Picture of my little boy w/Canon 24-80 L Lens

[jimchapin468]

Hi! Just wondering if you guys think that this is a good photograph of my son -- looking at sharpness, color, flash lighting, and etc.. Thanks for your help! Jimmy:)

[GyRob]

well i do, sharp,nice lighting, maybe a bit to close ,but a lovly shot.
Rob.

[jimchapin468]

Actually it is 100% cropped because the picture was bigger than 100k so I could not post the original.

[remo]

Very nice, sharp, good color........

[ed2day]

24-70L? Is this the second sample of that lens? I'd like to hear what YOU think. Is there a difference?

[jimchapin468]

ed2day -- This is the 2nd lens and yes I think it is better than the first one I got. IF I had to give a percentage I would say about 35%. What did you think about the picture? How is your 24-70 lens working out? Jimmy

[Sean-Mcr]

Looks too pixelated on my screen actually to give an opinion on it

[ed2day]

Probably should have posted a smaller image size, but looks pretty darn good for a 100% crop at that size.

[Miika]

The picture suffers from awful JPEG artifacts! Way too much compression.

Miika

[jimchapin468]

Will someone please explain what you mean by to much JPEG compression? I am new at this -- Thanks Jimmy

[drisley]

Is there such thing as a 24-80L? Is it discontinued?

[tim]

Will someone please explain what you mean by to much JPEG compression? I am new at this -- Thanks Jimmy

When you save a photo as a JPG you have to choose a level of compression, between high and low. Some programs will have a default that will be used if you don't change it. To lower the file size and keep the quality up i'd make the photo smaller than you have above, and use less compression. Another advantage of lowering the resolution is it will fit onto peoples web browser screens without having to scroll the screen sideways.

[wilflee]

From a technical perspective, too much USM. The fine hair on his forehead, the white thread on his dark colored shirt and the highlight on his teeth show signs of over-sharpening.

But the key thing is, what story does this picture tell? A picture that elicits emotional response from the viewer is a good picture, even if the technical aspects are not so strong. So, perfect technical aspect is not the only characteristic of a good picture.

[drisley]

From a technical perspective, too much USM. The fine hair on his forehead, the white thread on his dark colored shirt and the highlight on his teeth show signs of over-sharpening.
.
I thnk that may be jpg compression artifacting.

[MadMesh]

Nice Pict

[condyk]

The lens looks fine, but you might want to return that kid. He looks a bit too cheeky and I'm sure you could get a replacement under warranty.


:p

[Miika]

A quick explanation, I hope I don't sound rude:

Look the quality setting (1-12) when you save a jpeg. Smaller number - smaller file, more compression and obviously more artifacts. Bigger numer of quality: less compression, bigger file and less artifacts.

You had squeezed the 961x1352 (uncompressed TIFF approx 3.72 MB) image to about 78 kilobytes. The original data is replaced by rough approximations or larger areas of near color tones (complex algorithm), that can be seen as weird shapes or tiles - in this particular image just look the skin at close distance.

If you follow the (forum standard) image size limitation of 800 pixels on the widest side, and keep the file just below 200 kB limit, the result will generally look very good.

By the way, the original uncompressed file 961x1352 would look just fine when printed to 4x6 size (with white borders around the image)!

Miika

[Andy_T]

Miika,

the forum allows only attachments of 100K for JPG images.
Jimmy would have to link the image from another site then (e.g. provide a link to his PBase account)

I think it's a good and sharp image, but it's hard to tell with the low quality.

Best regards,
Andy

[Miika]

the forum allows only attachments of 100K for JPG images.


Sorry, I must have "doublechecked" that when wrote the message!

Miika