Sharpness / Crispness / Focus - DPChallenge Forums

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

11/03/2006 08:47:39 AM · #1

I find it interesting the level of "sharpness" or "tack sharp focus" that DPC has come to take for granted in the past couple of years. It's either an awfully easy comment to make on a photo that isn't all that great, or I simply don't have a clue of how to focus a dang camera.

And of course most of my photos aren't all that great, and I think a lot of people want to help, so they comment on sharpness.

I personally find "tack sharp" to be a characteristic of very high quality lenses and I'm curious as to how many of you get comments about "sharpness" even when the photo is definitely in focus (not blurred).

This is by no means a complaint about the comments; I'm just curious as to why this keeps being an issue.

In the RAW files, most of the time, the photos are pretty darn sharp, but it doesn't always wind up that way on DPC. Or at least others don't see them as sharp.

Any thoughts?

Kelli

Canon EOS-D60

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

11/03/2006 08:54:53 AM · #2

Yep, I get that comment all the time. That's why I joined the OOFers. Actually, most of mine are in focus. They are just not over sharpened. My current FreeStudy is going back and forth between 3.9 & 4.0. I truly wonder about the eyesight of people sometimes. Do they see everything in their world with "tack sharp focus"? I know I don't.

quiet_observation

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

11/03/2006 08:55:25 AM · #3

Perhaps you could post an example of a photo you believe is acceptably sharp to you with a previous comment that it wasn't sharp?

dahkota

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

11/03/2006 08:56:26 AM · #4

My monitor has a sharpness adjustment. I have lowered the setting as it seems DPC commenters believe my images aren't sharp enough. Nevermind that they print beautifully sharp, they aren't sharp enough for DPC.

But, when I believe I have oversharpened, I pretty much stop getting the not sharp enough comments and will get an occasional oversharpened comment.

You can't win. I have noticed that, unless the subject is either in complete focus or the DOF is so short its unmistakable, you will get not sharp enough comments from someone. And on the same image, a comment on its sharpness.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

11/03/2006 08:56:34 AM · #5

The anti-aliasing filter in front of your sensor causes the image to suffer from slightly reduced sharpness. It's not as razor sharp as it would be if you glued the lense to your eye and looked straight through. A little USM compensates for this.

Other than that, lense quality has something to do with it but for the most part a decent lense and a tripod will get you a sharp image every time. You should be able to view the photo at 100% size and see that is is sharp as a tack with no blurred edges at all.

Yes sometimes crushing the photo down to DPC submission size has a negative effect due to jpeg compression, but I haven't found this is usually the case.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2006 08:57:06 AM · #6

Bernard.... are you using USM as part of your processing? I often find I need a little more sharpening after resizing because sharpness can be lost there. I too would like to see an example image.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

11/03/2006 09:01:55 AM · #7

Anything that can be criticized WILL be criticized. That's sort of the nature of a "learning" site... people who are actively working on technique will point out technical issues more readily than others who just want to see pretty pictures.

I have learned that voters here prefer to see SOMEthing in sharp focus even on images where softness might work better. With that in mind, I always sharpen as the last step before saving (sometimes more than once). On my last ribbon winner though, there was so much detail that sharpening made the file size too large. The capture was sharp enough to cut your eyeballs if you looked too close, but I had to save an at image quality of 68 or so to stay under the 150kb limit, so more USM was out of the question. Sure enough, I got comments about softness. :-/

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

11/03/2006 09:34:05 AM · #8

Originally posted by idnic:

Bernard.... are you using USM as part of your processing? I often find I need a little more sharpening after resizing because sharpness can be lost there. I too would like to see an example image.

Yes, I do use USM, in discreet amounts. Apparently not enough :)

The most obvious example is a current challenge entry (actually two of them), but I'm looking for others. Maybe I don't get this as much as I thought I did... I just "remember" the comment a lot, but I can't really find them. Hmmph.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

11/03/2006 09:35:38 AM · #9

A tip I read somewhere once about sharpening. Start by seriously - I mean SERIOUSLY - oversharpening your image, then start pulling the slider back until it looks okay to your eye. If you start low and slide upward, you'll probably not sharpen enough.

quiet_observation

Canon EOS-7D

11/03/2006 09:44:30 AM · #10

Do you want to repost after the challenge is over? It would be helpful to see your original + your submitted photo. Listing your aperture, focal length and approximate distance from the subject might be useful.

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2006 09:44:40 AM · #11

Originally posted by idnic:

Start by seriously - I mean SERIOUSLY - oversharpening your image, then start pulling the slider back until it looks okay to your eye.

OK, I tried it and the image scratched my monitor. I blame you. ;-P

11/03/2006 09:45:19 AM · #12

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by idnic:
Start by seriously - I mean SERIOUSLY - oversharpening your image, then start pulling the slider back until it looks okay to your eye.

OK, I tried it and the image scratched my monitor. I blame you. ;-P

LOL But it works, doesn't it? :P

Tamron SP AF 24-135mm f/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical IF for Canon

11/03/2006 09:59:14 AM · #13

What determines "oversharpened"? Is that another arbitrary standard imposed / controlled / influenced by eyes and monitors? How would an oversharpened photo print on paper?

Thanks for all the responses, by the way. I'll try to remember to repost the photo after voting, or maybe I'll find one of my old ones with such a comment. I'm pretty sure they're there, somewhere :)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

11/03/2006 10:02:00 AM · #14

You can "see" oversharpening by the bluish or purpleish halos that get created along hard edges. You want to back off until those halos dissapear. If you have a very detailed image, you might have to sharpen the whole thing then use the history brush to fade back some of the sharpening along very dark straight edges since they show the halos most. I'll see if I can find a good example....

karmat

Apple iPhone 7

11/03/2006 10:02:22 AM · #15

and since mr nards is *supposed* to be working right now . . .

:P

m2iw

Nikon D2Xs

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

11/03/2006 10:10:27 AM · #16

Originally posted by idnic:

Bernard.... are you using USM as part of your processing? I often find I need a little more sharpening after resizing because sharpness can be lost there. I too would like to see an example image.

I would guess that after resizing you are losing pixels due to bicubic resampling of the image. Next time, try setting the resampling to bicubic sharper. I think you'll see a difference.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

11/03/2006 10:24:54 AM · #17

OK, I tried to find an example that was very simple, so you can see the effect of oversharpening easily.

This image has USM applied (on the full-sized original) at 200, 1.0, 0

This one has the same USM settings applied twice - to show the effects of oversharpening. See the dark halo along the bird's back & head? (dark in this case because of the color of the water) It looks like someone has dragged a crayon along that edge and it has a glowy-look - that's what I mean by "halo".

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

11/03/2006 10:40:03 AM · #18

The notion of 'tack sharp' also has quite a lot to do with the quality of light falling on the subject. Something that is side lit is going to tend to look a lot sharper than something front or back lit, even with the same lens. That's due to the increased local contrast caused by the raking light.

Mostly it is a consequence of the lens and focusing, but composition has a lot of influence on the appearance of sharpness, too.

glad2badad

DJI Mavic Air 2

Sears 55mm f/1.4 M42

11/03/2006 10:58:07 AM · #19

Originally posted by idnic:

OK, I tried to find an example that was very simple, so you can see the effect of oversharpening easily. ...

Great examples Cindi! Would anyone else say that the ideal end result lies somewhere between the two photos posted? I think the less sharpened one could still be enhanced a little.

This is a great thread/topic as it comes up ALL the time. Myself included. :D

scalvert

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

11/03/2006 10:58:34 AM · #20

FWIW, a single adjustment of the USM sliders are a crude way to sharpen IMO. You can achieve a crisp image without oversharpening with several light applications of USM at different settings. Advanced editing allows considerably more fine tuning since you can apply sharpening to just the areas that need it. For example:

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

11/03/2006 11:00:59 AM · #21

Dude, I was trying to keep it simple! lol

Barry, yes, I would normally play with sharpness again after resizing for DPC, I didn't do so with either of those images since they were for illustration only, but you are right... the best solution is somewhere in between.

Kelli

Canon EOS-D60

11/03/2006 11:06:11 AM · #22

Originally posted by scalvert:

This still looks a little over sharp to me. But, I think the main comment you would get at this point is "blown out". At least in my experience. Anything that turns white from the directness of the sun always gets me that comment.

Tlemetry

Olympus E-300 EVOLT

Olympus 50mm f/2.0 Macro ED Zuiko Digital

11/03/2006 11:29:05 AM · #23

Does anyone here use selective sharpening techniques?

11/03/2006 11:36:11 AM · #24

Originally posted by Tlemetry:

Does anyone here use selective sharpening techniques?

With the sharpen tool, no, I find it to be too destructive; with a feathered selection, yes, as needed. If an image only needs they eyes sharpened, for example, I will select them and apply sharpening only there, or use a mask to sharpen needed areas.

Message edited by author 2006-11-03 11:42:16.