My captures are not sharp!!! (Page 3): If someone is having sharpness problems, use a higher ISO, then do noise reduction in PS. It always cleans up noise and sharpness for me. Or use...

bebop22 Loc: New York City

If someone is having sharpness problems, use a higher ISO, then do noise reduction in PS. It always cleans up noise and sharpness for me. Or use DeNoise app. I find that I am using an ISO of 800, even outdoors and the images are clean enough for me.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

davyboy wrote:

What does obtuse mean?

https://www.google.com/search?q=obtuse

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

davyboy wrote:

What does obtuse mean?

1 annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand: he wondered if the doctor was being deliberately obtuse.
• difficult to understand: some of the lyrics are a bit obtuse.

2 (of an angle) more than 90° and less than 180°: an obtuse angle of 150°.

3 not sharp-pointed or sharp-edged; blunt: it had strange obtuse teeth.

fantom Loc: Colorado

burkphoto wrote:

1 annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand: he wondered if the doctor was being deliberately obtuse.
• difficult to understand: some of the lyrics are a bit obtuse.

2 (of an angle) more than 90° and less than 180°: an obtuse angle of 150°.

3 not sharp-pointed or sharp-edged; blunt: it had strange obtuse teeth.

What a coincidence. I got exactly the same thing when I googled it.

xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Rongnongno wrote:

Today I was the witness of a conversation between two 'photographers' who obviously did not anything about their cameras...

Both complained of the lack of sharpness.

Turns out they both use the infamous VR, expecting it to be the cure of all ills.

They demonstrated an ignorance I could not believe. VR 'allows for a lower speed' That is inherently wrong. Sure, there is some truth in it when dealing with a static object, but a moving one? That is wrong. The subject motion is and must be what determines the speed used if one wants tack sharp capture. You can play with the dof or ISO, not with the speed.

Then they did not take into account the type of sensor array their camera has, such as the density of it. The smaller the individual sensors are, the faster the shutter speed needs to be.

Then there was their use of JPG which opens yet another can of worm.

These two are 'shooting' weddings, more like a terminal execution in my opinion. A firing squad should be the next step, as in 'YOU ARE FIRED!!!'.

The issues are, again, in my opinion., a near complete ignorance of their cameras' capabilities and utter misunderstanding of what DR does and where.

VR helps stabilize the camera lens combination when hand holding it. It does not compensate for the subject motion at all.

So if your shots are not up to your expectation first and foremost check your capture speed. Since dof is an important part of having your subject within the acceptable field of sharpness*, the only setting you can use is the ISO setting. And to use ISO effectively, you need to shoot raw and know your sensor capabilities (DR as well as optimal ISO for invariant sensors). If using auto ISO the lower limit is the one that allows for the minimal speed to use in order to capture an image that is sharp.

In short, stop complaining like these two and take the steps necessary to reduce the throw-away due to lack of sharpness.

------------
* I do not use depth of field because the acceptable field of sharpness is shorter than the depth of field, even if the two terms are used interchangeably by many.

Today I was the witness of a conversation between ... (show quote)

Blah, blah, blah…stop shaking.

blackest Loc: Ireland

VR = Vibration reduction (Nikon term) Canon calls it image stabalisation.
It's designed to reduce camera shake while handholding the camera.
VR and IS systems are able to handle vibrations only in certain ranges.The frequency range of interest is about 0.3 Hz to 30 Hz.

IS and VR systems are designed to ignore very low frequencies of vibration because these systems would mistake panning or reframing for vibration, and would try to work against us as we tried to shoot.

Frequencies higher than about 30 Hz aren't particularly important. Our muscles don't wiggle faster than 30 Hz, and external vibrations at higher frequencies are filtered by the combination of our bodies and the mass of the camera.

So it's only compensation for the movement in the hands of the photographer , not the subject.
So it's best for stationary rocks and sutch. Which kinda leads on to what do you want to be sharp it probably will not be everything. shorter focal length lenses have a wider field of view than telephoto lenses which effectively means the subject will move over fewer pixels while you are exposing the image, higher shutter speeds give less time for the subject to move , flash gives even less time, panning with the subject also helps and probably a fast aperture (less in the frame will be in focus but thats to be expected.

Iso helps reduce the light needed for the shot but it can be interesting how it moves the dynamic range of the camera. Exposing a middle gray subject at say iso 100 gives more dynamic range to the shadows and less to the highlights. Higher ISO will push the dynamic range towards the highlights making for less details in the shadows. which depending on the scene may make a higher iso a better choice. More so on a sunny day where the range of highlights would tend to cause blown highlights. Kinda counter intuitive to our use the lowest iso instincts.

User ID

davyboy wrote:

What does obtuse mean?

Colloquially approximately "WTF-ish".

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Rongnongno wrote:

The real issue is overreliance on technology w/o understanding what it does. It is not about exposure or anything else for that matter.

You yourself have said their problem was that they didn't understand the need for sufficient shutter speed. That's got nothing to do with their camera's capabilities and everything to do with the exposure settings. If they don't get that basic lack of understanding sorted out they'll carry on having the problems that they're having.

Understanding dynamic range, pixel density etc will be absolutely no use to them until they identify the root causes of their problem. Motion blur is a purely physical phenomenon and the solution is purely physical - shutter speed, which is a mechanical issue (we can assume that the camera was capable of a sufficiently fast shutter speed).

There are many phenomena that are directly related to the camera's capabilities, but motion blur isn't one of them.

fhayes Loc: Madison, Tennessee

I was asked about why someone’s photos were progressively blurry, each shot getting more of a smear effect including the background. I learnt that the shutter speed started at 60 and continued to get slower. Following a bird in a dive would be better suited for a tripod at the least, using the drag to control her hand.The objective was to have blur in the background. I explained that for the sharper subject, a faster speed was a must.
Later, the photos improved!

Dannj

Rongnongno wrote:

Today I was the witness of a conversation between two 'photographers' who obviously did not anything about their cameras...

Both complained of the lack of sharpness.

Turns out they both use the infamous VR, expecting it to be the cure of all ills.

They demonstrated an ignorance I could not believe. VR 'allows for a lower speed' That is inherently wrong. Sure, there is some truth in it when dealing with a static object, but a moving one? That is wrong. The subject motion is and must be what determines the speed used if one wants tack sharp capture. You can play with the dof or ISO, not with the speed.

Then they did not take into account the type of sensor array their camera has, such as the density of it. The smaller the individual sensors are, the faster the shutter speed needs to be.

Then there was their use of JPG which opens yet another can of worm.

These two are 'shooting' weddings, more like a terminal execution in my opinion. A firing squad should be the next step, as in 'YOU ARE FIRED!!!'.

The issues are, again, in my opinion., a near complete ignorance of their cameras' capabilities and utter misunderstanding of what DR does and where.

VR helps stabilize the camera lens combination when hand holding it. It does not compensate for the subject motion at all.

So if your shots are not up to your expectation first and foremost check your capture speed. Since dof is an important part of having your subject within the acceptable field of sharpness*, the only setting you can use is the ISO setting. And to use ISO effectively, you need to shoot raw and know your sensor capabilities (DR as well as optimal ISO for invariant sensors). If using auto ISO the lower limit is the one that allows for the minimal speed to use in order to capture an image that is sharp.

In short, stop complaining like these two and take the steps necessary to reduce the throw-away due to lack of sharpness.

------------
* I do not use depth of field because the acceptable field of sharpness is shorter than the depth of field, even if the two terms are used interchangeably by many.

Today I was the witness of a conversation between ... (show quote)

Just wondering why you didn’t tell them what they were doing wrong instead of telling us.

Rick from NY Loc: Sarasota FL

Dannj wrote:

Just wondering why you didn’t tell them what they were doing wrong instead of telling us.

Duh!

User ID

Dannj wrote:

Just wondering why you didn’t tell them what they were doing wrong instead of telling us.

Cuz talking to that pair would be like talking to a wall but talking to Hawgs is like talking to two walls.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

R.G. wrote:

You yourself have said their problem was that they... (show quote)

It has to do with knowing the camera capabilities.
► Knowing what file format to use for best result (hint JPG is not good for sharpness)
► Knowing the 5 Ws of when one can depend on VR for help.
► Knowing the camera DR and how to best use it
► Knowing what settings to change in order to achieve sharpness (camera/lens* combination)

Anyone knowing the above will never complain about sharpness or anything else for that matter. Knowing this is what makes a good camera technician first. The rest as described below is what makes a photographer.

What does not depend on the camera
► External condition. There is no control, but corrective measures can be used by knowing what to do, including running for one's own life.
► Composition (Hybrid, the lens choice* plays an important role here)
► Visualization of the final result
► Creative process in PP

A photographer controls 85% of the full process.
An artist controls 99%. (The 1% missing? I do not know one artist satisfied with their own work, even if others are in awe. According to them, there is always something missing.) Ask Bob about that or those who do PP to such extent it is impossible to distinguish reality/fantasy/dream/vision.

------------
* Lenses are more complex than many assume, as if a zoom is basically a 'do it all' it does not offer the specialization needed for most serious shooting. Zoom use = good enough, not optimal result in most cases. I use one when I have a non-specific subject choice in front of me, especially when I travel. Anything else? Fixed specialized length lenses are my go to.
A lens has an optimal distance for its use, a specific aperture to achieve the best acceptable field of sharpness and the iris open diameter size and number of blades is significantly important. Knowing your lens and its 5 Ws is primordial, even more than the camera in many aspects of photography.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

User ID wrote:

Cuz talking to that pair would be like talking to a wall but talking to Hawgs is like talking to two walls.

Only two?