Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 23, 2007, 3:27 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

here is a shot I took today without PP. converted from RAW, cropped and resized for web. the sharpening was up two notches in the camera. Donna
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 3:33 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
D.Ann's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,932
Default

I am sorry I am having trouble today getting mypictures to load. the finished pic is at the wildlife forum under "bird shot". will try again. donna
Attached Images
 
D.Ann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 3:55 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
wrams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 490
Default

Hey D Ann thats a great shot....Shame about the shadow across the little fellows back...Still i'm going to take alook at the critique forum now you've PP'd it!!!
wrams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 4:56 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

D.Ann wrote:
Quote:
here is a shot I took today without PP. converted from RAW, cropped and resized for web. the sharpening was up two notches in the camera. Donna
Thanks for the shot D. Ann! Good one. Sharp at only +2. I guess with the 30D one can be happy with a pre-PP shot. Even if having it PP will take it to the next level.

And now for a question that's unrelated to sharpness but still about the 30D.

I noticed in the 30D brochure I have that the AF Assist Lamp is in the flash. So to make use of the AF Assist you have to remember to raise the flash. When you are shooting in a situation where the light is sort of low but not so dark that you'd definitely want to use the built-in flash or an external one...do you bother raising the builit-in to make use of the AF Assist? How vital is it to your shooting?

I read on a review of the XTi on one of the other sites that the XTi still does a decent job of AF without the AF Assist. But is just "better" with it. What's your take on this?
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 6:24 PM   #15
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

These are 100% crops and I shoot at sharpness level 2 (can't remember but I think it is 1 or 2 below standard). Sorry that these are a little large but as I was shooting with a pretty narrow dof I wanted there to be the section that the camera was fully focused on as well as the surrounding so you can see what the process does. In the kitesurfing I have also used some noise removal and then sharpened. The hockey is just sharpened.

These will not be quite as good as a portrait as with sports we are working at the extremes but should give you a good idea.

Straight from camera



Modified (sharpened only would have done a little levels as well usually)



Straight from camera



Modified (noise and sharpness)


Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 6:43 PM   #16
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Just realised I did have some people shots to hand. This was when I was using level 3 sharpening but thought it was adding too much noise in general which is why I reduced it to 2. I am looking at going lower but not yet decided.

style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"Again this is a 100% crop of a larger photo so you are getting the actual pixel size.


Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 8:18 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

Hello Mark1616,

Thanks for posting the pics!! Much appreciated!!

Looks like at +2 and +3 (Standard) shots taken straight from the camera look more than acceptable after all. With the first two shots the difference with sharpening seemed less obvious than the second pair with the kite surfer.

So doing some PP while not necessary just makes a good shot better.

Any how, back to my rearch. And I am waiting on the 40D still. Would like to see what changes they have made to the design of the 30D. Will they finally put the AF Assist lamp outside the flash? Bump the MP count to 10.2 or 12.8? How will the APS-C sized DIGIC III chip perform? Will it use the same dust removal setup as found in the XTi? Guess we'll have to wait and see.

Have a good week Mark et al.,!!
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 9:16 PM   #18
VP
Senior Member
 
VP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,786
Default

Here is a shot I took recently, lighting was not that great and it washandheld. Converted from RAW and cropped and resized only. Sharpness setting was +2 and I only have it increased to help ME judge a shot to delete or not. All other settings are at 0. I tried various in camera settings for out of the box satisfaction and wound up using what I do.

Will post the other shortly.


Attached Images
 
VP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 23, 2007, 9:20 PM   #19
VP
Senior Member
 
VP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,786
Default

I used this Cardinal shot because sometimes they are tough on getting highlights right. As was this one.


Attached Images
 
VP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 24, 2007, 1:59 AM   #20
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

Donna,

You have mentioned a few times in this thread that you shoot with sharpness +2 and in RAW.

You do realise that when you shoot in RAW any sharpness or colour balance or saturation settings are completely irrellevant? RAW is the data as it comes from the sensor. Those settings are only applicable for the in-camera converter with takes your RAW "negative" and converts it into a JPG "print".

Andrew,

I'm afraid there is much of the straw man about your argument; it is predicated upon a misunderstanding of howdigital images are produced.

The camera sensor captures data, that data is not viewable or printable in that RAW "digital negative" format; it must be converted before you can view or print. You can choose to convert it using the in-built computer inside the camera or on a bigger more powerful computer outside the camera. The latter allows more control and therefore better images much of the time, the former is more convenient.

There is no sense in which shooting RAW and adjusting the settings in PS is any less authentic than setting the values on the camera's internal processor. That processing must be done in order to obtain a usable image.

There is a distinction between digital processing - which involves setting white balance, saturation, exposure (within limits), contrast, sharpening, etc. And digital manipulation like moving clouds around or digital compositing. Certainly the boudaries between processing and manipulation can be fuzzy, but that is not the same as suggesting that they do not exist.

Was a film photographer who followed the zone system cynically manipulating his shots? Somehow less of a real photographer? It is perfectly possible to shoot RAW and process those images in photoshop and yet maintain any arbitrary (choose your own) set of rules about not manipulating elements within that photograph.

Consider the problem one has with dynamic range in a scene with a bright sky. How to expose to maintain detail in both the foreground and the sky. Is it acceptable to use a ND filter? If so, then why is it not acceptable to adjust in levels in PS to achieve the same effect? If two images can be produced that cannot be distinguished by the viewer is one method more authentic than the other? Both are manipulations of the scene as captured by the camera to more accurately (or aesthetically) represent the scene as it looked to our eyes at the time. After all the image processor in our brains is far more sophisticated at dealing with high dynamic range that those of the cameras we are currently able to build.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:54 PM.