Blurry Pictures

[Colin Southern]

With due respect Manfred you have changed them from grossly under to mildly over exposed and ignoring the situation they were photograhed under.

With all due respect, on my calibrated and profiled monitor, Manfred's versions look spot on.

There is another factor that with my un-calibrated monitor am producing a darker image than what you see on your monitor becuase I suspect I have a 'bright' monitor.

And therein lies the problem ...

[Manfred M]

John - they look fine on my calibrated and profiled monitor (other than all of the noise related to increasing the exposure); otherwise I would not have posted them. My primary purpose of getting the exposure up was not to create perfect images, but rather in the absence of metadata, to brighten things up enough to see if I could see why the images are blurred.

I have no issues with a beginner going fully automated on a camera. It's the only way they are going to get decent shots while they learn how to use it and figure out the controls

These results frankly back what I have said in the past. A beginner should start with a camera that is closer to their level of expertise (P&S, Super-zoom) before migrating the a DSLR or mirrorless camera with all of the associated bells and whistles. They will get better images with a less talented piece of equipment. One only really needs to upgrade a camera once you consistently find yourself limited by your existing gear.

[Colin Southern]

A beginner should start with a camera that is closer to their level of expertise (P&S, Super-zoom) before migrating the a DSLR or mirrorless camera with all of the associated bells and whistles. They will get better images with a less talented piece of equipment.

Although, having said that, what the difference between a P&S and a DSLR that's in "P for Professional" mode?

[ajohnw]

There are some calibration bars in the monitor tutorial on here that will help set mid grey on a monitor. That would help set brightness correctly. The usual grey scale can then be used as a second check. I posted a better set that doesn't dither the mid grey tone recently as well. On that the light end and dark end scales are more on the lines of showing just how good your monitor is especially at the dark end.

I have also found that I sometimes post images that look a touch too bright or dark actually on a site because the background colour is different to the one my editor uses.

P mode wont really allow any exposure mistakes Manfred - other than metering mode problems. Best use something akin to centre weighted. Hopefully the camera will inform the user that a correct exposure can't be reached. A couple of pages in most manuals on the display in the viewfinder should clear that aspect up rapidly.

Me I would have taken one of those shots with a blurred background if I could. It's a well known technique for making the figures stand out. Overdone a bit in this case maybe or maybe not.

John
-

[Manfred M]

Although, having said that, what the difference between a P&S and a DSLR that's in "P for Professional" mode?

In my experinece, much of it tends to be the "soft side" of things. A simple P&S is less intimidating (fewer controls), lower expectations (it's not a high end camera that will produce great results, so when something goes wrong, it can (partially) blamed on the camera, etc. That lets the beginner concentrate on what they know (which is usuall not a lot) and improve basic composition.

There are a few technical things as well; small sensor = too shallow of a DoF never blows a picture, etc.

The other part is purely the learning side of things. Learning is an incremental process, i.e. adding things one step at a time. The issue I find with a DSLR or mirrorless is that there are too many things and the temptation is to try out too many lenses or controls and never becoming comfortable with what each item does in isolation. A simple camera has less bells and whistles, so you can't play with a number of different controls at the same time and try to figure out why the image works or does not work.

I think if people left the camera in P mode (and auto-ISO) while they were learning, they would get up to speed faster. But they end up trying to shoot RAW, switch lenses and shoot manually, before understanding the basics, and that is where things go off the rails for them. Better camsra = higher expectations.

I remember when I was teaching my youngest daughter to drive. She felt more comfortable in using the old simple car, rather than the high end SUV with what appears to be a lot more complex controls. Once she was comfortable, she had no problems figuring out the more complex car (and frankly prefers driving it now).

[ajohnw]

Although, having said that, what the difference between a P&S and a DSLR that's in "P for Professional" mode?

Unfortunately P stands for a Program mode. It's essentially a set of presets. Manuals usually show the curves the camera settings follow. I'd guess that many don't even bother looking at it or realise that the settings can be shifted. The actual settings will be displayed in the view finder. If some one accounts for likely light levels and depth of field needs via ISO setting for the shooting they are about to go out and do the camera will often offer a suitable set of settings. Suitable ISO's for that sort of thing might be 100,200 and 400.

It will offer exposure times where shake might be a problem and also apertures that don't have sufficient depth of field but basically people need to learn about that aspect or use full auto everything. That setting might also display all of the settings in the viewfinder and in the extreme might have the same problems. I decided that full auto was a useful option on one of my Pen's. Lowish light situations that needed rather high ISO's where all I could really expect was a jpg or too much time post processing. Used because the noise reduction in the camera happened to be excellent and manufactures do their best to get the most out of their sensors. That is likely to involve compromises on all settings.

John
-

[JLarocky]

I have done a lot of practice with my camera. I started with a rebel T3 and grew out of it after about a year and a half. The quality of the images just wasn't there. Here is an image that I feel came out descent. I do understand how to adjust my settings in relation to increasing ISO for a brighter image with having to compromise the clarity. I understand that if the shutter is too high then the image may come out dark because of the time allowed for light enter the lens is short. My original question was simply for some pointers to a learning photographer. Some pictures came out blurry which I now realize is probably due to camera shake. I definitely need to work on the ease of my trigger finger. The other question was why one picture comes out with great exposure and the next consecutive photo would come out way under exposed. (I'm assuming it's due to me possibly zooming in closer to the subject?)I get a lot of usable images, but want to figure out why I experience these issues, (knowing full well that some of them are due to inexperience). In this picture you can see where the gentleman's face and little boy's face are clear while the female's face looks a little blurry? My goal is to be able to take great photos without much waste. I don't want to just point and shoot. I want to be creative, try new things, step outside my box, and make something great. Again, thank you to everyone who contributed to the answering of my questions.

[jcuknz]

John - they look fine on my calibrated and profiled monitor (other than all of the noise related to increasing the exposure); otherwise I would not have posted them. My primary purpose of getting the exposure up was not to create perfect images, but rather in the absence of metadata, to brighten things up enough to see if I could see why the images are blurred.

I have no issues with a beginner going fully automated on a camera. It's the only way they are going to get decent shots while they learn how to use it and figure out the controls

These results frankly back what I have said in the past. A beginner should start with a camera that is closer to their level of expertise (P&S, Super-zoom) before migrating the a DSLR or mirrorless camera with all of the associated bells and whistles. They will get better images with a less talented piece of equipment. One only really needs to upgrade a camera once you consistently find yourself limited by your existing gear.

I tend to agree with you about starting but some people have the money and think that pro-like gear will produce top results from the start and it is sad that some like the OP find out it is not the case .... but we can only do our best to help them recover from a starting error of judgement.

Your final sentance is very true but it would take a lot of the fun out of the whole business LOL The excitement of the new toy etc.

When I got my latest, which does have quite a few bells and whistles, after setting the camera to my preferences such as ISO to 400, centre weighted metering etc I worked in P mode for a few days before moving to A mode and I don't in the year since then I have needed to use Manual.

The biggest error a newbie can probably make is to think that it is cool to use manual after they have paid for all the automatics ... that could well, be etched in stone, and placed outside every camera store

I did cover the matter of calibrated monitors in my previous posting. I was quite supprised how far I had to, and could, move the top of the curves tool line and it still looked reasonably good to me for a family record snapshot.

Manfred #25 Really onto it with that
#24 The point of the digital camera is that it does not tell the user that it cannot take the photo unless one of the critical aspects has been set in a semi-auto mode .... that was one of the things I learnt about digital with my first Cooli-cam It never stopped working and worked in situations I would never have tried to use my film cameras ... it was a giant step forward in photography for me despite having been involved for fifty years or so.

As for people who talk about P for professional .... Nuff Said!

[Colin Southern]

I have done a lot of practice with my camera. I started with a rebel T3 and grew out of it after about a year and a half. The quality of the images just wasn't there. Here is an image that I feel came out descent. I do understand how to adjust my settings in relation to increasing ISO for a brighter image with having to compromise the clarity. I understand that if the shutter is too high then the image may come out dark because of the time allowed for light enter the lens is short. My original question was simply for some pointers to a learning photographer. Some pictures came out blurry which I now realize is probably due to camera shake. I definitely need to work on the ease of my trigger finger. The other question was why one picture comes out with great exposure and the next consecutive photo would come out way under exposed. (I'm assuming it's due to me possibly zooming in closer to the subject?)I get a lot of usable images, but want to figure out why I experience these issues, (knowing full well that some of them are due to inexperience). In this picture you can see where the gentleman's face and little boy's face are clear while the female's face looks a little blurry? My goal is to be able to take great photos without much waste. I don't want to just point and shoot. I want to be creative, try new things, step outside my box, and make something great. Again, thank you to everyone who contributed to the answering of my questions.

Hi Joy,

This image is an excellent "case in point", but first, I'd just like to ask a question -- was the IS function on your lens turned on when you took it?

[JLarocky]

Colin - Yes it was.

[jcuknz]

Joy #25 The woman's face is not blurry but lacks resolution due to being over exposed and I am afraid I am not up to correcting matters for you. It is the detail in a subject that gives sharpness and when there is no detail there is no sharpness. Frankly if you were not getting good results with the T3 then you will not with the current camera until you knuckle down and learn some basics about photography.

It is great that you do not want to be just a P&S user but much of the time I am doing precisely that after sixty years in the game ... but when I have a need to use my photo skills acquired over that period I can.
What I love about digital is that it has reached the stage where the camera does most of the thinking for me and leaves me to think about the actual photo ... what is in it and what it is saying.

In two of the three photos you have showed us you were careless in including bright highlights in the picture without knowing how to handle the situation ... here in the second it has ruined the woman's face though the camera has done its best to rescue the situation for you. If it wasn't over-exposed it would be pretty sharp, as sharp as the man and boy.

In all these assesments the calibration or lack of it of my screen has little or no relevance because in most cases it is simply not an issue. A final thought ... though I rarely if ever look at mine it might help you if the camera is capable of giving you a histogram of the shot you are going to take and if you find the lines bunching up on the right you probably can expect trouble ... this is one of the differences between P&S, Bridge and MFT cameras and fool DSLRs [ my bias not shared by most here] It is possible that you will need to take a shot and look at the histogram in review mode ... but I don't know or want to know your cameras, either of them.

[Colin Southern]

Colin - Yes it was.

Thanks Joy,

The image has a number of issues.

First up, it's soft overall - some output sharpening will fix that easily.

Second up, it's slightly over-exposed - resetting the black point and adjusting the mid-tones fixes that easily enough in any image editing program (may be called "blacks" / "shadows" / "brightness" sliders).

Third up, (and this is a big part of the problem), you've shot the image at F4.5 on a full frame camera; that gives you a plane of focus that's only about 20cm deep and - depending on where you focused - can land you in a bit of trouble. If the camera was on automatic AF point selection then - generally - it'll focus on the closest thing to the lens. Not sure if that's what's happened here, but it looks like it. That'll give good focus to the hands and arms - just catches the gent and the child, but the lady appears to be just a few centimeters further back -- and that's just outside the depth of field. As a general rule - for group shots - you'll usually want to be shooting at around F8 where your DoF is close to double. F8 cuts the light hitting the sensor down a lot though, so usually you'll need to increase your ISO to around 400 to 800.

Forth up, shutterspeed. 1/30th is pretty low. With IS on the lens will do a reasonable job of minimising camera shake, but subject motion can be a wee bit of a problem (especially with children).

Fifth up, you've shot into the light, which looks like it may have introduced a little bit of flare over the lady as well. Generally, you'll want to avoid active light sources being behind the subject.

Here's a quick retouch to show you the results of some sharpening and levels adjustments:



And here's a similar shot that I shot at F8 @ 1/40th @ ISO 100 @ 85mm - you can see that there's good DoF for the family, but still background blur:



Hope this helps.

[Stagecoach]

Hi Joy,

Firstly, you have still not posted the shooting settings for the first two images. These settings would have given us a clue as to what was possibly wrong and advise you what to look for. In the meantime with regard to the fact that some images came out well and suddenly without touching anything they came out dark have a look at and compare the settings of the good and bad images, you should see what has significantly changed.

The picture you have just posted has the Exif data attached, f4.5, 1/30s, ISO100, aperture priority, metering centre weighted, and taken at a focal length of 105mm,

You have positioned your subjects in direct bright light causing a loss of detail which is not the best option, but your metering has dealt with it well. I do not see a significant concern regarding sharpness but you did take this at a too slow shutter speed for a 105mm lens, that is assuming you were not using a tripod. It's a good image and a bit of work in post will make it better.

I'm all for learning with a DSLR, it's not rocket science as some would like us to think, all it really concerns is understanding the impact of three variables, aperture opening, shutter speed and ISO sensitivity and what they do and simply juggling these three items to achieve what you want. The other area of course is learning how not to pose your subjects as this example demonstrates, which is the same problem whether you use a P&S or top range DSLR, BUT, some actually like the affect you have achieved


Grahame

[jcuknz]

Not to be beaten I had another look at the family group and with my most used NIK plug-in Graduated filter darkening from the top and then selecting just the woman's head and shoulders applying sharpening to them I came up with this .... Some of my earlier comments were wrong since trying harder I did this



Again it shows the battle is not over until it comes out of the editor ... one of the advantages of shooting with a bridge camera is that inherently you have greater depth of field but normally the DSLR makes it easier to get good results ... I had no problems with shooting with bridge cameras until recently I changed to MFT and I consider that most of the time I am a serious photographer so it is how you go about it not the gear .... if you plan to make a practice of making 25x20 inch prints you probably need a DSLR but otherwise it is pleasant over-kill making life easier for you.

[Colin Southern]

you did take this at a too slow shutter speed for a 105mm lens, that is assuming you were not using a tripod.

Hi Graeme,

She used a 24-105mm lens with the IS function switched on, thus negating the need for the usual 1/100th -> 1/120th at that focal length.

[Colin Southern]

PS: Joy, not sure if you've seen my "school of portraiture" series, but you might find something useful there:

School of Portraiture - Links to Lessons 1 through 8

[Stagecoach]

Hi Graeme,

She used a 24-105mm lens with the IS function switched on, thus negating the need for the usual 1/100th -> 1/120th at that focal length.

Hi Colin,

My comment was based upon my hand holding abilities even using VR but I have to admit I took a shot the other day at 1/25s and surprised myself

Grahame

[jcuknz]

I'm guessing but my thought is that it is subject blurr of the woman to account for the difference in sharpness between the three or now I see it was shot at 105mm and I wonder if the lens is not soft on the right hand side ... without OIS 1/100 would be far too long an exposure for that lens 105x1.6 crop factor gives us 1/168 and the guide only applies if the photo is taken with care and attention to releasing the shutter and holding the camera properly ... though being a DSLR helps there .

[Colin Southern]

without OIS 1/100 would be far too long an exposure for that lens 105x1.6 crop factor gives us 1/168

It's a full-frame camera, and Joy does have IS.

[Colin Southern]

Hi Colin,

My comment was based upon my hand holding abilities even using VR but I have to admit I took a shot the other day at 1/25s and surprised myself

Grahame

Hi Graeme,

With IS she should have a reasonable chance hand-holding a keeper at as low as 1/15th (1/120th (no IS) -> 1/15th (3 stops from third generation IS units).