Advice on soft picture

[alanrusso]

<p>Today I was taking some pictures at a mountain bike race, and a bunch of my non-action shots seem unacceptably

soft - I just don't understand why. Please see the attached photo. This was shot with a 5D, ISO400, 1/200,

f/5, 105mm using a 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM. The subjects aren't moving, the shutter speed was 2x the focal length,

the lens is clean and clear, IS is on, the ISO reasonable. The camera indicates the focal point being one of

the lead riders, and exposure is correct. Other pictures taken moments later, are tack sharp. Throughout the

day I have a bunch like this, where for reasons I can't discern, the picture was not acceptably sharp. I don't

expect 100% of my shots to be perfect, but when they don't work out, I try to understand why.</p>

<p>Any ideas?</p><div></div>

[g dan mitchell]

I can't see the softness from your smallish jpg. The campy logo on the yellow jacket looks like it would be pretty sharp to

me. Are you sure it isn't must a case of flat light and bluish cast of the shade?

 

You can help this image out a bit via adding a bit of a warming filter, adjusting curves, increasing the saturation a bit, and

doing a bit of unsharp mask (USM) sharpening. If I do this right, a modified version of the file should be attached. (As I

worked on it, I really did not see any sharpness issue per se in the small jpg.)

 

Dan<div></div>

[alanrusso]

Dan - thanks for the work on this! This picture was just a test shot, I was dialing in for when my wife was starting shortly there after. It may be flat light on a hazy early morning. What I'm trying to understand is why shots with virtually the same settings come out of the camera tack sharp at the same time. Thinking a bit more on it, the better shots were closer to the camera, and the very best were shot with flash with high shutter speeds and high speed sync. This was Monterey where we currently have a number of forest fires. Maybe its as simple as bit of haze that's raising my ire.

[g dan mitchell]

Monterey, eh? I'm in the SF Bay area and I've pretty much not bothered to shoot for a week now due to the ugly air. Was

thinking of going to the Monterey area but with the Big Sur fires that is perhaps not even a great idea. Let's have some

wind!

 

I think your issue on this shot was simply the flat light and the bluish cast coming from the sky. If you shoot RAW you

might try making some initial adjustments to this during RAW conversion. I applied a 10% warming filter layer in PS,

which helped warm up the image a bit. The curve I applied was more or less a shallow S-curve that darkened the mid-

dark areas a bit and increased brightness in the upper quadrant a bit also. I increased saturation by a value of about 10-

12, which is a pretty typical thing to do.

 

Many so-called "sharpness" issues are really not about sharpness at all. Often what makes a photo jump out at you (not

that my version quite achieves that! ;-) is largely about curves, saturation and perhaps levels adjustments, combined

with good sharpening technique - I tend to use a smart sharpening layer for detail and then a subtle USM later after that.

 

Dan

[herb_cunningham]

I have had the same problem with the exact same equipment, hand holding shots of a mob of cedar waxwings who pillaged

our cherry trees ( flowering trees, not for human consumption).

 

I was using a 2x converter, which seems to have a bad name. I have not taken the time to try similar shots without the converter.

 

that is the next step.

 

Is the focus selection a potential problem? I notice the grid lights up differently for different images, and these birds were in a tree with plenty of foilage, I was thinking the camera was confused as to what to focus on.

[g dan mitchell]

Herb, there is NO focus problem evident in the photo that was posted. The image was actually quite sharp. The reason it

looked "flat" had more to do with shooting conditions (morning, flat light, blue cast, smoky atmosphere) and the need for

some post processing (warming filter, adjustments to saturation and curves primarily).

 

Take a look at the before and after posts - inspect them quite closely if you will - and see that a) there is nothing actually

OOF in the photo and b) the post processing improves the image.

 

For birds, I find that shooting with only the central focus point active often gives more reliable results. Otherwise the

camera may AF on the wrong thing. But that's a different issue than the one in this thread.

 

Dan