I need some tips on how to produce sharper images

[uracowman]

Originally Posted by Butor

Ok maybe, then let me ask you something.
When you took the pics, was the wind blowing?

I don't think so. I know some days when the wind was blowing, I didn't expect my shots to come out well anyway. My tripod is a POS though but I don't know if that would cause the camera to shake or not.

uracowman added 1385 Minutes and 40 Seconds later...Double Post Merged Below

anyone else have any ideas? Perhaps things like internal camera settings or something?

[crazyfoo]

Originally Posted by uracowman

Some nice HRE rims on the vette; 547's are they?

[uracowman]

Originally Posted by crazyfoo

Some nice HRE rims on the vette; 547's are they?

no those are CCW 505A's.

CCW > HRE

[Westx]

On the Vet the shutter speed in EXIF shows .5 which in my opinon is to slow. If on tripod then anything could have caused the camera to move a little thus causing the blurriness. The mirror could have caused or just a slight breeze. If your on a tripod you may want to try mirror lock up to take that variable out.

Did you shoot these in RAW are JPEG?

[MicWayWal]

Justin,

It is where your camera is focusing. EVERY photograph above has a sharp field, but it may not be where you want it. The sharp points are not where I would put them but I don't shoot cars.
First group of images
#1 image is soft
#2 focus is halfway up the hood, over the front tires
#3 focus is between the car and wall
#4 focus is at the rear tire
#5 image is soft

Second set of images
#1 focus is on the headlights, which to me is the only image you posted where the focus is where it should be.
#2 focus is on the rear tire of the silver car, and the front of the red car, which is about the same plane
#3 focus is on the left rear side light
#4 focus looks like it is at the turbo word on the side of the car

How are you focusing your camera? I have always heard highly reflective surfaces do not focus well. Since I don't regularlly photograph cars, I don't have much personal experience.

One other note that is contributing to the problem;
With the long shutter speed you need a great tripod, mirror locked up and use a cable release. If your tripod is not sturdy and heavy enough, it can and will move, especially if it is extended too far.

[uracowman]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

Justin,

It is where your camera is focusing. EVERY photograph above has a sharp field, but it may not be where you want it. The sharp points are not where I would put them but I don't shoot cars.
First group of images
#1 image is soft
#2 focus is halfway up the hood, over the front tires
#3 focus is between the car and wall
#4 focus is at the rear tire
#5 image is soft

Second set of images
#1 focus is on the headlights, which to me is the only image you posted where the focus is where it should be.
#2 focus is on the rear tire of the silver car, and the front of the red car, which is about the same plane
#3 focus is on the left rear side light
#4 focus looks like it is at the turbo word on the side of the car

How are you focusing your camera? I have always heard highly reflective surfaces do not focus well. Since I don't regularlly photograph cars, I don't have much personal experience.

One other note that is contributing to the problem;
With the long shutter speed you need a great tripod, mirror locked up and use a cable release. If your tripod is not sturdy and heavy enough, it can and will move, especially if it is extended too far.

as far as how I focus, I had a few questions about that. I use evaluative metering, but I was told that I should be using spot metering for the vehicle. I try to vary my points of foxus, but sometimes it doesn't work. For instance, on my camera therea are 9 focus points and I can set the focus to move from the center point to one of the other points. If I had the vehicle in the lower half of the image, I would usually try to set the focus point on the bottom point, but my lens would just focus back and forth and never focus on the object.

As far as MLU, I tried using it and it only allows me to take one picture at a time. I mention this because I bracket my shutter times and this will not allow me to do the bracketing. Also, my tripod is pretty crappy, actually really crappy. I got it as part of my package deal and it fell apart the third day I used it. It is made out of aluminum, but it very thin and hollow. If I had to guess the weight of the tripod, I would say no more than two pounds. most of the vehicle pictures I took in the second set were with a 10 second delay before exposure.

I think my main problem is how I focus as you explained above and I need a tutorial on how the different focus meterings work (evaluative, spot ect). Lastly, those duck pictures were taken without a tripod with a very fast exposure, something around 1/2000th if I remember correctly but I am not certain. I just don't see why it came out as sharp as it did unless I had my aperture too wide or I should of been using spot metering.

Thoughts?

[DickVH]

Let me comment on a few things.

First, metering has nothing to do with focusing. Metering is about how much light is allowed to reach the sensor.

Faster shutter speeds tend to help with sharpness - The camera moves less distance in the shorter time, and camera motion is an enemy of sharpness.

Consider this idea:

Set your iso up to 400;
Set your camera to focus only on the center spot;
Look through the viewfinder and frame the picture the way you want it;
Now - move the camera to where the center spot is where you want your sharpest focus;
press the shutter release button till the little square lights up and hold it there while you move the camera back to the framing you like;
Press the shutter release the rest of the way, being careful to hold the camera steady and only apply pressure to the tip of your finger.

Another factor in sharpness is f-stop. As a general rule, the middle of your f-stop range is the sharpest. Do a comparison - Shoot the same picture just like I outlined above using all the f-stops, one at a time and see which f-stop gives the sharpest image.

Remember:

Keep the f-stop at your sharpest,
Keep your shutter speed up,
Keep your camera steady,
Focus where you want, then re-frame.

Good luck.

Dick

PS Take a look at some of my car pics at www.tex-photo.com

[MicWayWal]

Justin,

Dick is right. Focusing spots have nothing to do with metering modes. You can set them independently of each other.

I have found that the center spot works the best. I don't always get a good focus using the outer ones so I have abandoned their use. I do as Dick suggests when hand holding. That is to press the shutter halfway down to focus, at the point where I want the focus to be and then while holding the shutter halfway down, recompose the image and then shoot. But this can be almost impossible using a tripod.

When using a tripod, use a separate button to focus and have your shutter button programed only to release the shutter and NOT focus. I don't know if your camera supports this but most Canon's can be programmed to do this. I use one of my thumb buttons to focus. I then move the composition to the way I want it and use the shutter to only release the shutter. It will not refocus.

MicWayWal added 6 Minutes and 36 Seconds later...Double Post Merged Below

By the way your duck pictures were taken at 1/320th @f/7.1. You were zoomed at 200mm with the lens but the effective focal length was 320mm with correction. That is right on the border of needing a tripod to avoid motion blur. That is why it is soft.

The turtle picture was taken at 1/60th @ f/5.6. Your effective mm is again 320mm and is way too slow for hand holding, IF you want sharp images.

[Westx]

Justin

Since you have the XSi you can change the focus function from the shutter button to the AE* button by going into custom functions of the menu and going to CF10 and selecting #1.

Like Dick was saying metering has nothing to do with focus but it has everything to do with how your camera measures light to make a recommendtion to you through its meter scale as to how to set your camera up. Learn to make use of the histogram on your LCD to judge you exposure. Also by doing like Dick recommended and take mulipule exposures at different apeture settings you will find your lenes sweet spot for sharpness. There are some really good sites on the net that explain all this and some good books also.

Good luck and keep on shooting. The more you practice the more you learn the better you photos get.

[humminboid]

We just discussed the same basic problem today in our monthly "Rat Pack" racing car photo group mutual admiration and hamburger scarfing society meeting.

One of our members was wailing because the back end of a Corvette was unsharp. The front end was very well focused. He was using a 300mm VR lens, focusing on the front corner of the car, and not using enough aperture to give him a sharply focused car.

There are two main causes of unsharp pixes:
Camera shake.
First, too slow a handheld shutter speed. Rule of thumb: Shutter speed no slower than the longest focal length OR EQUIVALENT you are shooting at; i.e. 350mm= minimum shutter 1/350 sec. 1/400 is better. 105mm=1/125 sec. A tripod or monopod can help. Some people are shakier than others, and caffeine doesn't help, either.

The second:
Too shallow depth of field. DOF=The distance from the
first object in acceptable focus to the last object in acceptable focus.

DOF is in the direction the camera is pointing. In front of you, extending from ~1/3 of the way in front of the subject focused upon, to ~2/3 behind the subject.

DOF is governed by 3 things only: Laws of physics.

Focal length of the lens: More focal length, like 300 mm=shallow DOF.
Wide angle lens, 28mm=lots of DOF.

Distance focused at : Longer distance= somewhat more DOF.

Aperture used: Maximum aperture= less DOF. Minimum aperture= More DOF. This confused our group member. Maximum aperture means the largest hole in the diaphragm, which lets in the most (maximum) light. But, it is designated by a small number, like f3.5.
On the other hand, minimum aperture, which lets in less (minimum) light, is the smallest hole in the diaphragm, designated by a large number, like f/16.

The reason for that, is apeture is expressed as a fraction of the theoretical "maximum" aperture of 1. Soooo...f/8 is 1/8th of f/1, f/2 is 1/2 of the elusive f/1, f/16 is...you get the idea. Don't worry about it. It is not something absolutely vital to the creative processs..except sometimes.

The fourth and least likely cause is a broken lens. It can happen. From your other pixes, I'd say that is not likely.

It can get confusing, but that's photography, some days. But, it is a magical pastime.

[crazyfoo]

Originally Posted by humminboid

We just discussed the same basic problem today in our monthly "Rat Pack" racing car photo group mutual admiration and hamburger scarfing society meeting.

One of our members was wailing because the back end of a Corvette was unsharp. The front end was very well focused. He was using a 300mm VR lens, focusing on the front corner of the car, and not using enough aperture to give him a sharply focused car.

There are two main causes of unsharp pixes:
Camera shake.
First, too slow a handheld shutter speed. Rule of thumb: Shutter speed no slower than the longest focal length OR EQUIVALENT you are shooting at; i.e. 350mm= minimum shutter 1/350 sec. 1/400 is better. 105mm=1/125 sec. A tripod or monopod can help. Some people are shakier than others, and caffeine doesn't help, either.

The second:
Too shallow depth of field. DOF=The distance from the
first object in acceptable focus to the last object in acceptable focus.

DOF is in the direction the camera is pointing. In front of you, extending from ~1/3 of the way in front of the subject focused upon, to ~2/3 behind the subject.

DOF is governed by 3 things only: Laws of physics.

Focal length of the lens: More focal length, like 300 mm=shallow DOF.
Wide angle lens, 28mm=lots of DOF.

Distance focused at : Longer distance= somewhat more DOF.

Aperture used: Maximum aperture= less DOF. Minimum aperture= More DOF. This confused our group member. Maximum aperture means the largest hole in the diaphragm, which lets in the most (maximum) light. But, it is designated by a small number, like f3.5.
On the other hand, minimum aperture, which lets in less (minimum) light, is the smallest hole in the diaphragm, designated by a large number, like f/16.

The reason for that, is apeture is expressed as a fraction of the theoretical "maximum" aperture of 1. Soooo...f/8 is 1/8th of f/1, f/2 is 1/2 of the elusive f/1, f/16 is...you get the idea. Don't worry about it. It is not something absolutely vital to the creative processs..except sometimes.

The fourth and least likely cause is a broken lens. It can happen. From your other pixes, I'd say that is not likely.

It can get confusing, but that's photography, some days. But, it is a magical pastime.

Thanks for that post Carl. I felt like I had a basic understanding, but now I have a much better understanding!!!