help with editing please!

moochas

moochas

Messages
1,066
Name
matt
Edit My Images
Yes
I have been experimenting with editing my photos, in general sharpening.

every time i save my pics they seem to lose the sharpness i have just added to them and therefore look a bit naff and soft. i have cs5 and have tried with dpp too.

i shoot in raw as more can be done than with jpg afterwards and appreciate jpg's lose quality when they are saved but most on this forum post great, sharp pics...

soooo........ anyone got any pointers/tips/advice as to getting sharper pics and any methods that they use please?? thanks, matt
 
I think a key thing is to avoid pixel peeping - and I'm guilty of it too! It's easy to forget when looking on a computer screen at 100% how sharp the image actually is at something like 1024x768 (or whatever the right dimensions are against a 1024 width).

I add some sharpening in Aperture but not much, it's more about holding the camera still and poss even using a tripod if you can.

I'm by no means an expert on this but I think it's the pixel peeping that creates the lack of sharpness rather than the image not being sharp.
 
It also depends how close you are to your subject - subjects which are closer will usually look sharper than a subject at infinity (assuming the lens is good and the focus is spot on).

This is simply because the sensor and lens combination has a limit to the amount of detail it can resolve.

So the trees on a mountain in a landscape pic will never be as sharp as a tree which only 50 feet away.

.
 
thanks for the replies, ive been photographing kingfishers pretty close with the camera on a beanbag with remote shutter and still 90% of the time they arent as sharp as i would like (light isnt great as underneath trees, dont know if this is why??) so i add sharpenening, its when i convert the cr2 files to jpg to view in other programs they seem to lose the sharpness??

i have quite a few shots, heres 1:

IMG_5191.jpg
 
actually I resize, then sharpen, then save as jpeg.
whatever you do, sharpen should be last in the process.
generally if an image isn't sharp to start with, which in my opinion the kfisher isn't, then there isn't a lot you can do with unsharpmask that will improve it.
 
That's a nice KF shot - shame it's not really critically sharp enough to start with. I gave it a go for you and while it's sharper - you can see the noise creeping in in the body of the bird.



IMG_5191-edit by tonky8203, on Flickr

If it's a substantial crop that could be the basic problem, although I think the real culprit is that beanbag and remote release arrangement which sounds well dodgy.

Use the beanbag by all means, but keep hold of the camera - make sure you have a fast enough shutter speed to overcome any camera movement as a minimum ,and as fast as possible to freeze the KF action. Keep your eye to the viewfinder using a single AF point and servo focus. Try to get that AF spot on the eye of the bird (on the head at least) and you should see a big improvement.
 
every time i save my pics they seem to lose the sharpness
Click to expand...
Might be worth a check but when you save as jpeg there are compression values/quality. You want to set to max quality and forget compression.

If you were in Gimp : subsampling at 1x1, 1x1, 1x1 (max quality), smoothing 0, quality 100%.

If these are your settings, then there must be something else that is negating the final step. Do you flatten the image before exporting?
 
it isnt a crop, its as shot.
why does the beanbag and remote sound dodgy? its on a log with no movement (dont see how this would be different to a tripod?).
when asked i save at max quality.
im guessing the problem is probably to do with the shutter speed (cant do much with this as its just very dark where im taking the shots from) but the pics look decent after sharpening, they just lose the sharpening after converting to jpg.
i guess ill have to keep trying and just get better shots to start with! thanks anyway everyone. matt
 
moochas said:
it isnt a crop, its as shot.
why does the beanbag and remote sound dodgy? its on a log with no movement (dont see how this would be different to a tripod?).
Click to expand...

It's the remote bit I don't understand Matt - i can't see any logical reason for using a remote release in this situation unless you're getting the camera close to the birds with a shortish tele lens while you yourself are further away operating the release. I admit the idea sounds attractive, but it just doesn't work or we'd all be dong it. The problem with this method is that whether you're using auto focus or manual focus you're pre-focusing and relying on the bird to land on the spot you want. Even if they do that, there isn't sufficient dof to cover how well that bird sits there in relation to the plane you've focused on and what part of the bird the AF spot falls on. Any sharp shots would be pure luck and few and far between.

Rest the camera on the beanbag, but keep hold of it and concentrate on getting that AF spot on the head/eye. I know a lot of bird photographers, and without exception this is the way they work.


when asked i save at max quality.
Click to expand...
OK

im guessing the problem is probably to do with the shutter speed (cant do much with this as its just very dark where im taking the shots from) but the pics look decent after sharpening, they just lose the sharpening after converting to jpg.
Click to expand...

If it IS the shutter speed being too slow then there's not much you can do other than shoot wide open and increase the ISO

Try reducing the image to web size, converting to jpeg and then sharpen the image at that size. Sharpening should be the last thing you do. Also you don't want to be sharpening the image at the larger size then sharpening it again when you reduce it - do it just once as the very last step in processing.
i guess ill have to keep trying and just get better shots to start with! thanks anyway everyone. matt
Click to expand...

I'm sure it's just a basic technique problem - don't get disheartened - you'll get there - keep clickin'
 
moochas said:
btw what did you use to edit the pic please??
Click to expand...

I adjusted the wb to 6500K (Daylight)

I selected the bg with the magic wand and ran low level NR on the bg, then inverted the mask and sharpened the bird selectively,
 
How to help? well not knowing your workflow its not easy to say what is happening, when do you do your sharpening? I do all other adjustments and cropping and sharpen last.
The photo you put up is not sharp at all, also small but this is what I could do to it along side your copy.
5739017993_9281af783d_o.jpg
Original >
IMG_5191.jpg
 
Chris Wormwell said:
Looks like a soft lens to me. No amount of pp work will solve that.
Click to expand...

Chris what are you doing in a Kingfisher thread?? :eek:

It could be the lens, but looking at Matt's profile he seems to be using the Sigma 50-500 and they're usually pretty sharp, although he could be unlucky and get a duff copy. I'd put money on it being just a basic technique issue with the remote release being the real culprit.
 
Chaz Photos said:
How to help? well not knowing your workflow its not easy to say what is happening, when do you do your sharpening? I do all other adjustments and cropping and sharpen last.
The photo you put up is not sharp at all, also small but this is what I could do to it along side your copy
Click to expand...
.
The problem Chaz is that the noise showing in the body of the bird is now pretty objectionable and this is a full frame shot where at this size you shouldn't expect to see any appreciable noise even at quite high ISOs which you'd expect with heavy cropping. The likelihood is that the shot was never really sharp enough to begin with and the more you sharpen, the more the noise becomes evident.
 
CT said:
.
The problem Chaz is that the noise showing in the body of the bird is now pretty objectionable and this is a full frame shot where at this size you shouldn't expect to see any appreciable noise even at quite high ISOs which you'd expect with heavy cropping. The likelihood is that the shot was never really sharp enough to begin with and the more you sharpen, the more the noise becomes evident.
Click to expand...

yes but trying to fix an image that is only 533 x 800 you on to a loser any how, this was to show there is more and if I had the full size image then it would look OK I think.
The issue is about the workflow, the image at the settings should produce good images.
 
Well we'd really need to see what the image looks like at 1:1 before we could dismiss it as purely a workflow issue.
 
As mentioned by Cedric Matt, using a remote is not really the way to go. I know there are those that say this lens performs better at around f8 but it would have been interestsing to have seen some results if you were at about f5.6. This would have taken you above 1/50 second, not by loads I agree but it might have been enough to get a sharper capture :shrug: Had a little play and is the best I can get it, but in all honesty you do not really need to be doing so much work in PP just to convert a Raw file.

KF_filtered.jpg
 
u8myufo said:
As mentioned by Cedric Matt, using a remote is not really the way to go. I know there are those that say this lens performs better at around f8 but it would have been interestsing to have seen some results if you were at about f5.6. This would have taken you above 1/50 second, not by loads I agree but it might have been enough to get a sharper capture :shrug: Had a little play and is the best I can get it, but in all honesty you do not really need to be doing so much work in PP just to convert a Raw file.
Click to expand...

I fall to see what your on about what has using a remote got to do with making the image soft? it helps by stopping the camera moving, so helping the camera stay stable, if you look at the wood this is not moving so shutter speed will not alter this so tell me how faster shutter speed will help?
I think people do not look at the whole but parts and think they have the answer.
Go back and re read what the OP put.....

I will add I looked at this lens when it came out and tested it and I was not that happy with it that's why I got L glass but this should not stop you using it and getting the best you can.
 
Last edited:
Chaz Photos said:
I fall to see what your on about what has using a remote got to do with making the image soft? it helps by stopping the camera moving, so helping the camera stay stable, if you look at the wood this is not moving so shutter speed will not alter this so tell me how faster shutter speed will help?
I think people do not look at the whole but parts and think they have the answer.
Go back and re read what the OP put.....

I will add I looked at this lens when it came out and tested it and I was not that happy with it that's why I got L glass but this should not stop you using it and getting the best you can.
Click to expand...

Chaz, you're hard work sometimes mate. It's been explained clearly enough I'd have thought. If he's using a remote and not looking through the camera then he must have pre-focused on a particular spot - probably the branch. That's nowhere near accurate enough given the shallow DOF with a 500mm lens to guarantee getting the bird sharp in the first place - in fact it's highly unlikely that he would. It's nothing to do with whether the branch moves - it's all to do with how the bird lands on that branch in relation to the pre-focused spot.

If it lands facing the camera it's highly likely that the bulk of the bird will be in front of the focused spot. If it lands facing away from the camera then it's arse end is likely to be sharper than the head. The best scenario is that that the bird obligingly lands sideways to the camera and parallel to the branch, but even then it's unlikely to be sharp given it's head could be at any angle and it's the head you need to focus on. If the focus is out a faster shutter speed isn't going to help one bit. A smaller aperture might help DOF, but the gains are very small for each aperture you stop down when using long lenses and of course each time you stop down you pay the price in reduced shutter speed.

People who predominantly shoot birds are trying to help Matt here., you're just confusing the issue unnecessarily and not for the first time either.

Before we can dismiss this as purely an editing issue we need to see the 1:1 image. If it's sharp, we can dismiss my thoughts on the remote release as being the likely cause in this instance, but it's still not the way to go about photographing birds.
 
Last edited:
Chaz Photos said:
I fall to see what your on about what has using a remote got to do with making the image soft? Nothing at all Chaz, in fact best forget I even mentioned it

It helps by stopping the camera moving, so helping the camera stay stable. This I already know Chaz

If you look at the wood this is not moving so shutter speed will not alter this so tell me how faster shutter speed will help? I did not mention that the wood was moving, nor did I mention the wood was oof :shrug:

I think people do not look at the whole but parts and think they have the answer. Yourself included then Chaz :shrug: The only part which would be important to me in the pic is the eye, which along with the head is looking soft. For this reason I would still suggest getting a fast as possible shutter speed
Go back and re read what the OP put..... I did. " Soooo........ anyone got any pointers/tips/advice as to getting sharper pics and any methods that they use please?? thanks, matt. Hence why I replied, be it right or wrong in your eye`s ;)

I will add I looked at this lens when it came out and tested it and I was not that happy with it that's why I got L glass but this should not stop you using it and getting the best you can. I totaly agree with you Chaz, perhaps the answer to all this is indeed in the editing :shrug:
Click to expand...
 
Here's a KF shot full frame and uncropped which is taken with a 500mm lens and looks to be about the same distance Matt was shooting at...



KF. by tonky8203, on Flickr


It was taken tripod mounted and with a gimbal head - both hands on the camera and trying to focus on the eye.

Here's a 100% crop from the image straight from raw and unedited...


KF crop by tonky8203, on Flickr

I'd consider this shot above average sharpness for bird shots, and not the sharpest, but if you look carefully you can see the shoulder area is slightly sharper than the eye. It doesn't matter that much and certainly isn't an issue at normal viewing or printing sizes. You don't have to get shots this sharp to be acceptable at web viewing sizes with proper editing, but it should give some idea of the level sharpness you're aiming towards.

Look at how the DOF drops away on that branch though in the full frame shot! You'd have to be incredibly lucky to get anywhere near sharp shots by pre-focusing on that branch.
 
I have taken 1000's of images of birds, so have a good idea of what works with long glass and what does not ... forget the release cable, set a shutter speed of 1/500, hold the camera so that you can activate focusing, rest the lens on beanbag, look through viewfinder.

When bird lands, focus and fire ... simple (y)

For an idea on how to reduce and sharpen for the web read this LINK post 14 deals with sharpening.
 
Martyn... said:
I have taken 1000's of images of birds, so have a good idea of what works with long glass and what does not ... forget the release cable, set a shutter speed of 1/500, hold the camera so that you can activate focusing, rest the lens on beanbag, look through viewfinder.

When bird lands, focus and fire ... simple (y)

For an idea on how to reduce and sharpen for the web read this LINK post 14 deals with sharpening.
Click to expand...

Thanks for some sanity Martyn. (y)

Matt....

This screen shot of my image shows the AF point and why the eye isn't quite sharp....


KF AF Point by tonky8203, on Flickr

Nobody's fault but mine, but it shows the difference a millimetre or two in focus error makes with a 500mm lens - especially working this close.

I was about 18 feet away - possibly a bit less - I'd guess you were about the same. You don't get much closer to KFs than that, but 500mm can be a bit too much at that distance. Several time on that day I was wishing I'd taken the 300mm instead, in which case DOF would have been less of an issue.
 
i know the spot where mats taking these pictures and the main problem with the location is lighting. It's very hard to get a good shutter speed when theres little or no sunlight getting through. The sigma lens at 500mm only allows it to have a maximum aperture of 6.3 to get the whole bird in the picture and have a good depth of field it needs to be set at around 8 but then your losing the light that can enter. You can increase iso but then your introducing a lot more noise. As for the release shutter argument i've tried both methods and agree that by pre determing a spot is not ideal but hand holding can introduce more camera shake even with os bulit in and reduce shutter speed.
We'd all like time to compose and get the focus point spot on but these birds and many others don't like to hang around for photos. It's what keeps us going back for more.
I think since matt's orginal post he's been up and managed to get better photos due to the light being a lot better.
 
Please let me point out
#1 At no time has the OP said they where not looking at ether the live screen or viewfinder, so I do not assume this not too be so, many of you do.
#2 No mention of how the OP focused so why make assumptions?
The OP said it looks fine on screen but not after saving it. This is what I have addressed, not what he should or should not do when taking the photos, OP Said it is good on screen, so for reply this is what the OP wants to know….
Other then that why go on about issues the OP has not raised…..

You all take such issues with what some are saying to the OP if they not agree with you, do you think you know it all? or your reply is the be end end all to it all.... get real
 
Chaz Photos said:
Please let me point out
#1 At no time has the OP said they where not looking at ether the live screen or viewfinder, so I do not assume this not too be so, many of you do.
#2 No mention of how the OP focused so why make assumptions?
The OP said it looks fine on screen but not after saving it. This is what I have addressed, not what he should or should not do when taking the photos, OP Said it is good on screen, so for reply this is what the OP wants to know….
Other then that why go on about issues the OP has not raised…..

You all take such issues with what some are saying to the OP if they not agree with you, do you think you know it all? or your reply is the be end end all to it all.... get real
Click to expand...

Photographing twitchy birds with LiveView? And what would be the purpose of using a remote release if your eye is to the viewfinder with your head touching the camera - even on a bean bag?

I certainly don't profess to know it all but I've been photographing birds predominantly for well over 7 years and know the likely technique problems associated with it. That's what I was advising on which is something I do know about or I'd have the sense to keep my gob shut.

Sadly not everyone else restricts themselves in the same manner!
 
ok guys, i didnt mean to cause an argument :LOL:

right where do i start? frstly i dont just guess where the kf wil land and hope the af point will hit its eye (although pretty new to this im not completely useless), i put it where i think it will land then try and move it onto the birds eye when it lands on the stick, easier said than done believe me in the amount of time they stay (not very long), its just awkward to get my hand on the shutter, this is the reason i use the remote!

the picture i put up was just the first one i grabbed, it was just an example, the whole thread was intended to get some tips on how others pp their shots and so i could give these a go and see if i was possibly doing something wrong, i know they aent as good a shots as most on this forum would achieve but im only using a 500d with the 150-500mm sigma (dont have the funds to buy a 1d mk4 or l glass)!!

u8myufo, thanks, ive not had the lens long but it seems to give better results at f8 (when theres enough light) but i'll have a play next time with the aperture but they just dont hang around long! :bonk:

lastly martyn, if i could get anywhere near a shutter speed of 1/500 i dont think this thread would have even been started!!! if you read the thread you will see that the lighting is really bad, thus bringing up issues with high iso, noise and so on.
 
Chaz Photos said:
Please let me point out
#1 At no time has the OP said they where not looking at ether the live screen or viewfinder, so I do not assume this not too be so, many of you do. That never even entered my head Chaz

#2 No mention of how the OP focused so why make assumptions? Are we not allowed to assume then? People are only trying to help, so assuming things sometimes usualy get`s the OP to respond and clarify things in a bit more detail.

The OP said it looks fine on screen but not after saving it. This is what I have addressed, not what he should or should not do when taking the photos, OP Said it is good on screen, so for reply this is what the OP wants to know…. With this in mind you have done really well in your reply (y)

Other then that why go on about issues the OP has not raised….. Because we like to ;)

You all take such issues with what some are saying to the OP if they not agree with you, do you think you know it all? Finding it difficult to understand this part :thinking: or your reply is the be end end all to it all.... get real Is this something you are ASSUMING :shrug:
Click to expand...
 
moochas said:
lastly martyn, if i could get anywhere near a shutter speed of 1/500 i dont think this thread would have even been started!!! if you read the thread you will see that the lighting is really bad, thus bringing up issues with high iso, noise and so on.
Click to expand...

OK fair point, but do not be scared of high ISO, there are plenty of free noise reduction programs available, Noiseware Community Edition for one.

Getting back to your question regarding PP, there are plenty of good tips in the link that I posted (y)
 
That's loads better Matt - could be a little bit sharper but the thing I like about this is that the perch is softer than the bird which is as it should be if you can't get both sharp.

It'll still sharpen a bit more, but if you post a link to the full file somewhere or post a 100% unsharpened crop here, we'd be able to judge the quality of the image from the original and where you might be going wrong in editing.
 
moochas said:
ok guys, i didnt mean to cause an argument :LOL:

right where do i start? frstly i dont just guess where the kf wil land and hope the af point will hit its eye (although pretty new to this im not completely useless), i put it where i think it will land then try and move it onto the birds eye when it lands on the stick, easier said than done believe me in the amount of time they stay (not very long), its just awkward to get my hand on the shutter, this is the reason i use the remote!

the picture i put up was just the first one i grabbed, it was just an example, the whole thread was intended to get some tips on how others pp their shots and so i could give these a go and see if i was possibly doing something wrong, i know they aent as good a shots as most on this forum would achieve but im only using a 500d with the 150-500mm sigma (dont have the funds to buy a 1d mk4 or l glass)!!

u8myufo, thanks, ive not had the lens long but it seems to give better results at f8 (when theres enough light) but i'll have a play next time with the aperture but they just dont hang around long! :bonk:

lastly martyn, if i could get anywhere near a shutter speed of 1/500 i dont think this thread would have even been started!!! if you read the thread you will see that the lighting is really bad, thus bringing up issues with high iso, noise and so on.
Click to expand...

We dont argue Matt :shake: but just disagree now and again ;) I honestly feel Matt that advising somebody on how to edit a picture is fine in one respect but imo each picture has to be treated seperately. If it was in a controlled environment then it would be fine, I myself do not bother with such things as batch processing. If I was to take a dozen or so shots of birds each will have different markings and each will give a slightly different result. The link Martin gave you should give some ideas as such. I am sorry but I have to " assume " that you have a slight handicap with the hand you would normaly fire the camera with, if this is the case then hopefuly a few more suggestions might come your way (y)
 
moochas said:
heres another 1, a bit better ive had a play with
kj.jpg
Click to expand...

Looking much better Matt. Ok what I have done is load it into PS and applied a straight sharpen. To me it now looks fine, to you and others it might well look totaly different, only you as the person who took it can really decide.

kj.jpg
 
That looks fine to me now - I'd be happy with that level of sharpness.
 
Ok so we have now narrowed it down to the final output for web display. Matt I would just like you to try something if you will. Use that same image again and edit the raw file, do all your adjustments save it to the same size, sharpening it will be the last thing you do. When you get to that stage go to image sharpen and sharpen it, then sharpen it again ( At this point it will look crap on your monitor ) and then post it up.
 
Rich's edit with a wb adjust and NR run just on the bg.


Matt-edit by tonky8203, on Flickr

You say yourself you're new to this Matt and I reckon you're dong fine as well as being very lucky to have somewhere to photograph KFs that close.You just need to get basic technique nailed well down. After that it's processing which can take longer to get to grips with , but keep clicking - you'll get there. (y)
 
Last edited:
Martyn... said:
I have taken 1000's of images of birds, so have a good idea of what works with long glass and what does not ... forget the release cable, set a shutter speed of 1/500, hold the camera so that you can activate focusing, rest the lens on beanbag, look through viewfinder.

When bird lands, focus and fire ... simple (y)

For an idea on how to reduce and sharpen for the web read this LINK post 14 deals with sharpening.
Click to expand...


Works for me as well Martyn.........(y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top