Nearly impossible to take a \"sharp\" picture

[KipCotter]

I'm really frustrated with my new G3. I had a Nikon 885 before this that seemed to take sharp pictures effortlessly. I have a very hard time getting photos that look sharp with the G3. I've read a lot on this forum, and it seems the general opinion is that the G3 shoots very soft pictures and it's a "good" thing. I'm not there yet, but I have Photoshop 5.5 and guess I'll need to learn to adjust all my pictures. Can people let me know if they sharpen or modify in another way most of the photos that they post from their G3's , or am I doing something completely wrong? I've even used a tripod on backyard shots and I'm still disappointed overall. The picture looks fine when I first pull it up, but if I adjust it to "actual size", it really doesn't look crisp at all.

Also, if you have any favorite sharpening techniques, please pass them along.

Much appreciated.

Kip

[xxlt]

KipCotter...Hello! i am in the same corner as you. Although I've been using the "Raw" settings 100% up till now. Most comments I get posting on this site:
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=116520
All say my photo's are not sharp or crisp. So I'll be waiting along with you for some advice. Btw..I have been using the auto focus 100% and the little green box says take the picture :)

bill from Ohio

[CowboyPoetWannabe]

KipCotter
Can you please post one of your "unsharp" pictures that you think should have turned out better and list the EXIF data for it? Need to know shooting modes, etc.

-CPW

[KipCotter]

Please take a look at this. I definately have worse, but if you click to view the entire image, you will see that the fence, trees, etc. don't appear nice and sharp. The image info. can be viewed also with the button at the bottom. I still can't get pictures to load live in this forum.

Sorry. I would appreciate any suggestions (pre or post photo). I have Photoshop 5.5 but have no experience with it.

Please let me know if I should reasonably be expecting sharper images. I was on a tripod so I know that camera movement wasn't the problem.

Thanks.

http://kipsphotos.fotopic.net/photo.php?id=514161

[CowboyPoetWannabe]

Hmm. I think I see what you mean. Were you using any filters? Even a UV? I can't make much from the EXIF data (unfamiliar format) but it looks like you shot in Superfine Large, not RAW, correct? 1/125 sec at f/8, full wide angle?
Have you ever touched the lens? Cleaning, that is.

-CPW

[KipCotter]

I just cleaned it this morning before the shot. I didn't have on any filters. Maybe a UV or Polarizer would help, but if the quality should be better, I'm thinking about returning this camera.

What are your thoughts?

The only photos I've been happy with have been macros; and they are far and few between. Seems like a lot of agrravating work (not to mention a real distraction from thinking about composition, etc.).

[CowboyPoetWannabe]

I was looking for the possibility of "cleaning haze", especially on a filter. Hmmm. Don't know. Can you go to a store and try another G3 side-by-side with yours? Don't know if the effect will be visible on the LCD, though, even at max magnification during playback.

-CPW

[2Hog]

On page 90 of the G3 users manual there is a way to change the photo effect. It includes a weak , neutral or strong sharpness selection to be used in P,TV,AV or m mode. Apparently cannot be used in Auto mode. Don't know if this will help as I have not actually tried it. Will do so though.

2hog

[satnitefever]

I used to share the same opinion with you KipCotter

I thought I should really post this because this photo really changed it..

http://www.deviantart.com/view/1931587
view of Hong Kong from my room

This is sort of the sharpest photo I have ever taken with my G3..

The EXIF data were:
File Name
IMG_0252.JPG
Camera Model Name
Canon PowerShot G3
Shooting Date/Time
5/15/2003 9:52:02 PM
Shooting Mode
Manual
Photo Effect Mode
Custom
Tv( Shutter Speed )
5
Av( Aperture Value )
8.0
Metering Mode
Evaluative
ISO Speed
50
Lens
7.2 - 28.8 mm
Focal Length
25.1 mm
Digital Zoom
None
Image Size
2272x1704
Image Quality
Superfine
Flash
Off
White Balance
Fluorescent
AF Mode
Manual Focus
File Size
1623KB
File Number
102-0252
Drive Mode
Single-frame shooting

Notice I emphasize the setting Image quality as "Super fine".

I hope this photo encouraged you as much as it did for me =)

Edit: Heres another method of process you could use in photoshop (I am not sure if 5.5 works, you might want to give that a check)

Filter -> Sharpen -> Unsharp mask -> (Then use the settings)

Amount 110 %
Radius 1.0 pixels
Threshold 2 levels

[kowen]

I can understand about the "soft" comments. I shoot mostly in RAW (99%), and don't have PS 6 or 7 not willing to shell out so much money for these programs, so can't use Nik sharpening pro or other sharpening plug-ins.

Having PS 5 LE (Elements 1. also, but with no curves-barely use it), I resort to simple sharpening-don't use high pass filter, (it has that but ?? what is it??) different color channels or other complicated techniques.

My way is pretty simple-if the photo has plenty detail, I use a smaller pixel (radius), say between .3-.7 or.8, but a higher percentage-say 85-105-175-whatever looks best. I think the smaller radius keeps the edge sharpening very small-but effective, and use either 0 or 1 threshold.

I usually view at 100% when doing any sharpening and look for any "halo" in contrasty areas. I also find a print is usually more sharp than what my monitor shows-so if it looks super sharp on the screen, it probably is 'too sharp', looking 'over processed' for a print.
This really is different if you have done film scanning, so I have different expectations-and not having full versions of Photo Shop (but PS5LE is pretty powerful), I just try to get the most from what I have.

If the shot has larger masses of color, I experiment with a larger radius-say .8-1.5 or larger, but a lower percentage of sharpening-maybe 45%, 85%, whatever looks okay but not too overdone.

I also try to use a tripod (since it's new, more-so), and use the smallest aperture. I am experimenting with ISO 100 also-checking noise. It seems if the photo has a bit more contrast, it would appear more sharp.

I do use Breezebrowser and Downloader, so I do use the smart noise reduction feature (low or normal) when I convert my RAW files. I keep the EXIF info in the RAW file, if I want to reconvert a shot. I do believe any noise filter (Canon's processing or Breezebrowser's) could have something to do with softening-maybe not. It reminds me of gaussian blur, like to remove noise in skies.

Just my 2 cents.

Kerry

Bill-nice shots at Photosig-beautiful scenery.

[kowen]

Just posted 2 pics at my Epson gallery-one is a bit cropped. One is a cropped version of the other larger one. It is taken early moring in our driveway, with sharpening-the 1st time 164 .3 0, the second time 46 .7 0, and I did remove a very slight cool color cast.

I guess I need to redo a website so I can post shots a large as I need to without a website automatically limiting the size.

Here's the larger:
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/ViewPhoto?u=4101034&a=30590151&p=63499381&f=0

and smaller:
http://albums.photo.epson.com/j/ViewPhoto?u=4101034&a=30590151&p=63499382&f=0

I do see the difference between my F1 or EOS Rebel and their lenses with fine grain (Reala 100 from Fuji), a 4000 dpi scanner, and the G3. I like that digital lets you keep what you can use; not the case with film-gets expensive.

Kerry

[Dana]

My feelings on the G3 focusing issues...

It ain't all bad, and it ain't all good.

My wife went on a field trip w/my son's class today to the Gold Country in Sacramento. (Part of the California elementary school rite of passage for 4th graders.)

She took the G3 and came back w/lots of great shots, majority of them very sharp. She is NOT a camera goddess in any way, shape, or form.

My experience w/my Oly 2020z (primary digicam before the G3) was that out of focus was a rare problem - more of an exception. W/the G3, "soft focus" (or sometimes just completely missed focus) is a more common exception than I'd like or expect for this level camera.

One factor in this, I think, is that the G3 seems to like to choose the widest possible fstop if allowed to do things on its own, which I think contributes to the problem (lack of DOF). When I've compared shots w/my Oly and the G3, (both cameras with me at the same place/time) the G3 chooses a lower fstop than the oly would for the same shot. They have similar lenses in terms of range (f2 - f2.8 for Oly, f2 - f3 for G3) so overall speed of the lenses is very close.

So between the autofocus mechanism missing sometimes and the reduced DOF, that seems to be a recipe for focus problems.

But I would not say that you can't shoot sharp pics w/the G3 as a blanket statement - I've shot a lot of really nice pics w/out worrying about settings. At the margin, however, the G3 seems to be less forgiving.

Dana

[kowen]

About the focusing, my major gripe is that you have just the sliding scale that shows an approximate focus-no real indicator of the exact focus point. I did notice in an auto focus mode, many of my shots were focused way to close-the subject was maybe 30 or more feet away, the contrast was high enough for the camera to hit focus, but it missed.

In the EXIF info, I see 1.3 or 3 meters-way off, for a subject that could be from . I've resorted to manual focusing most everytime-and lock my setting with the * button. There is nothing like a great exposure, nice scene-but out of focus.

I just had to re-install Win ME after a bad restore wiped out some of my programs-have been doing this the past 3 days. DOF master, a program I've mentioned in previous posts, is a great help in determining acceptable sharpness for photos. It is good for my EOS lenses that have no dof scale; not like my older FD lenses that do. (What are the manufacturers thinking of??)

http://dfleming.ameranet.com/

For Palm Pilot users, there is a downloadable program-I have this on a Palm 515-works great. An excuse to get the Palm (and to help me get organized), it is handy in the field-will fit in my camera bag. Those interested in this program, you can set different focal lengths between 7.2 and 28.8 and make different scales, save them. On the palm, just enter your settings.

I'd say focus is a major point.

Kerry

[Dana]

Here's a creative way to get at part of this problem:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=10973

Dana

[Rodenstock]

KipCotter wrote:
I'm really frustrated with my new G3. I had a Nikon 885 before this that seemed to take sharp pictures effortlessly. I have a very hard time getting photos that look sharp with the G3. I've read a lot on this forum, and it seems the general opinion is that the G3 shoots very soft pictures and it's a "good" thing. I'm not there yet, but I have Photoshop 5.5 and guess I'll need to learn to adjust all my pictures. Can people let me know if they sharpen or modify in another way most of the photos that they post from their G3's , or am I doing something completely wrong? I've even used a tripod on backyard shots and I'm still disappointed overall. The picture looks fine when I first pull it up, but if I adjust it to "actual size", it really doesn't look crisp at all.

Also, if you have any favorite sharpening techniques, please pass them along.

Much appreciated.

Kip
Always shoot at f4, you will see it is always sharp.

[kowen]

Dana,

Thanks for the link to the post about focal length marks-I just did that, shot a series of pics to make these marks. I cut a narrow label just to put a center mark on the outer barrel, then penciled in my marks-what a great idea.

About sharpening, read an article earlier that if you boost the threshold (Photoshop) to about 10 or so, keep the radius at .5 or below, and increase the %-rally high because of the high threshold-perhaps 300 or so, depending on your photo, this might give improved results. Here is a link to that site's page, with examples:

http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/techniques/index.htm

Hope this helps.

Kerry

[xxlt]

Btw...I really enjoy this forum and all of you give me some great ideas! Today I went picture taking and I have sworn off the *RAW* mode forever. I used the superfine mode and used the *landscape* *portrait* ect......I also switched back to the single focus mode. What a difference it Made!...all of my (well almost) pictures were crisp and sharp.
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=916817
Everyone Thank you! :) :)

bill from Ohio

[dtrayers]

Kip,

Just comparing the focus of the foreground to the background, and the fact that it was a pretty bright day, I would say that the f-stop on the shot was pretty small, and I would also guess the zoom was full wide, judging from the field of view. Therefore, your depth of field was pretty large. The planter and post in the foreground seem equally "unsharp" as the houses in the backgound. You may have a focus problem, but I don't think so. Just by looking at the picture and not having any EXIF data to go on, I would guess your camera may have the effects set to low sharpening or a custom effect with sharpening set at the minimum.

I took the liberty of downloading your full size image and tried to sharpen it. I typically use the 'high pass' filter method. I used Photoshop Elements 2.0.

If your not familiar with this method, here's a link to learn about it:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/high-pass-sharpening.shtml


Here's a link to the photo:

http://home.attbi.com/~dtrayers/photos/backyard.jpg

I copied the background layer to a new layer and set the blend mode to Hard Light. I then applied a High Pass filter to the layer copy and used a radius of 5. Then I set the blend opacity to 50%.

It's better, IMO.

By the way, I will only keep your picture on my web site for a week or so. If you have a problem with me hosting it at all, or with the fact I downloaded it and did some sharpening without your permission, let me know and I'll delete them from the web site as well as my hard drive immediately and offer my sincerest apologies.

[xxlt]

Just a update to my reference to sharper pictures
New link: http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=917689

[FrankG3]

I've had my G3 for one week and must say that I am very pleased with the results. What really surprises me is that there are so many people in this forum that are experiencing problems with focus and obtaining sharp pictures.

I can honestly say that I have not had any such similar experiences with my G3. The autofocus is as good as any other camera that I have owned or tried and the pictures are brilliant !!!

If you really have a problem getting sharp pictures then there may be something wrong with your camera or you may be doing something wrong. A passive autofocus system requires some contrast to focus - you cannot expect to point it at a white wall and hope that you will get focus lock.

My only gripe with the camera is the obstruction in the OVF. I initially thought the swivel LCD was a gimmick but now think it is one of the best features on this camera.

[gaz63]

Hi All, i'm with you Frank, i'm more than happy with the camera. Only gripe is can't find much to take piccies of at the moment ( hence the strange interest in the garden lately http://homepage.ntlworld.com/gaz.daznmaz/ )

happy snapping

[NILOLIGIST]

gaz63,

LOL..I am with you on that one, not too much interesting for me to take. There are very interesting things in NYC, but not enough to interest me. I see some very beautiful photos from all over the world. I have found that my interest in changing and I am driving looking for things to shoot. I am even thinking of taking a trip just to go shoot. I love photography, only wish I had this interest sooner.

Also, thinking of upgrading to the D10.

Smile,

[kowen]

Niloligist,

Great night shot in the Last page of the May challenge. Looks like you are up and running, and your eye is "tuned". Nice work on your website. I like that snow scene in Clear, crisp and clean air in your New Jersey Gallery-we rarely get snow.

Regards,

Kerry