Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
Thread started 27 Mar 2006 (Monday) 18:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Howz the sharpness? C&C Please

 
beachgirl
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,099 posts
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area (south bay)
     
Mar 28, 2006 17:20 as a reply to  @ post 1339788 |  #16

cosworth wrote:
Correct.

Bob, we're just trying to point out that any sharpness she's looking for is negated by the artifacts.

Cosworth, OK thanks, YUP it's very blury. And I was actually right for a change. Still kinda stumped on the saving files though. When I saved in SAVE AS It was to big to post but when I save in save for web it it is fine.( quality 10)
I have soooooooooo much to learn and understand.BIG thanks though.
PEacE,
BG




http://pinksandcastle.​smugmug.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
jbkalla
Goldmember
Avatar
2,831 posts
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA
     
Mar 28, 2006 19:22 as a reply to  @ post 1338202 |  #17

bones wrote:
JBKalla.......Correct me If wrong.....I look at the edge of the camera and it looks almost like heat rising from hot pavement....is that what you mean.

Yes. Exactly.

Also, here is an example of 100% crop (I think!). Mr. Lay will correct me if I'm wrong! The first is a 2" full-res version of the center of the second pic, which was downsized to 800px across. (hope this isn't too confusing!)


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


John
flickr (external link) | G+ (external link) | Panoramio (external link) | InterfaceLIFT (external link)
Fujifilm X-T2
| 10-24 f4 R OIS | 50-140mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR | XF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR | 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR | 56mm f/1.2 R | 27mm f/2.8 Pancake |  Retina iMac & MBP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Mar 28, 2006 20:40 |  #18

Dear beachgirl,

A more complete description of how to do a full detail 100% crop is found at Frame 37 - in this thread:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/...t=346​06&page=3

However, the gist of it is as follows:
Looking at the original image (preferably in a 16 bit mode and in a lossless format, such as psd or tif, pick a small region of the original image with critical detail - i.e., detail of the type that would most readily show softness due to motion or due to out of focus. Crop to a size of 100 x 100 pixels, for example. Make certain that as you perform the crop that the cropped segment of the full image ends up as only 100 x 100 pixels. No re-sampling should occur. Do NOT enable any re-sampling. The image should now be about 10000 pixels total, which would be about 30000 bytes (30 kB). Change the mode to 8 bits/channel and save as JPG using highest quality (12) - minimum compression. The file will now be about 10 kB or less. and when viewed on the screen at 100% it will be a little over an inch square. You can optionally choose to make it around 200 x 200 pixels, and the file size will be more like 40 kB. An image done this way will show all viewers the same level of detail as the author sees in the original.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Mar 28, 2006 20:48 as a reply to  @ jbkalla's post |  #19

jbkalla wrote:
Yes. Exactly.

Also, here is an example of 100% crop (I think!). Mr. Lay will correct me if I'm wrong! The first is a 2" full-res version of the center of the second pic, which was downsized to 800px across. (hope this isn't too confusing!)

I cannot tell whether your crop was properly made or not. If you made the crop from the 800 x 533 image then you did not do it correctly. The crop must be made from the original 3456 x 2304 pixel image (assuming that it is from an 8 MP camera).


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Mar 28, 2006 20:52 as a reply to  @ post 1339788 |  #20

cosworth wrote:
Correct.

Bob, we're just trying to point out that any sharpness she's looking for is negated by the artifacts.

Dear cosworth,

The JPG artifacts are certainly a factor. However, when you down-sample an 8 MP image (3456 x 2304 pixels) to an 800 x 533 image for posting on this forum, there is no quality or detail left, so the JPG artifacts only make an already pixellated image into a mottled and posterized pixellated image.:lol:


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jbkalla
Goldmember
Avatar
2,831 posts
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Elizabeth, Colorado, USA
     
Mar 28, 2006 21:13 as a reply to  @ Robert_Lay's post |  #21

Robert_Lay wrote:
I cannot tell whether your crop was properly made or not. If you made the crop from the 800 x 533 image then you did not do it correctly. The crop must be made from the original 3456 x 2304 pixel image (assuming that it is from an 8 MP camera).

It was from the original image, but I didn't do it correctly. Thanks for the tutorial!


John
flickr (external link) | G+ (external link) | Panoramio (external link) | InterfaceLIFT (external link)
Fujifilm X-T2
| 10-24 f4 R OIS | 50-140mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR | XF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 R LM OIS WR | 16-55mm f/2.8 R LM WR | 56mm f/1.2 R | 27mm f/2.8 Pancake |  Retina iMac & MBP

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cosworth
I'm comfortable with my masculinity
Avatar
10,930 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Duncan, BC, Canada
     
Mar 29, 2006 09:14 as a reply to  @ Robert_Lay's post |  #22

Robert_Lay wrote:
Dear cosworth,

The JPG artifacts are certainly a factor. However, when you down-sample an 8 MP image (3456 x 2304 pixels) to an 800 x 533 image for posting on this forum, there is no quality or detail left, so the JPG artifacts only make an already pixellated image into a mottled and posterized pixellated image.:lol:

Exactly why I asked her to send me her original file. I wanted to show her a nice tidy way to resize and sharpen her future pictures.


people will always try to stop you doing the right thing if it is unconventional
Full frame and some primes.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Mar 29, 2006 09:28 as a reply to  @ cosworth's post |  #23

cosworth wrote:
Exactly why I asked her to send me her original file. I wanted to show her a nice tidy way to resize and sharpen her future pictures.

I agree! BTW, if those folks who are good at doing a 100% crop would be so kind as to critique my tutorial on the subject, I would be glad to revise it. I get the impression that it is still too mysterious for people to deal with.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,808 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Near Charlotte, NC.
     
Mar 29, 2006 09:59 as a reply to  @ post 1337410 |  #24

Robert_Lay wrote:
At Frame 37 - Tutorial on Full Detail 100% Crop
http://photography-on-the.net …thread.php?t=34​606&page=3

Try the above procedure and limit your crop to about 2" x2" and it will be of the same detail as your original.

Bob, this link doesn't work for me but your first one does.

EDIT: Now for some reason it does.

I think what might be confusing for some is that you don't have to view the picture at 100% to do a 100% crop. If I get a chance I could do one at lunch and screen capture the steps, or if someone else has a chance it might help.


Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,808 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Near Charlotte, NC.
     
Mar 29, 2006 11:47 as a reply to  @ In2Photos's post |  #25

In2Photos wrote:
Bob, this link doesn't work for me but your first one does.

I think what might be confusing for some is that you don't have to view the picture at 100% to do a 100% crop. If I get a chance I could do one at lunch and screen capture the steps, or if someone else has a chance it might help.

Ok here is a quick example using CS2 with some screen shots. You may comment all you want regarding the pics and my technique.:D

1. This is the original RAW file opened up, nothing else. Notice that the image shows I am viewing at 19.9%.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


2. I then selected the crop tool and blanked the settings.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
19,808 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Dec 2005
Location: Near Charlotte, NC.
     
Mar 29, 2006 11:49 as a reply to  @ In2Photos's post |  #26

3. Here you can see I used the crop tool to select around the head of the bird and clicked the checkmark to crop the image.


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


4. Here is the 100% crop of the image. BTW there has been no processing of this image other than auto levels in ACR to correct exposure. IS it sharp?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Mar 29, 2006 17:20 as a reply to  @ In2Photos's post |  #27

In2Photos wrote:
3. Here you can see I used the crop tool to select around the head of the bird and clicked the checkmark to crop the image.

4. Here is the 100% crop of the image. BTW there has been no processing of this image other than auto levels in ACR to correct exposure. IS it sharp?

Dear Mike,

Tnx a million for sharing your very helpful additional examples of the 100% crop. I'm sure that will be of great assistance to those trying it the first time.
Very much appreciated.


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Anomalyi
Member
Avatar
249 posts
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Oakland, CA
     
Dec 16, 2007 10:16 as a reply to  @ Robert_Lay's post |  #28

Maybe I'm just slow or dense, or both... but there doesn't seem to be any real "exact science" to a 100% crop. You took a full res image and used the marquee tool to make a crop box, which if someone else had done it, could have been a different size. You then cropped the image and saved the selection as a new file.

I guess what I'm beginning to understand is that one guy's 100% crop is going to differ from another and there really is no exact science to it when you select a section with the marquee tool.

If my theory is correct, could one create a new blank canvas, maybe 100x100 or 200x200 pixels and paste the full res image onto that canvas? Once the full res photo has been pasted, you could move it around until you find the section of the photo you'd like to keep as your 100% crop.

This way, all of your crops will at least be consistent. Should the amount of pixels differ from a shot taken by a 30D vs a 5D, considering the megapixel difference?

Honestly, the term 100% crop doesn't make any sense to me. Defining something with a percentage generally allows there to be an equation that can be used to always obtain the same result. A formula. There doesn't seem to be any formula to go along with this "100% crop". To crop something, means to take away, right? So, if I have a number, "50" for example and I take away "100%", I'm now left with nothing. Wouldn't it be better to do a 5 or 10% crop, that way you have a consistent amount of pixels?

Sorry if this has been answered/addressed, but after pouring over the threads, I can't seem to find a straight answer.


1Dx | 1Ds Mark III | 24-70 ƒ/2.8L | 70-200 ƒ/2.8L IS | 300 ƒ/2.8L IS | 1.4x II tc | 580EX | 430EX II
randyashley.co (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Robert_Lay
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,546 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Spotsylvania Co., VA
     
Dec 16, 2007 20:41 |  #29

Anomalyi wrote in post #4514836 (external link)
Maybe I'm just slow or dense, or both... but there doesn't seem to be any real "exact science" to a 100% crop. You took a full res image and used the marquee tool to make a crop box, which if someone else had done it, could have been a different size. You then cropped the image and saved the selection as a new file.

I guess what I'm beginning to understand is that one guy's 100% crop is going to differ from another and there really is no exact science to it when you select a section with the marquee tool.

If my theory is correct, could one create a new blank canvas, maybe 100x100 or 200x200 pixels and paste the full res image onto that canvas? Once the full res photo has been pasted, you could move it around until you find the section of the photo you'd like to keep as your 100% crop.

This way, all of your crops will at least be consistent. Should the amount of pixels differ from a shot taken by a 30D vs a 5D, considering the megapixel difference?

Honestly, the term 100% crop doesn't make any sense to me. Defining something with a percentage generally allows there to be an equation that can be used to always obtain the same result. A formula. There doesn't seem to be any formula to go along with this "100% crop". To crop something, means to take away, right? So, if I have a number, "50" for example and I take away "100%", I'm now left with nothing. Wouldn't it be better to do a 5 or 10% crop, that way you have a consistent amount of pixels?

Sorry if this has been answered/addressed, but after pouring over the threads, I can't seem to find a straight answer.

You are doing quite nicely!

When I first came on the scene I found that there were people using the term "100%" crop without anyone ever explaining what they meant by that expression. Once I became satisfied that most people were consistent in their interpretation of what it was and how it was used, I decided to try and standardize it. I added the phrase "full detail" to the term "100% crop" in order to make the term more unique and less ambiguous. I was terribly frustrated that even though I had presented a full explanation of how to do it, with example pictures, confusion still reigned. Then the gentleman with the street name "Bobster" came along and demonstrated the simpler way using the crop tool. I added his steps to my link so that people should have two different ways to do it - in the hope that one of the two ways would catch on.

The bottom line is that POTN is so democratic that chaos is only a small step backwards from the norm in many discussions, and there are very few true standards prevailing for how to do things. Which is fine - that's what makes the world go 'round.

BTW, in the term "100% crop" the 100% seems to refer to the level of detail, relative to the original image.

This will probably start a whole new round of confusion:lol:


Bob
Quality of Light (external link), Photo Tool ver 2.0 (external link)
Canon Rebel XTi; EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-f/5.6 USM; EF-S 18-55 mm f/3.5-f/5.6; EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM; EF 50mm f/1.4 USM; Canon Powershot G5; Canon AE1(2); Leica R4s; Battery Grip BG-E3; Pentax Digital Spotmeter with Zone VI Mod & Calibration.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
magoosmc
Senior Member
Avatar
980 posts
Gallery: 80 photos
Likes: 479
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Keuka Lake NY
     
Mar 28, 2015 13:08 |  #30

Found this from 2006 - scroll down about half way:

http://photography-on-the.net …hread.php?t=152​215&page=2


https://www.flickr.com​/photos/22055591@N05/a​lbums (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

11,312 views & 0 likes for this thread
Howz the sharpness? C&C Please
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Critique Corner 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is mason.snipes
336 guests, 293 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.