D user. Yup, there it was on page 64, all fifty words and a tiny diagram. But I am not complaining as at least Canon gave a whole half page telling me how to attach the strap.

9/20/2011 9:26:41 AM

  The Auto ISO feature is not for every use, but like I said, I think the time has come to put it into our arsenal. We generally set two of the three parameters for exposure all the time. That is ISO and aperture for most people and we let the camera pick the shutter. With auto ISO we are still picking two of the three parameters, but we are swithing the parameter the camera picks. We had to set the lowest ISO possible in the past because of noise. Now that noise is not as large of an obstacle, I think it just makes sense to control DOF and motion sharpness in some situations. Would love to hear other peoples opinions.

9/20/2011 9:47:16 AM

  Carlton,

To get Auto ISO on the 5DII select ISO move the wheel on the right side toward the lens, CCW from your POV. the setting below ISO 100 is "A". That better stand for "Auto" because to set it for ISO 50 it is necessary to go into Cfn.

I used Auto ISO at the Marine Aquarium in Monterey, CA. It wsas a lot easier to go from indoors shooting into dark tanks to outdoors. It wliminates a lot of hassel. But I would only use it in extreme cases like this.


Lynn


10/9/2011 12:00:49 PM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  46 .  loose lens
Sorry abbout that it is an F/2.8 lens> Thanks Tom.

8/23/2011 8:45:19 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  47 .  loose lens
I have a Nikon #1986 80-200mm F/208D lens It seems to be loose now when mounted on my D7000 camera. It moves about 1/8" or more turns. Could these be my problem with focus on some of my shots even using a monopod. Especially on longer shots. Thanks Tom.

8/23/2011 8:44:04 AM

Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  Sorry about that, it is an F/2.8 lens. Thanks Tim.

8/23/2011 8:46:25 AM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  If it moves enough so that the electronic contact points between camera and lens don't connect properly, the auto focus could be getting interrupted.
I know you're guessing, but 1/8 an inch sounds like a lot. The flanges can get worn down over time from knocking against each other. But I wouldn't think that much
You should be able to experiment with trying the focus when making sure the lens is aligned at the right spot and try it after you move it.

8/23/2011 2:51:48 PM

Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  You are right, after I posted I took it out and it doesn't move a lot but it does move I will test it out soon. I know it probably wouldn't have to move much when I am holding and taking football photos especially out at 200MM right?. Thanks I will let you know as soon as I take some test shots.

8/23/2011 3:24:38 PM

  Tom, I own 4 Nikon bodies and various Nikon lens, they all rotate a slight amount, it's common with the Nikon mount. If they lose contact you will get an error message on the top LCD..It bugged me for a long time but you learn to live with it.

Nick.

8/23/2011 5:16:04 PM

Tom R. Fleeman

member since: 4/26/2010
  Thanks Nick I have had some shots from football scrimmage this weekend that some of the longer shots were not right on focus. I think I must still be moving a little to much with the action and not letting camera do it's job. I get a little pumped when they start moving. I just thought maybe the movement on the lens might be a problem. It doesn't really bother me I just didn't want it to not focus right. Thanks again appreciate the help, you too Gregory.

Tom

8/24/2011 2:47:58 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Amber Bromby

member since: 8/2/2011
  48 .  how to shoot this moving portrait?
 
  Spinning
Spinning
aperture - 3.5, shutter - 1/160, lens- 18-55mm, location- outside in the shade of the trees late morning
© Amber Bromby
Canon EOS Rebel T3...
 
I thought I'd try this shot and while it was fun to do, it took many attempts, most of which were blurred. Any suggestions on settings or a technique I could try?


I used the action mode on my canon T3i with the settings at f3.5 / 1/160 / focal length 23

8/16/2011 5:29:57 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Lynnmarie Daley
BetterPhoto Member

member since: 5/2/2006
  49 .  Resizing Images
I've noticed a considerable loss of image quality when resizing large file images to smaller sizes (i.e., 3600 pixels to 750 pixels) using Photoshop Elements. Even though the original is sharp and not grainy when resized, the sharp detail is lost. Does anyone have a solution or this problem? Would appreciate any feedback! Thank you,

8/12/2011 9:14:28 AM

Gregory LaGrange
BetterPhoto Member
gregorylagrange.org

member since: 11/11/2003
  If you're looking at the re-sized image with Photoshop, then it will look worse if you zoom in on the screen image. You are getting rid of lots of pixels, after all.
It's meant to be viewed through your web browser. Just open the file without Photoshop, and it should look better.

8/13/2011 7:22:41 AM

doug Nelson
DougNelsonPhoto.com

member since: 6/14/2001
  If the reason for resizing is to post to the web or to send as an attachment, you are downsizing the image by using a smaller resolution (print res of 300 down to about 75 pixels per inch, for example) AND reducing the image dimensions (750 pixels across is pretty small). We reduce the file size to make the image manageable. As Greg says, it's only for screen viewing, anyway. Loss of quality is the price we pay for convenience.
Any image you do this to needs sharpening. For a jpg this size, try about 78 as your amount, .6 as your radius and 1 as your threshold. Maybe your PS Elements has a "smart sharpening" feature. Other users can advise you.

8/15/2011 9:45:28 AM

Bruce A. Dart

member since: 1/7/2007
  Lynnmarie,
There IS a considerable loss of image quality when you downsize. For that reason you must rename the file and preserve your original or you will lose that quality. Screen resolution is 72 ppi, as mentioned but that is only for web viewing. Most of us have lost a good image in this process before we discover that we should not do that and then we become paranoid about having back-up files. Save the new file under a new name and you can always go back to the original large file. Also, if you are working on an image, (after renaming) then downsizing is the last step of the process. That also keeps larger files to view as you work on them. If you need to increase size of an image (you can never get back to the original) but if you need to make a larger print and don't have quite enough resolution, you can do a "step" process that helps. Just changing the file size to what you need -- for sake of explanation -- sort of arbitrarily grabs pixels from a large area of the image. When resizing (up), change pixels to percent and add 10%; i.e. make it 110%. It sort of grabs nearby pixels and makes the image better. Do that about four times in those increments and you can increase a file to something you can make a large print with. Years ago, I used a 16 meg file and increased it to where I could have the lab print a 40x60 with that process.

8/23/2011 5:40:24 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
 
Photography Question 
Janet Coffelt

member since: 2/1/2007
  50 .  Can't Save in JPEG Form
I am trying to save some images in Photoshop CS4 as JPEGs to upload. However, when I choose Save As, my only choices are: Photoshop, Cineon, Dicom, FXG, IFF Format, etc., through TIFF. I know I have done it before, but what has changed? Have I done something wrong, or do I need to change my preferences? Please help!! Thanks!

7/21/2011 6:23:53 AM

  Check the bit depth of the image. I don't know about CS4, but earlier versions won't let you save a 16-bit to jpg. Change the images to 8-bit and see if that fixes the problem.

7/21/2011 7:03:05 AM

Janet Coffelt

member since: 2/1/2007
  Yes! That worked, Thank you!

7/21/2011 7:13:14 PM

Pat Lawrence

member since: 5/5/2010
  Glad it solved the problem. Another common cause is that the image hasn't been flattened. No layers allowed in a jpg.

7/26/2011 7:27:10 AM

Respond | Ask Your Own Question
<< Previous 10 skip to page
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | >> ...229
Next 10  >>

Copyright © 1996-2014 BetterPhoto.com, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.