First DSLR results

[arej]

After my thread (and your recommendations) a few months ago about which DSLR to go for, I chose the Canon 450D with the kit lens and am very pleased - still trying to get to grips with how to do everything. Went to Regent's Park the other day and these are a couple of the results. Any C&C is more than welcome!




These were all actually taken with my dad's old Olympus 28-200mm lens with an adapter. This works very well but I am wondering whether to get a new 300mm ish zoom lens. What are all of your thoughts on that?
Thanks

[DIW35]

It's a good start. The berries look a little soft to me. Have you applied any sharpening in PP? The fourth picture also looks a little flat, and might perhaps benefit from a tweak of contrast and saturation.

[kevin63]

Just a bit of sharpening and some contrast seems to make it look a bit cleaner I think.

[trackcar]

Numpty post here : but why after you've bought several hundreds of pounds worth of DSLR should you need to add sharpness? or contrast for that matter? It's surely the photographic equivalent of a graphic equaliser? You'd be shot down in flames for suggesting electronically tampering with sounds so why is it accepted norm to tamper with digital pics? Any info appreciated thankyou

[DIW35]

Are you saying that you wouldn't consider using a graphic equaliser when listening to your music?

[GetCarter]

trackcar said:

Numpty post here : but why after you've bought several hundreds of pounds worth of DSLR should you need to add sharpness? or contrast for that matter? It's surely the photographic equivalent of a graphic equaliser? You'd be shot down in flames for suggesting electronically tampering with sounds so why is it accepted norm to tamper with digital pics? Any info appreciated thankyou

Hi there

Hopefully some answers.

Firstly, when you re-size an image to post, you'll need to sharpen as it loses a lot in the re-sizing.

Secondly, SLRs and DSLRs are not that bright, you have to work hard to get the camera to see what's there - if they fail (as they often do) you can spend time in the darkroom or on a computer to get the image towards what you saw.

Lastly, I spend my working life tampering with sounds, and have not (yet) been shot down in flames (!)

[SamHH]

kevin63 said:

Just a bit of sharpening and some contrast seems to make it look a bit cleaner I think.

I prefer the original. They all look good to me.

[trackcar]

Thanks for the reply Steve I spent my early days with film and used to spend time manipulating pics in the darkroom to achieve certain effects, but a soft picture was soft for a reason : poor lens or poor use of a good lens. In this day I would have thought soft pics were a thing of the past but seems not. If only there was an add-sharpness button on my enlarger

[SamHH]

trackcar said:

Thanks for the reply Steve I spent my early days with film and used to spend time manipulating pics in the darkroom to achieve certain effects, but a soft picture was soft for a reason : poor lens or poor use of a good lens. In this day I would have thought soft pics were a thing of the past but seems not. If only there was an add-sharpness button on my enlarger

I think that some cameras have menu options to change the way images are processed before they are written to the card. Maybe you can change the sharpness in this way.

[RobDickinson]

You need to add sharpening depending on the specific output you want, websized, large/small print etc - all require differing levels of sharpening.

So for the camera to do it for you means it will be wrong some of the time and you cant remove it.

Especialy with raw you have to process the file, levels, colour, sharpening etc.

[Simpo Two]

The bench stands out by far, but just needs a subject - person, dog etc.

[beano500]

Not a daft question...

trackcar said:

...why after you've bought several hundreds of pounds worth of DSLR should you need to add sharpness?

Inherent result of the physics of the light falling on/between the sensors. You don't need to, but you'll notice a big visual difference (and pleasant improvement) to whichever output if you apply an appropriate amount.

[slartibartfast]

the soft focus will more likely be a result of the kit lense that came with all it.
if it's the 18-55mm kit lense, mines exactly the same.
you can get some good results with it but you need to use a tripod and an small aperture.

i like the bench shot,i've seen similar shots in stock companies that have sold really well, all be it in colour.

Paul

[trackcar]

I guess i'm struggling with the idea that you can't in theory (apart from best guessing) add sharpness to an image which isn't inherently sharp on the sensor .. however what you appear to be saying is that the image would have been sharp on the sensor, but resizing means some of that is lost, so what you are doing is putting the sharpness back (by clever use of deduction of the sharpness of the original image and applying that sharpness curve to a resized image) to get it appearing sharp afterwards. Kinda.

[beano500]

And be wary of thinking "sharpness" and "focus" in the same brain at the same time (men, only - women can carry on multi-tasking). You cannot, in theory or practice, make an image that is not focussed, more focussed in post processing.

Sharpening is a totally different idea.

Someone else wrote about it, so it's easier than me explaining the stuff by looking here

And in that explanation, I haven't used the first method, but "High Pass" sharpening gives excellent and controlled results, especially for selective sharpening. For all of an image, LAB sharpening makes for a great result on colour images. Overall, USM is the easiest to apply. For non-critical work I now let Lightroom 2 sharpen on output via its fixed algorithms that you select as part of the export module.

Edited by beano500 on Monday 20th October 08:41

[arej]

DIW35 said:

It's a good start. The berries look a little soft to me. Have you applied any sharpening in PP? The fourth picture also looks a little flat, and might perhaps benefit from a tweak of contrast and saturation.

Other than the bench they are straight out of the camera.

kevin63 said:

Just a bit of sharpening and some contrast seems to make it look a bit cleaner I think.

Thanks, I think this makes it look like a better photo, not sure which I prefer though - I would have rathered to notice at the time of taking it as opposed to PP but I guess everyone strives for that!

SamHH said:

They all look good to me.

Thanks

Simpo Two said:

The bench stands out by far, but just needs a subject - person, dog etc.

Thanks, something to think about for future photos.

slartibartfast said:

the soft focus will more likely be a result of the kit lense that came with all it.
if it's the 18-55mm kit lense, mines exactly the same.
you can get some good results with it but you need to use a tripod and an small aperture.

None were taken with the kit lens, all with an old Olympus manual focus + adapter.

slartibartfast said:

i like the bench shot,i've seen similar shots in stock companies that have sold really well, all be it in colour.

Paul

Thanks. I'm very pleased with the bench shot and thought it looked better with this "old" effect, not quite as pleased with the colour version. This is it: (slight increase in exposure and contrast - no sharpening!!)

Thanks all for comments.

[slartibartfast]

if i were to use that as stock i'd leave it as it is in colour as the customer can adjust it as he/she wants.

and i think i prefer it in colour

[Simpo Two]

arej said:

I'm very pleased with the bench shot and thought it looked better with this "old" effect, not quite as pleased with the colour version.

Agreed. It's a good example of a shot that (IMHO) doesn't quite work in normal colour, but comes alive with suitable treatment (possibly because of the man/dog deficiency!). Would also work in high contrast BW.

[arej]

Simpo Two said:

arej said:

I'm very pleased with the bench shot and thought it looked better with this "old" effect, not quite as pleased with the colour version.

Agreed. It's a good example of a shot that (IMHO) doesn't quite work in normal colour, but comes alive with suitable treatment (possibly because of the man/dog deficiency!). Would also work in high contrast BW.

Had a look of the high contrast B&W too!