Am I going nuts? sharpness on D70

[paul_ulici1]

Ok, I got a D70 not long ago, and I've been playing with it, trying

to get the most out of it, but somehow the images just lack that

crispness that I see in other people's photos.

I did the backfocus test I found on a webpage and it doesn't seem to

have real terrible back-focus, but still... the image just doesn't

POP!... and it annoys the heck out of me. I understand that right

out of the camera they will be a bit less sharp and they need to be

processed, but I dunno, I somehow feel like I should expect better.

I was trying to create an immage for a photo contest and I'm not

sure this is the best example, but maybe you can give me your

opinions of what I may be doing wrong.

I took this with the speedlite covered and used a peanut to triger

an external flash through an umbrela so the light comes sideways.

The aperture was F18 and speed 1/500 (I had to increase the

apperture because the external flash doesn't have a way to decrease

power. The lens is the kit 18-70

colored image is out of the cam only cropped and resized, second is

after I played in photoshop with it. I realized it may be somewhat

underexposed, but the sharpness shouldn't be affected should it?<div></div>

[phule]

f/18 for that size sensor is getting into the diffraction-area.

 

Also, you could try using the USM filter in Photoshop.

[benoit_deshaies]

As Rob suggested, the USM (UnSharp Mask) filter in photoshop can make a big difference.<div></div>

[peter_nelson1]

I think digital cameras ARE soft, in general. I'm told this is because of the antialiasing filter, but the D70's antialiasing filter is one of the weaker ones on the market, so I don't know.<P>

 

In your case F/18 probably has a lot to do with your problem - you're really getting into diffraction territory there.<P>

 

<B>Everyone here says to use UnSharp Mask</B>. I'm sure when I'm in my 60's I'll consider Botox shots and facelifts, too, just like I use USM with my D100 and 20D, now. But in both cases people need to understand that it's just a <B>cosmetic illusion</B> that doesn't change the underlying realities. USM can make a not-so-sharp image <B>LOOK</B> sharper; but it cannot actually make it sharper! If the detail is not in the original because it was fuzzed out by the AA filter, or a cheap kit lens, or focussing error, you can USM 'til you're cyan in the face and you won't put that detail back, just as the Botox shot might make you look younger, but you won't BE younger.

[lex_jenkins]

I'd say backfocus, frontfocus or any other bugbear is unlikely to be the culprit here. Careful sharpening is essential to getting the best results from any digital camera.

 

Many of us who started out with compact P&S digicams found them to produce satisfactorily sharp photos using the in-camera settings - usually Low, Medium and High. Reportedly some digicams sharpened photos automatically without asking the user to choose. This affected both JPEGs and TIFFs on my Olympus C-3040Z (which didn't offer RAW). Reportedly the Fuji Frontier machines added a bit of sharpening. So our 4x6 snapshots looked plenty sharp.

 

With my D2H when I plan to shoot only JPEG-Fine photos for quick turnaround and media card capacity (I still have only a pair of 1 GB CF cards, which the D2H can burn through rapidly), I set the in-camera sharpening to the highest or next to highest settings. If I take care to avoid blown highlights in important areas, I get very good photos up to the camera's maximum native resolution at 300 ppi, especially from the DIY Kodak dye thermal-something kiosks.

 

When I shoot NEF files I always have to tweak them on the computer or they'll seem soft. And I really dislike the implementation of most USM. I've tried a couple of utilities that do pretty much nothing but sharpen the photo as a last step before printing - these seem to do a better job than the USM included with most image editors.

[ilkka_nissila]

What ISO setting did you use? The sharpness declines when you increase the ISO, so ISO 200 is the way to go for still life. Also, good exposure (lighter) wouldn't hurt. I never stop down more than f/11 on my D70, diffraction definitely may be at effect here.

 

Sharpening won't make detail that is lost come back but it will increase the MTF back to a higher level, which in most cases is inseparable from having the MTF high in the first place. With noisy shots (high ISO), you run into problems with USM increasing the noise to a more visible level, so this limits the use of sharpening, like with film.

[vivek iyer]

Paul, Better lighting (proper exposure) would definitely help. USM also cranks up the contrast and the light level. When you do this on an under exposed image the result is usuually with elevated noise.

 

I think keeping the Coconut in the front and sending the Melon to the background also help you- image wise as well as your occult experiments :-)

[chris m., central florida]

Your images may be soft because of your camera's settings. You can set a sharpness factor via the program menu.

 

As I view your image, two things jump out at me:

 

1. The image is underexposed. If I had to guess, I'd say by at least two stops. For f18, you need a siginificant amount of light. In this case, you may need to illumintate both objects seperately in order to achieve proper exposure, including ratios. Underexposure can definitely affect sharpness.

 

2. The image appears to have a very low contrast setting - probably right out of the camera. You can also adjust the D70's contrast setting. You can also boost contrast in PS.

 

The D70 seems to be predisposed to slight underexposure and low contrast images. Try adjusting these settings either in camera or in PS. Both can make your images appear slightly out of focus.

 

If you can shoot in RAW, you will have more exposure control.

 

Have fun experimenting, and good luck in the contest!

[chris m., central florida]

To add more detail to my above post... two stops of underexposure may be a bit much. I tend to use softboxes a lot, so to me I'd want more light, but I'd want it more evenly dispersed on my subjects. Direct flash may require less light to hit the subject if you are trying to keep the background dark.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>Am I going nuts? --Paul Ulici<br>

</em><br>

No youve stopped down too much, try to stay with f/11 or

larger. An aperture of f/18 is on the wrong side of the

aberrations v. diffraction compromise. Most prime Nikkors Ive

tested achieve their sweet spot a bit before f/5.6. Some at f/5.6

and a some around f/4.0. This is from tests on high resolution

film. Some zooms may like being stopped own to f/8.0. Anyway

better images are usually obtain at f/2.8~f/11.<br>

<br>

I just looked at some sample captures from a Canon EOS-1D Mk II

before deleting them and they were quite soft as they were

unaltered images. Unsharpened images from my D2H generally look

rather soft. This is typical of current DSLR(s). I had my own

moment of doubt and pain though I knew better. You will need to

sharpen most images. Those worrying about a lens being too sharp

for portraiture might try setting their DSLR for no in camera

sharpening. <br>

<br>

Im shooting with a pair of 1GB SanDisk Ex III CF cards. Ive

taken to shooting NEF, Large without JPG(s) and use Color Space

II. If I need sRGB images Ill use Image > Mode >

Convert to profile not Assign Profile in Photoshop. Im

using PS 7.0.1 and Nikon View 6.2.5 due to poverty. To create JPG(s)

for proof work I use IrfanView 3.97s batch mode (Free for

the download). Its not perfect but I dont need full

resolution JPG(s) at this time. I get 159 Large, uncompressed, NEF(s)

per 1GB CF card.<br>

<br>

I recommend that you down load IrfanView 3.97 and you will need

the companion plugins for v3.97. You can find it at tucows.com.

Here is a link...<br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.irfanview.com/" target="_new"><u>http://www.irfanview.com/</u></a>

<br>

<br>

Once at the IrfanViews home page you will find links to

Tucows. Remember you need the program and the additional plugins.<br>

<br>

To get a feel for sharpening you can press <Shift> +

<S>. Each time you do the image gets sharpened a little

more. Once you are tailoring an image for a particular use you

will use different method for each. Youll probably use PS

or some utility.<br>

<br>

Here are a couple of links regarding lithium-ion batteries. These

batteries need different care from the NiMH and NiCd(s) most of

us are used to...<br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm"

target="_new"><u>How to prolong lithium-based batteries</u></a><br>

<br>

<a href="http://www.batteryuniversity.com/partone-23.htm"

target="_new"><u>How to charge - when to charge table</u></a><br>

<br>

Not to worry, we all get sharper at this as we progress ;-)<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[ky4tki]

The picture is much underexposed. Most of the details are there, but you have to play a little to see them. The biggest problem with underexposed pictures is the noise. I played a little with curves and colors and I got the picture below. Given correct exposure to show all the details, and the image will look much sharper.

[greg s]

The under-exposed composition does have a Voyager like quality about it... the melon and coconut look like other worlds. I suspect this is what you're looking for. -Greg-

[david_h._hartman]

Occultation...<br>

<br>

The passage of a celestial body across a line between an observer

and another celestial object, as when the moon moves between

Earth and the sun in a solar eclipse.<br>

<br>

---<br>

<br>

Another question is calibration of your monitor? How bright is

your work area? Stuff like that.<br>

<br>

Maybe the f/18 aperture was required by the distance from one orb

to the other. Using the unsharp mask can cover diffraction some.

To get both sharp you can shoot on a tripod focusing on each,

take two shots, then over lay one and erase the soft image

allowing one to see both sharp images.<br>

<br>

Anyway try applying Filter > Sharpen > Unsharp Mask... to

your image.<br>

<br>

Here is a test where I clipped some of the very dark grays in the

background and punched the gamma using curves. Im not sure

of my CRT(s) calibration. Im not sure its in good

heath as it gets brighter when first turned on as it ages. Im

going to have to open it and see if I can turn down the sub-brightness.<br>

<br>

Heres my test...<br><div></div>

[greg s]

If cropping the image is ok (which seems to be the case), then another trick you can play (if some amount of underexposure is necesaery) is to have a monochromatic square off to the side. After the shot is taken you can use a noise reduction app like NeatImage to sample from the square, then perform both NR and sharpening in NI. -Greg-