photo quality issues..please help

erinelliott

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 20, 2006
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Rob gave me some ideas on what settings to try on my gateway DC-T50 and I think this camera just isnt capable of shooting the quality I need to photograph my paintings. I tried the settings and it got a little better but I cant seem to lose the grain.

So back to looking for suggestions on a camera that doesnt cost a fortune that can shoot a crisp clean photo.

Even with my lights on the painting grain grain grain. grrr

At the time when I bought the gateway it was the most affordable camera I could find and considering I was shooting my art with video on my one chip digital video camera at 72 resolution, putting the video in final cut pro and pulling a still, the gateway was a step up.

I need to go to the next level and I know cameras can vary, as my gateway with it's 5.25 mp sounds really good but aint cuttin' it. It is obvious that the 5.25mp is supposed to mean high quality but I am guessing that the quality of photo from cameras with similar mp can vary greatly.

So ideas from you professional photographers for a camera that is not gonna cost a fortune but will shoot a crisp clean photo from 8 - 10 feet away would be GREATLY APPRECIATED!

PLEASE GIVE ME IDEAS! THANKS!!!!!!!!
 
A couple questions that may help someone come up with an answer... What media are your paintings? What are the photos to be used for? If the surface of the paintings are textured (oils or acrylics) you're probably going to get thousands of tiny light reflections which will look like grain in a photo. Watercolor paper is usually very textured and grainy to begin with.
 
I paint on canvas with oil and acrylic both. The acrylic is flat and reflection isnt an issue. With the oil I do have to take out some tiny reflections in photoshop.

This I can live with but that grain...what a pain.

Other artists photos show details like the pattern in the canvas with close ups, but my current camera cannot achieve that unless I place the painting in full bright sunlight, in which case the reflection is off the charts.

So my camera just doesnt hold up without full blown off the charts light.

So a camera that doesnt fall apart without tons of insane light is what I am looking for.
 
I wonder if a polarizing filter would cut the glare and reflections in a full-sun location. I'm assuming your camera doesn't accept screw-on filters. Have you considered a used 35mm camera (from a pawn shop or flea market)? With ISO200 film, an 85mm lens, and a polarizing filter you would probably get pretty good results. Anyone ???
 
I am posting on ebay so I really love the speed of the digital for posting. I paint a painting or 2 a day and am concerned that 35mm will add tooooo much delay.

The convenience of digital works good, just looking for a better camera.

the gateway I am using has reviews that in low light it has issues.

I dont want to buy another digital with the same problems if possible.

I am scrambling to servive selling on ebay as it is but my paintings are going up in price. I just wish folks could see them better because I think it would bring more money and interest.

I am concerned that if the paintings dont look crisp the people think that the painting looks that way.

I post every day and between shipping, making frames, stretching canvas, painting and customer correspondence.... another step .... going to get film developed may break the camel's back. My boyfriend has a nice 35mm but I would love the ease of a digital.

I wil try the 35mm but if anyone knows of a digital that is great let me know. thanks
 
Looking at the the larger version with the guy on the sofa, it looks like there's a lot of JPEG artifacting. Are they there before you post to eBay? What quality setting are you using? If you edit, and you probably should to apply a gentle sharpen, what compression setting do you use when you save the JPEG?
 
*******Nice Camera
by Lifeling - May 4, 2005
Pros:
High res at low cost, good daylight shooting, easy charging, good flash

Cons:
battery life (not so great),gets grainy in low light

******Good pictures under adequate lighting, difficult focus, slow performance.
by sjwvuie - December 28, 2005
Pros:
Picture quality at 5.2 megapixels (with adequate lighting), small size fits into a pants pocket easily, decent battery life.

Cons:
Very slow focus and shot to shot time, terrible pictures if adequate lighting is not available.

Ok.This is all over the place so I know it isnt me. It was all I could afford at the time. hmmmmm. I find it over and over when I google this cam.

It is still much better then the 72 res from the video cam but would love to hear if anyone has a camera they are happy with in not in not complete bright bright daylight. I think having a manual focus would be good.

I may just have to paint and paint my lil b-tt off and save for a mac-daddy digital.

Still would love a cam under $300 that would be better.
 
the smaller photo is tiny. that is just to show size of painting so not needed to be so clean.

it is the "gallery" photo that needs to look crisp.

wow... thanks for going to the trouble to check out the photos.
 
Send me, or post an original image and I'll have a look at it for you.

It sounds like the lighting is about right - certainly looks fine on the ebay site. Megapixels are irrelevant.

I think Mark is on the right track - it's a workflow / compression / eBay problem more than a camera problem. My best guess is that if you went out and bought another digital camera the situtation wouldn't improve.

Rob
 
I have to agree that it's something with your workflow, and the quality at which you are saving the jpgs. All I see are artifacts, not noise.
 
Under $300 - YashicaMats [6x6cm film] will provide very sharp grain-free enlargements up to at least 11x14". Many are available.
 
Torus34 said:
Under $300 - YashicaMats [6x6cm film] will provide very sharp grain-free enlargements up to at least 11x14". Many are available.

Yes, I've got one for sale as well! :mrgreen: Sadly, they're probably the least appropriate way to generate jpgs for the web.

Rob
 
sent you a photo rob. they look aweful right out of the camera. grrr. thanks for all the help
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top