Photo Lady
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 6,387
- Reaction score
- 6,445
- Location
- ny
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
i will check on that ...be back..thanks.. i just checked and photobucket won't give me the image stats.. they keep saying check back later... i quess i will keep trying..Sharpen? that is a help right there.. i will check the shutter speed next time and try to set it for the right speed
Are you using an auto mode? What f-stop? What shutter speed?
thanks very much............................ i appreciate it .. now i can go from here.... thanks again..first one has no exif that I can read. the second was taken at f/3.5 and 1/600s (ISO 320) 1/600s should stop moderate motion.
maybe missed focus? the first looks plenty sharp on my monitor.
p!nK
first one has no exif that I can read. the second was taken at f/3.5 and 1/600s (ISO 320) 1/600s should stop moderate motion.
maybe missed focus? the first looks plenty sharp on my monitor.
p!nK
first one has no exif that I can read. the second was taken at f/3.5 and 1/600s (ISO 320) 1/600s should stop moderate motion.
maybe missed focus? the first looks plenty sharp on my monitor.
p!nK
Where'd you get 1/600?
I got
Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Image Date: 2010:03:31 23:57:46 - ????
Focal Length: 44mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.0006 s (1/1600)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Maybe the updated FxIF isn't working properly, I don't think this was taken at 11:57pm. *shrug*
But honestly, I don't think it's a motion blur issue. Look at the right front paw in the second shot, it doesn't have any motion blur, the tongue (which if you have a dog you KNOW is ALWAYS moving), yet the fur looks very soft. I think this is just simply a case of lower end optics and VERY manicured fur on a "show" quality dog. Soft & fluffy fur = soft outline to the animal.
The first shot looks quite sharp to me, you can pick out individual hairs in the fur on the dogs chest and right side (our left), and even the fur on the ears is crisp. Can't see the paws though.
I think both are a wee bit over exposed too, it makes the "white" fur look pure white, which it's not naturally. (Unless you give the dog daily baths lol)
Anyway, beautiful dog and cute shots. I'd be pleased with the snapshots if I were you. :thumbup:
first one has no exif that I can read. the second was taken at f/3.5 and 1/600s (ISO 320) 1/600s should stop moderate motion.
maybe missed focus? the first looks plenty sharp on my monitor.
p!nK
Where'd you get 1/600?
I got
Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Image Date: 2010:03:31 23:57:46 - ????
Focal Length: 44mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.0006 s (1/1600)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Maybe the updated FxIF isn't working properly, I don't think this was taken at 11:57pm. *shrug*
But honestly, I don't think it's a motion blur issue. Look at the right front paw in the second shot, it doesn't have any motion blur, the tongue (which if you have a dog you KNOW is ALWAYS moving), yet the fur looks very soft. I think this is just simply a case of lower end optics and VERY manicured fur on a "show" quality dog. Soft & fluffy fur = soft outline to the animal.
The first shot looks quite sharp to me, you can pick out individual hairs in the fur on the dogs chest and right side (our left), and even the fur on the ears is crisp. Can't see the paws though.
I think both are a wee bit over exposed too, it makes the "white" fur look pure white, which it's not naturally. (Unless you give the dog daily baths lol)
Anyway, beautiful dog and cute shots. I'd be pleased with the snapshots if I were you. :thumbup:
haha.. read it too fast. you are correct 1/1600. :blushing:
p!nK
thanks very much.. i have the nikon d5000 ... i will go with this info with that camera now... hopefully better pics ... thanks also for compliments on my brushing...and my collie boy.... every day for a few minutes does the trick...first one has no exif that I can read. the second was taken at f/3.5 and 1/600s (ISO 320) 1/600s should stop moderate motion.
maybe missed focus? the first looks plenty sharp on my monitor.
p!nK
Where'd you get 1/600?
I got
Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Image Date: 2010:03:31 23:57:46 - ????
Focal Length: 44mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.0006 s (1/1600)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Maybe the updated FxIF isn't working properly, I don't think this was taken at 11:57pm. *shrug*
But honestly, I don't think it's a motion blur issue. Look at the right front paw in the second shot, it doesn't have any motion blur, the tongue (which if you have a dog you KNOW is ALWAYS moving), yet the fur looks very soft. I think this is just simply a case of lower end optics and VERY manicured fur on a "show" quality dog. Soft & fluffy fur = soft outline to the animal.
The first shot looks quite sharp to me, you can pick out individual hairs in the fur on the dogs chest and right side (our left), and even the fur on the ears is crisp. Can't see the paws though.
I think both are a wee bit over exposed too, it makes the "white" fur look pure white, which it's not naturally. (Unless you give the dog daily baths lol)
Anyway, beautiful dog and cute shots. I'd be pleased with the snapshots if I were you. :thumbup:
haha... i do too:mrgreen:Where'd you get 1/600?
I got
Camera Maker: Canon
Camera Model: Canon PowerShot S5 IS
Image Date: 2010:03:31 23:57:46 - ????
Focal Length: 44mm
Aperture: f/3.5
Exposure Time: 0.0006 s (1/1600)
ISO equiv: 320
Exposure Bias: none
Metering Mode: Matrix
White Balance: Auto
Flash Fired: No
Maybe the updated FxIF isn't working properly, I don't think this was taken at 11:57pm. *shrug*
But honestly, I don't think it's a motion blur issue. Look at the right front paw in the second shot, it doesn't have any motion blur, the tongue (which if you have a dog you KNOW is ALWAYS moving), yet the fur looks very soft. I think this is just simply a case of lower end optics and VERY manicured fur on a "show" quality dog. Soft & fluffy fur = soft outline to the animal.
The first shot looks quite sharp to me, you can pick out individual hairs in the fur on the dogs chest and right side (our left), and even the fur on the ears is crisp. Can't see the paws though.
I think both are a wee bit over exposed too, it makes the "white" fur look pure white, which it's not naturally. (Unless you give the dog daily baths lol)
Anyway, beautiful dog and cute shots. I'd be pleased with the snapshots if I were you. :thumbup:
haha.. read it too fast. you are correct 1/1600. :blushing:
p!nK
Ahh, ok, but still...23:57 is when it was taken?! lol I want to find a place (warmer than Alaska) where it's that sunny at 11:57pm!
thanks...will check that.Adjust clarity slider
[I think this is just simply a case of lower end optics