Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Camera Settings - Over Sharpening  
User currently onlineGaryck From United Kingdom, joined May 2008, 298 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5642 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Some advise would be greatfully recieved..................

I have a Canon EOS450D, 70-200mm F4 L non-IS and I use Photoshop CS2 to edit my images.

My images look crisp and clear on the screen of the camera when "out in the field", but when I get home and start to look at them on my laptop prior to editing i'm finding alot are over sharpened. This then gives me a huge headache when editing as parts of the aircraft need sharpening allover, but parts don't. I then end up with lots of 'jaggies'. I can't get my head around editing jaggies, I've be told how to do it, but I can never see the "difference".

I've gone into the Menu settings of my camera, on Picture Styles - Standard Picture my settings are:

Sharpness 3
Contrast 0
Saturation 0
Colour Tone 0

I also can't really shot anything on the ground, for some reason the images come out very light. I've tried 'stepping' down the contast by 1/3 but things seem to dark.

I was wondering what settings could be recommended to overcome this.

I shoot in JPEG if thats any help. (please don't moan at me for not shooting in RAW) lol

Gary


Keep your Ladders close, but your camera closer
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5632 times:

Set in-camera sharpening at zero. Sharpen in Post-processing.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2035 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5624 times:

Gary,

Check your manual for the parameter preset setting to use to give neutral sharpening ('0' sharpening). '3' is actually quite an aggressive sharpening setting to be using; I had the same thing myself and didn't realise for a long time. Looking back at those images now, even out of the camera they look very sharp on TFT's.

Your metering problem sounds odd. The camera's metering is trying to achieve the same thing whether it's pointed at an aircraft or the ground. Learn to use the histogram and dial in appropriate exposure compensation; or shoot manual if the conditions permit.


James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 5597 times:

Gary,

I'd say the 1000D and XXXD Canon's must have a habit of chucking out images which are slightly 'over-processed'. I use +3 (default) or 4 sharpening with my 30D and although people recommend using 0 I don't shoot specifically for A.net and actually like a bit of out-of-camera sharpness, especially if I'm not going to edit the pictures.

I'd knock it down to +2 or even 1 if you think the images straight from the camera are over-sharp. As for the over-exposures try stopping down the compensation even more, or alternatively use a different metering mode. The XXXD range isn't great at accurately metering (lots of over-exposure issues) and it's been a long time since I used a 350D but you could see if they've improved centre-weighted average, which will take a small percentage reading from the centre (i.e. the subject) of the frame only.

Don't forget also than sun-flash can have a small bearing on exposure.

K


User currently offlineJohnJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1656 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5587 times:



Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
I shoot in JPEG if thats any help. (please don't moan at me for not shooting in RAW) lol

I'm not going to moan at you, but if you shoot in RAW the Canon RAW converter lets you adjust the sharpness after the fact - at least the Digital Photo Professional software that came with the 40D does, not sure if that same software is bundled with your camera. I use "3" sharpness on my 40D and I still get far more "soft" rejects than "oversharp".


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5575 times:



Quoting JohnJ (Reply 4):
I'm not going to moan at you, but if you shoot in RAW the Canon RAW converter lets you adjust the sharpness after the fact

That's true. I rarely shoot in RAW these days as I pretty-much know my camera and its capabilities inside out, however I do use it as a safety net with rare/unusual aircraft or situations. Additionally, you can correct bad exposures post-capture using RAW.

I'd suggest trying RAW if you're experiencing problems - at least until you've sorted them. Easier to wiggle a slider back and forth than having to mess around for hours in Photoshop!


User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5568 times:



Quoting JohnJ (Reply 4):
but if you shoot in RAW the Canon RAW converter lets you adjust the sharpness after the fact - at least the Digital Photo Professional software that came with the 40D does

You're right John, and it does allow you to adjust the camera settings on individual photos after the fact.

Quoting Viv (Reply 1):
Set in-camera sharpening at zero. Sharpen in Post-processing.

Yes, and shoot in RAW.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 3):
you could see if they've improved centre-weighted average

Tends to underexpose, and really I only use this in strong sun. Example, Air France landing around mid afternoon on a very sunny day, switch it to Center Wieghted. 90% of the time I'm in Evaluative Metering, but on the occasional few shots with this camera that are overexposed due to , I fix in post processing. 90% Evaluative is all you need, switch to Center Wieghted for strong sun.

Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
I can't get my head around editing jaggies, I've be told how to do it, but I can never see the "difference".

Sigh  Smile yeah you have by me several times. But you know what I'm going to do for ya? I'm going to take some screen shots when I get a second so you see what I mean, I'll either post here or email you. I'm going to prove to you that the eraser works! But trust me, keep using that Eraser at approx 50% opacity on the sharpened layer (or duplicate layer, wherever you applied your sharpening) over the edges of the aircraft. At times extreme jaggies call for more. I'll frequently adjust the Opacity % for various parts of the aircraft. I just ran 90% across a tall section, 50% around tires, 75% around flaps, etc etc.

Quoting Sulman (Reply 2):
Learn to use the histogram

Right on, I check my Histo quite frequently.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 3):
XXXD range isn't great at accurately metering (lots of over-exposure issues)

Actually I found once I got the hang of using Evaluative and then switching to Center Wieghter for strong sun, then switching back when the sun is more at an angle or not as strong, the 1000D exposes pretty darn good.



All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5556 times:



Quoting RonS (Reply 6):
90% Evaluative is all you need, switch to Center Wieghted for strong sun

Depends on the body. Like I say, it's been a while since I used a 350D and that was best using mostly evaluative, however the metering on the 30D is much more accurate. Centre-weighted delivers a consistently better shot if the subject is on the deck, and is also useful when balancing a bright fuselage with, for example, a dark, stormy background.

Quoting RonS (Reply 6):
Actually I found once I got the hang of using Evaluative and then switching to Center Wieghter for strong sun, then switching back when the sun is more at an angle or not as strong, the 1000D exposes pretty darn good

I usually use a combination of evaluative and centre-weighted and as you say each is more useful in certain light conditions. In strong sun with a blue sky both do a very similar job, with not much in the results.

By the way, I noticed when I borrowed a friend's 1000D for the day how accurate metering, etc. is compared with the old 350/400D (the latter was awful for under-exposing!).


User currently offlineSpencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1635 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5556 times:



Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
This then gives me a huge headache when editing as parts of the aircraft need sharpening allover, but parts don't.

That (can be) normally the way even with a "perfectly" sharpened image, pre-edit.

Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
Sharpness 3



Quoting Viv (Reply 1):
Set in-camera sharpening at zero

Like Viv said, kick it down 3 points. The only sharpening you need to do should be done in CS/PS.

Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
I've tried 'stepping' down the contast by 1/3 but things seem to dark.

Do you mean exposure compensation? That won't really do anything to the overall sharpness if you're set at 3 on the in-cam sharpness. It will bring the "brightness" down however, by a slight amount.

Quoting Garyck (Thread starter):
I shoot in JPEG

Try, for once, a set in RAW, or for starters at least RAW+JPG. That way you've got your RAW file there for "back-up", and your JPG for what you would normally edit from.

Spence.



EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5553 times:

Gary,

If you have no joy I'll have a quick play with your camera next time we're at MAN. Should only take a few sec's to set it right. I imagine it'll be very similar to the 350D, with bits improved.

Karl


User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5533 times:

Take a look at this Gary in regards to your jaggie questions/issues:


Here is an example of my Eraser work. Look at the lower right hand pallette. I de-selected the eye on the Background Layer and only have Visible the Sharpened Layer. I did this simply so you can see my progress so far. The stuff that is erased is basically the sharpening around the edges of the aircraft, removing jaggies.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk4mCHRVI/AAAAAAAAUi0/bOZgOroNOA4/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2045940%20PM.jpg

Now here is the difference of what I erased showing both Layers. See along this ridge, I how the Pixels look duller and smoother on the lower right side of the ridge, and past my Circle Eraser they look brighter and sharper? I didn't "erase" that part yet. I'm at a high Opacity so you can see the difference.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk5RvGl4I/AAAAAAAAUi8/YGh8BE9ZeTA/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2050025%20PM.jpg

OK here on this line of the paint scheme, I had some Jaggies (the whiter/brighter pixels when zoomed in like we talked about). I erased the top left of the Orange/Whie line and have yet to Erase the bottom right.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk5n4NWGI/AAAAAAAAUjI/8LwJupmKjZI/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2050118%20PM.jpg

OK, here I zoomed out to check my progress. On the lower right Pallette I deselected the Background Layer, so I can check what I did and what I have left to do. Oops, I didn't do the nose wheel gear...see, no eraser mark around it.
http://lh4.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk6Ee9WFI/AAAAAAAAUjQ/k5-61SQyHos/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2050218%20PM.jpg

See around this spar/gear brace...the white pixels = jaggies and I did not erase them yet
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk6yP8lcI/AAAAAAAAUjY/dyKcNnVYSpU/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2050257%20PM.jpg

OK, here is the finished product.
http://lh6.ggpht.com/_XZ-ysxSDq7c/Sxbk7pDVgZI/AAAAAAAAUjo/7BRi9yAUM8U/s800/Fullscreen%20capture%201222009%2050459%20PM.jpg

I know we had some talks about saving. For me, and everyone does it a little different, I simply save one file as a PSD so it keeps my layers in tact in case I get a rejection. I can then open the PSD and make a correction. But after I save my PSD version, I simply click Save As, Jpeg, Compression 12 (max) unless it is larger than 1MB. Like I said, if i get a rejection, I don't touch that Jpeg again. I open my PSD, make the adjustment, the save it as another PSD labelled V2 and then Save As JPEG V2. Do not open and resave JPEGs, too much compression, only do it once. You also asked about Flattening the Layers. I do not do these, never needed to. At one time I asked what the purpose is of flattening the layers, but I don't think I ever found out. Forgive the typos...  



[Edited 2009-12-02 14:35:18]


All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Camera Settings Help posted Fri Nov 28 2008 04:32:37 by Haphadon
Looking For Advice On Camera Settings In Museums posted Sun Oct 5 2008 13:18:59 by 2H4
How Do You Get Photo (camera Settings) Info? posted Thu Feb 28 2008 17:39:40 by Witticism
Advice Needed On Camera Settings posted Fri Dec 28 2007 22:10:46 by Reliantresin
Camera Settings,Nikon D70S Please Help posted Fri Nov 23 2007 08:23:07 by Maxketan
Heathaze Or Camera Settings? posted Sun Apr 30 2006 00:01:56 by B076
Camera Settings posted Fri Nov 25 2005 15:12:19 by Virgin7
Cockpit At Night: What Camera Settings? posted Fri Sep 30 2005 16:36:19 by Skywatch
Digital SLR Camera Settings posted Thu Sep 29 2005 17:44:36 by Olympus69
Camera Settings/Quality Vs. Post Processing posted Mon Feb 21 2005 08:27:14 by WakeTurbulence