User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  6
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: image quality test

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    12 May 2010
    Location
    Beenleigh
    Posts
    320
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Last edited by pjs2; 30-12-2011 at 9:38am.
    Peter

    Canon s3is, 2 x 50Ds, Canon 18-55is, Canon 55-250is, ef 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM, Canon Nifty Fifty f/1.8,
    Sigma 70-200 f2.8 ex dg os hsm, Sigma APO 150-500 f5-6.3 dg os hsm
    tripod, monopod, 4 didgeridoo's.
    Two million years of evolution and I'm still a Homo ergaster.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mustymustang/

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    22 Jun 2010
    Location
    Lake Macquarie
    Posts
    4,883
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Looks a bit soft, Peter. I can't see the EXIF so I can't say whether that's a compression issue or otherwise. Cheers.
    Waz
    Be who you are and say what you mean, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind - Dr. Seuss...
    D700 | D7000 | Nikkor AF-S 18-55 DX 1:3.5-5.6G | Nikkor AF-S 55-300 DX 1:4.5-5.6 G ED | Nikkor AF 50 f/1.8D | Optex OPM2930 tripod/monopod | Enthusiasm ...
    My Flickr images ...

  3. #3
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 May 2010
    Location
    Beenleigh
    Posts
    320
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Whodo,
    The orig photo I think is as sharp as a tack. But when I resize it, it turns out soft. I am a bit of a dufuss when it comes to the pp stuff. I will just have to keep playing around with photo shop till I learn how.
    Cheers
    Peter

    [Image]
    Make = Canon
    Model = Canon EOS 50D
    X Resolution = 72
    Y Resolution = 72
    Resolution Unit = inch
    Date Time = 2011-12-25 13:16:28
    Artist =
    YCbCr Positioning = co-sited
    Copyright =
    Exif IFD Pointer = Offset: 250
    GPS Info IFD Pointer = Offset: 8448
    A401 = 0
    A402 = 1
    A403 = 1
    A406 = 0
    [Camera]
    Exposure Time = 1/2"
    F Number = F7.1
    Exposure Program = Manual
    ISO Speed Ratings = 800
    Exif Version = Version 2.21
    Date Time Original = 2011-12-25 13:16:28
    Date Time Digitized = 2011-12-25 13:16:28
    Components Configuration = YCbcr
    Shutter Speed Value = 1 TV
    Aperture Value = 5.63 AV
    Exposure Bias Value = ±0EV
    Metering Mode = Pattern
    Flash = Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
    Focal Length = 50mm
    Maker Note = 7512 Byte
    User Comment =
    Subsec Time = 0.28"
    Subsec Time Original = 0.28"
    Subsec Time Digitized = 0.28"
    Flashpix Version = Version 1.0
    Color Space = sRGB
    Exif Image Width = 3168
    Exif Image Height = 4752
    Focal Plane X Resolution = 5306.533
    Focal Plane Y Resolution = 5315.436
    Focal Plane Resolution Unit = inch
    [Thumbnail Info]
    Compression = JPEG Compressed (Thumbnail)
    X Resolution = 72
    Y Resolution = 72
    Resolution Unit = inch
    JPEG Interchange Format = Offset: 8560
    JPEG Interchange Format Length = Length: 12806
    [Thumbnail]
    Thumbnail = 120 x 160
    Last edited by pjs2; 30-12-2011 at 9:56am.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    09 Nov 2009
    Location
    Kalgoorlie
    Posts
    1,153
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What steps are you taking in photoshop to resize?

    What is the sharpening set to when you resize? If it is not set to it, try bicubic sharper (best for reduction) and see if that helps.

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    12 May 2010
    Location
    Beenleigh
    Posts
    320
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Copy-of-IMG_0743_edited-5.jpg
    Bicubic sharper


    Copy-of-IMG_0743_edited-3.jpg
    Bicubic

    fess67
    It does look a bit sharper

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    457
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    have a look at these two threads, should give you some good info about sharpening for different purposes, for the web, look at 'progressive sharpening'

    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...gressive+sharp


    http://www.ausphotography.net.au/for...eed-SHARPENING
    Some Nikon stuff... gerrys photo journey
    https://plus.google.com/+GerardBlacklock
    No amount of processing will fix bad composition - trust me i have tried.

  7. #7
    Ausphotography Regular agb's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Sep 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Posts
    825
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Perhaps you might like to read some of Damien Symonds articles on sharpening for the web.
    This one perhaps.http://damiensymonds.blogspot.com/20...eb-lately.html
    The age of entitlement isn't over, it's just over there where you can't get to it.
    When several possibilities exist, the simplest solution is the best.
    "There are no rules" Bruce Barnbaum, The art of Photography
    Graham


  8. #8
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I moved this thread. The Test Zone is for testing AP site features, whereas this thread is more about post processing.

    It is a much lauded guideline that after resizing, one should then sharpen. Sharpening should be the very last step before saving. Resizing a photo means your software does a lot of clever algorythm processing, and a side effect of that process, is that photos often look softer after resizing, So try leaving your sharpening to last, and see how that improves things.
    "It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro

    Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
    Nikon, etc!

    RICK
    My Photography

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Jul 2010
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Dont know wether this will help , I noticed in the Exif data your only using 72 DPI Res, Try 240-300 DPI , I dont often look but I noticed Kym's shot the other day and he uses 240 , I always have used 300 and we both dont have a problem , It's not gunna cost anything to try , May help PS : Just changed it to 300 DPI , Can aynone see a difference
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by William; 30-12-2011 at 12:35pm.
    Canon : 30D, and sometimes the 5D mkIII , Sigma 10-20, 50mm 1.8, Canon 24-105 f4 L , On loan Sigma 120-400 DG and Canon 17 - 40 f4 L , Cokin Filters




  10. #10
    Administrator ricktas's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Jun 2007
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    15,643
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    72ppi was based on the old CRT screen's. Most monitors these days are 100ppi or above, so at least consider doing them about 150ppi as a minimum, though 300ppi is the standard for printing.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    10 Jul 2010
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    6,346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Peter, In answer to your PM, I change my DPI/PPI At the export stage of processing on the TIFF file , I shoot RAW , It then stays with the image , Even to JPEG , You can change it on a JPEG in PS , By going to Image>Image Size>In the POP up box Deselect resample image , Change from 72 to whatever in my case 300 PPI , Then reselect resample , Like this , Hope this helps , Any questions , Just ask - Bill
    Attached Images Attached Images

  12. #12
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ricktas View Post
    72ppi was based on the old CRT screen's. Most monitors these days are 100ppi or above, so at least consider doing them about 150ppi as a minimum, though 300ppi is the standard for printing.
    When printing enlargements, say your don't have pixels for 300ppi at the size, is it better to let the printer work it out, or do some PS enlargements to take your image to 300ppi? If so how do you do it? For a start my uncropped will come in at 240ppi, and I usually crop a bit.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •