Why post blurry and out of focus images?

[nicholas1986]

firstly do not flame me ....
i think a blur or pin sharp photo being posted here all shows one thing which is that the person is willing to share his/her pictures. imagine clubsnap only showcase the good shots, and moderaters will delete all blur shots, won't clubsnap be a place only for the pros which are able to show wonderful pictures.

i feel that members in clubsnap some of them are still learning, a blur photo to them may be a big stepping stone to better pictures next time (at least they can get comments)... if i am a newbie that can't post a blur photo, how am i going to improve??? i would rather not take up photography then.

 

[jasphotography]

Maybe I have to requote what I said before and again:

I feel the fundamental of photography has to be there and I hope this thread will serve its purpose to help people realise that. I am not here to undermine any individual or their works.

I hope you guys take a step back and try not to generalise too much of my thread. Yes, I do agree besides sharpness, other factors like composition, exposure and moment are important too. I have also seen blurred (or slightly out of focus) photos taken by Nat Geo or photos of Sept 11, for example, when focus is no longer as important. The moment is... I truely understand that and I totally agreed what you guys have said.

Ok, now... let me bring you back to context of this thread...

Situation: Blur wasn't deliberate, no special moment is involved, pro or amatuer is not a factor, thread starters are here to ask for critiques and not just sharing photos.

Photo Concerned: A blurred picture of "everyday achievable" subjects like our very own parliament house, esplanade, city skylines etc.

Threads like these often get neglected/ignored or without proper advice given and I have always wanted to help (members I have helped before would probably agree more ) but I must admit this is no individual effort.

 

[jasphotography]

I sincerely believe Clubsnap is not a forum that promotes elitism. I concur and totally respect that. But, Clubsnap is still a photography forum afterall. Is getting the basic right or generating interest of that length too much to ask?


I know we all started out as a newbie and many of us learnt through the hard and "film" way. Few of us may take weeks, months if not years to realise our basic is wrong. I am here hoping to shorten this process. Rather than taking this thread or my comments negatively, have anyone thought this thread may consciously or sub-consciously make several members rethink and re-evaluate their photography, their techniques, their basic and hopefully shorten their learning curve?


Would appreciate again that my thread/words are not taken out of context...

 

[Kit]

To a certain extend, I feel that technicalities(tones, sharpness) cannot be really accurately judges from the monitor so what you perceived as unsharp can well be otherwise unless you're talking about those really OOF examples. I myself have had some images posted and I find that the sharpness level is no where near the A3 prints.

 

[jasphotography]

To a certain extend, I feel that technicalities(tones, sharpness) cannot be really accurately judges from the monitor so what you perceived as unsharp can well be otherwise unless you're talking about those really OOF examples. I myself have had some images posted and I find that the sharpness level is no where near the A3 prints.

Agree with you monitor don't do justice to pictures' tones and sharpness to a certain extent. I think that is a good point to make... probably one should re-evaluate how a pic file should be saved (i.e., at what resolution, at what quality or even at what pixel) if you find your original is sharp and the same photo posted is not.

 

[SniperD]

for web it's usually 72dpi for viewing. I dun use "Save For Web" option in PS...

 

[Kit]

I use 72 dpi too and try to compress the least depending on where I post my images but at times, it still didn't turn out right. So whenever its too close to call, benefit of doubt will be given unless its those obvious case which I think is pretty rare where landscape, architecture and cityscape are concerned.

 

[CYRN]

I sincerely believe Clubsnap is not a forum that promotes elitism. I concur and totally respect that. But, Clubsnap is still a photography forum afterall. Is getting the basic right or generating interest of that length too much to ask?


I know we all started out as a newbie and many of us learnt through the hard and "film" way. Few of us may take weeks, months if not years to realise our basic is wrong. I am here hoping to shorten this process. Rather than taking this thread or my comments negatively, have anyone thought this thread may consciously or sub-consciously make several members rethink and re-evaluate their photography, their techniques, their basic and hopefully shorten their learning curve?


Would appreciate again that my thread/words are not taken out of context...

I too am guilty of posting such photos... :embrass:

Anyway, my main intention is post just for the fun of sharing. Also, I use AF almost all the time... if the cam dun get it, I also dun get it.. ... then again, most of my OOF pics is that I did not wait for IS to stabilise. Any idea how to shoot fast moving objects with IS..or should I disable it in the first place. :think:

 

[CYRN]

for web it's usually 72dpi for viewing. I dun use "Save For Web" option in PS...

Might I ask why?

 

[jasphotography]

yeah, for web viewing, I am using 72 dpi too and usually save it as jpg at medium (scale of 7) quality.

Below are illustrations of the same file saved as jpg at 3 different qualities:

Highest quality (12)

Medium quality (7)

Low quality (3)

oh btw, I have gotten model release and parental approval :bsmilie:

 

[Kit]

I usually don't go below 8 unless the file is just too big. Still I get problems.

 

[Kit]

These 2 are save at high quality, 8 or 9 I think.

 

[jasphotography]

I usually don't go below 8 unless the file is just too big. Still I get problems.

your problem as in certain details are lost? I am not referring to sharpness btw...

I feel different pictures have to be given different treatments in saving if we want to preserve that certain details. hmmmm, maybe some of my pictures should have deserved a 12 !!! :think:

 

[jasphotography]

just saw your this thread after I posted mine

so I was right about those "details" you lost...

From my experience, I tend to be more generous with my saving quality for low light or night photography, more so if you want to count those brickwork.

For my case (check my architecture folder if you wish), I think I saved my low light architecture photos at quite high quality, possibly 10, as I also saw the fuzziness you experienced in your below first photo even when I saved mine at high quality 8.

These 2 are save at high quality, 8 or 9 I think.

 

[Kit]

your problem as in certain details are lost? I am not referring to sharpness btw...

I feel different pictures have to be given different treatments in saving if we want to preserve that certain details. hmmmm, maybe some of my pictures should have deserved a 12 !!! :think:

Both I think. Sharpness and detail are lost. Unfortunately, "details intensive" files are often too big to be saved in highest quality. My host will automatically resize everything over 250kb.

 

[jasphotography]

Both I think. Sharpness and detail are lost. Unfortunately, "details intensive" files are often too big to be saved in highest quality. My host will automatically resize everything over 250kb.

yeah agree... details intensive pics are abit problematic and the problem will be magnified if your host resize the pics for you.

Sometimes, for my case lah, I save details intensive pics at 100 or 140 dpi instead of 72 dpi to give me that physcological edge...

 

[jasphotography]

I too am guilty of posting such photos... :embrass:

Anyway, my main intention is post just for the fun of sharing. Also, I use AF almost all the time... if the cam dun get it, I also dun get it.. ... then again, most of my OOF pics is that I did not wait for IS to stabilise. Any idea how to shoot fast moving objects with IS..or should I disable it in the first place. :think:

aaaa.... I don't do fast subjects one hoh and as of now, I don't have the luxury or don't feel the need rather to own a IS or VR lens.

Go ask around or post a thread for help. Sorry, can't be of too much help here. :embrass:




Kit, what camera/lens did you use for the above 2 pictures? Is the original file abit like that also, especially pic 1?

 

[Kit]

yeah agree... details intensive pics are abit problematic and the problem will be magnified if your host resize the pics for you.

Sometimes, for my case lah, I save details intensive pics at 100 or 140 dpi instead of 72 dpi to give me that physcological edge...

..........

 

[Kit]

I too am guilty of posting such photos... :embrass:

Anyway, my main intention is post just for the fun of sharing. Also, I use AF almost all the time... if the cam dun get it, I also dun get it.. ... then again, most of my OOF pics is that I did not wait for IS to stabilise. Any idea how to shoot fast moving objects with IS..or should I disable it in the first place. :think:

IS and VR are supposed to be instantaneous or at least faster than most people. I think even with IS/VR, you still have to establish the slowest shutter speed you can handhold. Remember IS/VR can help you to a certain extend only, there is a limit.

 

[Kit]

aaaa.... I don't do fast subjects one hoh and as of now, I don't have the luxury or don't feel the need rather to own a IS or VR lens.

Go ask around or post a thread for help. Sorry, can't be of too much help here. :embrass:




Kit, what camera/lens did you use for the above 2 pictures? Is the original file abit like that also, especially pic 1?

I used a 10D with a 17-40 f4. As with all other DSLRs, the original Raw file from 10D was a bit soft so I applied Fred Miranda's 10D sharpening action. I managed to get good details on A3 prints.