Outdoors - ENTRY thread -...What is it? - CHAT thread...What is it? ENTRY thread ...End of an EraPoll - Doom and GloomDOOM and GLOOM CHAT 13-2...Outdoors - CHAT thread - ...DOOM and GLOOM ENTRIES 1...POLL - FruitPOLL - VehiclesENTRIES-FRUIT-Weekly Comp...CHAT-FRUIT-Weekly Comp 6-...VEHICLES - CHAT thread we...VEHICLES - ENTRY thread w...Poll - PortraitsPortraits - CHAT - Weekly...

Author Topic: Acceptable Blur  (Read 2452 times)

Offline Skhilled

  • Amatuer In Training
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Still Learning! ;)
    • The Family Gathering
Acceptable Blur
« on: October 29, 2011, 11:53:25 PM »
I've been trying out my latest lens...a 70-210mm f4-f5.6. I'm used to the VR of my 18-55mm and am finding it a bit challenging to get a tack sharp shot while handholding it. Yeah, I know, practice makes perfect.

But I've read that in some shots that an acceptable amount of blur is OK. My question is how much is OK? When I view the photos on the PC in Lightroom, etc. I can definitely see the blur. When I upload them to photobucket and add them to a post in a forum they do not seem as blurry.





The composition and exposure does not matter in the above pics.


Nikon D3000
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6.G VR
Nikkor 70-210mm f4-f5.6 AF Macro Zoom
AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6.G ED VR

Offline Mick

  • I've got the latest Canon - 4 rings, double oven and eye level grill! And HD video!
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
  • I really, really hate lawn mowers.
    • Camera Craniums
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #1 on: October 30, 2011, 12:30:55 AM »
Steve, shooting @ 1/80 with lens full open at 210mm might be the problem as it was hand held. 

You could try shooting in AP  mode and cranking the ISO up to give you a better shutter speed and smaller aperture.  Or stick it on a tripod.  It's said, the shutter speed should match, or better still exceed the focal length when hand holding.  ;)
Thank You, "Guest" For Reading This Post.

My Gallery
Tinyportal.net Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.0
Guitarist Guild Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R
The Garden Machinery Forum Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R

Offline Oldboy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5428
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #2 on: October 30, 2011, 01:01:06 AM »
You can handhold at 80/s but you have to be rock steady to do so. Acceptable blur depends on the subject and what you are trying to achieve. In normal situations, the subject should be sharp but the surrounds can be blurred, as this makes the subject standout. In other situations, blur can be used to show a range of colours rather than having some sharp whilst others are blurred. These would be considered as soft, like a picture of a loved one, give the image a dreamy aspect. Blur can also be used to show speed, like a train passing a station whereas, a sharp image couldn't/might not convey that the subject was moving. So the real answer is, it depends on what you are trying to convey in the final picture.  :tup:

Also noticed you have exposure compensation set at +0.33, and suggest you set it to -0.33, to give better results with Nikon cameras.  ;D
« Last Edit: October 30, 2011, 01:05:49 AM by Oldboy »

Offline spinner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1463
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #3 on: October 30, 2011, 01:26:59 AM »
When I view the photos on the PC in Lightroom, etc. I can definitely see the blur. When I upload them to photobucket and add them to a post in a forum they do not seem as blurry.


I seem to recall reading somewhere that sites like Facebook have an algorithm that auto sharpens anything posted to them. Perhaps Photobucket does the same.
And more, much more than this, I did it my way
Ol' blue eyes

http://ddsdigita4.wix.com/ddsdigital
https://www.flickr.com/photos/spin498/

Offline Markulous

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #4 on: October 30, 2011, 08:24:08 AM »
I'd say there's no such thing as acceptable blur but there is deliberate blur!  ;)

And although you say that in the above two shots that exposure doesn't matter, as is pointed out they're overexposed - this leads to burned and overexposed pixels affecting the neighbouring (compare the trees against the sky in the top shot with the trees against the field). I can assure you that whatever the camera reducing the exposure comp to something like -0.7 would massively improve the shots

Can also confirm that Photobucket does not sharpen the shots if you link to the image (as you've done). But reducing the final size of an image will have the effect of sharpening (if you think about it, a difuse object will become more concentrated and hence, sharp) - hence sharpening being the final process before saving (as an aside, wider lenses tend to need less sharpening)
Whatever and ever. Amen
http://smg.photobucket.com/home/Markulous/index
Mark @ Photobucket

Offline Mick

  • I've got the latest Canon - 4 rings, double oven and eye level grill! And HD video!
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
  • I really, really hate lawn mowers.
    • Camera Craniums
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #5 on: October 30, 2011, 08:51:59 AM »
I notice in the first pic, you have the white  balance set to + Cool white Fluorescent (W 3900- (was that intensional?) 

You're also shooting in Shutter priority mode on both pics, so you're letting the camera decide what aperture to use.  You have no control over depth of field using that mode.  Unless Nikon's have a trick up their sleeve. :)
Thank You, "Guest" For Reading This Post.

My Gallery
Tinyportal.net Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.0
Guitarist Guild Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R
The Garden Machinery Forum Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R

Offline ABERS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2195
    • Black and White Images by Alan Abercrombie
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #6 on: October 30, 2011, 11:36:38 AM »
This thread came to mind as I was reading an article in today's Observer about the Lytro light field camera that has been a subject on a thread somewhere here on CC.

After talking about HC Bresson's portraits and the fact that some are sightly out of focus, it goes on to say that in most of those cases the fuzziness doesn't really matter.

Here's a quote from it to raise the hackles of some!

"So perhaps an  obsessiveness with sharpness is a symptom not of aesthetic sensibility but of nerdish perfectionism"  :o
 
All complaints to a Mr John Naughton c/o The Observer.  ;)

Offline Graham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1543
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #7 on: October 30, 2011, 01:26:47 PM »
This thread came to mind as I was reading an article in today's Observer about the Lytro light field camera that has been a subject on a thread somewhere here on CC.

After talking about HC Bresson's portraits and the fact that some are sightly out of focus, it goes on to say that in most of those cases the fuzziness doesn't really matter.

Here's a quote from it to raise the hackles of some!

"So perhaps an  obsessiveness with sharpness is a symptom not of aesthetic sensibility but of nerdish perfectionism"  :o
 
All complaints to a Mr John Naughton c/o The Observer.  ;)
    Dare you to go over to PRader and say that!......And make sure you have a big bucket of popcorn at the ready. :knuppel2:
                    Graham. :2funny:
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day.
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. 

My Gallery
My Flickr Pics

Offline Mick

  • I've got the latest Canon - 4 rings, double oven and eye level grill! And HD video!
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2557
  • I really, really hate lawn mowers.
    • Camera Craniums
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #8 on: October 30, 2011, 02:19:14 PM »
What ever happened to the use of Vaseline on the lens, or breathing on the lens and taking pics at various stages of evaporation.  :D  Anyone still do this?
Thank You, "Guest" For Reading This Post.

My Gallery
Tinyportal.net Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.0
Guitarist Guild Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R
The Garden Machinery Forum Running SMF 2.0.13 / Tinyportal 1.2R

Offline Markulous

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 365
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #9 on: October 30, 2011, 02:31:07 PM »
This thread came to mind as I was reading an article in today's Observer about the Lytro light field camera that has been a subject on a thread somewhere here on CC.

After talking about HC Bresson's portraits and the fact that some are sightly out of focus, it goes on to say that in most of those cases the fuzziness doesn't really matter.

Here's a quote from it to raise the hackles of some!

"So perhaps an  obsessiveness with sharpness is a symptom not of aesthetic sensibility but of nerdish perfectionism"  :o
 
All complaints to a Mr John Naughton c/o The Observer.  ;)

It's a pretty daft thing to say but I wouldn't necessarily disagree, depending on the context. If it's a choice between an excellent composition and good focus, I'll take the former very time and not mind a little OOFness - way too often find a dire composition and everything in focus! What's that about?  :uglystupid2:

    Dare you to go over to PRader and say that!......And make sure you have a big bucket of popcorn at the ready. :knuppel2:
                    Graham. :2funny:

Over there you get a distinct whooshing noise as the comment about burned highlights passes at 20,000 feet over their heads!  :doh:

What ever happened to the use of Vaseline on the lens, or breathing on the lens and taking pics at various stages of evaporation.  :D  Anyone still do this?

Ah, but that's deliberate and so invalidated in this argument!  ;)
(and I'm sure there's a PS filter for that somewhere along the way......  ::))
Whatever and ever. Amen
http://smg.photobucket.com/home/Markulous/index
Mark @ Photobucket

Offline ABERS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2195
    • Black and White Images by Alan Abercrombie
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #10 on: October 30, 2011, 02:37:27 PM »
Quote
    Dare you to go over to PRader and say that!......And make sure you have a big bucket of popcorn at the ready. :knuppel2:
                    Graham. :2funny:

Are you suggesting that there are those that seek perfection to the level of nerdishness, or there are just perfect nerds? :-\

Ah the old Vaseline ploy Mick, or the crumpled cellophane on the baseboard. Happy days! :tup:

Offline Skhilled

  • Amatuer In Training
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 204
  • Still Learning! ;)
    • The Family Gathering
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #11 on: October 30, 2011, 07:13:45 PM »
Steve, shooting @ 1/80 with lens full open at 210mm might be the problem as it was hand held. 

You could try shooting in AP  mode and cranking the ISO up to give you a better shutter speed and smaller aperture.  Or stick it on a tripod.  It's said, the shutter speed should match, or better still exceed the focal length when hand holding.  ;)

Yes, I notice that when I up the shutter it works better for me. So, I tend to go with SP instead as AP and M do not seem to give me enough light in some situations. I'll bump up the ISO and try it again. The flourescent wb was an error and I know it was on in the first pic when I posted it. LOL

It's just that sometimes trying to get the shutter up high enough is also a challenge unless I'm in bright daylight, etc.

You can handhold at 80/s but you have to be rock steady to do so. Acceptable blur depends on the subject and what you are trying to achieve. In normal situations, the subject should be sharp but the surrounds can be blurred, as this makes the subject standout. In other situations, blur can be used to show a range of colours rather than having some sharp whilst others are blurred. These would be considered as soft, like a picture of a loved one, give the image a dreamy aspect. Blur can also be used to show speed, like a train passing a station whereas, a sharp image couldn't/might not convey that the subject was moving. So the real answer is, it depends on what you are trying to convey in the final picture.  :tup:

Also noticed you have exposure compensation set at +0.33, and suggest you set it to -0.33, to give better results with Nikon cameras.  ;D

Thanks for the tips. :)

I'd say there's no such thing as acceptable blur but there is deliberate blur!  ;)

And although you say that in the above two shots that exposure doesn't matter, as is pointed out they're overexposed - this leads to burned and overexposed pixels affecting the neighbouring (compare the trees against the sky in the top shot with the trees against the field). I can assure you that whatever the camera reducing the exposure comp to something like -0.7 would massively improve the shots

Can also confirm that Photobucket does not sharpen the shots if you link to the image (as you've done). But reducing the final size of an image will have the effect of sharpening (if you think about it, a difuse object will become more concentrated and hence, sharp) - hence sharpening being the final process before saving (as an aside, wider lenses tend to need less sharpening)

Thanks, will try adjusting the exposure comp.

Thanks to everyone for their honest input. :)

The weather's been horrible lately and I haven't been out much. We've actually got more than a 1/2 foot of snow yesterday and there are still 1000's without power. Trees and limbs are littering the city everywhere. I started to go out and take a few picks of it but the sun is melting it pretty quickly and it is kind raining under the many trees here. There are also a lot of half-broken branches still hanging from trees waiting to fall so it is probably best I stay in and not get hit in the head with a limb or a whole tree.  :2funny:
Nikon D3000
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6.G VR
Nikkor 70-210mm f4-f5.6 AF Macro Zoom
AF-S DX Nikkor 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6.G ED VR

picsfor

  • Guest
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #12 on: October 30, 2011, 09:32:10 PM »
That said, do not pass up the opportunity to practice hand held at slow shutter speeds - you never know when you will be out in low light and not have a tripod, or in a situation where flash will be adequate to the task.

My recent trip to Vegas pretty much involved constant shooting at 1/20th sec with a 24-105 lens, and occasionally down to 1/8th sec. Yes, i was pushing it, but in know i got several shots i would not have got without doing it, and when i attended a wedding reception last night, i found practice came to use as i was able to get hand held shots i may not have attempted previously.

Offline Beaux Reflets

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2267
  • Commonsense answers a whole load of the unanswered
    • Beaux Reflets
Re: Acceptable Blur
« Reply #13 on: October 31, 2011, 08:58:58 AM »
How much blur is acceptable? As much as you desire!  ;)

:beer: Andy

"Light anchors things in place and gives perspective meaning."

The choices we make are rooted in reflection.

http://beauxreflets.blogspot.com/

 

latest Posts

Subject Board Views/Replies Member Date & Time
xx Outdoors - ENTRY thread - Weekly Comp 20/09/30 - 27/09/20 International Weekly Comp Entries 128/4 Oldboy Last post Today at 10:02:45 AM
xx What is it? - CHAT thread - Weekly Comp 26/09/2020 - 04/10/2020 International Weekly Comp Entries 14/0 Jediboy Last post September 27, 2020, 07:20:03 PM
xx What is it? ENTRY thread - Weekly Comp 26/09/2020 - 04/10/2020 International Weekly Comp Entries 11/0 Jediboy Last post September 27, 2020, 07:17:48 PM
xx End of an Era General Discussion 108/6 anglefire Last post September 27, 2020, 02:28:15 PM
xx Poll - Doom and Gloom International Weekly Comp Entries 184/5 Jediboy Last post September 26, 2020, 09:30:50 PM
xx DOOM and GLOOM CHAT 13-20/092020 International Weekly Comp Entries 217/6 jinky Last post September 22, 2020, 09:54:12 AM
xx Outdoors - CHAT thread - Weekly comp 20/09/20 - 27/09/20 International Weekly Comp Entries 142/4 Oldboy Last post September 22, 2020, 12:03:31 AM
xx DOOM and GLOOM ENTRIES 13-20/092020 International Weekly Comp Entries 142/3 Oldboy Last post September 21, 2020, 11:51:45 PM