JW from PA

Hi all, I have a question and I am sure I will get the answer here.
Question:
When viewing a photo on the computer it looks ok but when zooming in, the image gets fuzzy. When cropping, it may or may not stay sharp. After taking a photo I look at it in camera and it looks fine, but zooming in it looks fuzzy.
I noticed when I download an image here on this site, it is crisp and clear even when zooming in.

I know I do not understand very much about cropping a photo, and I have a whole heap of learning to do about photography, so maybe someone will chime in with some thoughts on this.

Thanks and
Semper Fi,
Joe W.

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

Google Chuck Close. His paintings are mosiacs. There used to be a couple of his at the Philly Art Museum - I don't know if still there. If you stand a few feet away all you see are small circles/squares and no recognizable image but back up 50 feet and the image is there. That's analogous to cropping - the closer you are the less of the overall image you see. Digital images are made up of millions of these small squares and when you zoom in enough you see them. You should try to see a Close painting - it's amazing - start as far away as possible and then walk closer and closer. That's zooming in with your feet!!

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Many of the images here are high pixel count. The "fuzziness" is more pronounced with lower pixel count images.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

You might want to post an example so we're all speaking from the same example. But, to your question, most image browsing software will initially display the image scaled to fill the screen. A 24MP image at 6000x4000-pixels is scaled down to fill a screen with resolution 1920x1080-pixels, a screen with less than one-third the resolution of the image file on the wide-side of the image.

When you click and view the details of the image, you're viewing software is typically zooming to a 1:1 view of the image where 1 pixel in the image resolution is mapped to 1 pixel on the monitor. Cropping a sharp image that is sharp in the details should look fine in the resulting crop where you're viewing exactly 1920x1080-pixels within the 24MP image file. But, an image that is not sharp in the details, will not "hold up" when cropped into those details.

Now, the specifics as to 'why' an image is not sharp in the details can be many and varied. Rather than generalities, here's where a specific example would help so we're all speaking from the same example to then analyze the image and identify possible reasons and possible corrective actions.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

These articles should help with the basics of resolution and the properties of pixels:
https://digital-photography-school.com/understand-pixels-resolution-resize-photoshop/
https://www.exposureguide.com/resolution/

A downloaded photo on UHH will not stay "crisp" if you zoom in far enough, just like you found with your camera's playback screen. "Far enough" on UHH varies because photos are posted in varying sizes (the numbers of pixels wide and tall such as Longshadow mentioned).

I like ecobin's real-life example of Chuck Close mosaic art. At a certain point of "closeness," you are seeing something totally different than when viewed from across the room. Did you know that if you view a billboard up close, it is just dots with lots of white space between them? Normal viewing distance for a billboard is not up close!

Cropping: your image starts with a finite number of pixels. Cropping removes pixels so in theory you can't enlarge a cropped photo as big as the original (Chg_Canon discusses when/how it will look OK). But even uncropped, at some point of enlarging, the photo is not going to look as sharp because you are trying to fill too large a space with your finite number of pixels. This is why automated printing centers, like at Costco or Walgreen's, will warn that a photo has too low a resolution to print at the size you've requested.

More on resolution: there is a difference when viewing on a monitor vs. printing, and there is also a difference among monitors now that there are very high resolution models available.

These concepts are not particularly easy to understand, and you're going to get an even wider variety of explanations than already posted

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

How far are you zooming in? At 1:1 or 100% it should not appear fuzzy or very little fuzziness, otherwise you may have focus issues? At 2:1 or 3:1 you will start to notice "fuzziness" and beyond that pixelation...what type of camera/MP are you shooting? Lens? There will be a limit how far you can crop before you start to see jaggies.

JW from PA

I have a Canon T4i and using a Tamron 17-50 2.8 most of the time. I have been practicing and I think after reading several post and watching a couple videos I find that most of my problem is missing the proper focusing point. When I get it right all is well, when missed it is not good.

I will continue to take suggestions and practice getting better at focusing on the eyes or a spot on an object that I am taking a photo of.

I also have put my camera on ai servo mode and and AP mode and it is helping quite abit. I will post a couple picture to get some constructive opinions.

Thanks to all for your help.

Semper Fi,
Joe W.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

A lot also depends on what subjects you are shooting and under what conditions. Post a sample of the problem is the best route to go.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

You must realize that on a 1920 X 1080 monitor, you are displaying ~2 MP. That means you are not displaying 90% of the pixels in the image if you have ~20MP camera. When you zoom in, you start to see the remaining pixels.

If you are zooming in the same amount on your photos as you do on ones you download from here, it is that your photos aren't as sharp as those you downloaded, but are good enough for computer viewing.

If you post an example here (you must use store image and Add Attachment) we can better detrmine if that is the case. If we can examine the EXIF data we can decide what you need to do to get better photos.

JoeM845

Please do post an example image at full resolution. People here are just taking wild (well, maybe not so wild) stabs at diagnosing the unseen image.

When you enlarge the viewed image (zoom in) many technical faults become more apparent. The term "put under a microscope" comes to mind. For example, you might be seeing the focus problems you hypothesized. They are less visible when the image is smaller. Similar effect with motion blur and camera shake.

JW from PA

Duck
Attached file:
(Download)

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Hey Joe - recognize that a CR2 file is a Canon RAW file, requiring specialized editors to even open and view (and to edit) this attachment. Everyone who suggested you provide an example was meaning to provide one of your edited RAW files converted to a JPEG or instead a JPEG straight from the camera. Until processed by a RAW editor, all RAW images will lack both sharpness and vibrate colors. This particular example exhibits a few issues and opportunities:

1) Get closer. The screen capture is a crop from the 100% view of the image. If the image was a bit sharper, this crop would be more interesting. But, most images benefit from filling the frame without needing to zoom to a 1:1 view of the content.

2) Use a shutterspeed that is a minimum of "one over the focal length" of the lens. Here, the 50mm lens, having no IS-support, should be at least 1/50. Given the crop-sensor body, that speed should be multiplied by the 1.6 crop factor for a recommended minimum shutterspeed of 1/80 (when hand-holding). If shooting from a tripod, just get the shutter fast enough to freeze any subject motion, if applicable.

3) Research the 'sweet spot' for your lens(es). The EF 50 f/1.8 is a wonderful lens from about f/2.4 onward, even if the maximum aperture is f/1.8.

4) Use the lowest ISO possible, given the shutterspeed and aperture considerations. ISO-200 would be fine, except the suggestion to use both a faster shutter and smaller aperture that would require a higher ISO in the low light of this example.

5) Research and consider AI Servo for continuous focus operation at all times using your DSLR. Research Back-Button Focus (BBF) that leverages AI Servo.

6) Review your in-camera customizations for the Canon Standard picture style. I'd raise the Sharpness to 4 and would set the contrast to +1 rather than -1, but these settings apply only to the JPEG and can be revised / refined in your RAW editor.

7) Consider too shooting in bursts rather than single individual frames. This requires something like low-speed continuous on the drive mode, if available from your camera. You end up with more images to review, but the likelihood of 1 or multiple frames being in sharp focus is higher than just 1 single shot, giving you the option to select the best and dump the rest.

Don't be discouraged that ever frame is not 100% sharp. It's takes practice, practice, practice mixed with reading and research and review of your images, and then still more practice, practice, practice of the ideas you found via your research.

(Download)

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Comprehensive, clear, outstanding post, Paul

JoeM845

JW,

Quick look in PS. I would think it would be fairly dark in PA on 2/20 at 6:45PM (camera clock set?). Exif data shows a EF 50mm II lens and 1/40 second with ISO 200.

I don't have any experience with your rig. The EF 50mm II lens is not very expensive, but a quick scan of reviews shows people happy with it ("for the price"). I would think that the image would be sharper if that lens were clean front-and-back, un-filtered, and performing to spec (and everything else was done perfectly).

I see the image looking soft long before I start to see pixelation. I don't think the resolution is causing the problem.

Part of the problem could be camera movement. General rule-of-thumb is that the exposure speed should be greater than the lens length. 50mm would lead to 1/50 second or faster (image stabilization may help). If this happens on many of your shots, you might try the same shot at 1/40 and at 1/200 (there-abouts) to see if the faster shot looks sharper. You might also compare hand-held versus tripod mounted to see if camera movement may be contributing. I did not notice any elongation that would suggest movement in a particular direction.

I tried to check focus by looking at parts of the picture whose distances varied. I would expect to find something sharp if the focus was off. I really didn't find anything.

I can't provide and answer, just some probabilities. Hopefully something here gives you an idea to sparks someone else with more Canon knowledge to chime it.

Another thing to think about is visiting a local camera club. They are typically a bunch of people who love to talk about cameras and post processing - even paying money to do it.

JW from PA

I have a couple more photo's to look at. These were were taken at about 20-30 feet up the tree.
By the way, I am in Florida and will leaving to go back home on March 5th.
Thanks for all your input on this subject.

Semper Fi,
Joe W.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)