HELP! Just can't get a sharp image :(

[rivendellstudios]

I'm at my wits end today, for the life of me I can't get a tack sharp image of a full length garment.

 

I am using a Canon 50D with either the Canon 100mm macro or Canon 24-105mm L lens. I am working in a studio

setting, using a tripod and a cable release.

When I take a portrait or 3 quarter body shot I have no trouble getting the image very sharp, but I need to do some

full length garment / product shots and it is essential that the clothing is super sharp from top to bottom.

 

I have tried everything but they are still coming out really fuzzy. I am using manual focus and all the focus lights are

lighting, I have tried a range of aperture settings from 8 - 16, I am using a 100 iso, I have even tried locking the mirror

up. I have tried using the 100mm lens, I have also tried the 24-105mm lens at different focal lengths but nothing

seems to make a difference, the images are still all really soft and fuzzy.

 

What am I doing wrong? How can I ensure a sharp full length shot? Does anyone have any advice, pleeeeease!!!

[cabbiinc]

Can you give an example of a poor shot?

[sattler123]

Post a shot with ethe EXIF in tact. Have you tried live view with the magnification window? You should certainly see if the garment is in sharp focus or not with that method.

[rivendellstudios]

I don't know if this will be large enough to see, but this is a close up of the collar section of the garment. The one on the left is a section of the close up shot, this is fine on the full size image you can see the detailing on the buttons etc. The one on the left is the same section from the full length shot and it is awful!

Full length shot was taken at 1/125 f/11

Close up was taken at 1/125 f/10

 

I have tried other settings on the full length image but can't seem to get anything better than this :(

 

Have tried live view and everything looks ok till I get it on the computer?<div></div>

[ronald_moravec1]

They can`t be both on the left.

 

You can not enlarge a section and expect it to be as sharp as a full image.

 

Now you know why they sell Leif, Hasselblad, etc. Small cameras are capable of just so much. To get more you need a

bigger sensor or film. More pixels on the same sensor is not the answer either.

[rivendellstudios]

Sorry, I don't think I'm getting this across too well!

 

The images are not enlarged.

 

The clip on the left is a section of the garment that was shot at full length.

The clip on the right is a section of the garment that was shot from the waist up.

 

The one shot full length is fuzzy the one shot 3 quarter length is sharp.

 

The image size from the 50D is fine for what I need it for, what I need to achieve is a sharp full length portrait. I have

no trouble getting tack sharp, 3 quarter length or head shots, I just can't get a sharp full body shot. I don't understand

why this would have anything to do with sensor size, surely this is a lens or focus problem?

[robert lee]

"The one shot full length is fuzzy the one shot 3 quarter length is sharp."

 

This is as expected: you have a much fewer pixels covering the button on the full length frame versus the close-in shot.

 

Here's a thought experiment. Suppose you shot of the garment even further back, say so that it occupies only a quarter of the frame, would you expect the button to be as detailed as the close-up reference?

 

Basically, you need a camera with higher resolution. There's no quick, easy, or cheap solutions. As far as equipment goes, look into renting digital MF backs or perhaps a scanning back like http://www.betterlight.com. If you're comfortable with film, well scanned 6x7 MF or LF will work as well.

 

If you've lots more time than money for this project, perhaps see about stitching images together. You will need some specialized equipment for this as well.

[rffffffff]

looks out of focus to me... try using autofocus! if that doesnt help, try bracketing focus. You may have a lens issue, perhaps,

 

also, if you are focusing zoomed in, then zooming out, depending on the lens, that may be a bad (or good) idea. Try doing it the opposite way.

 

If your pixel density is high (I think the 50D is very high density, but I dont remember the specs) diffraction will soften your photographs at smaller apertures too. You should be able to get sharp pictures at f/5.6 or f/8, but by f/11 or f/16 you are probably diffraction limited.

[cabbiinc]

Have you focus tested your lenses? The out of focus theory looks about right to me.

[rivendellstudios]

Thanks for the input everyone, Robert I know that I can't expect to get a full length shot as sharp as a close up and I really don't. The problem is that the full length shot is just not even within the realms of acceptable, it looks like it has been taken with a camera phone!!

 

I personally think that it is a focus issue, but I don't know what to do. I have tried manual, I've tried auto, the results seem to be exactly the same. I have also swapped camera bodies and I seem to be getting the results from both my 30D and new 50D.

 

The results are also the same regardless of what aperture setting I am using, they still look out of focus at f/5.6.

 

Could it be a lens problem? Both of the lenses I'm using are high quality lenses, so I would expect good results from them.

 

Dan, I haven't done a focus test on the lenses. How would I go about doing that?

[fullmetalphotograper]

First suggestion is is check the simple things first.

 

(1) the diopter settings

 

(2) Check the front and rear elements and make sure they are clean.

 

(3) the sharpness setting in the camera and resolution.

 

(3) shoot raw

 

(4) check your AF focus points. Make sure the on target.

 

Good luck

[krisheylen]

You say that ALL the focus lights are lighting. Use only one focus point and place it where you want the

focus.

[Ed_Ingold]

<i>The images are not enlarged. The clip on the left is a section of the garment that was shot at full length. The clip on the right is a section of the garment that was shot from the waist up.</i>

<p>

Think about it. The sample on the left is cropped about 50% then enlarged to match the uncropped view. At least part of your problem is that the full-length image covers much more of the subject with the same number of pixels. Details in the picture on the right are actually much smaller in the image on the left. You can't resolve surface detail much smaller than one pixel.

<p>

You could use a camera with more resolution, or try stitching two images together.

[seismiccwave]

That's why there are cameras out there with larger sensors and lots of mega pixels. You are asking for something that your

camera cannot do. You want your camera you show you an image with the same resolution no matter how big or small you

make the image. You are enlarging the image on the left because the original image shows more of the garment.

[rivendellstudios]

I really don't think that I have managed to highlight the problem that I am having very well because a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding me :(

 

The images that I am trying to take are for a clothing website. This particular image is a coat, I need a full length front shot, a full length back shot and a close up shot.

 

The close up shots aren't a problem, if I am a few feet away from the target everything is fine and perfectly focused.

The full length shots however are causeing me some problems because they all just simply appear to be out of focus.

I don't think that I am expecting too much from the camera, I don't expect the shots to have anything like as much detail as the close up (that if why we have a close up, so customers can see the detail) I am not enlargeing the full length shots at all and I don't think that I am expecting something that the camra can't do. The 50D is more than capable of producing crisp images - just not for me!!!!

 

I have seen plenty of other photographers produce sharp, focused full length studio portraits with the 30D and 40D. If there is anyone out there using one of these cameras for full length portraits can you help at all?

[Ed_Ingold]

<i>I am not enlargeing the full length shots at all </i>

<p>

How is it that the dress in each sample image is the same size?

[felix_mizioznikov]

the 50d has micro lens correction. Every lens is set with tollerance to back-front focus. Learn how to use this adjustment and adjust the camera to focus correctly with each lens depending on how much each lens back or front focuses (focusing behind the intended point of focus) I've experienced this problem with my 40d where aiming at someones eyes the ears would be in focus, with to 50d this is easily fixable.

[rivendellstudios]

Edward - The full length shot was not enlarged, they appear the same size because the close up was reduced.

 

Felix, thanks for that, I have just been doing some reading up on the micro lens correction, it seems that a lot of people have had to makes considerable + & - adjustments for all their lenses.

I have since been working on some very close up shots and I'm having the same problem with those, it seems that I am only getting a sharp focus at a mid point, so lens adjustment might be the answer. However I am finding it a bit complicated! If anyone has a got a straight forward method of testing, please let me know :)

[mark_chartrand]

Caroline,

 

I didn't read all of these ideas for you to try, but -- try shooting on manual, zoom in, focus, frame your shot - take your

picture. Or - on auto-focus, zoom in, auto-focus, lock your focus, frame your shot - take your picture. If these do not work

you indeed have a problem.

 

Mark

[seismiccwave]

Here, take a look at what Bob Atkins wrote. Print out the charts he has in the article. Do a few test and let us know what

you found out.

 

http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/technical/focus_testing.html

 

Another thing you may want to do to help us help you is to load up the two images you kept on referring to in the exact

same size. Do NOT crop, enlarge, reduce or manipulate the images except of size the original image to fit on the forum.

Simply go and size the longest side of each image to 700 pixels keeping the original proportion.

 

Right now we are only looking at two of your images showing the garment at very similar size. Edward and I said you are

enlarging the full size garment and you said you are reducing the close up shot. They both meant the exact same thing.

You are manipulating the image to achieve similar size in the garment. Let's not even talk garment since that get

confusing. Just look at the two letters K & L on your images. The letter are similar in size on both images. So you either

enlarged one image or reduced the other image. Makes no difference. You are not helping us to help you.

 

Another test you can do is simply take your zoom lens. Keep everything exactly the same and shoot two images. One

when your zoom is at 105 mm and the other when you set your zoom to 50 mm. Then post the two images up here and

we can help.

[personalphotos]

Caroline, I don't shoot Canon but might be able to offer another suggestion. First I'm of the opinion the sensor

size on your camera is more than good enough for this work. My cameras are 14.1Mp 1.5 crop sensors and could easily

(and have done) do this work.

 

First an aperture around f5.6 to 11 is best. The 100mm macro could be shot at 16 or 22 but as stated above you

risk some aperture diffraction making the shot look softer.

 

Do these lenses have anti shake in them? If so make sure this is turned off when using a tripod. Anti shake can

very often make the image soft when the camera is on a tripod.

 

The other suggestion would be to do as posted above. Zoom in and get the focus. The zoom back out to frame the

shot not touching the focus at all.

[rivendellstudios]

Thanks to everyone for bearing with me on this, I really appreciate all your advice.

 

Hansen, thanks for the link to the Bob Atkins article, I've had a quick look at that and I will test the lenses using his

method as it seems quite straight forward.

I apologise for the confusion with the enlarge/reduce issue. What I meant when I said I had not enlarged the image,

was that I had not actually enlarged it beyond it's captured pixel size. I didn't want people to think that the lack of

sharpness was due to interpolation.The two clips that I posted had of course been re-sized to show the same portion

of the garment.

 

I have attached another shot of the full length garment, this is straight out of camera, I have just removed a bit of

surplus background. This shot was taken at 1/125 f/10 using the 24mm - 105mm L at a focal length of 65mm.

I must explain that these designs are featured on a Gothic Clothing site, so the dark lighting is intentional.

The final images will have some work on the back ground and some hand painting in the cloth. Although most of the

images on the site are digitally enhanced, I do prefer to start with the sharpest and best quality image that I can, and

I know that this camera is capable of better than this!

 

Peter thanks for your reassurance about the sensor size, I was starting to doubt my camera choice! Before

upgrading to the 50D I had considered going for a full size sensor, but I honestly felt that it is much more than what I

need for day to day use, and long term storage of the full size images I think would eventually start to create

problems for me.

 

I do have the IS switched off when the camera is on the tripod. I haven't tried zooming in to get focus, but I'll give that

a go when I've done the focus tests.

 

Thanks again everyone for your input.<div></div>

[Kent Shafer]

You might also try a healthy dose of sharpening. Here's your original post with the image on screen left treated with Smart Sharpen (300%, 1.0 pixels, Lens Blur) and the image on screen right untouched.<div></div>

[rivendellstudios]

Kent, thanks

 

I always run a sharpening filter over the final edited image, but I just want to ensure that I have the best quality image that I can get out of my camera before post processing.

 

I have just run the Bob Atkins test on the 24mm - 105mm L lens. Lens was set at f4.5. The first image was AF and the second MF. Does anyone have any thoughts on these results? I'm not really sure what I'm looking for.<div></div>

[rivendellstudios]

MF result<div></div>