Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

 

REALLY?

 

Allan

 

 

Yes, that's what i thought at the time! It does look a little soft, but it has got me paranoid now and i've been downsizing 60.2mp pics from my Canon 5D Mk II to 20mp to make sure they pass.

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

not fully perpendicular to the subject  that explains what happened.

 

 

A handy trick is to put a flat mirror in place of the object (ie coin) and adjust tip/tilt (and focus) until you see a reflection of the lens exactly in the center of the frame. Replace the mirror with the object, adjust focus. Shoot.

 

GI

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Was the one you submitted 2048x1365? Because at this size it looks ok.

If there's a bigger one, I cannot find it?

 

wim

 

 

Wim,

 

Yes the submitted photo was 5616 x 3744. I thought the one I posted was that size as I just copied the file I submitted. I don't know how to submit the larger file!

 

John

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By default Google plus seems to reduce the size of uploaded images, unless you change your settings.

 

You can find how to change your settings here https://support.google.com/plus/answer/156348?hl=en

 

I played around with Google plus the other night and had exactly the same problem, until I found these settings.

 

Must say I think Google Plus Photos is one of the worst apps I've ever used. I found it to be very unfriendly and has quite a few bugs! I gave up on it in the end. Entering captions seems particularly unreliable. Captions sometimes get entered against the wrong photo and then you don't seem to be able to edit them. At least I couldn't find a way. Not impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By default Google plus seems to reduce the size of uploaded images, unless you change your settings.

 

You can find how to change your settings here https://support.google.com/plus/answer/156348?hl=en

 

I played around with Google plus the other night and had exactly the same problem, until I found these settings.

 

Must say I think Google Plus Photos is one of the worst apps I've ever used. I found it to be very unfriendly and has quite a few bugs! I gave up on it in the end. Entering captions seems particularly unreliable. Captions sometimes get entered against the wrong photo and then you don't seem to be able to edit them. At least I couldn't find a way. Not impressed.

 

Thank you! I had not seen that. Google is not very self evident. I have never found either the help pages nor the settings page. Mine must have been default at full size and allowing download. Viewing some of the others I had already wondered how to set do not allow download. However, for this purpose downloading seems very useful to me, as it allows some play with a file in Photoshop.

If downloading is disabled, downloading is possible, but by tiles only. (Like Google Maps.)

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Google apps is that what you know today may not be what you need to know tomorrow! I only use Google apps when I have to for a particualr client; even they recognise that Google is in perpetual beta, they are simply not stable. It is run by engineers who forget that most people are not bothered about the bells and whistles, most people just want stuff to work so they can do their job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GI,

 

Yes many thanks, that is a good idea. 

 

I have been busy trying to redo the shot but I have so far not got it to my satisfaction.  The DOF with the Olympus Macro lens only just reaches the back of coin so it is never going to be enough.  Stopping down gets into diffraction soon.  

 

My solution is my Sony RX100 - 10.4 FL at 12cm focus distance and f6.3 gives 0.78cm in front of the coin and 0.89cm behind.  So I have it all in focus.

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

 

 

I see. You may get it to work OK with your setup.. Hope you realize that you are at a severe disadvantage compared to others who use proper tools for still life photography.

GI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

 

 

I see. You may get it to work OK with your setup.. Hope you realize that you are at a severe disadvantage compared to others who use proper tools for still life photography.

GI

 

 

I know it! 

 

In fact in my collection I have quite a lot of images of old objects gleaned from my junk drawer. Several of these have been very good sellers, but every one photographed in a amateurish way with no proper control over lighting.

 

Every now and then I think I will buy a light tent with a couple of flashes, which would give me a controlable set up.    They are not necessarily vey expensive and there are a great many available, market driven, I suppose, by the need to make pictures of stuff for e-bay. 

 

So far, I have not been able to decide upon the secification of what I need,  what size? how many flashes? what storage space will it need?   will I use it more than once?

 

Maybe I will get round to it soon with the dark days coming.

 

Any advice about such a set up would be appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stokie, I'm not quite clear - you talk about downsizing 60mp to 20mp. Isn't the camera sensor around 22mp?

 

Forgive me if I'm missing something.  I've never tried downsizing and don't quite follow.

 

[sorry quote didn't work for some reason]

Edited by TokyoM1ke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stokie, I'm not quite clear - you talk about downsizing 60mp to 20mp. Isn't the camera sensor around 22mp?

 

Forgive me if I'm missing something.  I've never tried downsizing and don't quite follow.

 

[sorry quote didn't work for some reason]

 

The image OOC at high res JPEG setting comes in at 60mp. Once i've processed it, since the failure i've reduced the file size down to 20mp for submission to Alamy so that images get through and I can start to build up my pass rate again. Hope i've made myself clear :) 

 

Only my second failure in nearly 200 submissions and luckily i haven't had to stay in the sin bin.

 

John.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Stokie, I'm not quite clear - you talk about downsizing 60mp to 20mp. Isn't the camera sensor around 22mp?

 

Forgive me if I'm missing something.  I've never tried downsizing and don't quite follow.

 

[sorry quote didn't work for some reason]

 

The image OOC at high res JPEG setting comes in at 60mp. Once i've processed it, since the failure i've reduced the file size down to 20mp for submission to Alamy so that images get through and I can start to build up my pass rate again. Hope i've made myself clear :)

 

Only my second failure in nearly 200 submissions and luckily i haven't had to stay in the sin bin.

 

John.

 

 

Megapixels or megabytes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

 

 

Peter I regularly shoot at f8 with my RX100 and do not see signs of diffraction. Why not give it a try with your setup and if not happy you can always shoot another image.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Stokie, I'm not quite clear - you talk about downsizing 60mp to 20mp. Isn't the camera sensor around 22mp?

 

Forgive me if I'm missing something.  I've never tried downsizing and don't quite follow.

 

[sorry quote didn't work for some reason]

 

The image OOC at high res JPEG setting comes in at 60mp. Once i've processed it, since the failure i've reduced the file size down to 20mp for submission to Alamy so that images get through and I can start to build up my pass rate again. Hope i've made myself clear :)

 

Only my second failure in nearly 200 submissions and luckily i haven't had to stay in the sin bin.

 

John.

 

 

Megapixels or megabytes?

 

 

I mean megapixels

Edited by Stokie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Megapixels or megabytes?

 

 

Perhaps I mean megabytes?

 

 

. . . I broke a metatarsal once . . . or was it a metacarpal?  . .

 

dd

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

 

 

Peter I regularly shoot at f8 with my RX100 and do not see signs of diffraction. Why not give it a try with your setup and if not happy you can always shoot another image.

 

Allan

 

 

Allan,

 

Yes, I too often shoot at f8, it was the suggestion of f16 that made me nervous.   

 

Having said that, I have never taken the trouble to test the RX100 to see whether I can actually make diffraction happen.  I know there is some oft-quoted theory based on consideration of light falling on a single pixel which predicts a problem when none actually exists due to the interaction of multiple pixels working together to form the image.

 

I will do some testing to see if I can make it happen.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to check out the stats in  www.cambridgeincolour.com for smallest aperture before diffraction happens. A good starting point IMO.

 

dov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

Problem is the reflective strip in the £20 note should look silver, but it mostly reflects the camera and is black. Have not though of a way round that yet.

 

How about two flashes illuminating at an angle from opposite sides? F/16 for DOF?

GI

 

 

I don't have any slave flashes and there is no external flash connection on the RX100.  I will try some reflective cooking foil over the front of the camera, with a hole for the lens, tomorrow.

 

Using f6.3 is OK with 6mm DOF behind the coin front, especially with your mirror trick to keep it square.  I could go to f8 but do not fancy stopping down much further for feaar of softeningby diffraction. .  .

 

 

Peter I regularly shoot at f8 with my RX100 and do not see signs of diffraction. Why not give it a try with your setup and if not happy you can always shoot another image.

 

Allan

 

 

Allan,

 

Yes, I too often shoot at f8, it was the suggestion of f16 that made me nervous.   

 

Having said that, I have never taken the trouble to test the RX100 to see whether I can actually make diffraction happen.  I know there is some oft-quoted theory based on consideration of light falling on a single pixel which predicts a problem when none actually exists due to the interaction of multiple pixels working together to form the image.

 

I will do some testing to see if I can make it happen.

 

 

My tip: ignore the theory and shoot at f/16. From experience, in most (at least) images you'll wonder what all the fuss was about :-)

 

dd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What dustydingo said, I shoot a lot of interiors and I am usually at F16 for those

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be worth adding some caveats here. The aperture you can get away with without appreciable softening will depend critically on the lens, sensor and pixel size.

 

There's often a trade-off between softness due to insufficient depth of focus, and softness due to diffraction.

 

The diffraction effect is very real and I find quite noticeable. I rarely shoot above F11 on my micro 4/3 system. But if I was using FF and downsizing to 24MP I'd probably be happy at F16. I'd never use F16 on my Canon G15 (not even sure it can stop down that far).

 

Smaller apertures also increase noise.

 

F16 may well be fine for FF, but on systems with small sensors with high MP count, my belief is that the resulting softness risks a QC fail.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be worth adding some caveats here. The aperture you can get away with without appreciable softening will depend critically on the lens, sensor and pixel size.

 

There's often a trade-off between softness due to insufficient depth of focus, and softness due to diffraction.

 

The diffraction effect is very real and I find quite noticeable. I rarely shoot above F11 on my micro 4/3 system. But if I was using FF and downsizing to 24MP I'd probably be happy at F16. I'd never use F16 on my Canon G15 (not even sure it can stop down that far).

 

Smaller apertures also increase noise.

 

F16 may well be fine for FF, but on systems with small sensors with high MP count, my belief is that the resulting softness risks a QC fail.

 

I too do not venture above f11 on M4/3.  On the RX100 with its smaller 1" sensor and 20MP, I have stayed at f8 or under, because it felt like the right thing to do.

 

However I carefully tested the RX100 at f11 (as far as it goes) and find it no less sharp than at f8 or f5.6.

 

The RX10 has the same size sensor and can go to f16.  I have not tested it for diffraction yet.  I will do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the water taxi?

 

EA5284.jpg

 

Down sized to 3200x4800 (+ half a day more of pp) it went through.

 

wim

  • Upvote 3

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.