photos not sharp.....why???

<p>hi folks</p>

<p>just came back from a trip to EThiopia--took 100's of pix as usual but have to say i am very dissappointed with the quality of them--they just dont seem sharp--i have been on plenty of trips over the past 2 years with this camera and never have the pix come out like this--ok so its not a massive loss of quality but enough to be noticeable to me especially when compared with other pix i have take on other trips--the settings were the same are for other trips--av priority mode, evaluative metering, auto focus, image stabilisation on, white balance sunny or haze normally ---i have a circular polarizing filter on ot that has been on it last few trips now--bit scratched at this stage but not sure that is the problem---i have attached a few pix ---any ideas on why the quality is poor this time round?</p>

<p>cheers in advance</p><div></div>

<p>You had a polarizing filter on full-time regardless? What camera? What ISO? </p>

<p><img src="../photo/13294632" alt="" /><img src="../photo/13294652" alt="" /></p>

<p><a href="../photo/13294592">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294592</a><br>

<a href="../photo/13294652">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294652</a><br>

<a href="../photo/13294612">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294612</a><br>

<a href="../photo/13294552">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294552</a><br>

<a href="../photo/13294632">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294632</a><br>

<a href="../photo/13294572">http://www.photo.net/photo/13294572</a></p>

<p>hi Rob</p>

<p>iso was automatic<br>

canon eos 450d --17-85mm lens<br>

i normally leave the polariser on unless it gets really dark and need to take off--have always done that and worked out ok until now</p>

<p>I'm assuming you're not using a lens hood while shooting? A lot of these images are low-contrast, which can take on the appearance of "not sharp." A few minutes in your post-production software of choice should certainly help there.</p>

<p>However, you're choice to use a polarizing filter all the time, regardless of conditions or need, is certainly not helping your images. Especially in times when a hood would be more appropriate. (For example, the obvious lens flare in this image: http://www.photo.net/photo/13294632)</p>

<p>Are you shooting JPG files or RAW? If JPG, what in-camera settings do you have configured (saturation, contrast, sharpening, etc)?</p>

<p>Most of them look fine to me. Some have a bit of veiling flare from back lighting; others need a touch of normal sharpening. Last one IS soft, but it was also taken at the slowest shutter speed.</p>

<p>Tom, I would have suggested that your shutter speeds for hand held photos were too slow and that camera movement was the problem but you have other shots at 1\200 & 1\400 second which are similarly afflicted. Sounds like a camera\lens problem. Take some shots without the filter on to eliminate that variable. If you still have a problem try another known good lens. Good luck & don't forget to come back to let us know how you resolved the problem. Ruined trip photos? Bummer! We feel your pain. Best, LM.</p>

<p>Rob--no i'm not using a lens hood (never have done). I am using the standard camera setting regarding saturation, contrast, sharpening, etc. I shoot in Large Jpg format (always have done)--i will try a high pass sharpen in corel paint shop pro and maybe increase saturation (i usually do this but normally from a better starting pic)</p>

<p>Yes will try take a some pix without the filter and different lens (i took some with my 50mm lens and they came out ok--no filter on that)--but that filter has been on in mexico a few months ago at same settings and pix were great (and havent used the camera much since then)</p>

 

<p>1/50 second at F7.1 for one of your pics (632) ???<br />I'd expect at that speed to get some blurring due to hand shake. I also notice on that picture there does seem to be a massive flare over the boys face. I can't understand why you don't use a lens hood.</p>

<p>No hood? Asking for flare. Putting a multi-layer double-glass filter (the CP filter) out on the front of the lens, without a hood? <em>Guaranteeing</em> flare under many circumstances, and loss of contrast. Doing that with slow shutter speeds makes matters worse, because of the camera and subject motion blur. The presence of the CP filter is also robbing at least a stop of light from the autofocus system, making it less able to nail focus. All of these things could be combining to make a soft mess of the photos. Good sharpening strategy in post, though, could really help out some, here.</p>

<p>I'm not doubting your findings, you should know better than us whether there was some sort of deterioration between your previous travel photos and the latest ones. Unfortunately, we would have to make a comparison between both sets of pictures. What we can do is only surmise at what could have caused the deterioration.<br>

From personal experience, I can list some of the things that have contributed to my blurry, or low resolution pictures. A polarizing filter acts almost like a ND filter in that you lose about 2 stops of light. If your camera was set to AV, that 2 stops loss will give you a lower shutter speed, which might cause camera-shake. A<strong> high ISO </strong>usually over 400, is bound to not only increase noise, but also decrease the resolution of your images. <strong>Hurried shots </strong>without taking the time to choose the proper <strong>focusing-point</strong>. <strong>Glare</strong>, shooting into the Sun without a hood will degrade the image. <strong>Low battery, dirty lens or filter</strong>. <strong>Auto ISO. </strong><br>

Last but not least <strong>faulty/malfunctioning </strong>lens, camera, or editing software. You could check your lens against other lenses using one of those resolution charts. I use a plain calendar hanging on a wall in my living room. If the other lenses are working fine, but your 17-85 is not, then the lens is the problem. If all your lenses are not performing up to par, then it's the camera. If it's not the lens or the camera, check that the settings on your editing software did not change. </p>

<p>Here is, literally, a 2 second adjustment in Photoshop: Auto Contrast and UnSharp Mask. (Right side is unmodified crop).</p>

<div></div>

<p>Since he apparently has Paint Shop Pro it is a simple job of applying high-pass sharpening to all of the zillion photos he took ... not an enviable task I guess, unless he knows how to batch process. Alternatively the contrast function in 'brightness and contrast' tool as Rob suggests.<br>

I'm not sure that we should be horrified about him not using a lenshood because most these days, since they have to accomodate the wide angle end of the zoom, are really pretty pathetic immitation of a lenshood compared to the sort of hood I was 'brought up' with. I keep mine on for physical rather than light protection. But the idea of 'always' having a polariser on except when it gets dark is highly questionable to me and can lead to loss of shutter/aperture with its 1.5 stop reduction in light whatever mode one is working in.<br>

I wonder if one gets more critical with maturity and exposure to good photographs around us as technology improves, but can be sabotaged by no lenshood and use of filter. It is good we have quality editing programmes to rescue us.</p>

 

<p>hi folks<br>

thanks for the advice .</p>

<p>Might seem strange to not be using a lens hood but i honestly dont think my photos up to now would have been improved substantially by using one--maybe i am wrong, but my pix don't seem to have suffered from flare (as seen in one pic over the boys face)--and that was in places like nepal and mexico where there was intense sun--maybe i should look into getting one but they just seem so big and cumbersome!<br>

-also always had the polarising filter on in those places too--i was under the impression that the filter helped "bring out" the colours , especially in outdoor landscape photos. (i tend to take if off when indoors or light is low outside) -</p>

<p>-just checked my filter now and it is quite marked at this stage (lots of minute scratches but nothing much different from last trips)--a tad dirty too but not caked in filth!--maybe might be an idea to get a replacement..</p>

<p>so with corel paint shop pro my best option would be to apply "high pass sharpen" to the pix and maybe also increase saturation?</p>

<p>Rob are the two functions you applied to that photo in corel paint shop pro??</p>

 

<p>1. Only use the polarizer when it affects the creative outcome. They don't always benefit your photography, if they did, they would be incorporated into the lens assembly by the manufacturer. The very best optics are achieved using no filter, every piece of glass you put between the front element and your subject reduces optical quality (but not necessarily image quality).</p>

<p>2. Shoot in RAW or at least RAW+JPEG and make Canon's Digital Photo Professional your first stop in post-processing workflow. The basic RAW tools in that software are specifically designed for the images your camera produces and, in my opinion, do a better job of developing those images. Some swear by Lightroom or Paint Shop Pro, I use Lightroom and Photoshop but <em>after</em> initial processing in DPP. The latest version of DPP includes a three-stage sharpening mask as well, giving you even more control over the sharpening process. The software came with your camera and it's not just a silly, consumer tool, it really works.</p>

<p>3. If the lens came with a hood, use it. If it didn't, attempt to cast a shadow on the lens face with your hand while keeping it out of the frame. I do this frequently, with a 1 foot x 1 foot piece of black foamcore, even when I'm using a lens hood.</p>

<p>4. Make sure your optics are clean, including filters.</p>

<p>This may not be what you want to hear but I assure you, if you follow these four steps the image quality of your photographs will improve.</p>

<p>[[but my pix don't seem to have suffered from flare (as seen in one pic<br />over the boys face)]]</p>

<p>I disagree. I think a couple of the photos you've presented here suffer from a loss of contrast due to flare. It might not be as visible as the spot on the boys face but it's there. The fact that the filter was dirty and scratched only increased the possibility of flare. </p>

<p>When you were taking these photos were you turning the polarizing filter and seeing a change in the viewfinder? By change, I mean, were you able to see the polarizing effect before pressing the shutter button? </p>

<p>I agree that you should remove the CPL. It does not bring out colors in general, although it sometimes can bring out blues in skies. It is extra glass and a loss of light. Use it when you need it, and leave it off when you don't. Also, you did not say what kind of CPL it is. If it is an inexpensive one, the degradation of image quality could be substantial. If you are in an environment where you want lens protection (I don't want to start yet another iteration of the endless filter wars), get a multicoated UV filter of at least moderate quality, e.g., a Hoya HMC or something in that range. In high-flare situations, you will have to remove that too.</p>

<p>Petal lens hoods (the kind you get with zoom lenses) are pretty lousy (they have to be, to accommodate the shortest focal length of the zoom), but they are better than nothing. I would always use one in bright sun.</p>

<p>Other than those two issues, I would suggest trying some shots under controlled circumstances to make sure things (like AF) are working as they are. Do it at home, or someplace where you can take your time. Make sure that the shutter speed is fast and the lens is not wide open. If those are good, then you know that the issue is not your camera.</p>

<p>While it is certainly true that you can get both better images and more control by shooting RAW, I would not spend much time worrying about software. You can get superb images with Paint Shop Pro, and if you shoot RAW, you can get superb images with either LR or DPP. From what you have posted, I think the issue here is the original capture. You can clean it up a little in software (yes, PAint Shop Pro will do what other posters have suggested, sharpening using either unsharp mask or high-pass sharpening, and increasing contrast), and you should learn how to do those things, but you should also make sure the original captures are good.</p>

<p>I agree with JKeff, loose the polarizer unless the situation warrants the use of it and ALWAYS use the lens hood - as others have stated, it helps control flare (which affects contrast) and it helps protect your front element against physical damage. IMO your shutter speeds were way too low considering the amount of light you were dealing with.</p>

<p>Just to reiterate what's already been said:</p>

<p>- Lose the polarizer (unless you want to saturate skies or eliminate reflections in glass or water)<br>

- Always use a hood<br>

- Keep lens surfaces clean and scratch-free<br>

- Shoot in RAW</p>

<p>It's particularly important to follow this advice while shooting in harsh, full sunlit conditions such as those you were shooting in in Ethiopia.</p>

<p>How might the poster compare the ill effects of years with the same polarizer in a subjective and an objective way? Just from memory is not enough. Maybe there now is fungus inside the CP that is barely visible and can certainly not be seen if poster or anyone does not want to replace that admitted dingy filter even as it gets full and ever fuller of scratches ....</p>

<p>If a new CP filter (kept 99% of the time inside the bag) and a hood do not cure the problem, I think the lens or camera mount or ... may have been bumped somewhere in Mex-Afri-USA trips over time.</p>

<p>Gear just falls apart through use, as we all do.</p>

<p>How might the poster compare the ill effects of years with the same polarizer in a subjective and an objective way? Just from memory is not enough. Maybe there now is fungus inside the CP that is barely visible and can certainly not be seen if poster or anyone does not want to replace that admitted dingy filter even as it gets full and ever fuller of scratches ....</p>

<p>If a new CP filter (kept 99% of the time inside the bag) and a hood do not cure the problem, I think the lens or camera mount or ... may have been bumped somewhere in Mex-Afri-USA trips over time.</p>

<p>Gear just falls apart through use, as we all do.</p>

<p>Rob used Photoshop to do his sharpening, I used Canon Digital Photo Professional because you should have that... it comes with all Canon DSLRs and most of their P&Ss, as well. The adjustments I made took 30 seconds. I increased sharpness, increased contrast by 5%, and made a very slight reduction in the blue channel. I also filtered luminance noise slightly.</p>

<p>You may have been pleased with your previous results but the image you linked is better than I would expect from a kit lens with a dirty polarizer on it and no lens hood in mid-day-ish sun.</p>

<p>The histogram confirms you were a little over-exposed on this shot with a pile of pixels on the right side and a gap on the left.</p><div></div>

I wear polarized sunglasses.

And they always make African Americans look ashy, and dulls their hair. When in direct sun.

 

My circ pol filter does the same thing on camera.

 

The pic posted in op, looks like it was shot at a high iso on first glance.

<p>Everything Jeff Lear said, plus...</p>

 

<ol>

<li>Mind your shutter speed and keep it FASTER than the 1/lens_focal_length rule of thumb for handheld shots.</li>

<li>Use image stabilization for handheld shots (but NOT with a tripod).</li>

<li>Invest some serious "quality time" learning the fine art of sharpening and RAW processing.</li>

<li>Test your gear (including autofocus reliability) BEFORE you go on a big trip and verify it once you get there.</li>

<li>If you're going to use a filter, be selective with its application, and by all means buy one that's not scratched.</li>

</ol>