# Blurry Photos



## MirandaJo (Jul 29, 2012)

First time on this forum! Anyways, Ive been taking photos for over 2 years now. I have a problem with the people in my photos ending up blurry when I zoom in (in photoshop) on them. Im am getting VERY fustrated with this! I see others photos where the people in their photos look very clear and crisp! Anyone have any pointers? Thanks.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 29, 2012)

Upgrade from your kit lens.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 29, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Upgrade from your kit lens.



Well I only have two lens at the moment. Im basically taking photos for friends and family at the moment. Im trying to practice right now because I just finished College and Im broke. No lens buying going on here anytime soon! lol. Anyways, Would there be any other reason my photos would end up like that? I am just wondering if for any reason when I give my friends and family their photos if they will notice? I know when I started taking photos I didnt notice the photos being blurry much, but now I notice it alot and It makes me want to SCREAM! I just dont want them to get bigger prints of their photos and think "Wow those are blurry" lol.


----------



## enzodm (Jul 30, 2012)

I looked at the picture at max resolution, and I'm unsure how much better you could do. 
Do you shoot RAW or JPEG? If you shoot RAW, you could (you must) increase sharpness in post at least a little (even selectively). If you shoot JPEG, go RAW. 
However, if pictures are to be looked at the computer, you do not see lack of sharpness because you see them resized (only pixel peepers will go 100% - no normal people). Try to print it, and  will not be such a problem up to some size.


----------



## Hobbytog (Jul 30, 2012)

Find out what is the 'sweetspot' range of your lens. Most lenses are sharpest between f10 and f16. Use the lowest ISO setting you can. For a shot like this if possible use a tripod and the shutter speed at about 1/125. I see you were on Manual setting, but try aperture priority, also in the ambient lighting you shot in maybe your onboard flash was not powerful enough. Most digital images will need a PP sharpen, and as the guy above said shoot RAW and get more control.


----------



## enzodm (Jul 30, 2012)

Hobbytog said:


> Find out what is the 'sweetspot' range of your lens. Most lenses are sharpest between f10 and f16.



this might be perhaps true in general terms, but unfortunately on a crop sensor, over f/8 diffraction kicks in, so you loose resolution. Definitely, avoid to go below f/11 (if you want sharpness). 

The posted picture is at 1/160, ISO200, f/8. So nothing to complain about the triad.


----------



## amolitor (Jul 30, 2012)

There are basically no lenses that are sharpest between f/10 and f/16. It would have to be a completely terrible lens to not be completely diffraction limited at those apertures. If you're in this range, you're trading depth of field for sharpness. There's nothing wrong with that, but that's what's going on.

As enzodm suggests, you mostly don't need to worry about diffraction when you're more open than f/8, but these things aren't actually completely separable. Things that add fuzziness add up. If your lens is diffraction limited and losing maximum sharpness at f/4.5, say, that BY ITSELF is not visible at the sensor. Added on to other factors, though, it will exacerbate the situation. Combine "not visible" camera shake with "not visible" diffraction, and you may wind up with "visible unsharpness"

If you want a rule of thumb, "most lenses" are sharpest 1 to 2 stops down from wide open, but your mileage may vary. There are many fine review sites that will cheerfully show you endless graphs that show you where your lens is sharpest, and where the lens/camera system is sharpest, and so on.

All this aside:

a) the original photograph looks fine
b) worrying about sharpness is a fool's game. sharpness does not make the photograph, and a little unsharpness almost never ruins one.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 30, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Upgrade from your kit lens.



what???


----------



## KmH (Jul 30, 2012)

Part of the problem is the lighting you used, to make the photograph.

It needed more fill lighting. Note the dark eye sockets (raccoon eyes).

Having your subjects in open shade was the right choice. Unfortunately, they are apparently not facing towards the open sky, which becomes your key light. You would then use another light source, either reflected light, or strobed light, to carefully add some shadow highlights, preferably not on the same axis as the lens.

Another possibility is the post processing others have done to their photos.



MirandaJo said:


> View attachment 15291



I have done a quick edit to the photo. I corrected the white balance, color, increased the mid-tone contrast & subject exposure, did some dodging, and tried to help the little boys grimace look a bit more like a smile.


----------



## Groupcaptainbonzo (Jul 30, 2012)

in spite of "Price tag junkies" a lot of kit lenses do a creditable job. An expensive lens will often out perform a cheaper one. but you will empty your wallet before you know it.

Try to shoot in good light.
try to shoot at about f8 or f11 (about 2 stops in from the Max and Min appertures of the lens.
try to shoot with a low ISO (100 ish)
try to shoot with a tripod (Even a cheap one is better than none at all).
try to shoot with as fast an exposure as possible (At least the same fraction of a second, as the lenght of focus in mm of the lens, so a 50mm lens at least 1/50th sec  or a 200mm lens , at least 1/200th sec etc)
in photoshop finish with "Unsharp mask", try with 100% to start with and work up or down as suits, Always save the original un re-touched. and save the altered image as something else (eg if you are re-touching IMG-XXXX then save the re-touched result as something like AIMG-XXXX just in case) . Don't over sharpen as it shows in large prints.


to pinch AMOLITORS advice
All this aside:

a) the original photograph looks fine
b) worrying about sharpness is a fool's game. sharpness does not make the photograph, and a little unsharpness almost never ruins one.

Some of the best advice I've seen posted on this or any other forum...


----------



## Stradawhovious (Jul 30, 2012)

How are you focusing?

I made the change from the "focus then recompose" method to the "move your focal point in the viewfinder" method, and it made a world of difference in my photos.

Warning.... the following may, or may not apply to your situation......

If you are using single point focus, and you are using the "focus then recompose" method of focusing, it is possible that you are slightly changing what is in the DOF of your picture by recomposing, and not getting the sharpest possible image. In most of the bodies I have seen, there is a way to move the focal point in your viewfinder without having to recompose, allowing for sharper focus where you want it.

Remember what you paid for the above advice, expecially with me being terminally amateur and all.

Wow.... I just re-read that.  Sorry it sounds like a badly translated instruction manual.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

Thank you all, but Im more confused that I was! :/ Im still learning manual mode. I think I move my camera settings the wrong way each time. Im getting really discouraged about photography at all. I took a class last summer that taught about ISO, fstop, and shutter speed, but it just didnt seem to help me much. The day I took this photo I tried to keep it at F8 or f11 and a faster shutter speed and ISO 100-200. My photo ended up dark! It drives me crazy how I can not get this down! What Drives me crazy is there is this girl who started taking photographs the same time I did and her photos are amazing and mine arnt! :/ She has other photography friends that help her though. I have no one! :/ 
Ok, let me stop gripping and ask- so when Im photographing someone in the shade- where should the sun be? Over them, behind them, or in front of them? Where would the best light be that comes in? By the way I do not have refelectors neither! I try to turn people where they will not have sun spots on there face from the light coming thru the leaves. 
Also, I guess since I am zooming in on my computer that means Im being a pixel Peeper? lol. I guess I should STOP that! huh? lol.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

Stradawhovious said:


> How are you focusing?
> 
> I made the change from the "focus then recompose" method to the "move your focal point in the viewfinder" method, and it made a world of difference in my photos.
> 
> ...



Lol... Yes a instruction manual that just confused me more! lol.


----------



## MTVision (Jul 30, 2012)

MirandaJo said:
			
		

> Thank you all, but Im more confused that I was! :/ Im still learning manual mode. I think I move my camera settings the wrong way each time. Im getting really discouraged about photography at all. I took a class last summer that taught about ISO, fstop, and shutter speed, but it just didnt seem to help me much. The day I took this photo I tried to keep it at F8 or f11 and a faster shutter speed and ISO 100-200. My photo ended up dark! It drives me crazy how I can not get this down! What Drives me crazy is there is this girl who started taking photographs the same time I did and her photos are amazing and mine arnt! :/ She has other photography friends that help her though. I have no one! :/
> Ok, let me stop gripping and ask- so when Im photographing someone in the shade- where should the sun be? Over them, behind them, or in front of them? Where would the best light be that comes in? By the way I do not have refelectors neither! I try to turn people where they will not have sun spots on there face from the light coming thru the leaves.
> Also, I guess since I am zooming in on my computer that means Im being a pixel Peeper? lol. I guess I should STOP that! huh? lol.



Your photos were dark because you probably didn't have enough light for those settings. You have a little in camera light meter that can help you determine your settings 

+......0.......- <----- usually looks something like this. Then it will have little lines underneath. Under the - means underexposed/under the + side means overexposed for the most part. Metering to 0 is a good starting point but won't always give you the best exposure. 

Buy Bryan Petersons Understanding Exposure book. It will help


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

MTVision said:


> MirandaJo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Thank you. Yes I know what the light meter is and I go by that alot, but my photos still end up dark or blurry. :/
I will be buying books and going to the library alot after I take my NCLEX (Big LPN Exam- I just graduated college and cant afford much right now). Right now Im just trying to get some pointers. :/


----------



## amolitor (Jul 30, 2012)

Stop using manual mode. Manual mode is a stupid rite of passage thing, and it's there for when things are extremely weird.

 Go to work sorting out "shutter priority" and  "aperture priority" modes, and how exposure compensation works instead. Manual mode is just making you move dials around that the camera is perfectly capable of moving around by itself -- and it will turn them the right way all the time.

Most of the time you want aperture priority, bigger numbers -> more depth of field, smaller numbers, less depth of field.
If you're shooting moving objects you may want shutter priority -> slower shutter speeds, more blur; faster shutter speeds, less motion blur.
If you want the picture darker, dial exposure compensation into the negative range.
If you want the picture brighter, dial exposure compensation into the positive range.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

amolitor said:


> Stop using manual mode. Manual mode is a stupid rite of passage thing, and it's there for when things are extremely weird.
> 
> Go to work sorting out "shutter priority" and  "aperture priority" modes, and how exposure compensation works instead. Manual mode is just making you move dials around that the camera is perfectly capable of moving around by itself -- and it will turn them the right way all the time.
> 
> ...



Thank you. I have used Shutter Priority before... here are some photos of kids on a  water slide that I took using Shutter Priority. I try to use shutter priority and Aperture Priority but again my photos come out dark and it drives me nuts-o! lol. these photos didnt turn out dark though. Which Im happy with!


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 30, 2012)

amolitor said:


> ....... Manual mode is just making you move dials around that the camera is perfectly capable of moving around by itself -- and it will turn them the right way all the time...........



Now I've heard everything.


----------



## amolitor (Jul 30, 2012)

480sparky said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > ....... Manual mode is just making you move dials around that the camera is perfectly capable of moving around by itself -- and it will turn them the right way all the time...........
> ...



Not even close, I have much more radical ideas than this.


----------



## chuasam (Jul 30, 2012)

Groupcaptainbonzo said:


> a) the original photograph looks fine
> b) worrying about sharpness is a fool's game. sharpness does not make the photograph, and a little unsharpness almost never ruins one.


The original photo is adequate. 
Embrace the blur!


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 30, 2012)

amolitor said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > amolitor said:
> ...



Well, if all cameras make all the right choices all the time, why spend the money on any other method?  Just make cameras with only *Auto*.  No need for shutter priority, aperture priority, manual, program, or any other mode.  If the camera's perfect, that's all we'll ever need.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

Thanks Chuasam


----------



## amolitor (Jul 30, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Well, if all cameras make all the right choices all the time, why spend the money on any other method?  Just make cameras with only *Auto*.  No need for shutter priority, aperture priority, manual, program, or any other mode.  If the camera's perfect, that's all we'll ever need.



Oh, oops. It's sparky, I forgot.

There are two possibilities: One is that you don't understand how priority modes + exposure compensation work, and the other is that you are willfully misrepresenting what I said. I actually don't give a damn which it is, because you are rude.


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 30, 2012)

First, you are trying to learn too many things much too quickly.

Start using aperture preferred mode and learn to pick your f stop and let the camera pick the shutter speed. 
Then learn to use exposure compensation to fix what the camera can't understand about the exposure.

Use Peterson's book and do the exercises.

Your pictures don't look sharp because the faces are all in the deep shade and there is no directional light to provide the appearance of sharpness.

Get one subject in the shade but facing the sun so that any reflected light will light their faces.
Shoot at the best f stop (perhaps 5.6) and then look at the pictures.
Don't try and learn while taking pictures that count.

And ignore the damn back and forth sniping that seems endemic to this thread.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 30, 2012)

amolitor said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > Well, if all cameras make all the right choices all the time, why spend the money on any other method?  Just make cameras with only *Auto*.  No need for shutter priority, aperture priority, manual, program, or any other mode.  If the camera's perfect, that's all we'll ever need.
> ...



I know perfectly well how they work.  Suppose you tell me how I 'willfully misrepresented what you said' instead?

Or did you miss the quote?


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> First, you are trying to learn too many things much too quickly.
> 
> Start using aperture preferred mode and learn to pick your f stop and let the camera pick the shutter speed.
> Then learn to use exposure compensation to fix what the camera can't understand about the exposure.
> ...



Thank you. Ive tried to practice on my daughter, but well shes 4! haha! I need to find that book!


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 30, 2012)

Damn near any book will do but you have to do this in some orderly fashion, starting with the basics of the exposure triangle, exposure compensation and how to use natural light.

Any subject will do, it doesn't have to be a person.

Shoot a vase, a statue, anything.
Most of us have been shooting for years and still have to puzzle through situations.

This is not easy and, like any craft, takes knowledge, practice and experience to build skill.


----------



## Robin Usagani (Jul 30, 2012)

seriously.. dont bother buying books.  So many great links on the internet for FREE.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> Damn near any book will do but you have to do this in some orderly fashion, starting with the basics of the exposure triangle, exposure compensation and how to use natural light.
> 
> Any subject will do, it doesn't have to be a person.
> 
> ...



I know that... I just wish I could find some kind of Photography group... You know they have AAA meetings for drunks that are free sometimes or they even have meetings for dancers to get together! Why not have some kind of group meetings for photography! I mean, there are a BUNCH of photographers around where I live! Why cant they be nice enough to help one another out instead of being rude... :/


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> seriously.. dont bother buying books.  So many great links on the internet for FREE.



Yeah... I have a hard time finding the correct ones.... :/


----------



## The_Traveler (Jul 30, 2012)

There are Meetup.com groups for just about anything but the unpleasant reality is that, like piano playing, it is you that works the buttons and you that has to do the practice.

There are gazillions of people who want to take pictures and part of the sorting out is for you to do some work yourself.
It's not like the information isn't around.  You have a manual, there are lots of books.
It's up to you to learn.
When you show that you've put some work in, you'll have a better chance of finding a mentor.

Lew


----------



## KmH (Jul 30, 2012)

The advantage of a book is that it has a lot of related information all in one place.

Information on the web tends to be all over the place, in bits and pieces, and many aren't capable of putting all the bits and pieces together into a coherent, understandable sequence.

I provide more links to some of those internet bits and pieces than just about anyone here at TPF, but I also recommend quite a few books too.

Digital Photography Tutorials

Here are some bits and pieces in book form - Scott Kelby's Digital Photography Boxed Set, Volumes 1, 2, and 3


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

The_Traveler said:


> There are Meetup.com groups for just about anything but the unpleasant reality is that, like piano playing, it is you that works the buttons and you that has to do the practice.
> 
> There are gazillions of people who want to take pictures and part of the sorting out is for you to do some work yourself.
> It's not like the information isn't around.  You have a manual, there are lots of books.
> ...



Ive been trying to learn for over two years now and Ive gotten no where... 
My point is I learn better in a group setting.


----------



## 480sparky (Jul 30, 2012)

Books also have the huge advantage of functioning just about everywhere.  I've been in airports, off-the-beaten-path hotels, and out in the boonies with time to kill, so a book comes out.  No batteries, no innernets connection, no lecktrickery.


----------



## MirandaJo (Jul 30, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Books also have the huge advantage of functioning just about everywhere.  I've been in airports, off-the-beaten-path hotels, and out in the boonies with time to kill, so a book comes out.  No batteries, no innernets connection, no lecktrickery.



True! I just finished Nursing school... I carried my books everywhere! I guess I need to get to looking for Photography books and carrying those everywhere!


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

Schwettylens said:


> seriously.. dont bother buying books.  So many great links on the internet for FREE.



For the love of all that is holy, listen to this man!!! There is nothing in a book that you can't find on YouTube!
Hell, I just learned how to perform open heart surgery on myself while learning to play guitar. Thanks YouTube!

In all seriousness though, every tutorial resource that you will ever need is free on the internet. Give me a minute and I'll provide you with a fw links.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Books also have the huge advantage of functioning just about everywhere.  I've been in airports, off-the-beaten-path hotels, and out in the boonies with time to kill, so a book comes out.  No batteries, no innernets connection, no lecktrickery.



To be fair, anything online can be saved. If you don't have a smart phone, or a laptop, or a tablet, than you can most certainly print out written tutorials.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

Top 5 Photography Tutorial Websites - Aputure Blog

Strobist

Photo Extremist - YouTube

Here's a couple. And don't forget, if you found something, run it by the forum for credibility.


----------



## MirandaJo (Aug 1, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> Top 5 Photography Tutorial Websites - Aputure Blog
> 
> Strobist
> 
> ...



Well thank you. That's my problem...I look things up and I can't tell if it's correct it not.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 1, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> To be fair, anything online can be saved. If you don't have a smart phone, or a laptop, or a tablet, than you can most certainly print out written tutorials.



True, it there's no copyright laws involved.  And want to pay a premium for paper, ink, plus wear & tear on your printer.  I'm not a fan of printing out a 1,200-page book.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > To be fair, anything online can be saved. If you don't have a smart phone, or a laptop, or a tablet, than you can most certainly print out written tutorials.
> ...



What copyright law disallows you to print free tutorials? I'm not talking about printing out the 50 shades of gray trilogy. 
I'm talking about printing free, 10-20 page tutorials for yourself.

I also have no idea why wear and tear of a printer was brought up.
If you don't own a printer, you can have things printed for very cheap, around 4 cents a sheet.


----------



## KmH (Aug 1, 2012)

Copyright owners have the _*exclusive*_ right to make copies.

Exclusive right means, anyone else has to get permission from the copyright owner to make copies.

Visit U.S. Copyright Office and read the FAQs.


> *What does copyright protect?*
> Copyright, a form of intellectual property law, protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, systems, or methods of operation, although it may protect the way these things are expressed.



http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf - 



> Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the following:
> &#8226;     reproduce the work in copies....



You'll find the specifics of Section 106 here - http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.pdf


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 1, 2012)

Ballistics said:


> I also have no idea why wear and tear of a printer was brought up......



Well, truth be told..... when your printer is used, it costs you money.  Money (and time...) you could spend on a book instead.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > I also have no idea why wear and tear of a printer was brought up......
> ...



While going through a certain background investigation for a civil service job, I have printed well over 400 pages of documents that I need to bring with me. Hasn't put much of a dent in my ink level. At less than 1 cent a page, I spent probably 5 dollars total. 

This however, is beyond my point. Like, way far beyond my point and an extreme end of the spectrum.


----------



## KmH (Aug 1, 2012)

Even cheap ink costs about $10,000 a gallon.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 1, 2012)

KmH said:


> Even cheap ink costs about $10,000 a gallon.



If that's the case, then that would equal over 1000 refills at costco for black ink.


----------



## HowardHaines (Aug 9, 2012)

Warm photos!


----------



## bianni (Aug 9, 2012)

Your photo looks ok, just a bit of sharpening and white balance correction needed.


----------



## MWC2 (Aug 12, 2012)

Miranda Jo -I picked up my first DSLR almost 2 years ago (2 years in October) and it really wasn't until I joined TPF, posting for C&C and really listening to what people were telling me did I see any improvement. I totally understand what you are saying about trying to move forward  with this hobby and learn all you can and having that feeling that you  aren't making the steps you thing you should be. My problem was I was  trying to learn everything all at once as quickly as I could, I was all  over the place. Instead of trying to learn 100 things at once, I started by figuring what I needed to work on the most, for me it was focus.  I posted images for C&C and made a point of mentioning I was trying to improve my focus issues.  People were more than willing to give me steps on improving that and when I started getting positive feedback on that issue, I picked a new issues (for me that was white balance)... I moved on one step at a time.  

I also found a local camera club that meets monthly and got wonderful information from people there that have helped me on my journey as well.  https://www.google.com/search?hl=en...2AXt7oG4AQ&ved=0CGQQvwUoAQ&q=positive&spell=1


----------



## greybeard (Aug 12, 2012)

The kind of blur I see in the example you posted is pretty typical of a kit zoom included with most DSLR's.  The least expensive solution would be to get a prime lens and let your feet do the zooming.  Canon makes a 40mm pancake 2.8 that looks like fun.
Canon U.S.A. : Professional Imaging Products : EF 40mm f/2.8 STM


----------



## bobandcar (Aug 12, 2012)

Book wise, i found ample amounts at my local library! they even had the kelby books mentioned above somewere


----------



## Karloz (Aug 19, 2012)

Nothing to add the above advise is generally sound and I learnt something too ! Thanks


----------

