My RAWs BLOW!

[themedicine]

Beautiful TT! Good work on that thing. My buddy has a couple triumphs he working on too while i sit around and work on my Cabby

 

[burstintoflame81]

Just throwing this out there, do you have a UV filter ( or any other filter on your lense when shooting? ) I had a crappy sunpak filter on one of my lenses when I first started. Was told to always keep it on to protect the lense. Anyway, I thought it was the lense that just was cheap so I didn't think much of it. When I took the filter off due to it getting a smudge, I snapped a couple pics without it and it was a world of difference.

 

[Vicelord John]

both of the lenses used (my kit lens and the 17-55) had protective filters.

 

[dl4449121 83]

I noticed that the EXIF in the first 2 pictures says that you have the sharpness set to hard in the camera.
I'm not sure if that is what you are talking about but maybe that is part of the problem??
Troy

 

[TJ K]

Is it a cheap filter like the Tiffen ones? If so that could be the problem. Generally filters only take away from IQ
TJ

 

[Vicelord John]

I noticed that the EXIF in the first 2 pictures says that you have the sharpness set to hard in the camera.
I'm not sure if that is what you are talking about but maybe that is part of the problem??
Troy

I didn't know you could adjust it in the camera. Maybe I just don't know what to do with raw and how to take the pictures.

 

[brianT]

With my D90 and shooting raw, I set the advanced picture control sharpness setting to 5. "Standard" setting is sharpness 3, and "Neutral" setting is sharpness 2. Not sure if this is the OP's problem but I find using sharpness 5 is more pleasing. Of course if you're shooting raw this setting can be changed at anytime in post anyway.

 

[dl4449121 83]

If you go to the shooting menu then set picture control then adjust with the multi selector button (press to the right) you shoulld see the sharpen slider and a saturation and hue slider also
Troy

 

[burstintoflame81]

If he is shooting RAW, wouldn't the RAW file not show any "In-Camera" processing on it? ( that was my impression of it, but I am not familiar with his camera )

Take two pictures of the same thing with those filters on and off and compare them as well as the JPEG and RAW comparison.

 

[PhotoXopher]

So that's what the inside of a ducks ass looks like... not what I had imagined at all.

 

[Vicelord John]

sharpening was on 9

 

[Vicelord John]

is this better?

 

[I'm new to photos]

[/QUOTE]


ddddddddddddddddddddaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[Pugs]

Much sharper.

 

[NateS]

I haven't read all the responses so maybe it's been answered. The reason for your first shot being not sharp has nothing to do with equipment. You shot at 1/4th handheld. You are darn near asking the impossible of your camera doing that and you would have to be made of lead to be steady enough to get a very sharp shot handheld at that shutter speed.

The second shot doesn't seem reasonably unsharp to me....it's just very flat and lacking some contrast. A lack of contrast can lead to a photo looking unsharp. Bump the conrast slightly (but don't go overboard....which you did in the first shot), and sharpness will seem to increase as well.


You just need to make sure you aren't asking the impossible of your equipment. Shooting 1/4th second handheld is asking too much of your camera.


Oh, and the red car is sharper because you were at 1/200th...easier to prevent motion blur at that shutter speed. The cat is at 1/60th but you used flash which will help stop motion as well.