Question concerning photo quality

219 · Sep 5, 2013

Hello,

I have been taking photos for a couple of years but do still think that there is some room for improvement. I have found a lot of other photos online being much sharper and more detailed. I would like to ask you whether I am doing something wrong when editing my pictures or whether it is just the camera not enabling such a high quality.

I have chosen a photo of mine to give you an example:

Compared to the following photo some parts of my image became too pixelated when I sharpened them (e.g. the numbers of the tram): http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wAr3hO3O2QM/UIlTQnVBmdI/AAAAAAAAAWA/egwZ6Ffl2k4/s1600/IMG_9493b.jpg

On the photo linked the details are much clearer. I have to admit that that photo has been taken with a Canon EOS 7D whilst I have taken mine with a Canon EOS 1000D. If I don't sharpen my images they look too soft to me, if I sharpen them (by Photoshop), they usually get partly pixelated. Would it be better to take RAW-photos? Thank you for your help in advance.

Best wishes

cynicaster · Sep 5, 2013

Shoot RAW for most latitude in post
Learn all the ways to maximize photo sharpness right in the camera (shutter speeds, lens sweet spots, etc.)
Have realistic expectations for the results possible with entry-level gear

KmH · Sep 5, 2013

All digital photos start out as a Raw file.

When a camera is set to make JPEG files in the camera, the JPEGs are made from Raw files.

JPEG is a lossy, compressed file type.
Lossy means about 80% of the image color data has been discarded to get from thew 12-bit or 14-bit color depth of a Raw file to the 8-bit color depth JPEG is limited to.
Compressed means the image pixels have been converted into 8x8 pixel, 8x16 pixel, or 16x16 pixel groups known as Minimum Coded Units (MCUs).

In addition, a JPEG made in the camera has editing done to it by the camera - Contrast, Saturation, and Sharpening are all applied to some extent.
Camera menu settings can be changed to crudely adjust how much or how little contrast, saturation and sharpening are applied to the JPEG in the camera.

JPEG is intended to be a finished, ready-to-print file type that will have no additional editing applied to it. While some JPEGs have some editing headroom, it is rarely as much editing headroom as a Raw file has.
Many JPEG files have no editing headroom.

So yes, it would be better to start with a Raw file.

These tutorials cover the above in more detail - Photo Editing Tutorials

amolitor · Sep 5, 2013

First, stop peeping at the pixels so closely. It just causes sorrow, suffering, and spending money on more expensive gear.

Second, stop oversharpening. If it looks like crap, you've gone too far, unless you're going for a "crunchy" effect.

You should probably not be messing with sharpening at all if you're shooting JPEGs, anyways. So, yeah, RAW, and sharpen as part of the conversion. You can probably improve sharpness with better technique, and/or a tripod or monopod. You can only improve sharpness up to a point, though, and after that just learn to love whatever softness is left. Sharpness is overrated.