Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
DJ72

Taken with Canon G9x, and received "soft or lacking definition"

Recommended Posts

Hello Experts.

 

I am not a professional photographer. I recently took a few shots while travelling and wanted to see how far I could take it trying to get them professionally appraised. Not very far by the looks of things ... :mellow:

 

I just got the "soft or lacking definition" response for my first three photographs. I understand that this evaluation can mean anything from poor focus to bad exposure to camera shake.

 

I will attach the same three here, if I can.

 

https://www.viewbug.com/photo/72603978

https://www.viewbug.com/photo/72603988

https://www.viewbug.com/photo/72603991

 

 

 

Is anyone able to explain to me why they failed? I am not looking for answers just a general advice as to what I should be fixing. 

 

Thank you,

DJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not possible to judge from those, you need to put up a full-sized image or 100% crop.

However the second one has very bad CA and seems to be rather diffused overall. The third one is rather unsharp at the edges but I wonder if there is subject movement given the circumstances There's also some CA.

They are also all around f4.5. I have interchangeable lenses and I don't go that wide unless I have to.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Mark said, we need to see them at 100%, as that is how Alamy judges them.

 

The blue dragon looks slightly soft at the size shown, so would look even softer at 100%.  For me, any wildlife (not my real skill mind you), you have to have the eyes tack sharp.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, thanks for those really useful responses.

Spacecadet I have corrected the dragon for CA, and to me it looks ok.

Jill, how can I ensure that I include a link to a "100%"  picture?

 

I have corrected one of them, and would love to hear any comment before trying to resubmit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put your image in PS (or whatever post processing software you use) and crop out an area of the image (a fairly large section) and upload that without downsizing.  On the dragon choose the face as the eye is the most important on any live subject.

 

If where you place your image always downsizes to fit its area, make your cropped size that size.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't mean the dragon, it was the ones on the boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you shooting RAW? There seem to be a lot of jpg artefacts. The sharpness isn't brilliant but downsizing might have got it through.

How about the others? Remember all the images in the sub have to pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is soft.  Your focus was obviously on the body of the dragon, not the eye.  Mark is right, you may have got it to pass if you downsized to 6 MP, but that is one f those images that if it were mine, I would stare are for 10 minutes and as much as I hated to, bin it.  Too borderline to gamble with.

 

Shoot RAW as well, a lot more data to work with.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like your subjects. Good eye.

 

I had too many failures with that camera, even shooting RAW, and quit using it. The dynamic range was poor, and often there was diffusion in the bright whites. That was the camera I had with me in Bar Harbor, Maine while having a seafood dinner. My Nikon was left in the RV.

Looking out the restaurant windows at the boats moored in the harbor amidst lobster buoys, the most incredible light happened. Dark blue storm clouds in the eastern background, western evening sun breaking through. The white boats were illuminated. It was a drop-dead gorgeous scene. I raced outside to capture it. The images were ruined because of the diffusion on the boats. They glowed as if lit within. They appeared soft because of it.

 

That's when I put that camera down for good. I painfully remember the loss to this day. I have had two opportunities at that light in my lifetime. Maine, and one on a busy two-lane road with no verge to park. And my Nikon was in my lap! I have scars in my retinas from the misses. ;)

 

There are scenes and lighting where the camera worked, (flat light, overcast, mostly) just not enough of them.

 

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Betty, for your thoughts on the Canon G9x. I bought this last year and i bought it for its size more than anything. As you point out, it has its limitations. I am a family man of limited means, can you suggest something of better reliability but not something that will need a second mortgage? Is sticking with a non-DSLR camera an option? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jill. thank you again for taking the time to look at the photograph of the blue dragon. It was taken while moving around a tree since he wouldn't stay still!

 

Mark, thank you for suggesting that downsizing might help - I will give this a try since I dont know how to do that, and also I would like to at least try the dragon one more time. It is what he would have wanted!

 

Interesting you both ask about raw - I started about 4 days after this picture was taken. So I do have several in raw but havent yet gotten to these (have a few to go through since returning from trip).

 

Thanks again.

 

DJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Is sticking with a non-DSLR camera an option? 

 

Absolutely. Many contributors to Alamy use small mirrorless cameras. I have a Sony NEX6 as a second camera to my DSLR and I have no trouble getting images through QC. It's small enough to slip in a pocket. Generally speaking, fixed lens cameras will not fare well on Alamy, though many here swear by the Sony RX100 as an exception.

 

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Phillipe, wise words. I never once thought I would ever make any money with my photographs, I would just love for someday to have sold one!

Alan, yes the RX100 was an option but i saved myself a few hundred and went with the CanonG9x.....i have to say, that travelling with a pocket camera was very liberating and i think its just one of those things I wouldnt ever wnat to compromise on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I have now used a photo taken from a raw file

I made some changes, to tint  highlights and vibrance, removed chromatic aberration

 

But, sadly, not enough! Still getting the dreaded "soft or lacking definition" . .. .

 

Would any one be able to say if this was a case of me having to increase sharpness in this shot? 

Or did I overcook it with the tint changes?

 

This is the orginal

https://www.viewbug.com/photo/72621353

 

Here is a cropped version

https://www.viewbug.com/photo/72621366

 

Is there something obvious I am missing regarding QC here?

 

Thank you for any comments, however they come!

 

DJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a tricky image to submit. Noisy and not really sharp looking.

Your initial sub should be conventional images- bright sunlight, f8, fast shutter speed, that sort of thing. Show us some images like that.

Betty's diffusion point is a good one. Perhaps that camera is problematic.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're inviting scrutiny of the not-too-sharp foliage there. Again maybe a resize would help but I'd have submitted the pic of the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still soft.

 

You will find tons of threads in here supporting the Sony RX100 set of cameras.  I have the M2 version.  I bought mine second hand on Kijii (online classifieds here in Canada) for a fraction of what I would have paid new.  Look for a second hand camera and then you can sell your Canon.

 

If you do want to sell eventually you need all your images to come out of the camera sharp and ready.  I paid $400 CDN for my Sony and best investment I ever made.  Hardly use my Canon 650D anymore. the Canon is more the backup camera and for shots with a long telephoto.

 

Jill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still soft!! Ah! A friend of mine has that Sony, maybe he can let me ride it for a while and I will post back here. 

Thanks Jill.

 

Thanks Mark, I will have a go at that. Or maybe I am just wasting my time using the Canon ... however I will be using it for the near future!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jill has given good advice about buying a used RX100, whatever version. I shoot RAW on mine, put it on auto, and it seldom fails me.

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jill

 

Glad you mention "whatever version" as the Mark IV is retailing for about £700.

 

Would you happen to know if any of the earlier versions departed significantly from the previous? 

 

My thinking is, of course, to get the cheapest version of the Sony.

 

(looks like the Mark II improved with its sensor and tiltable viewfinder...)

 

 

Thank you.

DJ

Edited by DJ72

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could probably find the RX100 (first version) quite inexpensively used.  There are people on here using it exclusively for their Alamy port.  It does not have a viewfinder so you have to use the LCD screen, but my M2 version doesn't have a viewfinder either.  But I can tilt the screen.

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you happen to know if any of the earlier versions departed significantly from the previous? 

 

 

 

I'm aware that my experience isn't necessarily typical but I bought a cheap secondhand RX100 Mk 1 and I was unable to get anything remotely usable from it for Alamy purposes. That's why I bought the NEX6.

 

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Gerard and Alan. Its good to hear both sides of the story. To be honest I am not that obsessed with getting anything past QC. Its more of a learning experience for me (and yes I am learning a lot).

I am a bit hesitant to leap right into buying a new camera so short a time after spending nearly £400 on the Canon in November. 

But I may have to if I keep getting rejected by QC!

 

Thanks again for all the feedback.

 

DJ

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.