Forums
New posts
Articles
Product Reviews
Policies
FAQ
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
Archival Forum
Photo of the month: May 2011
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Doug b" data-source="post: 1235708" data-attributes="member: 59143"><p>Three things are going on here.</p><p></p><p>1. Lighting is everything. I can tell that you used flash, but it's still a tad underexposed. Was this a popup flash that you used or off camera and bounced? The lighting can account for how easy it is for the AF sensor to find its target. </p><p></p><p>2. Whether or not it is sharp, doesn't account for the focus being a bit off. Looks like it's front focusing just a hair, thus making the focus soft. </p><p></p><p>3. Sharpening in general is a tricky thing. How did you sharpen the image (with what and with what kind of pass/filter etc?) to begin with, and where is that image being hosted? You have to remember that most websites or hosts use their own compression schemes, so what might have started out as a sharp image directly from Preview or a photo editor, is easily ruined by such things. iWeb is a good example of such a thing. Apple's compression scheme with that host is fairly heavy handed and I'd never use it as such. </p><p></p><p>I like ImageShack for hosting single random images. They don't really use much in the way of compression. Same with atpic.com. Photobucket is alright too, but not as good as the other two. Then you have to deal with the website on which you're posting the picture. That too, will usually have software which compresses images in order to save bandwidth. Not sure about this forum, so maybe one of the mods/admins will be able to answer that one. </p><p></p><p>Basically then, when you're saving your jpg from whatever program you're using, it's usually good to use a bit of extra sharpening. This is especially true for RAW images. For those, you want to apply sharpening while editing, as well as output sharpening. Two totally separate things. </p><p></p><p>If you knew all this already, sorry for the rant! </p><p></p><p>Doug</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Doug b, post: 1235708, member: 59143"] Three things are going on here. 1. Lighting is everything. I can tell that you used flash, but it's still a tad underexposed. Was this a popup flash that you used or off camera and bounced? The lighting can account for how easy it is for the AF sensor to find its target. 2. Whether or not it is sharp, doesn't account for the focus being a bit off. Looks like it's front focusing just a hair, thus making the focus soft. 3. Sharpening in general is a tricky thing. How did you sharpen the image (with what and with what kind of pass/filter etc?) to begin with, and where is that image being hosted? You have to remember that most websites or hosts use their own compression schemes, so what might have started out as a sharp image directly from Preview or a photo editor, is easily ruined by such things. iWeb is a good example of such a thing. Apple's compression scheme with that host is fairly heavy handed and I'd never use it as such. I like ImageShack for hosting single random images. They don't really use much in the way of compression. Same with atpic.com. Photobucket is alright too, but not as good as the other two. Then you have to deal with the website on which you're posting the picture. That too, will usually have software which compresses images in order to save bandwidth. Not sure about this forum, so maybe one of the mods/admins will be able to answer that one. Basically then, when you're saving your jpg from whatever program you're using, it's usually good to use a bit of extra sharpening. This is especially true for RAW images. For those, you want to apply sharpening while editing, as well as output sharpening. Two totally separate things. If you knew all this already, sorry for the rant! Doug [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Digital Lifestyle
Images, Graphic Design, and Digital Photography
Archival Forum
Photo of the month: May 2011
Top