Noise / Grain issues and some print questions...

[paulpippin29]

Well 3EO... you nailed it. I just went outside and did another test shot of the same flower, same afternoon sun conditions, and I closed the aperture just a bit, tried F10, then F8, and while fully zoomed in, F8 was the sweet spot. Hardly any noise at all in the images, and still adequate background bluring.

Thing is though, what if I want the widest aperture possible, which with this lens is 3.5.... I mean, surely, I should be able to use that, but maybe I shouldn't, or maybe I can just clean the noise up as PaulK did.

I'm already following a new rule that I learned a few weeks ago about this lens of mine... which is to, when shooting people (which is what I prefer) to zoom in to the maximum, then back away from the subject, as to prevent distortion caused by the wide (18 mm) end of the lens. I figured I'de stick to this rule for flowers, or anything else for that matter, as I do not want to add distortion to anything.

Oh, musicaleCA... I missed your last posting, and I say you should go out and buy that lens sir, regardless of all things. I notice in your sig however, you already have quite a nice selection of glass

 

[KmH]

Well, that's why I was asking what the optimum resolution for print would be. I simply figured that with a full resolution image, you'de be able to print any size you want, though I could be wrong. I would think that it works like basic resizing... wheras... resizing an image down to a smaller size always looks better than resizing a smaller image up to a larger size... but, I'm just now diving into the whole print thing, so I'm probably wrong about it all... just seems like it should work that way, and if it were to work that way, I'de want to give the client the optimum res, allowing him or her to print any size they wish, without cutting off anything. I am aware of aspect ratio's when resizing images, and would hope it works the same way for prints, but again, I'm probably wrong.

Why not give it a try on some test images. There is no 1 optimum resolution for all print sizes.

I would submit it's not a good idea to give clients full resolution files unless you price the files at $100+ per image.

I wonder if you're using the term resizing when you really mean cropping.

 

[paulpippin29]

Wow KmH... $100 per image... jeez... I wish I could pull that off, could make a nice living at that rate

And when I say resizing, I do indeed mean resizing. Since I'm not equipped to provide prints myself, the most I do to any image concerning size, is resize it using photoshop, mainly so that I can upload them to my various spots on the web, and if the models wish to use them, they have a web friendly size to work with. I make sure to preserve my aspect ratio, and go to a lower size which will be allowed by all the sites I upload to.

In print terms... I simply mean when referring to size, that I again, believe that if you for example, use an online service to print your images... and you upload the maximum resolution that you have, you'de be able to print any size they offer... in comparison to uploading a small, or smaller image to that same service, and being told that your resolution is not large enough to print at larger sizes.

So while I know most folks typically go for the wallet sized, and the 8x10's... I would like to provide them with the ability to get the best print possible. Again, I'm new to the whole printing thing, but it just seems logical to me that the larger the image, the better the print, though as always, I could be very much so wrong about that.