How to get a sharp picture? - DPChallenge Forums

12/20/2006 07:53:11 PM · #1

Ok well im still learning to use my camera, i pretty much understand how to use TV and AV, iso and stuff, but whenever i take pictures they look fine at first but they are never as detailed and sharp as id like, ive seen many pictures done with 3mp cameras that are far more detailed than the pictures i take. Ill try to find the examples. Is it my lens thats making them not that sharp? I just have the 18-55mm kit lens though after i pay off my visa i got $500 to get some goodies :D

examples:
Done with 3.2mp camera:

Message edited by author 2006-12-20 20:07:11.

12/20/2006 07:57:38 PM · #2

P&S usually has pretty good in camera processing. A dSLR you may have to do some addition work on your own.

Usually the kit lens is not the best in a camera company line up, but seems the Canon 18-55mm can come up with the goods.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

12/20/2006 07:58:23 PM · #3

Post some shots and maybe the fine folks here can help.

alfresco

Nikon D700

12/20/2006 07:59:09 PM · #4

Use a tripod, it will make more difference than you can imagine. :)

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/20/2006 08:01:30 PM · #5

try to avoid the extremes of aperture on the kit. F/8 is close to the sharpest on that lens. You can get quite sharp results with it then. Learn how to use USM. Use a tripod if needed.

You can get quite sharp images with what you got if you follow those three rules.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/20/2006 08:09:01 PM · #6

well i do use a tripod, in the pictures i took my aperature was at f/8 (i just read a thread on it) my lighting was sufficient for the settings, and i did use USM, and its still rather blurry, i cant post it though cuz its for a challenge

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

12/20/2006 08:10:00 PM · #7

We'll look at it after if you bring it up.

12/20/2006 08:12:05 PM · #8

also, not to stray from the thread topic but i have a few quesitons i might as well ask while i have you folks here. How exactly do i achieve the effect of where you focus on the object then everything past that point is blurry, the Dof. I can do it a little, but i dont know how to make it really pronounced, even when i have lots of distance between the subject and the background.

12/20/2006 08:12:05 PM · #9

Originally posted by kawana:

examples:
Done with 3.2mp camera:

Anna is pretty good with post-processing.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/20/2006 08:13:26 PM · #10

ya thats what i mean though, i dont know what to do in PP to get those results, i use USM but that usually makes things grainy and doesn't seem to help a whole lot with the sharpness, it makes the sharpness seem kinda "fake" for lack of a better word. Maybe im using usm too harshly, but i try to keep it low.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/20/2006 08:20:11 PM · #11

When doing your sharpening in PS, use a small radius. For initial out-of-camera JPEGs, you may or may not need any sharpening on the fulll-size image, depending on the in-camera sharpening setting. For RAW files, running Radius=0.3, Amount=150, and Threshold = 3 will usually give good results. It may need to be run twice.
For final sharpening, use a single pass at R=0.3, Amt=100, threshold=2 or 3.
Some folks recommend setting the threshold to zero, but I do not recomend this; it will bring up noise. In fact, if you shot at very high ISO, say 1600, you may want a threshold as high as 6.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/20/2006 08:23:20 PM · #12

Originally posted by kawana:

...How exactly do i achieve the effect of where you focus on the object then everything past that point is blurry, the Dof. I can do it a little, but i dont know how to make it really pronounced

The larger the aperture (lower number) the more pronounced the effect. many of the really dramatic narrow-DOF shots you see here were shot at very wide apertures, like f/1.8, f/1.4 or even f/1.2.

12/20/2006 08:26:41 PM · #13

ah ok that makes sence, im looking to pick up that 50mm/1.8 on saturday, $70 sounds good to me lol :P should be good for what i wanna do. This dang camera is so confusing lol, but ill get the hang of it eventually. Also when you were talking bout running usm on a raw, how do i do that. When i shoot raw i convert it with Rawshooter pro, how would i do that in this program?

Nikon NIKKOR Z 24-120 f/4 S

12/20/2006 08:46:19 PM · #14

yet another off topic question but in this picture

, how do you get the sky to not be blown out, i know what he/she did here is with dodge/burn, but when i take pictures outside the sky tends to be way too bright, you cant see the clouds at all. Even when i use the correct wb of cloudy/daylight, any tips with this?

bassbone

Nikon Z8

12/20/2006 08:49:28 PM · #15

Using HDR and tonemapping can make a huge difference to allow images like what Neil Shapiro took. It is becoming a very popular and successful technique. CS3 and Photomatix provide processing software that allow you to take images (especially in RAW format) and do the cool stuff.

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

12/20/2006 08:50:05 PM · #16

Shot RAW, stack multiple exposures, use graduated filter, or all three.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

12/20/2006 09:15:50 PM · #17

Neil may have used a graduated ND filter, but he does not list it. Neither tonemapping, nor multiple conversions of the RAW file were done per the steps he provided to us during validation.
FWIW, a fairly large chunk of the bightest sky was blown, not recoverable even in the RAW file. That doesn't affect the impact that this shot has.

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

12/21/2006 11:06:19 AM · #18

Your questions range from the most basic to some pretty advanced PP techniques. My advice would be to start basic and not worry about the other stuff yet, it will come. I would first learn so its second nature the relationship between shutter speed and aperature and how each relate to one another. Also make sure you understand ISO. Learn basic PP such as levels, curves, USM. Just work on that for a while. Shoot lots of photos and look at your settings. Also just looking and really examining your photos will help develop your eye as well.

Work with simple setups, don't confuse yourself w/ mutliple lights or backdrops and difficult subjects. To practice DOF or the blurry background you asked about, get two flowers, put them each in their own glass or vase and work with that. Change their positions and mess around w/ the aperature and see what happens.

Don't get in the mindset that your gear will produce the images you want. The kit lens although not very versitile due to its aperature, can produce some nice images, you will probably need a tripod most of the time to shoot at F8. The 50mm is a good one though, price is great and it is fast.

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

12/21/2006 11:16:29 AM · #19

Originally posted by kawana:

yet another off topic question but in this picture , how do you get the sky to not be blown out, i know what he/she did here is with dodge/burn, but when i take pictures outside the sky tends to be way too bright, you cant see the clouds at all. Even when i use the correct wb of cloudy/daylight, any tips with this?

The sky is blown out in the brightest regions. While HDR, multiple exposures and RAW formats can help, the simplest way to achieve shots where the sky and ground are both exposed correctly is to be there at the right time. I realise that often this isn't the popular answer around here, where most anything is supposed to be 'fixed' in post processing, but shooting it right, with the right light is an easier while also at the same time much harder way to 'fix' things. The results are often far superior, particularly if you want to print large. Even then a split neutral density filter on the lens can be a great help in balancing sky and ground.

emorgan49

Olympus E-5

Olympus 50mm f/1.8 MF Normal Zuiko

12/21/2006 12:07:28 PM · #20

A simple thing that helps the ground/sky problem is to set your in camera contrast to a lower setting.

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

12/21/2006 07:16:58 PM · #21

whats HDR and tonemapping? i know a bit about cs2, got a few books on it so im slowly learning lol.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

12/21/2006 07:49:03 PM · #22

HDR is High Dynamic Range imaging.
In a nutshell, we can see what a camera has never and doubt ever will be able capture in a singe click. Stand in a poorly lit room and look outside during the day. We can see details in the shadows and dark areas in the room at the same time we can see detail outside in the very bright areas. This is because our brain post-processes it live and we "see" a huge range. A camera however, can expose for one or the other or in between, but cannot do what the human body can.

Enter HDR.
HDR is when several images of varying exposures are taken, usually controlled and on a tripod, then "assembled" into one image very close to what we saw.

Here are a couple examples:

The above are the 3 images I used to assemble:

In the above, 4 images were used, as there is no way
to get the dark foreground AND the brighter sky all
exposed into something like shown, with a single click.

HDR can be done with a single image though, but is a far more advanced style of editing as is the tone mapping. Search the Forums, as there has been a lot of recent discussions on both, and am sure you could spend a couple hours getting completely confused.
:)

Message edited by author 2006-12-21 19:52:18.

PaulE

Canon EOS-50D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/21/2006 08:05:55 PM · #23

I'm loving this thread. As Jmnuggy said your questions span a very broad range of abilities. I say - g00d ofr you for asking. I lurked on the sides for months reading stuff to get to the core of what I wanted to know. Keep practising.