Not so sharp

[dieseldavey]

Hello all

i have just purchased a 20d camera after having owned a nikon d70 and to be honest aint that happy with the results (sharpness) could anyone help i have been in parrameters and altered the sharpness to maximum but still not as sharp as nikon and before you ask yes i know how to take photographs having done this for over 20 years with numorus qualifications thanks :cry:

[badrotation]

the 20d was designed for post-processing in a program like photoshop. After a bit of unsharp mask, your photos will look amazing.

[Bob_A]

It might help if you could provide a crop of an example photo. Also:

- What are you using for USM in Photoshop (post sharpening is a must)?
- What lens(s) are you using?
- Are you using a UV filter, if so, which one? I read one report where a cheap UV filter caused AF problems.

The following may help:

http://www.photoworkshop.com/canon/EOS_Digital.pdf

Take a look at pages 25-32.

[Parson]

I'd be interested in knowing what it was about the D70 that you didn't like to make you switch to the 20D?

Dave H.

[dieseldavey]

Wanted to get as sharp a image as poss but so far they aint as goodas d70
I'd be interested in knowing what it was about the D70 that you didn't like to make you switch to the 20D?

Dave H.

[dieseldavey]

I am new to photo shop so am getting to know all the different sides to it any quick advice would be greatly appriciated

[dieseldavey]

Hi i hope the fles have been attached properly

[Bob_A]

I am new to photo shop so am getting to know all the different sides to it any quick advice would be greatly appriciated

As mentioned in the Canon pdf file that I pointed you to, as a first try use unsharp mask with the following settings:

Amount = 300%
Pixels = 0.3
Threshold = 0

You find USM under Filter -> Sharpen -> Unsharp Mask


I use this formula for most of my photos and it works pretty well. Keep in mind that you can get similar results with different combinations of Amount and Pixels.

[Bob_A]

Hi i hope the fles have been attached properly

Watch for error messages when you attach files. There is a limit to how big a file you can attach, so you may have to save it at a lower quality before posting.

[dieseldavey]

Got it thanks for your help i,ll give it a go Thanks again

[dieseldavey]

If you feel you have anymore advice regards photo shop in the future please feel free Thanks

[Stearmandriver]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone played with "smart sharpen" in CS2? Pros / cons you've found of "smart sharpen" vs. "unsharp mask"?

[Dante King]

I think it is important to know what mode dieseldavey is shooting in? Raw, jpeg and size etc...

I have found the 20D to be remarkably sharp even shooting raw. The settings for jpeg capture in the 20D can produce captures right out of the camera that are insanely (sometimes to sharp) sharp and ready for printing with out any further processing.

Examples of captures would be helpful as would be the settings and mode used.

Welcome to POTN Dieseldavey!!!!!!

[Bob_A]

I think it is important to know what mode dieseldavey is shooting in? Raw, jpeg and size etc...

I have found the 20D to be remarkably sharp even shooting raw. The settings for jpeg capture in the 20D can produce captures right out of the camera that are insanely (sometimes to sharp) sharp and ready for printing with out any further processing.

Examples of captures would be helpful as would be the settings and mode used.

Welcome to POTN Dieseldavey!!!!!!

Hiya Dante,

Shooting mode may make a difference in how much sharpening should be applied (i.e., what resolution the the photo was taken at), but all photos from a 20D can benefit from sharpening in PS. This is because of the anti-aliasing filter that is in front of the sensor and due to the way digital cameras interpolate color data. Photos from the 20D are not supposed to be sharp if you shoot in Raw and sharpness is set to average. Some can be decent, but unless you want the photo to look a tiny bit soft, all can be improved.

In Raw you can select some sharpening when you do the conversion to jpeg, but even at the highest setting I'm not able to get as nice a result as when I use USM in PS. So I do my conversion with sharpness set at average during the conversion and always apply some USM, starting with the formula I gave in the other post.


Bob

[I Simonius]

I am new to photo shop so am getting to know all the different sides to it any quick advice would be greatly appriciated

If you are new to photoshop maybe just use the Elements version that came with the camera

In either program (photoshop elements or full photoshop) got to Filter>Sharpen - then try the first option , if that isn't sharp enough play with the others esp unsharp mask (bonkers name)
Provided that your shooting technique is good and the lenses are decent (which all apply to you) then you will get nice sharp pics. The 20Ds pics DO look soft until post processed, but the detail IS there

have fun :D

[I Simonius]

Just out of curiosity, has anyone played with "smart sharpen" in CS2? Pros / cons you've found of "smart sharpen" vs. "unsharp mask"?

I tried it on a few pics and it didnt seem to do anything - I'll play with it more later but so far not stunned by it

[ed2day]

What lens are you using? I'm surprised no one asked. Presumably not the same one used with the Nikon. If it's the 18-55 kit lens, mine won't produce sharp pics either. I'll never understand slapping a $100 zoom lens on a $1500 camera unless it's just temporary until you can upgrade.

[d'homme]

I took some photos inside yesterday at 1600, no flash. Soo happy with the sharpness. Even using a telephoto lens.

[badrotation]

What lens are you using? I'm surprised no one asked. Presumably not the same one used with the Nikon. If it's the 18-55 kit lens, mine won't produce sharp pics either. I'll never understand slapping a $100 zoom lens on a $1500 camera unless it's just temporary until you can upgrade.


Dont say the kit lens is not sharp... It is MUCH sharper than most people think...


Here is an example... something like a 20 second exposure at f/22 ISO 400

http://www.wtfhost.com/files/img5153sharpsmall5kp.jpg

[I Simonius]

Dont say the kit lens is not sharp... It is MUCH sharper than most people think...


Here is an example... something like a 20 second exposure at f/22 ISO 400


Indeed the leaves on that tree are pin sharp ;)

[ed2day]

I said mine was not sharp. And it isn't. And judging by the number of people unhappy with the kit lens along with the number of people pleased with it I suspect quality control is the issue. But I've seen a lot of great pics with the kit lens. Nice pic BTW.

[Dante King]

Hiya Dante,

Shooting mode may make a difference in how much sharpening should be applied (i.e., what resolution the the photo was taken at), but all photos from a 20D can benefit from sharpening in PS. This is because of the anti-aliasing filter that is in front of the sensor and due to the way digital cameras interpolate color data. Photos from the 20D are not supposed to be sharp if you shoot in Raw and sharpness is set to average. Some can be decent, but unless you want the photo to look a tiny bit soft, all can be improved.

In Raw you can select some sharpening when you do the conversion to jpeg, but even at the highest setting I'm not able to get as nice a result as when I use USM in PS. So I do my conversion with sharpness set at average during the conversion and always apply some USM, starting with the formula I gave in the other post.


Bob

Hiya Bob!
My unserstanding of the 20D is that none of the parameters affect raw shooting. So sharpness setting is uneffectual when sooting raw.

my concern was that he was expecting a sharpened jpeg output from the camera and had the camrea in raw capture mode.

[drisley]

Ed2day hit the nail on the head.
We have to know what lenses were being used on both cameras.
If you are comparing a 50mm prime you were using on the Nikon to the kit lens on the 20D, then there is your problem.
As far as the kit lens goes, tests I've seen show the 18-55mm kit lens to actually be better optically than the kit lens included with the D70. However, as others have mentioned, there seems to be a quality control problem with the 18-55 lens. The one I had was actually very sharp.

The 20D outresolves the D70 by a nice margin, so it is capable of taking sharper pictures than the D70.
However, the D70 has a less agressive AA filter than the 20D. So, the 20D will require sligthly more post work, but in the end will give better results.

[Bob_A]

Hiya Bob!
My unserstanding of the 20D is that none of the parameters affect raw shooting. So sharpness setting is uneffectual when sooting raw.

my concern was that he was expecting a sharpened jpeg output from the camera and had the camrea in raw capture mode.

Bonjour Dante,

The parameters are applied when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg before editing in PS :) So, when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg the result isn't necessarily any different than when you shoot jpeg. You set the sharpness, contrast, saturation, white balance, etc. prior to the conversion process.


By the way (off topic) one thing I did notice when doing the conversion from Raw is that while jpegs from the camera at the highest setting are "Fine", the ones converted at the highest resolution using EOS Viewer Utility are "Superfine". There is a significant difference in file size indicating that there is a difference in resolution.

Personally I doubt if I really need to shoot Raw, I just do it because it seems to make sense for archiving my images ... sort of like how I archive negatives for film photography.

[SDJNJ]

Has anyone used the Smart sharp in CS2 vs USM? If so, what's your take on it? Thanks!

[Bob_A]

Has anyone used the Smart sharp in CS2 vs USM? If so, what's your take on it? Thanks!

Check the first page of this topic ... Simon King made a comment regarding this.

[SDJNJ]

Thanks, Bob! I did miss that.

[jfrancho]

The parameters are applied when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg before editing in PS So, when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg the result isn't necessarily any different than when you shoot jpegThat's news to me.

[Bob_A]

That's news to me.

In what way? If you use EOS Viewer Utility you set everything prior to conversion.

[Bob_A]

And with different settings ...

[Dante King]

Bonjour Dante,

The parameters are applied when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg before editing in PS :) So, when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg the result isn't necessarily any different than when you shoot jpeg.

Sup Bob!
so you are saying that the camera's parameters are applied to my editing in PSCS? That is odd as I dont beleive that my cameras settings are imbedded in my raw files. Does the PC take my raw files and converth them from raw to jpeg to tiff as saved on my PC? Sounds odd too. Please calrify as I am hopelessly confused.

[prime80]

Has anyone used the Smart sharp in CS2 vs USM? If so, what's your take on it? Thanks!

I've actually started using Smart Sharpen almost exclusively. I like the output compared to USM, and it's basically a 1-slider approach. Try it out and judge for yourself.

[jfrancho]

I think the parameters Dante referred to are the in camera parameters.

The parameters are applied when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg before editing in PS So, when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg the result isn't necessarily any different than when you shoot jpegThis is misleading. You are saying that you change all these settings, move this slider and that, yet somehow the result is the same as if I shot in jpeg? Why would I bother? The WHOLE point of raw capture is to take control of these variables and make the adjustments yourself. Several different versions (conversions) of the same raw file can be made. See this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=78879) if you don't understand. This many interpretations (notice the word implies a human trait) cannot be possible using jpeg mode. I don't use the EOS viewer utility. It looks like the kind of program that meets the minimum level requirements, yet falls short of my expectations. Finally, I don't convert raw to jpeg. Especially if it will be printed. I use seperate workflows developed for specific output.
I'm not sure that anyone asked, but on what do the pictures not look sharp enough? Sharpening in in ACR is plenty fine for prints up to 8x12. Capture One takes it a little even farther, making pretty sharp tiff files for viewing on a monitor. A minimum loss jpeg may need some sharpening, but not nearly the amount previously suggested in the thread. What level of compression was used? Are the images downsampled for the web? If USM was used, what method was employed?
Raw is tricky. I think I figured it out myself over the course of 6 or 7 months. The book recommended by Tim validated many "best practices" I'd discovered, and revealed a few new ones as well. So you can hunt and peck, and maybe you'll get it right, if you are lucky. Or you can learn how to use the tools to acheive the expected results.

I got crossed up, I thought I had a link to this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=79249)earlier

[jfrancho]

And with different settings ...Seriously, that program is a turkey. Download Rawshooter (http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.html), and see if your tune doesn't change.

[jfrancho]

Sup Bob!
so you are saying that the camera's parameters are applied to my editing in PSCS? That is odd as I dont beleive that my cameras settings are imbedded in my raw files.Some are. This is where the "As Shot" values come from. But, you, like me, probably grab a slider about a millisecond after the image loads....

[Bob_A]

[QUOTE=jfrancho]I think the parameters Dante referred to are the in camera parameters.

The WHOLE point of raw capture is to take control of these variables and make the adjustments yourself. QUOTE]

Yes ... I don't think I said anything that disagrees with this, although I could have worded it better ...

My point is that when you do the conversion from Raw to jpeg or Tiff you apply whatever parameters you want. Not necessarily what you would be using in camera if you shot jpeg ...

Personally I only adjust white balance and sometimes digital exposure compensation when converting, with everything else set to average or neutral. I do all other corrections in PS. For that EVU is fine. No doubt I could probably do more with my Raw files with a better utility, but at least by shooting/archiving as Raw I can come back to the Raw file later and try something different.

[Bob_A]

Seriously, that program is a turkey. Download Rawshooter (http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.html), and see if your tune doesn't change.

I have Rawshooter Essential also. Nice app, but EVU is ok for basic conversions.

[Bob_A]

Sup Bob!
so you are saying that the camera's parameters are applied to my editing in PSCS? That is odd as I dont beleive that my cameras settings are imbedded in my raw files. Does the PC take my raw files and converth them from raw to jpeg to tiff as saved on my PC? Sounds odd too. Please calrify as I am hopelessly confused.

The in camera settings are not the ones I'm talking about. I'm referring to the similar settings that you can adjust in the software you use to convert from Raw to jpeg or Tiff.

i.e., EVU and other software first display the "as shot" settings which can be tweaked to whatever you need before conversion.

[jfrancho]

Let me re ask these questions, as they may have been missed by DieselDave:
I'm not sure that anyone asked, but on what do the pictures not look sharp enough? Sharpening in in ACR is plenty fine for prints up to 8x12. Capture One takes it a little even farther, making pretty sharp tiff files for viewing on a monitor. A minimum loss jpeg may need some sharpening, but not nearly the amount previously suggested in the thread. What level of compression was used? Are the images downsampled for the web? If USM was used, what method was employed?

It would really help if posted some pics from the old and new cameras, and explain what you are looking to acheive.

As far as the kit lens goes, I must have a good one:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=59992
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=58462
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=61451

[Bob_A]

As far as the kit lens goes, I must have a good one:


or you know how to use it :)

I don't have the kit lens, but from the MTF's it looks like it isn't as terrible as some people would like to make out. To me it seems like a pretty good value.

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=10512

I think some of the kit lenses that come with film SLR's are much, much worse (such as the 28-80 or the 28-90). I can't remember which one of these that I had, but I got rid of it after about a month and got the much sharper 28-105 II USM. I wouldn't doubt that for the same range the EF-S 18-55 is probably better than my 28-105 II USM.