Alexander Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Hi all. I have submitted first three pictures and have rejected by reason "Soft or lacking definition". Pictures was taken by recommended camera and lens. Picture was landscapes with big depth of field and exposition was normal as I can see by histogram. Could someone help me to understand if I need increase sharpen of photos with contrast always? Thanks Alexander. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Hi Alexander. To comment in any meaningful way, we need to see a 100% crop of the image/s that failed. dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 We can't comment unless you post 100% crops here, but Alamy say don't sharpen and I never have, but then I shoot jpeg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 "Soft or lacking definition" could be caused by stopping your lens down too far in order to get "big depth of field". On my full frame sensor camera F5.6 is the sharpest and F11 is acceptable sharpness. F16 or F22 would cause softness due to diffraction, and probably result in a "Soft or lacking definition" verdict in QC On my smaller sensor cameras any stopping down beyond F6.3 will yield unacceptable soft results. If I am using a zoom lens then the F11 limit can vary, depending on the zooom setting. Here is an explanation of diffraction. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/u-diffraction.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 I've never had a fail for diffraction and I'm typically using f10-13 on a sunny day. SonyA55/356, kit 18-55. Interesting point though- it never goes smaller than f13 on Program. A fortunate byproduct of trying to keep a faster shutter speed? But OP, we still need to see your failed pix at 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Does this mean that Ansel Adams would have failed Alamy QC? Personally, I've never had any problems with f/11 images (APS-C sensors) on Alamy, and I also use the f/10 to f/13 f-stop range fairly often with my Sony cameras and lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Hi all. I have submitted first three pictures and have rejected by reason "Soft or lacking definition". For your “test” submission, please send FOUR images. Once your “test” submission has passed Quality Control (QC) you can send as many as you like. Possibly didn't help your first submission....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dov makabaw Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Without more information we can't give constructive advice. Please let us know what body and lens you are using and whether your images have been cropped. If you attach a copy of your image then I am confident that somebody will be able to pinpoint the problem. Good luck anyway - we have all been through this! dov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brooks Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Photographers owe a lot to Ansel Adams, however Ansel Adams shot to the technical standards of another age. I was at an exhibition of Adams prints about 6 months ago, and I would say that yes, his early 1930's 1940's work would have failed Alamy QC because of a lack of sharpness. The difference in sharpness between Adams' work, and Burtynsky's work was like night and day. http://www.mcmichael.com/adams-burtynsky/ansel-adams.html Sharpness standards have come a long way since Adams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted January 29, 2014 Share Posted January 29, 2014 Photographers owe a lot to Ansel Adams, however Ansel Adams shot to the technical standards of another age. I was at an exhibition of Adams prints about 6 months ago, and I would say that yes, his early 1930's 1940's work would have failed Alamy QC because of a lack of sharpness. The difference in sharpness between Adams' work, and Burtynsky's work was like night and day. http://www.mcmichael.com/adams-burtynsky/ansel-adams.html Sharpness standards have come a long way since Adams That may be so, but I'm sure that there are millions of images -- including plenty of landscapes -- on Alamy that were shot at f/11 or smaller apertures with non full-frame cameras and "consumer" lenses. Anyway, I'm sure that you landscape experts can help the OP if he decides to post some 100% crops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dov makabaw Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Check out your camera sensor pixel size on the Cambridge in Colour website. This will show you the smallest aperture that can be used before the image softens. dov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 Check out your camera sensor pixel size on the Cambridge in Colour website. This will show you the smallest aperture that can be used before the image softens. dov Thanks for this. So, according to their calculator, a camera with a 1.5 crop factor (CF) shouldn't have diffraction issues until f/16. Correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I did a rough-and-ready test today on a resolution chart, A55, 18-55 on 35 and there was no detectable deterioration until f22. f29 was quite ropey. Optimum, between 11 and 16. Which is where the P setting puts most of my exposures. So I'll stop thinking about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kilpatrick Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 This matters because on the A7R full-frame you really need f/13, f/14, f/16 to be used quite often to get enough depth of field. And the sensor is actually slightly larger in pixel size than the A55. It works, of course. All these cameras today have either very weak AA filters or none, and the old problems with pictures getting softer at f/11 were often down to the AA filter on an even lower resolution sensor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted January 30, 2014 Share Posted January 30, 2014 I hope we haven't frightened the OP away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pearl Posted February 1, 2014 Share Posted February 1, 2014 Check out your camera sensor pixel size on the Cambridge in Colour website. This will show you the smallest aperture that can be used before the image softens. dov Very useful website. Thanks for sharing Dov. Pearl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MariaJ Posted February 6, 2014 Share Posted February 6, 2014 Yes, very helpful website, thanks Dov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.