show me your 100% crops....
OK I'm very curious to know if it's just me being silly or what. But...what's a 100% crop really suppose to look like? Or rather what's your photo really suppose to look like at 100%? Show me one with fill flash (speedlight) and one with natural light. My flash ones the 100% crops look great but when it's natural light and low light (like in my house) I just get a lot of noise instead of a crisp clear photo. Is that normal? I'll post some examples today. I have actually been thinking of testing all of my lenses out so I might do that today But post here if you could. I'm just curious. And if you don't mind sharing, I'd really appreciate it!
To see 100% crop, use your magnification tool and right click on actual pixel and it should show you a 100% crop of the photo.
Here is an example using my 16-35ml lens. I only edited on ACR, no sharpening at all or noiseware. As you can see there is some noise in the 100% crop but not drastic. I was using my speedlight. Settings are ISO 400, f2.8, ss1/80
Here is 100% crop
-El mommy to B & A
Just chug-chug-chugging along.
hey great! thanks for that example photo! Looks great to me! Oh and I know how to see it 100%. But let me rephrase that sentence. I guess what I REALLY mean is how crisp should a photo really be? I've heard of "tack sharp" focus. But what is that really and is your example considered tack sharp or?
I'm glad i'm not the only one curious
One thing I've always wondered was...when I'm far away from my subject, and then later on in Photoshop zoom in 100%, they are not always crisp and clear. There is noise (of course that depends on ISO) usually but they are in focus when zoomed out (about 25% in Photoshop). Now, this picture here is an example of what I mean. I edited in ACR for white balance and exposure but I didn't touch the sharpening at all, then just saved. Settings are: aperture f/5, SS 1/250, ISO 400, 63mm using my 28-75mm 2.8 lens. Natural Light of course, no flash.
January 092 by loidaeg, on Flickr
and the 100%crop
January 092crop by loidaeg, on Flickr
now, is this normal? What in the world can I do to fix this? Am I doing something wrong? Should my settings be different? It was a gloomy day and the sun was going down so I had to use a higher ISO. Is this a BAD picture, technically? Is there anything wrong with this picture? I'm very curious because this is something that has been bugging me for a very very long time.
Yeah I wonder how other people get their photos printed so big without them looking all funny. I hope someone else knows
Don't worry about blowing those things up. Noise always seems to look much worse on my computer than on printed photos.
Also, you'll never percieve your far away subjects looking as crisp as your close up subjects. I think it has something to do with the way our brain works. There just aren't as many pixels making up the eye in a far away shot, so the eye doesn't show as much detail, and you perceive more noise in it.
Also remember, that there is a lot more noise in the dark parts of a photo. So, the shadows and blacks look much noisier than the rest of the image. The best way to protect against excessive noise (other than keeping the ISO low) is to make sure you expose the image properly. This is one reason people like to expose to the right...it lessens the amount of noise in the image.
Somewhere on my computer I have an example of a photo taken (underexposed) at ISO 1600 and then properly exposed at ISO 2500. There appears to be less noise in the 2500 version even though ISO 2500 really should produce more noise. Because it is properly exposed...it looks cleaner and crisper.
Wife to Rich~ 8/16/03 Mom to Nathan~ 9/30/07
I agree with Amber. I think it is also associated with the pixels on the sensor of the camera.