Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just purchased a Sony RX100 Va and had the first trial submission fail QC for 'soft lacking definition' 

 

I will admit my eye is not 'in' on images at the moment but images did not look to be a problem, but was.

 

Workflow I'm using is as follows

 

1:- convert to DNG

 

2:- process in Bridge and PS CS6, hence the need to convert to DNG

 

3:- output at camera resolution. as a tif.

 

4 :- convert to jpeg at quality 12

 

Basically the same work flow I have used for years with my big cameras adding the DNG conversion.

 

Also ensured that images were shot at Low ISO and stopped down to f4 and f5.6 which after tests proved to be the best aperture.

 

If anyone who is successfully passing QC, with this camera or any other RX100 version, has any advice and would care to share I would appreciate help.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The RX100 is not a dSLR camera, but can shoot the mainstream stock photo. My experience is with the RX100-3.

If you shoot on automatic be sure the focus points cover your main object. Move around until satisfied. 

You can easily stop further down. F.inst. If you shoot night images it can be around f1.8 - 2.8. Try the automatic setting and see what the images look like.
More accurate if you don't shoot on automatic - but A f.inst. - you can choose the focus area to be centre - then focus and compose.

Sometimes it is necessary to downsize a bit or to the minimum acceptable - but most of my images are full size or 85% - I know that many downsize to the minimum - but you won't get the sales for larger image uses then.

Take more images, if possible, to select the better one when editing.

Shouldn't be difficult to pass QC.

 

There are members here that have nearly one of each version - they might enlighten about changes in the Va version

 

I still prefer my dSLR - but the RX100 can be great to carry all the time.

 

 

Niels

Edited by Niels Quist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the Sony as a pocketable alternative to the D700s 

 

Shot images on auto 

 

Will go back and downsize and try some different files. 

 

only send 4 files as a test. One was marked as QC fail but not able to tell if all images were viewed.

 

Anyway will try again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to say that I don't think there is anything wrong with your workflow.

Be critical about the sharpness to avoid more failures.

You will soon get the hang of it and know how you will get the best focused images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the tiny camera more difficult to hold steady. You can get a simple little grip that gives a better purchase for your fingers. I have had to pay a bit of attention to how steady I hold it. Be sure it isn't moving as you press the shutter.

 

Paulette

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ian, could you maybe upload the original failed image to something like dropbox?

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NYCat said:

I find the tiny camera more difficult to hold steady. You can get a simple little grip that gives a better purchase for your fingers. I have had to pay a bit of attention to how steady I hold it. Be sure it isn't moving as you press the shutter.

 

Paulette

got a smallrig cage/grip on order

 

https://www.smallrig.com/smallrig-cage-kit-for-sony-rx100-iii-iv-v-2105.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Ian Goodrick said:

_0010116

 

Flickr possibly compresses image

 

 

 

It looks to me like the focus is on the wrong part of the image - the flowers in the foreground look sharp to me but the car is outside the focal plane and clearly not at all sharp. I think it may be mostly a case of getting used to using that particular camera and getting used to how the images look when viewed in your workflow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the point of the image. The roads in the area have had wild flowers planted on the verges and the subject is trending to a small degree. The image was to concentrate on the verge not the car. 

 

If I had shot full frame I could have given a greater focus differentiation between the car and the verge. As it is it is neither one thing or another.

 

Possibly not the sort of subject that plays to the cameras capabilities.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ian Goodrick said:

That was the point of the image. The roads in the area have had wild flowers planted on the verges and the subject is trending to a small degree. The image was to concentrate on the verge not the car. 

 

If I had shot full frame I could have given a greater focus differentiation between the car and the verge. As it is it is neither one thing or another.

 

Possibly not the sort of subject that plays to the cameras capabilities.

 

 

Next time blur the cars in post. Or give the plants more prominence in the image and make the cars half the size. This is a well known case: clients could mistake your image for a photo of the car. So make sure the car is blurred even at thumbnail sizes. 

Flickr is indeed sharpening images, so no way to know if the foreground would be sharp enough for QC. But I'm pretty sure the real problem here is the ambiguity of the image re: the real subject.

 

wim

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

Next time blur the cars in post. Or give the plants more prominence in the image and make the cars half the size. This is a well known case: clients could mistake your image for a photo of the car. So make sure the car is blurred even at thumbnail sizes. 

Flickr is indeed sharpening images, so no way to know if the foreground would be sharp enough for QC. But I'm pretty sure the real problem here is the ambiguity of the image re: the real subject.

 

wim

 

Agree with Wim's diagnosis - foreground seems sharp enough, but the car should be much more blurred (slower shutter speed) otherwise QC can't tell what you're trying to show

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having slept on it overnight and looked again at this file against my previous submissions, I’m sure it is the ambiguity of the car.

Also it was the first image numerically in the submission and my understanding is that if a failure is found the rest of the submission is rejected without being QCed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Ian Goodrick said:

That was the point of the image. The roads in the area have had wild flowers planted on the verges and the subject is trending to a small degree. The image was to concentrate on the verge not the car. 

 

If I had shot full frame I could have given a greater focus differentiation between the car and the verge. As it is it is neither one thing or another.

 

Possibly not the sort of subject that plays to the cameras capabilities.

 

 

True. I got the RX100VA as well recently and it is an amazing bit of kit for what it is but one thing it does not do well is give a narrow depth of field with nice bokeh background. For that definitely stick with the D700. It is great for subjects where you want everything in focus - buildings, cityscapes, landscapes and so on. One great advantage with the fixed lens is it is not necessary to check for dust spots (so far at least). It is not very good at high ISO in comparison to a Nikon DSLR - I wouldn't take it beyond 800 and even then I would be wary. It seems to be doing some sharpening in-camera for the raw images as they look over-sharpened at the Lightroom default (new one). But overall it is excellent if one focuses on its strong points.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MDM said:

 

True. I got the RX100VA as well recently and it is an amazing bit of kit for what it is but one thing it does not do well is give a narrow depth of field with nice bokeh background. For that definitely stick with the D700. It is great for subjects where you want everything in focus - buildings, cityscapes, landscapes and so on. One great advantage with the fixed lens is it is not necessary to check for dust spots (so far at least). It is not very good at high ISO in comparison to a Nikon DSLR - I wouldn't take it beyond 800 and even then I would be wary. It seems to be doing some sharpening in-camera for the raw images as they look over-sharpened at the Lightroom default (new one). But overall it is excellent if one focuses on its strong points.

From the first few few images I have shot I would agree with everything you say. I just need to get my head around not shooting full frame. Never entered my head issues such as this occurring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MDM said:

 

True. I got the RX100VA as well recently and it is an amazing bit of kit for what it is but one thing it does not do well is give a narrow depth of field with nice bokeh background. For that definitely stick with the D700. It is great for subjects where you want everything in focus - buildings, cityscapes, landscapes and so on. One great advantage with the fixed lens is it is not necessary to check for dust spots (so far at least). It is not very good at high ISO in comparison to a Nikon DSLR - I wouldn't take it beyond 800 and even then I would be wary. It seems to be doing some sharpening in-camera for the raw images as they look over-sharpened at the Lightroom default (new one). But overall it is excellent if one focuses on its strong points.

 

The latest LR has 40 as its default sharpening for raw files..  Adjust downward and see if that improves things.  I changed the sharpening default for one of my cameras (a6000, I think), but don't remember precisely how I did it.  Google should pull up the how-to.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, MizBrown said:

 

The latest LR has 40 as its default sharpening for raw files..  Adjust downward and see if that improves things.  I changed the sharpening default for one of my cameras (a6000, I think), but don't remember precisely how I did it.  Google should pull up the how-to.   

 

 Yes I have already done that - brought it down to 25.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read through tech posts, I often find that my suggestions have already been made. Before you posted the image, Ian, I had assumed you had a handholding problem (as Paulette said). But Wim got it right. If you had shown more blur on the red car (blur for motion) the pic would have passed. 

 

I see people using these pocket Sony RX100s and framing with the back screen. I never do that except when sitting at a restaurant table shooting food. I have a slight vibration in my hands (essential tremor). It's not an age thing. I've had it all my life. Shooting with the EVF, I lean back slightly so the camera is centered over my body and I press the camera against my forehead. If I were to hold that little Sony out in front of me to see the screen, I would get camera shake. I have the RX100-6. The Va and 6 have better autofocus than the earlier models. 

 

Edo

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MizBrown said:

 

The latest LR has 40 as its default sharpening for raw files..

Eek.....40 is my nuclear option, for when I'm downsizing as well to get an image I like through (or should that be past) QC.

Still on LR5.7 here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.