Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Lighting & Studio Techniques | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2011 · Blurry Photos at f22 question
  
 
alaskalive
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


This may be one of the craziest questions you ever read.. but,
Recently I got a black, grey, white target to set white balance.

When I use my 2 alien bees 800s, canon 60d, canon 24-70 2.8.. hand held..
In the past I always got clear, crips photos..
But doing the settings to get the histogram correct with the target... all my photos.. the eyes are not crisp..

Shooting at:
Shutter Speed 250
f16, f22
iso 100
54 mm and others. Even at 70mm.

Does the fstop settings have anything to do with Crispness, sharpness?



Dec 11, 2011 at 09:16 PM
Bruce Sawle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


F22 will more then likely be the softest aperture to shot at due to diffraction. Most lenses are optimized for sharpness between f4-f8. The more you stop down past f11the more diffraction will impact sharpness.


Dec 11, 2011 at 09:28 PM
alaskalive
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


Bruce Sawle wrote:
F22 will more then likely be the softest aperture to shot at due to diffraction. Most lenses are optimized for sharpness between f4-f8. The more you stop down past f11the more diffraction will impact sharpness.


Thank you so much for your help...
Now I have to go back to the drawing board..
Figure out how to get great photos, white balanced using the ab800s, and my setup.

Atleast now I know why the test photos were all blurred



Dec 11, 2011 at 09:48 PM
cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


Set aperture at f/8 then adjust power of lights up from min power.


Dec 11, 2011 at 11:33 PM
alohadave
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


alaskalive wrote:
Atleast now I know why the test photos were all blurred


Not necessarily. You could just be shaky. Post up a 100% crop and an uncropped version for comparison.



Dec 12, 2011 at 01:11 AM
alaskalive
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


alohadave wrote:
Not necessarily. You could just be shaky. Post up a 100% crop and an uncropped version for comparison.
\

Will do all posted here..
But, I forgot, using my 70-200 was always crisp for portraits, I forgot, the 24-70 is NOT IS.. only usm.

You could be right.. I may be too shaky for the NON is lens.
At any rate, going to start at f8, low light on AB800s.. and work up..
Will work up a post of the photo as well.





Dec 12, 2011 at 03:17 AM
alaskalive
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


alohadave wrote:
Not necessarily. You could just be shaky. Post up a 100% crop and an uncropped version for comparison.




FULL SIZE JPEG FROM RAW
Above is for download.

Below is reduced to 1000 pixels wide.
Soft eyes.
exif is entact



OH SHOOT, AFTER I LOOKED AT THE EXIF.. I SHOT THIS WITH MY 70-200..IS, USM..so possibly I had the is on the wrong setting.
Updated, I checked the settings on the lens, I had all correct for distance, is and af.



Dec 12, 2011 at 03:40 AM
alohadave
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


That picture is tack sharp. No blurriness that I can see. Look at the hairs, they are a dead giveaway that you nailed the focus on this shot. The eyes are in focus and that is the most important part.


Dec 12, 2011 at 05:30 AM
BrianO
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


alaskalive wrote:
...Soft eyes. ...exif is entact

http://www.akfamilyphoto.com/ul/IMG_0077sm.jpg


alaskalive wrote:
...I SHOT THIS WITH MY 70-200..IS, USM.


Are you saying the eyes in ^ this ^ image look blurry to you? They look tack sharp to me. Her eyelashes, the reflections of the lights in her eyes, etc. -- all clear as a bell.

Maybe something's wrong with your monitor.

Here's a 100% crop from your raw image:








Dec 12, 2011 at 06:05 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



dmacmillan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


Why are you shooting at f16/f22? Why are you pixel peeping?


Dec 12, 2011 at 02:11 PM
cgardner
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


More significantly you have finally captured and posted a correctly exposed and color balanced image with more flattering butterfly lighting.

Kudos for that, you are making progress



Dec 12, 2011 at 02:50 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


+1 @ f16/f22 ... you don't need to be stopped down that far.
If you are concerned at sharpness, f16 & f22 are counter-productive to your goals.

Differing opinions will abound, but most would agree that 5.6, 8, 11 are much better choices for sharpness.

Also, contrast and sharpness are not the same thing. Shooting at 16/22 will introduce diffraction that will reduce your contrast/sharpness

Here's a link that you can use to compare your lens against itself (or other lenses) @ the different apertures. The link is for 5.6 vs. 16 ... just "mouse over" the image to get the arrow to point/change so you can see the difference. I chose 100mm focal length as an arbitrary portait FL ... you can choose others as well.

Each lens has its own "sweet spot" for sharpness which is typically 2-3 stops from wide open ... but not always. You lens is probably close to "typical" where wide open is a bit softer, 2-3 stops down are sharpest, f16 and smaller soften up again.

That being said ... you won't always want to shoot at the "sharpest" aperture for your lens ... but it is good to know where it is. Then you can choose whether you want your subject "sharper" or softer". Probably more critical than how "sharp" it is ... is how well focused it is ... as others have mentioned "the eyes" are very important to be well focused.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=242&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=3&LensComp=242&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=6







Dec 12, 2011 at 03:47 PM
dmacmillan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


RustyBug wrote:
+1 @ f16/f22 ... you don't need to be stopped down that far.
If you are concerned at sharpness, f16 & f22 are counter-productive to your goals.

Just to clarify, while tecnical considerations are important, my main concern is more aesthetic. It doesn't matter as much when shooting in front of a plain background, but I do think there's a subtle difference even here. The relative sharpness of the ears and shoulders determines how much they compete with the face. I just prefer the look of a portrait with a medium telephoto (85mm on FF) at f 4 or even 2.8.



Dec 12, 2011 at 04:22 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


Regarding contrast vs. sharpness ... this is with a boost in contrast only, no sharpening applied. It's not ideal, but to show that your RAW image isn't exhibiting unsharp as much as you might be thinking, but instead a bit lower contrast than maybe you are expecting to see ... just guessing.

Take a test shot or two to compare f5.6 or f8 vs. f16 ... I think you'll find it more to your liking.

HTH







Dec 12, 2011 at 04:25 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


+1 @ aesthetics of portaits regarding DOF and drawing your viewers eye where you want it to go ... and not go. While it may not be as "thin" as 2.8 ... going from 16 down to 5.6 will be a marked difference in DOF also ... but with a little more "safety" factor for now. Before long, he'll be wanting an f 1.0.

Since his question began as a technical one regarding sharpness, I tried to keep it in that realm ... but yes, there are more implications (technical & aesthetic) regarding aperture choice than just sharpness.

you won't always want to shoot at the "sharpest" aperture for your lens







Dec 12, 2011 at 05:20 PM
cordellwillis
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


print, then judge


Dec 12, 2011 at 08:56 PM
pr4photos
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


Is this soft? No, its tack sharp. If you think otherwise, there is something wrong with your eyes/monitor!


Dec 14, 2011 at 09:01 AM
BrianO
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Blurry Photos at f22 question


I really think you need to get your monitor calibrated.

You had been posting shots that were too dark, but it seems they didn't look too dark on your monitor.

Now that you're using an exposure target your images aren' too dark, but now you're seeing them as soft when we see them as sharp.

That suggests that the brightness and/or contrast of your monitor may be incorrectly set.

On the other hand, maybe we don't know what your mean by "soft." Maybe you're using the term in a way that's different from how we use it. In another thread you said you wanted skin tones "soft, not white" -- two terms that refer to different aspects. Maybe it would help if you try to explain in more detail what it is that you think is wrong with the eyes in the above photo.



Dec 14, 2011 at 09:54 AM





FM Forums | Lighting & Studio Techniques | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password