View Full Version : Deceptive screen
I'm feeling a bit disheartened today. I'm wondering if I have a setting or something wrong with my camera or if I am doing something wrong when taking a picture.
Yesterday I went out for 6 hours walking amongst the rain forest on a overcast sort of day and played with the manual settings and took a few shots of the same thing with different aperature and shutter speeds to practice and learn what is best. So doing landscape type pictures. I've taken over 80 shots and I know not all of them are going to turn out well, but I do remember looking at my screen after the shot had been taken and thinking yep, perfect! It looked like a great picture and I was really quite chuffed.
Now I have come home and looked at the pictures on the computer and I'm disappointed. A lot of the pictures are out of focus for some reason. Whether I have used the wrong settings I am unsure. I do use a central focus point, but maybe I just haven't got my composure correct. This is all fine, but the thing that is really bugging me is that they all looked fine on the camera at the time! If they hadn't of course I would have retaken the picture. Those two or so pictures I thought would be the best, I can't even seem to find. *sigh*
So I guess my question is why is the screen picture not telling me the truth? Should I ignore it all together or is there a setting to change? Does anyone have any help for me??
Oh... and I am using a tripod now.
Thanks.
It is disappointing, but because the resolution of your LCD screen is so small, you definitely can't rely on it to check sharpness, unless you can zoom in to the image on it. I am not sure with your camera.
I am not a landscaper, but if you are using a tripod, manually focussing by using your viewfinder will probably give you better results. also it depends what aperture you have used, if you want more in focus you need a higher f stop.
If you are not sure about settings, check out the new to photography forum as there are some great tips in there. :)
Steve Axford
04-08-2010, 2:50pm
The screen picture is very small, so it will not really show if things are out of focus. You will have to zoom in to check that and even then, with many cameras, you will not see the full resolution. As for other things, I find that the small screen does not give you a true representation of how the photo will look when displayed much bigger. You just have to get used to that. Photography still contains some elements of prediction. ie from how the scene looks to how will it look when finally printed or displayed. It's not really WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) just yet. Nor will it ever be.
Definitely a disappointing experience, it's happened to me many times.
Oh... and I am using a tripod now.Did you mean you used a tripod for this shoot, or that you are going to use one in future? My first thought was that for the conditions (rain forest, overcast) maybe your shutter speeds were a bit slow resulting in some motion blur. If you can post a couple of images with the EXIF data intact we might be able to give you some more specific answers.
Cheers.
Thanks for your comments guys. I did use a tripod for this shoot. I also took my time looking through the finder and then standing back andhalf pressing the button and adjusting exposure. I did take a few with different exposures, because the correct exposure was just way to bright.
Phil, I've tried to upload the pictures to photobucket, but not having any luck. I will try tomorrow.
I don't know much about Canon Lenses so was wondering if you have 'Image Stabilization' and was it turned on?
Always turn off IS when you are using a tripod. I believe that when you have your Camera on a tripod and have IS turned on the lens IS mechanism constantly looks for movement and thus causes vibrations which slightly blur your images.
I hope you work out your issue and get some pleasing shots soon.
alba100
04-08-2010, 7:54pm
I'm pretty new to this - but could it be the act of pressing the shutter causes some movement at slow shutter speed, or the mirror lifting causes slight movement, even on a tripod
Might it help to use a remote or a 3 sec delay.
This is the engineer in me coming out, not the photographer
Darey, I can't find any mention of Image Stabilization in my manual, so I would say I don't have it.
Dan, I'm going to look at getting a remote and do a mirror lock up and see how that goes.
I'm also going to weight the tripod and see if that helps too. I'll go back next week and have another go at things :)
twister
04-08-2010, 11:17pm
Darey, I can't find any mention of Image Stabilization in my manual, so I would say I don't have it.
Dan, I'm going to look at getting a remote and do a mirror lock up and see how that goes.
I'm also going to weight the tripod and see if that helps too. I'll go back next week and have another go at things :)
The "Image Stabiliser" should be a rocker switch on the lens next to the AF/MF switch if the lens has IS in it...on a tripod, switch the "Stabiliser" rocker to the off position...
ricktas
05-08-2010, 6:09am
Post one or two of the photos here and we can usually find the cause and solution once we can see exactly what the results look like. You will find you will get to the crux of your issues a lot faster if we can see examples!
yummymummy
05-08-2010, 7:00am
The "Image Stabiliser" should be a rocker switch on the lens next to the AF/MF switch if the lens has IS in it...on a tripod, switch the "Stabiliser" rocker to the off position...
not all Canon kit lenses have IS on them, mine don't so don't stress yourself if you don't have it.. the non IS ones work just fine, and I've taken many good shots without IS.
stoogest
05-08-2010, 7:51am
+1 on what Rick said. Post up one of the photos. We won't bite....(well...except Mongo perhaps...).
Andrew.
I did try to upload photos yesterday but really was not having any luck. I have put a few up on Photobucket and hopefully this link will work. ... Nope, link button won't do anything for me. So I'll paste it.
http://s119.photobucket.com/albums/o158/guppyminx/Montezuma%20Falls/
Longshots
05-08-2010, 8:54am
Photobucket would have appeared to have stripped the Exif data - which is the information that tells us your shutter speed, your aperture and choice of ISO. If you can provide that for say the last shot on Photobucket, people will be able to give you more help.
Yes, I am going to look at a new hosting site today. Not at all happy with Photobucket.
Photo 1:f/11, 1.6sec, ISO-100, 24mm focal
Photo 2: f/8, 0.8sec, ISO-100, 24mm focal
Photo 3: f/8, 1/2sec, ISO-100, 24mm focal
Photo 4: f/8, 1/2sec, ISO-100, 21mm focal
Photo 5: f/5.6, 1/2sec, ISO-100, 21mm focal
Photo 6: f/5.6, 1.3sec, ISO-100, 21mm focal.
You certainly picked a challenging subject with a deep shaded area on the left and a well lit area on the right. Interesting subject but probably the wrong time of the day.
I could not pick your focus point as the whole image looks OOF and the low ISO and big aperture is not helping. If you went to ISO 400/800 or maybe even higher, and used a smaller aperture you would get a huge increase in your DOF. I don't know how your particular camera handles high ISO's, whether it would be too noisy, but it's worth a try.
If you are using centre spot focusing try to pick a focal point near the middle of the area you want to be most in focus.
I feel your frustration because I'm going through the same learning curve.
Keep plugging away. I keep telling myself it will be worth it in the end.
Cheers
Kevin
Thanks Kevin, definitely is a learning curve and that is why I do take so many with the different aperture and shutter speeds. Why would you use a faster ISO? I have used them before and haven't noticed too much noise, so I will try it when I go back next week.
I also thought f/11 was a good aperature to use. Should I have gone 22 maybe? I am really really still learning these I think and I'm wondering if I should drop back from complete manual and just work on one at a time. But, then the auto parts don't always work either.
When I focus I do use the central point. I'm beginning to think that I shouldn't always use this one, or I should learn to use the focus lock.
But yes, I will get there in the end :)
no f11 is fine. you are using a tripod as you say but are you using a remote too? just pressing the button can shake the camera and cause blur at long shutter speeds. the central focus point will give you the most accurate focus but use which ever one suits the scene. if you are using the cameras af assist (assuming canon has this) you have to use the center focus point.
shame really, thats a nice looking scene.
also if you were using the central focus point then the background trees would be your focus point and the forground may very well look OOF. Id have focused on the rocks under the bridge, locked the focus there by switching to manual focus, then take the shot.
btw, going to f22 would cause diffraction softness. like i said f11 is fine... no higher than f16 is my recommendation.
I agree with ving, f11 (or maybe f16) should be optimum for that scene and that will give you significantly more DOF than f5.6.
Also recommend using a remote release.
As I said previously, that shot was always going to be a challenge with the two different light levels.
If you can, have another go at it either early AM or late PM, depending on it's aspect relative to the light, so the whole shot is getting the same amount of light.
Cheers
Kevin
mynxt have you done any post processing on the images? They look like they could be improved with some sharpening and exposure-type adjustments in post.
I hope you don't mind (mods can remove if you do mind), I made some quick adjustments to your first image. It's still soft but shows some improvement I think - you would probably get better results by applying changes to the original full resolution file. (Processing was lighten shadows + slight saturation boost + sharpening. Took about a minute to do.)
If you are shooting jpeg format it might be also be worth checking your in-camera settings for sharpening, contrast, etc. which might give you better images straight out of the camera.
Looks like a great location to shoot, definitely worth a revisit...
Cheers.
Analog6
05-08-2010, 2:01pm
Flickr is much better than Photobucket.
If you are shooting RAW, the pic you see on the screen is how the camera would reproduce it as a jpeg, you never see the actual RAW pic on the screen.
Were you using a tripod?
Did you use a cable release?
What lens are you using?
You may be better off with centre spot focus, I always use that mode whatever the subject. f8 is usually the 'sweet spot' for most lenses.
I didn't use a remote at the time. I will get one before I retake this shot. I did use a tripod and was using the 18-55mm lens.
I think it was early afternoon when I took the pictures. Roughly 2pm. It was also a very bright but overcast day and I didn't see the sun at all. Add that to the canopy being rather heavy over the dark spot of the bridge. There is also another bridge right next to the one in the picture that you use to cross the river. I was actually standing under it. So it was relatively dark, which is why I was surprised when some of my shots were coming out overexposed. I actually underexposed them on purpose.
fillum, I haven't tried any processing yet. I'm really still learning everything and the processing is quite daunting. Now that I have seen what you have done, I will have a play and see what I can do.
I do shoot in jpeg at the moment, but I will try RAW when I redo this shoot.
Thanks for all then help :)
You asked me in a previous post why you would increase your ISO, and rather than me try to explain the 'Sunny 16 rule' have a look at this link.
It will explain much better than I ever could the relationship between EV, f stop, ISO and shutter speed.
http://www.fredparker.com/ultexp1.htm
Cheers
Kevin
ameerat42
06-08-2010, 1:23pm
Mynxt. I think the low shutter speeds would have helped soften these shots, recording any small subject movement. Am.
Thanks Kevin, I am going to go off and read the site.
You are probably right Ameerat. I priced a remote release today and they aren't expensive, so I'll get one next week before I head out there again.
mynxt,
I strongly recommend you get a copy of the following book:
"UNDERSTANDING EXPOSURE Revised edition"
by Bryan Peterson ISBN: 0-8174-6300-3
In my opinion this book is the absolute bible on achieving correct EXPOSURE for your photographs and the book is a very easy read.
Ensure you use a sturdy TRIPOD and REMOTE RELEASE and the book will give you all the other information you need to achieve excellent exposures.
I have read my copy 6 to 8 times already and I guarantee I will read it many more times in the future. Every time I read it I learn something new.
Just as a teaser page 126 begins a article about "Mr Green Jeans (the Sky Brother's Cousin)" which an exposure method you could use to improve your low light shots where the colour Green is dominant.
I hope the above information helps you and
look forward to seeing more of your shots in the future.
ricktas
09-08-2010, 7:08pm
I didn't use a remote at the time. I will get one before I retake this shot. I did use a tripod and was using the 18-55mm lens.
I think it was early afternoon when I took the pictures. Roughly 2pm. It was also a very bright but overcast day and I didn't see the sun at all. Add that to the canopy being rather heavy over the dark spot of the bridge. There is also another bridge right next to the one in the picture that you use to cross the river. I was actually standing under it. So it was relatively dark, which is why I was surprised when some of my shots were coming out overexposed. I actually underexposed them on purpose.
fillum, I haven't tried any processing yet. I'm really still learning everything and the processing is quite daunting. Now that I have seen what you have done, I will have a play and see what I can do.
I do shoot in jpeg at the moment, but I will try RAW when I redo this shoot.
Thanks for all then help :)
Where you stand is irrelevant, the exposure is related to what you see through the viewfinder. I agree that the trees behind the bridge are the sharpest part of this scene, you should have focused on the bridge itself. I disagree with increasing your ISO for landscapes. You should always use the lowest ISO possible, and then select your aperture (f11 should be fine), you then chose an appropriate shutter speed to get a good exposure. Increasing the ISO will give you a faster shutter speed, but as long as you don't have something in your scene that you need to 'freeze' then there is really no point in a higher ISO.
You may find your kit lens just lacks sharpness, it does happen. Sharpening your photos can give them a boost.
Next question, what colourspace is your camera and/or processing package set to use. If you use AdobeRGB it can make the resultant photo look dull and lacking in contrast and 'punch', when viewed on an sRGB system (the internet etc).
Now for my last bit. The photos on photobucket are small. In fact they are way to small!! Not the pixel dimensions, but the filesizes. Most are between 50 and 60KB. Here is some information on JPG. JPG is a lossy format, which means when you save to JPG you lose some data, by saving your photos at 50/60KB your software needs to dump a lot of information from the file to get it down to that size. I would suggest you go back to the originals and save them about around 200KB or 250KB and all that extra data might just give you a better photo.
Just to show you what I mean, here is an example:
This is the same photo (note that grain was added on purpose,so look at the degradation for each smaller filesize)
270KB
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/Scott-Kelby-Photo-Walk-2648.jpg
150KB
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/Scott-Kelby-Photo-Walk-2648150kb.jpg
75KB
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/Scott-Kelby-Photo-Walk-264875kb.jpg
35KB
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/Scott-Kelby-Photo-Walk-264835kb.jpg
Your problem with your photos will be even more pronounced due to colour data as well. i think your entire issue here relates to the size you are saving your files at. You are saving them at way to small a size and JPG compression is reeking havoc with the results
ricktas
09-08-2010, 7:16pm
Now to show you what happens in colour
Original file that I uploaded to AP
Filesize : 317kb
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/mt-wellington.jpg
Same photo..only difference is it is now : 50KB
http://i248.photobucket.com/albums/gg175/snoopytas/mt-wellington50kb.jpg
Thanks Darey, I will have a look for the book.
Rick, I didn't actually realise that the picture file sizes were so small. I will definitely watch that next time I upload pictures.
I have been out since to the same place and taken some more pictures that I am a little happier with. I still don't have my remote release so I have been using the timer. Not the best, but definitely better than not using anything. I have not put any of those pictures up yet as I'm not happy with the processing. I've not been able to work out the brightening shadows without increasing the hightlights. (I did post for help in the processing section). So thought I would wait until I get Elements which seems to be easier to use than PS7.
I do know I have to work better at finding the right object to focus on. I have read a little about the 1/3 rule of focus and others and will try that. I did have issues where I couldn't get my focus lock to work. Last night I worked out it won't work in full manual mode but will if I change to Av or Tv. So I'll try that or try focusing then switching to manual focus and see how that goes.
I do now shoot in Raw and I am amazed at the difference.
The colourspace I now use is sRGB. I might have used Adobe for the above picture, I would have to check. But from now on, from other posts I've read, I've changed to sRGB.
So I am back out practicing and will post some more pictures soon.
Thank you everyone for your help and teaching :)
As mentioned in my last post, here is another picture I took the other day. I haven't processed it the way I would like yet. The focus point is the leg of the bridge closest to the camera.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4118/4886818833_6f4a57bbe9.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/amandabradley/4886818833/)
I'm not sure why the image is so small.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.