Why are my photos not sharp (examples)

[holly_swanson]

<p>I have good equipment but for some reason can never get razor sharpness. If it's because I'm not focusing correctly then I'm in trouble, because I work hard to do all I can to focus (continuous back-button focus on the eye). This was shot with a 50 1.2 at f2.0, iso 160, 1/125th with a canon 6D.<br /> <img src="http://postimg.org/image/hoohchjs3/" alt="" /> <a href="http://postimg.org/image/hoohchjs3/">http://postimg.org/image/hoohchjs3/</a><br /> I'm not crazy about my 6D because for some reason I get lots of shutter button lag/delay. I press the button and the shutter takes a second or two. Could this be causing the softness?</p>

<p>I want sharness like this (random examples):<br /> http://www.rokkorfiles.com/Weddings/images/IMG_3399.jpg</p>

<p>http://torontophotographer.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/toronto_baby_portrait.jpg</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<hr>

<i>Mod note: Please don't embed photos from other sites - it's a drain on their resources. Links are fine.</i>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Post some maximum resolution sample photos to your photo.net portfolio space, or hosted elsewhere online (Flickr, etc.). Be sure the metadata is intact. Providing relevant info will help other photographers to help you.</p>

<p>In this case, unedited JPEGs straight from the camera may be best. If you shoot only raw, perhaps using the camera manufacturer's basic image editor to recreate in-camera style JPEGs will do.</p>

[Charles_Webster]

<p>Your large aperture combined with a slow shutter speed is probably the culprit. At f/2.0, you have only a couple of inches of DoF and it looks to me like that's in front of the baby's face (the sequins on the front of her dress are sharper than her eyes).<br>

If you're going to shoot in low light situations that need good DoF, you can add light with your flash, or you can turn up the ISO. Your 6D provides decent noise performance at ISO 800 and above. That will get you 2-1/2 stops of smaller aperture at the same shutter speed.</p>

<p><Chas><br /><br /></p>

[holly_swanson]

<p>Thanks. I shoot in aperture priority so have been letting the camera choose everything else. Do you think I should raise my minimum shutter speed? <br>

Also, do you think my lens might need microadjustment if you think the sequins are more focused? I'm not sure how else that could happen with careful picture taking.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"I shoot in aperture priority so have been letting the camera choose everything else."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Choose the camera settings that are appropriate for the occasion. In this case aperture priority mode failed you because the camera chose a shutter speed too slow for the situation, presumably while keeping the ISO low.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"Do you think I should raise my minimum shutter speed?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Absolutely. The only way to minimize subject motion blur is through a faster shutter speed or flash. This is essential with kids.</p>

<p>With photographer motion blur/camera shake, a tripod or monopod may also help. You can determine your own capabilities by practicing on motionless subjects. I know from experience that as I've aged I can no longer reliably handhold below around 1/125th second without my own motion blur causing problems. VR lenses or other stabilization can help get me down to around 1/15-1/30 on a good day. But slower speeds like that lead to subject motion blur.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"Also, do you think my lens might need microadjustment..."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Work on your technique first, before worrying about whether the equipment is fine tuned or otherwise diminishing your efforts.</p>

[Charles_Webster]

<p>The biggest issue is DoF, you missed having the eye in focus because the DoF was too shallow because you chose the wrong aperture and the camera then chose the wrong shutter speed.<br>

<Chas><br /><br /></p>

[holly_swanson]

<p>I'm not sure that makes sense Chas, seems like you're saying that focusing simply isn't possible at that wide of aperture... ? I didn't know there was any "wrong" aperture when it comes to aperture priority.</p>

<p>What would you say an acceptable minimum shutter speed is? The minimum in my camera is currently 1/125.</p>

[Palouse]

<p>A 2-second shutter lag is not characteristic of any modern DSLR--except if you have some form of shutter delay set with an in-camera function. I'm not a 6D user, so I hope one will chime in.</p>

[joe_willmore]

<p>Holly, when you set on aperture priority, that means your camera is willing to sacrifice shutter speed in order to maintain the aperture you set. And unless it's either a still-life object OR a human trying very hard to remain still (and has something to lean against), anything from 1/25th or slower is not going to be tack-sharp. It's not that Chas is saying that you can't focus with aperture priority. It's a narrow DoF results in a very small margin of error. The cliched advice that editors used to give photographers going out in to the field was "f8 and be there" which was a way of saying that f8 or f11 made it easier to take shots in-focus b/c the DoF was wider/deeper. So if you're shooting with a small DoF, being off just a small amount results in blur. If you're shooting with a slow shutter speed and you're not on a tripod then you're likely going to get blur when shooting people.<br>

Here's a suggestion (that is a great tip for a new shooter). Take a subject (puppy, baby, flower being blown by a consistent flow of air...maybe by a fan). And try shooting by manipulating Brian Peterson's triad of ISO, shutter speed, and aperture. Shoot with a narrow DoF, then a deeper DoF. Set to shutter priority and play with shutter speeds. Then adjust ISO. Compare the results. You'll make more sense out of some of these posts. You'll grow as a photographer. And you'll identify looks (blurred movement, high key, bokeh) from this little experiment that you'll want to deliberately incorporate into your shooting style in the future.</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure that makes sense Chas, seems like you're saying that focusing simply isn't possible at that wide of aperture... ?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>At very wide apertures, with subjects that are near you, the DOF is so shallow that only part of the face is in focus. Sometimes that works--if the eyes are in focus, viewers generally perceive that the face is in focus. But it can be difficult, because you have to make sure that the focus is precisely at the eye.</p>

<p>I agree that a higher shutter speed and a a slightly smaller aperture are good ideas, even if you have to raise the ISO. One thing that has not been mentioned is that you should do some sharpening in post-production. The image of the baby, for example, can be made much sharper.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Again, Holly, please upload a high resolution example with metadata intact. Otherwise we're just guessing at possible problems and solutions. The sample you linked to is either missing most metadata, or the file hosting site is preventing my EXIF data readers from seeing it.</p>

[holly_swanson]

<p>Ah I see. Very helpful, thanks. I will try some suggestions..</p>

<p>Lex - alright, I'll try to give that a go too.</p>

[James G. Dainis]

Note that in the good photo of the child that you linked to it was shot at 1/125 sec. at f/5.6 at a distance of 0.45m with a 48mm lens. The depth of field is much greater at f/5.6 than at f/2.0 but while the child's eyes are tack sharp the ears only a few inches back are out of focus. You really have to try using a smaller aperture than f/2.0. Try f/5.6 or f/8.

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Incidentally, in the "Toronto baby portrait" linked photo, the eyes appear to have been individually edited - cleaned up to remove any natural detail in the whites of the eyes, while adding sharpening and/or clarifying. This is a common technique with portrait photography, especially when shooting wide open. Even accounting for shallow DOF, if the photo was naturally that "sharp", the eyelashes and eyebrows would be much sharper.</p>

<p>Often when novices point to photos they consider "sharp" the photos don't demonstrate any particularly unique resolution of fine detail. Often what they perceive as "sharpness" is relative due to in focus/out of focus areas in photos with shallow DOF, clarity due to good use of light and editing tools, contrast, color and other factors that have little to do with how well a lens, sensor or film resolves detail in technical testing.</p>

<p>And often the difference is simply due to good, solid technique, including minimizing motion blur.</p>

[frode]

<p>Hi<br>

From the reflections in the eye it is easy to see that there is pretty much motion blur in the image, at least 2, maybe 4 pixels in the vertical direction. If this image is only resized and not croped (at least vertically), this means that the original will show at least 8, maybe 16 pixels of vertical motion blur (assuming the 6D gives images of size 5472 x 3648 pixels).<br>

Motion blur could be caused both by camera movement and by the subject (the child's head) moving. In the first case better technique for holding the camera during exposure can work. In the latter case only shorter exposure time will help (which will of course also help in the first case).</p>

<p>Best wishes<br>

Frode langset</p>

[brett_w.]

<p>'I agree with the other posters, shooting at f2 creates DOF - "depth of field" problems and low shutter speeds results in unsharp photos. Get a book like "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson to learn more about better photography techniques</p>

<p> </p>

[frode]

<p>I have run the image through at program called "Focus Magic". It has a function for "de-bluring" motion blur. In this clean-cut case, where the movement has been in a straight vertical line, Focus Magic will do a pretty decent job, even if the camera has moved 16 pixels (in the original) as seems to be the case here. I set it to be 4 pixels vertical in this image and you can see the result. This result tells me that the main reason for this image to look blurred is vertical motion, either the camera or the subject or both.</p><div></div>

[robert_k1]

<blockquote>

<p>A 2-second shutter lag is not characteristic of any modern DSLR--except if you have some form of shutter delay set with an in-camera function. I'm not a 6D user, so I hope one will chime in.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Agreed. If there is indeed a 2-second shutter lag, that should be the first and most important issue for you to resolve.</p>

<p>I also agree with comments regarding shutter speeds, DOF, tripod, testing, etc. Any or all of them can help you get sharper photos. Also try firing off a sequence of shots, and pick the sharpest one. But if there is a 2-second shutter lag, this probably won't work.</p>

<p>One thing not mentioned is camera shake when hand holding a camera. I can't find a really good reference off hand. Google and you will find plenty. The list should include:</p>

<p>- how to hold the camera with your hands<br>

- where your elbows should be<br>

- what your legs stance should be<br>

- how to breathe before, during and after releasing a shutter<br>

- etc.</p>

<p>IOW, act like a sniper.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

Significant delay in shutter response may be due to using focus priority

AF, rather than release priority (pardon the Nikon terminology, but Canon

has the same feature). Check the menu and try another AF option.

[AlanKlein]

It's there someone you know who can personally

show you do these things on your camera? Having

ten people throw things at you on the web can get

very confusing.

[kirigoi]

<p>Agreed with Alan, there's a lot of suggestions and trouble shooting by proxy may be difficult, and some more information from you might help work out where the issue lies. However, I'd suggest that there's obviously something not right with the setup of your camera for such a large lag in shooting, the 6D should be a very responsive camera, and I imagine it's probably more likely that it's a settings issue rather than a hardware defect.</p>

<p>Can you tell us a bit more about how the lag manifests itself? For example does the camera wait without any action between you pressing the shutter release and actually firing? If so it may be worth checking if you actually have a 2s shutter delay set; it's a setting that's quite useful for tripod shooting as it lets you take your hands off the camera to reduce camera shake before the shutter fires. It's accessible via the drive button on the top of the camera and looks like a stopwatch with 2 written next to it in the top window. I'd check your manual for the different options available via the drive button, but essentially if the shutter delay has been set you want to return the camera to a normal shooting mode. With such a large delay and such a critical focus situation, it's entirely likely that you'd move slightly between focussing and the shutter firing, which would make accurate focussing extremely difficult.</p>

<p>If the camera continues to hunt for focus during the period of lag, it may be an issue with autofocus settings, trying to focus on a low contrast area etc. but more information would enable us to help.</p>

[James G. Dainis]

<I>Moderator's note: I have deleted the last three posts on this thread as they were getting a bit too confrontational for this Beginner's forum.</I>

[kirigoi]

<p>Tim, I'm referring to the fact that if Holly is UK based then her three posts yesterday were between 6 and 10pm last night. Unless she's unemployed I would not expect her then to stay up all night or post during the day, as I assume she has a job to go to. At the time of my post (listed as 12:41pm on photo.net) it was actually 5:45 pm here, so I assumed that if she was anywhere she'd be still at work or at best heading home. These are just assumptions, but people have lives to live away from photo.net.</p>

<p>I realise that as a photo.net member for a decade with 10,000 posts to your name, you are a heavy user and used to contributing very frequently. By contrast, the OP only joined a month ago and from the look of her forum history is still finding her feet, with a few simple questions in the beginner forum. I think it is the responsible approach of old-timers on the site to be patient with new members, particularly here on the beginner forum as otherwise they'll just go elsewhere. This forum is intended for constructive comments and usually a certain amount of leeway that might not be afforded elsewhere, so to resort to telling her off for her inactivity this soon is probably not useful. I'd like to refer you to the beginner forum community standards:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This forum is for basic questions about techniques for new photographers. To make sure that the questions are appropriate and the responses given in the spirit of real assistance, the Beginner's forum is much more tightly moderated than other Photo.net forums. Experienced photographers who can offer patient, helpful and informative replies are greatly appreciated here! Thanks</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, there is more information that she should supply if she wants a better answer than people have been able to give so far; although the three exposure parameters you have asked for are actually in her original post. For someone new to digital photography it is not necessarily a trivial matter to upload photos with exif intact; it may require learning more about her software package, arranging hosting via e.g. flickr, or learning how to post on photo.net's portfolio pages (which she has not done before) etc.</p>

<p>Hopefully we'll hear back from her soon and get to the bottom of her problem. Best wishes, Mark</p>

[donbright]

<p>All of the contributors advisories are to be adhered to, but not to forget for your own piece of mind going forward, whenever theirs doubt about equipment, which is some of your concern, take the time and do a test with a tripod on a fixed target using the aperture, shutter combo that you described, and see if you get a sharp result then, then you can be confident all other techniques are worthwhile to apply. If then you can't get a sharp result, well, there could be a serious mechanical issue.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Holly, please post the shutter speed, aperture and ISO numbers for the image in question.</p>