How to take sharper pictures?

[wagner]

So, maybe I’m just stupid, confused, or both, but how do I make a picture “less soft” via shutter speed in aperture priority? At first I was told to lower my ISO, but when I explained it was already at 100 I was told to watch my shutter speed.

 

At this point I am 100% lost and don’t understand the correlation in how to make a sharper picture. I had my ISO set at 100 and shot my F-stop from 2.8 all the way up to F22.

 

Any help, links, information would be great so I can become a more “professional” photographer and suck less I guess

[spankis]

I've been told before that the glass you're using and the sensor in your camera are the limiting factors beyond everything else.

[Berto]

I don't see how shutter speed affects the crispness of the shot.

 

most lenses have sweet spots. so lets take my F1.8 lens. I can get a real short DOF at 1.8 but in reality its sharpest 2 stops up from that. Also I learned the hardway...going up to F22 doesn't mean sharper, it just means longer DOF. Every lens has a sweet spot. In general I wouldn't go much over F11 unless I really needed that DOF.

[TTQ B4U]

So, maybe I’m just stupid, confused, or both, but how do I make a picture “less soft” via shutter speed in aperture priority? At first I was told to lower my ISO, but when I explained it was already at 100 I was told to watch my shutter speed.

 

On crop bodies like the 70D you need to insure your shutter speed is at minimum 1.5x the focal length. You're in a better boat than most as your primary lens has a great 4 stop IS advantage so you can get away with a bit less. However, technique or lack of can impact that. Fire on a slight exhale. Try setting up your camera on a remote trigger, use longer exposure times and practice bouncing the flash off the interior too.

 

ISO can impact the appearance of the image but even there, it's all about exposure. Here's a 100% crop from a now 7yr old 10mp crop body exposed to ISO 6400 via a simple ISO push. Hand-held with a 24-70L. Hardly soft. In fact it could be printed at 13x19 with no sense of softness or visible noise. http://www.pbase.com/timothylauro/image/118911533/original.jpg

 

At this point I am 100% lost and don’t understand the correlation in how to make a sharper picture. I had my ISO set at 100 and shot my F-stop from 2.8 all the way up to F22.

On your lens/body, anything above f/11 is pointless really. Read up on Depth of Field. You can obtain greater depth of field with a decrease in aperture (larger f-stop) and decreasing aberrations, but there's a point at which diffraction begins to erode sharpness. This is very likely what you're seeing. It's even more dramatic on a crop body camera vs a full frame.

 

Any help, links, information would be great so I can become a more “professional” photographer and suck less I guess

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/

 

there are many links but IMO tell the yahoo requiring f/22 that until he understands the phsysics of light and photography, he needs to step aside. F/22 and up is really best for Macro photography. With today's newer mirror-less cameras and 4/3'rd systems, I am far more likely to use one of those however than even my macro lens on a true SLR. The images are far better in my experience. That debate will live on beyond Ford vs Chevy though

 

Lastly, I stand by my previous points that your "soft" images won't matter 1 bit in a magazine print. My images are use for corporate photography/ marketing needs and displayed on projection screens for large audiences and for large marketing material with minimum sizes of 36" often much larger. Even there I can hide the rare minor focus issues with ease. Magazines, you'll never see them.

 

I'll try and dig up some of my out of focus images that have been printed and show you what I mean.

 

Post up a link to some full size shots being called soft and I'll chime in with feedback.

Edited March 26, 2014 by TTQ B4U

[Mojoe]

http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l284/dsnowgod/4274B3ED-C6FA-4DA5-A38F-13235583CE38_zpsv6k1en6j.jpg

[Turbotrio]

I'm still very much of the opinion that his "Soft" isn't talking about actual sharpness. Even a full page lay-out in a magazine is small enough for it to not matter unless something was REALLY out of focus.

 

I have never seen this magazine before but maybe see if you can look at the back-issue pics online and get an idea of what he is used to seeing?

 

If you haven't, look at threads like this to get ideas on how far you can go with just the processing side of things:

 

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1007907

[wagner]

I'm still very much of the opinion that his "Soft" isn't talking about actual sharpness. Even a full page lay-out in a magazine is small enough for it to not matter unless something was REALLY out of focus.

 

I have never seen this magazine before but maybe see if you can look at the back-issue pics online and get an idea of what he is used to seeing?

 

If you haven't, look at threads like this to get ideas on how far you can go with just the processing side of things:

 

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1007907

 

I have the current issue my feature was in and I can't see what he is talking about. Now, the pictures I took of Mike's car are dark on the inside, but I did correct that issue.

[mrs.cos]

So what does he say when you ask him to clarify what he means by soft. What specificly on the image he discusses with you? Ask him to send you examples of what he considers "hard" or "not soft"

 

I think until you know exactly wht he thinks he is talking about will you be able to fix what ever this crazy dude is asking.

[Orion]

clarify what he means by soft

 

That made me chuckle.

[mrs.cos]

That made me chuckle.

 

I see.. You are used to woman knowing what it means to be soft when it pertains to you? :gabe:

[wagner]

So what does he say when you ask him to clarify what he means by soft. What specificly on the image he discusses with you? Ask him to send you examples of what he considers "hard" or "not soft"

 

I think until you know exactly wht he thinks he is talking about will you be able to fix what ever this crazy dude is asking.

 

I will post the example pictures I was sent. After looking at them I think I realized something, there is zero post process done to these, or at least very little.

 

I'm starting to wonder if he does any type of touch up to anything that is turned in....

[wagner]

Well I got tired of playing grab ass and had a very long talk with my editor today. I think the big issue was communication, and we have that fixed. I also now know what he is looking for and talking about.

 

-The softness he was talking about is digital noise

-Anything I turn in must:

- be at a 100 ISO

- F22

-I need to "flip my mirror" and use the infinity focus

-Shoot multiple shots

-Make sure I have good and multiple focal points

-Have top level depth of field

-ALL interior and under the hood shots must be done in the shade

 

I feel better after talking with him and now knowing more of what he needs. He wants to help me and said I have unlimited potential.

 

Now, was going to send me examples from another persons work until he looked at the metadata and realized his shots were much softer and worse

 

One thing he totally loves is my video work. They want me to start doing video production for the magazine that includes racing and interviews AND they will pay me for the videos in addition to my other work :fuckyeah:

 

I need to do some test shots so he can help me dial in what I'm doing more.

[Tractor]

I can't imagine what he's calling "noise". Your camera should be able to take a photo up to ISO 1600-3200 with extremely low noise. Thats assuming the photo is properly exposed to begin with. Canon's tend to shoot about 1/2 to 1 1/3 stop under exposed so set your compensation until your just blowing some highlights and back down.

 

Tim pretty much covered the technicals behind a sharp image. I'll add that focus point can be hard to master, especially on a Canon. Have you customized your buttons to allow for shutter/exposure to be controlled by the "shutter" button" and the focus to be controlled and locked by the "asterisk" rear button? A large number of canon shooters do this. Especially useful in moving scenes such as people moving at weddings, sports/cars, etc.

 

Another benefit is that it allows you to focus once while on a tripod and then don't touch that button and focus should remain the same or you could turn the focus on the lens to fine tune it and the shutter button won't cause it to focus again while grabbing exposure data and taking the photo.

 

Switching between crop and full frame bodies during a shoot, I see the difference in focusing techniques. Each has its own sweet spot that you have to learn and I've found that takes thousands of photos with each camera. Hopefully canon has made this easier with the newer technologies.

 

if your using Nikon, your SOL. they focus like magic:-)