allanj Loc: New York City

I took this photo about a month ago in the Conservatory Garden Section of Central Park, NYC. After some PP, I have decided that I really like it, and would like to know what others think. Like many others, I know that I have a tendency to fall in love with my own pictures, so you have permission to burst my bubble. Suggestions for improvement are, of course, also welcome. Technical details are as follows: Canon 7D, 100 mm lens, f4.5, 1/90th sec, ISO 500.

(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Allan - the composition and colors are very pleasing. But, I have some concerns about the focus. The EXIF shows the EF 100 f/2.8L macro, one of Canon's sharpest lenses. When I open the download, I'd expect sharp details on the statue's head or some area in that portion of the image. But, there's really not anything in sharp focus, no where in the image. The download does not include the AF data nor the complete EXIF data from the EOS 7D. A few things DPP does say is Sharpness = 0 and Saturation = 100.

Can you comment a bit more on the original image and camera parameters (JPEG or RAW, Picture Style, WB, AF mode and location, etc) and the processing applied including the software? I think this image has a lot more potential that can be harvested with a different approach to processing, if desired.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Overall I like it, Allen, but I would do some serious cropping. I think you're in love with the garden section experience and tried to recreate that, but compositionally it's too much. The subject here is the statue and it's competing with the brightly lit tree at the top. I would crop just above the row of flowers across the bottom edge and just below that tree, making it a landscape orientation and centering on the statue with the red grasses as a nice background for her. Sometimes less is more?

allanj Loc: New York City

Thanks for your interest and comments; I will answer your questions as fully as I can. The picture was taken in RAW, and opened, cropped and tweaked in Adobe Camera Raw. It was then exported to PS. The cropping was quite minor. For WB, I used daylight and then fine-tuned. In ACR's HSL I decreased the luminance moderately for red and yellow, and increased the saturation a smidgen for green. In PS, I increased the contrast slightly and sharpened using smart sharpen.

Your main concern is sharpness, and I am not sure what I could (should?) have done differently -- other than use a tripod. For focusing, I just use the single center point and then recompose. I am sure that I focused on the statue (or at least would be very upset with myself if I didn't). 1/90th of a second with IS should be able to give a sharp focus. Of course, the f4.5 doesn't help with the sharpness, but I was at ISO 500, and was reluctant to go any higher. And, as I mentioned above, I sharpened in PS. I could go back and try upping the numbers of smart sharpen. (Actually, I might try doing that this evening.)

Again, thanks for your interest, and I will be interested in any suggestions.

Allan

allanj Loc: New York City

I appreciate your comments and interest. Cropping out the thin row of flowers or bushes at the bottom probably should have been a no-brainer for me. I did crop it out when I printed the photo for framing. Cropping out the tree at the top and making the picture a horizontal is a tougher issue. It basically makes a different picture than what I was intending -- which is not to say it isn't a better picture. I tried it, but need to think it over before I adopt the suggestion. As for the tree that you think is too bright, I have a confession! I had lightened it somewhat, thinking that it balanced and complemented the statute. Originally, it just looked like a dark blob. You would probably say that was a mistake, and you may be right. I will try reversing or modifying that change and see what I think. Thanks again for taking the time to comment.
Allan

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Allan - it's hard to create an apples to apples comparison, but I happened to be working on images from a 135mm lens and I saw I have a fountain in this work. Here's a merged crop at 100% of your image next to mine. When I say yours isn't sharp, this is what I mean, download and view attachment.

I would go back through your work flow and assure sharpening was applied in your workflow. First, the CR2 file comes into Adobe with zero sharpening from the file and Camera RAW defaults a bare minimum setting of 25 to all RAW imports, on a scale of 0 to 100. My side by side image is DPP's raw editor with a setting of 4 on a scale of 0 to 10. I shot a 7D for a few years and edited with LR. Within LR I'd use a sharpening setting at 40 to 50 (same scale as Camera RAW) which corresponds to the +4 sharpening value in DPP. The answer to the riddle may exist elsewhere, including subsequent noise processing; but it seems to my eyes, your processing has unnecessarily softened the details of the image. I guess I'd have to see the unprocessed original to confirm it was sharply focused before the processing.

(Download)

joehel2 Loc: Cherry Hill, NJ

I really like everything about the photo but I would like it better with the crop Larry suggested. Thanks for posting it.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

I do like this image. I think the setting for the statue is beautiful and is as much a part of the story as the statue - given the fact that the image shows the "lady" turned toward the garden and not toward the viewer. My only concern is that row of out-of-focus stuff across the bottom. But you say you've already done that. Converting this to a landscape would, in my opinion, ruin the shot. Or, as you say, make it a different image than you intended. I really like the golden tree above her. It's nice and adds to the image.

As to the sharp focus, when I look at the thumbnail I see the statue and the yellow tree as being definitely in-focus. However, when I enlarge the DL, they aren't as sharp. I wondered if this was because you uploaded a small image and we're over-enlarging it? (I can't tell how large it is, so that might not be right.) I assume that seen at normal viewing distance, the print looks just fine.

allanj Loc: New York City

Thanks for looking and for providing feedback. Allan

allanj Loc: New York City

Thanks for giving me this feedback. I also like the golden tree, and that is one of the reasons I am not initially enthusiastic about a severe crop. As for the focus, I had not seen it as a problem before posting, but now understand it is not as sharp as it could be. I uploaded a full-size jpg, so uploading a small image is not the problem. As was suggested above, perhaps the noise reduction setting was part of the problem, and I will investigate this in the next couple of days.
Thanks again for taking the time to comment.
Allan

raymondh Loc: Walker, MI

I agree with this crop suggestion.

mcveed Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia (between trips)

I like the composition as it is(except for the OOF fringe along the bottom) but I would back off the brightening of the yellow leaves near the top as they compete for attention. I have viewed the image at 100% and I think the apparent softness of the statue is caused by too much contrast and over sharpening. There are definite haloes around the statue suggestive of over processing. I suggest starting over from the original raw and doing all your processing while viewing at 100%. I also strongly suggest you sharpen last. I convert my raw files to TIFFs using DXO Photolab with sharpening set low. I do most of the general editing in DXO while viewing at 100% and then store the TIFF in Lightroom. I prefer to sharpen in Lightroom because of the mask which confines sharpening to where you want it and minimizes sharpening any noise that might be in the blank areas. I usually save the sharpening step until export since different uses dictate different levels of sharpness.

10MPlayer Loc: California

Agree.

10MPlayer Loc: California

The statue looks sharp to me in download. I'm not sure what you're seeing.

-edit -- I saw your side by side example. Yeah there is a big difference in sharpness. I hadn't zoomed in on the download.

allanj Loc: New York City

I just realized that I had not thanked you for your helpful follow-up post. The side-by-side images illustrate that my image should be sharper. As you and others have suggested, I will redo my processing, and see if I can get a better result. I appreciate the time you have put in helping me to improve my image and technique.
Allan