Is this Sharp?

OK, not sure I'm happy about with the ability to get sharp pics on the 20D. Most of the stuff I shoot is low light band stuff so I'm shooting wide open with slow shutter speeds. My thought is I'm moving or the artist is moving.

So I shot a couple outdoor shots in Raw, added a little sharpening and tweaked contrast and exposure a little. I then converted to JPEG in PS2.0 and saved for web.

Do you think this is sharp?


My thoughts are it is a touch soft but I think that is the conversion, the full size in PS or Rawshooters does look a little more sharp than this picture here.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

At that size, the eyes look dead-on for focus. If you're shooting wide open, your DOF will be shallow which is why the nose and ears look "soft".

On another note, the color seems a bit off, maybe it's just me.

The color looks off to me as well. As for the picture being sharp, it looks ok, not super sharp, but not super soft either.

the color in this pic is extremely blue and levels seem off. the eyes i think are pretty much in focus but the nose is soft becuase of lack of depth of field. did flash fire in this becuase the lighting seems harsh. for your band shots, shooting wide open and increasing your iso is all you can do to get sharp pics especialy if it is dark. i know the iso on the 20d goes up to 1600, but under custom functions you can expand your iso to 3200. with your 2.8 lenses and this you should be able to do this especially if they are IS lenses. i would also try to shoot on a monopod or tripod but that isnt always possible so brace yourself well. hope that helps

thanks guys, being a little color blind I did not see the "blue". Maybe it is my monitor but I've never heard anyone say that before. I'll look at it on my laptop and see.

I did use fill flash on this, I don't think I was wide open but I'll check.

I do think I made a mistake and had the ISO set for 1600 and this was outdoor. I'll try some more this weekend and see if they are any better. I think I had the white balance off as well....would that matter in RAW?

Thanks!


EDIT...Is this any better?

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

The sharpness is fine, at least in the eyes.

Yes, it is VERY blue (well, cyan, actually, but who is counting.)

Photoshop Elements has a great color cast tool. I targeted his eyes as "white" and the program shifted all the colors around that.

If you use a tighter aperture, you will get a deeper area that is "in focus". Next time you and Baxter are taking pictures, I suggest you try f11 or so, to try to get both his nose and eyes in focus.

Rad

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

Nicely corrected Rad and a good subject to start with (I'm a sucker for dog photos). I like the frame you added Rad.

A very minute bit of camera shake. Did you take this on a tripod? If it was hand held, was your shutter speed 1/125 or greater? It does not look sharp to me but close. ...Bob

Frame was on the original. Credit where credit is due.

Rad

Ooops...brain short circuit. I like the frame you used taygull

Thanks for the tips.

I have got to get me a "check list" to follow before I click. I had the ISO all out of wack. The crazy thing is I thought I had the fstop at 11 or more (or is it less)? I was outdoors but I forgot to change the WB settings from my last shoot and my ISO.

Does the WB setting have an impact when shooting RAW, I would guess it does?

Either there is a problem with focus, or U made it look like it. Have to think what U wants to show in that pic. Eyes and ears? Or eyes and nose?
Personally I do think that the quality of sharpness in that image is very poor.
Left eye looks to me like it’s out of focus. Right looks better.

Just a suggestion:
You used the Sigma I assume (as you referred to using F2.8)
Take a pic outdoors , ISO 100 , F5.6 , with the camera supported on a "bean bag" (Any small bean bag type thing will do - a plastic bag filled with rice - better than a tripod)
Use mirror lock up to be sure of no mirror slap induced shake, or at leat use the timer instead of pushing the shutter release with your finger.

You should now have a good "reference pic" to show what the lens can do not wide open , and with no camera shake.

Then you can try opening lens up towards f2.8 , or try increasing ISO , confident you are seeing the results of these changes with reference to a known "best possible"
Try some hand held shots and you should get at least some good examples of what camera shake looks like.

I'll try that last tip.

I really think some of it is the software. I did a shoot last night, posted a few of the pics in Performing Arts. They seemed a bit soft.

Well I took them to Ritz and had a couple printed, they were as sharp as anything I could expect. I think I'm loosing a bunch of sharpness (is that a word) in the converting process.