This is a test. This is only a test...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Jarrell, Jan 3, 2006.

  1. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    of the Conley sharpening methods.. :biggrin:
    As you younger folks may have already heard, one of the things to get untrustworthy with age, is eyesight. While there are other things, I agree, this is a family safe website and we won't go into that. But lately I've been wondering if my sharpening method is ok..
    54362149.
    This was made with my D100, Sigma 70-200mm zoom, Canon 500D, tripod and self timer, indoors, raw. Light was provided by one large strobe to camera left and a white fill card to the right. Exposure was 1/160th second at f/32. I know there are many variables, perhaps too many, things such as image compression in Photoshop and the amount of sharpening applied, not to mention the lenses used.
    But, is this shot sharp enough to you?
    Show me a good sharp image you have and tell me what it was made with and under what circumstances please.
    Jarrell
     
  2. It looks fine to my 47 year old eyes.

    Granted I don't really like ultra sharpness in images. Or should I say any hint of halos, which I do not see here. I do however see lots of well defined detail.
     
  3. Baywing

    Baywing

    Feb 22, 2005
    CT USA
    It looks ok, but I think it could be sharper. I'm going to say that I think the problem is with the aperture, f32 is just too small to get maximum sharpness. With the tiny apertures, the diffraction errors now effect a larger percentage of the image than at wider openings, and you just don't get the maximum sharpness out of the lens.
     
  4. jfenton

    jfenton

    Jan 26, 2005
    Haverhill, MA
    On My Monitor

    It looks perfect. I wouldn't want it any sharper.

    I'm finding more and more lately when I look at home vs work (LCD vs CRT) there is a considerable difference in apparent sharpness. On my CRT it's perfect.
     
  5. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    Hmmmmm.... ok. Thanks! Baywing, you're more than likely right about the f32 part. I was going for max dof but I may have hurt sharpness in doing so. I may reshoot it at f/8 or 11 and see how it does.
    Jarrell
     
  6. Gale

    Gale

    978
    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    Looks fine here Jarrell.

    But are my "older than you eyes" a fair test :>)))))

    I really like dandy lion fuzz. Have yet to get a good pic of one yet.
    So will take your clue on settings :>)))))

    He Jarrell that D200 is faster than a snake...LOLOL
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 3, 2006
  7. Commodorefirst

    Commodorefirst Admin/Moderator Administrator

    May 1, 2005
    Missouri
    Jarrell,

    Drug the image to my desktop and even when viewed at 350% on this little file I couldn't see any sharpening artifacts so I say maybe try adding a bit more. Although I would never have noticed this image as being not sharp. Great lighting and exposure! Bravo

    Wade
     
  8. Flew

    Flew

    994
    Jan 25, 2005
    Alabama
    Jarrell,

    I have to echo what most of the other posters have said. It could probably be a tad sharper, but then it might look sharpened. As it is it looks good, and it doesn't scream 'I've been sharpened!!'. I like it just the way it is.
     
  9. K-loader

    K-loader

    140
    May 31, 2005
    Maryland, USA
    Jarrell,

    It looks plenty sharp to me. It’s kind of hard to explain, but I think if it were sharper it would detract from the soft subject (no pun intended). Great exposure.

    Below is one where I used the OOF sapling to accentuate the one in focus. D100 image with the 70-200VR @200mm hand held, f/4.5, 1/400s natural light. Converted NEF in CS2 in 16bit, applied a pass Neat Image on the full size image to tame the accidental ISO 1000 grain:smile: , reduced to displayed size using the bicubic-sharper resampling option, then one more mild pass in Neat Image using mild noise reduction and sharpening, and finally converted to 8bit.

    54369671.
     
  10. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    You gotta D200, Gale! Wow, I can't keep up! :smile:
    Jarrell
     
  11. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    Thanks Wade, I appreciate you doing that!
    Jarrell
     
  12. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    Dan, one of these days I'm going to REALLY learn how to use Neat Image. I've never fully understood the program and you've certainly gotten beautiful results with it.
    Thanks for your input.
    Jarrell
     
  13. This looks perfect to me Jarrell! Dandelions aren't supposed to be sharp! Furry animals aren't sharp either! I recently posted a squirrel picture and after my usual sharpening, he looked like a porcupine, so I eased back a little. Sometimes I really think we go overboard with "technical" sharpness and don't take into account the characteristics of the image.
     
  14. Jarrell, here is one I posted recently
    Shot with my recently re-discovered 50mm Ai f/1.4 (on my D1x).
    Tripod mounted, manual exposure at 1.0 sec and f/4.0 with a touch of flash.
    That 30 year old MF lens is really amazing - razor-sharp (the original full-size version, at least).

    original.

    Here is a pbase galery with some more test shots with it: http://www.pbase.com/ripps22/50
     
  15. Jarrell

    Jarrell

    Feb 13, 2005
    Macon, Ga.
    Thank you Roman and Janet for your comments!
    Fritz, that's a beautiful shot and I think it has juuuuuuusssst the right amount of sharpness. Thanks for posting it.
    Jarrell
     
  16. Baywing

    Baywing

    Feb 22, 2005
    CT USA
    Jarrell, I don't think you need to go all the way down to f8-11, f16-22 would probably do. As a general rule, I try to stay 2 stops in from either end. If I need to go to the outer limits for an effect, I go knowing the pitfalls.
     
  17. K-loader

    K-loader

    140
    May 31, 2005
    Maryland, USA
    Jarrell, Based on the samples I’ve seen of you work overt he years, I don't think you need any help all getting results, but let me share this:

    I’m no expert in using Neat Image (NI), but I’ve become comfortable with it over the last couple of years. Whether you are comfortable navigating around in NI’s settings or not, I’ve found that applying the results selectively is the key to any success I’ve had with the software. Most often I make a duplicate of the layer before applying NI which allows me to simply adjust the opacity of the layer to easily minimize the effects of the filter to my liking, and/or apply a mask to the filtered layer and brush in or out selected areas. I very often apply the same technique for applying USM to selective parts of an image.
     
  18. Looks good to me, but I'd say it could do with a wee touch more sharpening, however, one must take into account that I love pics razor sharp (hey, each to their own)... I would like to see the same process on an f/16-22 as mentioned.
    Winter in Jawja = shooting weeds indoors!!??? I hate winter for this fact alone! *LOL* Either send me some sunshine on snow or else git spring here in a hurry.... My camera is collecting dust....
     
  19. It's not a cactus it's a dandelion so that sharpening looks great to me on my 22" LaCie CRT monitor. You have done well Jarrell and it is a nice looking image.
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Prints vs screen images as the final test General Discussion May 26, 2017
Test more snout get you General Discussion Jul 2, 2016
Test your RGB perception General Discussion Jun 15, 2016
Lens test - shot with an air pistol General Discussion Jan 2, 2016
Filters Saved My Butt, Again!!! (AKA Desmond's drop filter test of destruction) General Discussion Nov 7, 2015