Check out Astronomical Photography Forum section of our forum.
Can we discuss radical cropping?
May 10, 2014 09:29:23 #
I am playing with some radical cropping with the huge pixel count delivered from my D7100. I have not enlarged / printed any such images yet but this image looks to be holding up and it is less than 10% of a cropped sensor image. What are your thoughts?
May 10, 2014 11:21:05 #
Hard to tell; too blury. Maybe you could supply a sharper image so we could get a better idea of what is going on when you crop it.
May 10, 2014 13:29:52 #
Printing requires much larger files than a monitor does... What looks great on a monitor may not print with the same quality.
Check out Photo Critique Section section of our forum.
May 10, 2014 14:18:15 #
The biggest problem I see, is using a 300-mm lens to capture a macro subject. MFD of a 300-mm lens is measured in feet, whereas MFD of a macro lens is measured in inches. With the proper lens, cropping would be minimal.
Exif info:
Camera Model: NIKON D7100
Image Date: 2014-05-05
Focal Length: 300mm
Aperture: f/11.0
Exposure Time: 0.0080 s (1/125)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: -1.00 EV
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Exif info:
Camera Model: NIKON D7100
Image Date: 2014-05-05
Focal Length: 300mm
Aperture: f/11.0
Exposure Time: 0.0080 s (1/125)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: -1.00 EV
Metering Mode: Spot
Exposure: Manual
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
May 10, 2014 15:19:26 #
Douglass, it was shot with my manual 105mm kiron/Dine macro lens. I did not reset the data in the D7100 after I had used my manual 50-300mm Nikon AIs lens. The D7100 lets you enter a handful of manual lenses, focal length and aperture into the camera. It will meter them as well as activate the focus check. I just forgot to change to lens no. 3 which is the Kiron.
It was also captured with my Nissin flash and diffuser. Not sure why the data did not capture that.
The image posted was not a keeper, I have another with dew drops all the way around the leaf. I noticed that the tip dew drop on this one was sharp in the full image and decided to crop it all to blazes to see how it held up.
When I get back to my laptop I will upload the full image.
It was also captured with my Nissin flash and diffuser. Not sure why the data did not capture that.
The image posted was not a keeper, I have another with dew drops all the way around the leaf. I noticed that the tip dew drop on this one was sharp in the full image and decided to crop it all to blazes to see how it held up.
When I get back to my laptop I will upload the full image.
May 10, 2014 16:26:18 #
The first image was the discard that received the radical crop. The second image is the one I was after.
My question has more to do with what can you do when you have 24.1 Mp to play with it. If you crop an image 50% you still have 12 Mp left which should hold up to printing a fairly large image. Do you see where I am going?
I guess you can sacrifice MegaPixels to cropping to get a desired image size, like you can sacrifice or add noise in an exposure using ISO to get the exposure and DOF you want.
As cameras cram more MP onto a sensor I think they are in play (in macro world) to achieve an image of some acceptable size. What that size is, I don't have a clue. Do any of you know?
My question has more to do with what can you do when you have 24.1 Mp to play with it. If you crop an image 50% you still have 12 Mp left which should hold up to printing a fairly large image. Do you see where I am going?
I guess you can sacrifice MegaPixels to cropping to get a desired image size, like you can sacrifice or add noise in an exposure using ISO to get the exposure and DOF you want.
As cameras cram more MP onto a sensor I think they are in play (in macro world) to achieve an image of some acceptable size. What that size is, I don't have a clue. Do any of you know?
May 10, 2014 17:25:23 #
Here is your original capture (24 Mp) + the outline of your crop (354,816 pixels), which is 1/85 the area, and 1/85 the pixel count of your original.
Your extreme cropping leaves no ability to enlarge your cropped image, without quite noticeable "pixelation".
Your extreme cropping leaves no ability to enlarge your cropped image, without quite noticeable "pixelation".
Check out Advice from the Pros section of our forum.
May 10, 2014 18:18:35 #
jbmauser wrote:
What the size is, would depend on what's acceptable to you as a photographer. Your image after all. I think you will find also it begins with the original, how sharp, best possible illumination, DoF accomplished, so on and so forth. My friend just recently got one of the 24 MP crop sensor Nikons herself. In viewing her results it's evident at least from my chair that all of the above mentioned is important when dealing with this many mega pixels on a crop sensor. Illumination seems to have the largest affect. My friends images seem to have a huge noise/photo have the appearance of using higher ISO/ problem when the lighting is off even the slightest. When lighting is dead on you can crop to the moon. Not knocking your camera as I have the D7000 and a huge Nikon fan myself and have lusted after the D7100. Bottom line = what is acceptable to you?The first image was the discard that received the ... (show quote)
May 11, 2014 10:57:06 #
I de-noised it and sharpened it a bit. Still usable but getting a bit blurry !
May 11, 2014 20:06:45 #
I need to learn how to de-noise. I can push the sharpen slider around but don't feel I have a touch for it yet. thanks.
I will play with this idea some more, perhaps not quite so radical. Printed output will be tested. I need to go over the DPI concept as it relates to quality of output and radical crops. Thanks all, I have material I need to consider further. JB
I will play with this idea some more, perhaps not quite so radical. Printed output will be tested. I need to go over the DPI concept as it relates to quality of output and radical crops. Thanks all, I have material I need to consider further. JB
May 11, 2014 20:33:22 #
Turbo wrote:
I still can't seem to de-noise very well without loosing a lot of sharpness. What software are you using?I de-noised it and sharpened it a bit. Still usable but getting a bit blurry !
Check out Commercial and Industrial Photography section of our forum.
May 11, 2014 20:54:06 #
Flyextreme wrote:
Deb has a Nikon D3200. She uses Nik Software/Define 2.0 for noise reduction. I always use this as first step before any other post production work is done.I still can't seem to de-noise very well without loosing a lot of sharpness. What software are you using?
May 11, 2014 21:05:08 #
fstop22 wrote:
Why first step, and not last step?I always use (Nik Software/Define 2.0) as first step before any other post production work is done.
May 11, 2014 21:07:41 #
jbmauser wrote:
DPI concept is pretty simple, you just need to make sure that you are printing a file that has 200 pixels per linear inch. There are some who will argue the difference between pixels and dots but you can set that aside, others will argue that you need 300 pixels per linear inch but you can get away with 200. I need to go over the DPI concept as it relates to quality of output and radical crops.
A monitor needs only 72 to display well.
May 11, 2014 21:58:15 #
Flyextreme wrote:
What I did was use CS6 and open it through the raw process.What software are you using?
Go to the LUMINANCE slider and move right until the noise is gone.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Traditional Street and Architectural Photography section of our forum.