# What are the secrets for clear and sharp photos?



## msaha (Jun 11, 2012)

Hello everybody!
Hope you all have a good morning/evening/night 

I have an issue with Image quality with both the 1000D and 40D where the sky has grain whatever ISO I use even at 100! this is very bad because I cant sharpen the images in PS as the dots get sharper! :madmad:
also they are affected by the level of contrast I choose.
are they specs of dust on the sensors?
They are just grain not similar to dust!
I have included a 100% sample from the 1000D
Just saying.... ISO is 100..... (I shoot RAW)





See how they appear in a 100% crop picture


Now lets see how it looks with a bit of contrast, clarity, and sharpening.






How can I achieve results that are crisp and clear?
such as these from *&#9658;CubaGallery ?
what is the secret?
and thanks for your help*


----------



## 480sparky (Jun 11, 2012)

Start with good glass, shoot in raw, use solid post processing techniques.


----------



## KmH (Jun 11, 2012)

What you see is image noise, not grain. Digital photography has a technical side. The better one's understanding of the technical fundamentals, the fewer mysterious problems one encounters.  

Every digital image has some amount of digital noise. When the amount of image noise is low, the noise is barely noticable.

Under exposure makes image noise more visible. Plus the way digital images work, fully 1/2 of the luminosity data is in the brightest stop of exposure, which makes image noise more noticable in the darker stops of exposure. http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adob...ly/prophotographer/pdfs/pscs3_renderprint.pdf

Editing, particularly a low bit-depth file type like JPEG, also makes image noise more visible, as well as adding JPEG artifacts if the editing exceeds the very limited editing headroom JPEGs have.

JPEG was designed as a finished, ready-to-print file type. Headroom for editing outside the camera was not designed into the JPEG file type.

By the way JPEG stands for - Joint Photographic Experts Group. JPEG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## msaha (Jun 11, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Start with good glass, shoot in raw, use solid post processing techniques.



I use good Sigma 10-20mm glass, I shoot in RAW, I use ACR and DPP.



KmH said:


> What you see is image noise, not grain. Digital photography has a technical side. The better ones understanding of the technical fundamentals, the fewer mysterious problems one encounters.
> 
> Every digital image has some amount of digital noise. When the amount of image noise is low, the noise is barely noticable.
> 
> ...



The problem is that I shoot RAW and barely process the images until this is visible
thanks for the links


----------



## BlueMeanieTSi (Jun 11, 2012)

I prefer to use other sharpening filters outside of what is in photoshop.  Also try using a noise reduction plugin before sharpening.


----------



## Groupcaptainbonzo (Jun 11, 2012)

I can'treally tell from these, but you could be over sharpening.Digital images are by their nature a little soft, and require a bit of "Unsharpe Mask" (the amount that the image can take differs from shot to shot and is less on smaller formats than on bigger) if you over sharpen you can get this effect.


----------



## KmH (Jun 11, 2012)

Image shapening and noise reduction are the 2 sides of a single coin. While USM (UnSharp mask) is there for use, there are many alternative sharpening techniques available for use. Plus, many subscribe to the notion that sharpening is a fairly technical, 2 or 3 step process. - Real World Image Sharpening with Adobe Photoshop, Camera Raw, and Lightroom (2nd Edition)


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

BlueMeanieTSi said:


> I prefer to use other sharpening filters outside of what is in photoshop.  Also try using a noise reduction plugin before sharpening.



At ISO 100, you shouldn't need NR.

How are you metering these? Are you using any techniques similar to ETTR? Instead of Unsharp Mask, try Highpass on Overlay, taking care not to sharpen noise. Apply more than once if needed. Always apply sharpening at the very end, and never at the begining.


----------



## BlueMeanieTSi (Jun 11, 2012)

That is a lot of noise in the first example if it was shot at ISO 100...


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

^^ I know. 

It almost looks like ISO 400. I am also wondering if there is any Auto Expose compensation in the RAW processor left turned on?

What software are you using for RAW conversion?


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 11, 2012)

Attempting to sharpen large areas of color that have no detail, like a cloudless sky, is a losing situation because you can only encourage processing artifacts.

Sharpen what needs sharpening and don't sharpen what doesn't.

Lew


----------



## Dao (Jun 11, 2012)

In situation like this, I usually do selective noise reduction.

See here for more details.

JuzaPhoto - Noise Reduction


----------



## msaha (Jun 11, 2012)

Thanks everybody
Personally I have no idea why this happens to the image.
I use Adobe Camera RAW plugin for sharpening my images. Hmmm...​*unpopular* you seem to have another way, but it is ISO 100 I shouldn't see noise right? this made me wish to have ISO 50....
I am using Adobe Camera RAW for my processing.
Can the temperature affect image noise? because the temperature is about 40C+.....
But not to this point (the first image is unprocessed)
Thanks​


----------



## msaha (Jun 11, 2012)

Dao said:


> In situation like this, I usually do selective noise reduction.
> 
> See here for more details.
> 
> JuzaPhoto - Noise Reduction



Thanks!


----------



## BlueMeanieTSi (Jun 11, 2012)

ACR automatically applies sharpening to entire image when you use it.  I turn that off and sharpen myself.


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

msaha said:


> *unpopular* you seem to have another way, but it is ISO 100 I shouldn't see noise right? this made me wish to have ISO 50....
> I am using Adobe Camera RAW for my processing.
> Can the temperature affect image noise? because the temperature is about 40C+.....
> But not to this point (the first image is unprocessed)
> Thanks​



Well, the further in any direction from the sensor's native ISO (the sensitivity of the image sensing elements) the less dynamic range you'll get. My Sony has a native ISO of 200, so I actually get more slightly less shadow noise at ISO 100 than I do at ISO 200, despite having slightly more general noise. But being that I ETTR, noise at ISO 200 is just never a problem, even with my noisy a350. However, this is not the shadows and you shoot canon, which, iirc, has a native ISO of 100.

Temperature can affect noise performance, and 40°C is pretty hot, especially if you were out shooting for a long period - it I'm not sure if it's THAT hot. And it should be noted that both the 40D and the 1000D are older bodies, but not ancient. Coupled though with poor technique and prolonged high temperatures, this may contribute to the noise problem you're seeing.


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 11, 2012)

why are you sharpening the sky in the first place?


----------



## Solarflare (Jun 11, 2012)

480sparky said:


> Start with good glass, shoot in raw, use solid post processing techniques.


 Um, what about getting the object of interest into focus first ?


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 11, 2012)

Solarflare said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> > Start with good glass, shoot in raw, use solid post processing techniques.
> ...



OP seems to mostly be talking about the sky, which nailing the focus on the sky isn't really a concern.


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

Blue/Cyan also is going to be noisier than Yellow/Red. Digital cameras have always had trouble in this area.

Of course, in that part of the world blue skies are pretty typical.


----------



## fjrabon (Jun 11, 2012)

Though I dont think it's what the OP was talking about (wince his issue seemed to be mostly due to sharpening and adding contrast to the sky, instead of selectively adding sharpness and contrast where it was needed), but these tips are helpful nonetheless, and they just popped up on my facebook feed: 

5 Simple Steps to Sharper Photos


----------



## sovietdoc (Jun 11, 2012)

you sharpened the picture too much


----------



## msaha (Jun 11, 2012)

Thanks everybody, this has been helpful to the most extent.
Now I think I know the problem I am facing which seems to be "sky sharpening".
How can I sharpen everything but the sky, I mean what if there where clouds?
Should I use USM "unsharp mask" rather than Adobe Camera Raw sharpening?
Any useful tips or even walkthroughs on how to sharpen everything but the sky?
I have been a pain in the knee for what I know 
Thank you all this is very helpful!


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

I always sharpen after the RAW is processed. Make sure that you are outputting as a 16-bit image if you are planning on doing additional processing, this will ensure greater flexibility. I also never use USM. It's very crude. Instead look up Highpass Sharpening and place the highpass layer on Overlay or Soft Light for a more subtle effect. I believe (and others might disagree) that 8-bit images are more noisy upon editing than 16-bit images.

I also tend to use multiple highpass layers, each with decending radi and increasing opacities. So I'll have the first one with like 12 pixels on soft light and maybe 20% opacity, the next layer on overlay or soft light mode with 6 pixels, and 30-50% opacity, 3 pixels on overlay with 70-100% opacity and 1 pixels on overlay with 100% opacity.

More basic information here on this principle:

High-Pass-Sharpening

If you are stuck on USM, the problem is too much amount and too small a threshold (radi looks OK from here). Obviously you needn't sharpen areas without detail in teh first place, but to avoid increasing noise over all, make sure to use a threshold large enough that noise is not sharpened but edges can still be detected.


----------



## KmH (Jun 11, 2012)

Hopefully, understand that sharpening can be done both locally and globally within an image.

I often use USM. USM can be used in a very precise manner, both in ACR (Camera Raw/Lightroom) and in CS5. USM saw some significant improvments starting with CS4.
Not only can USM be used for sharpening, it can also be used to adjust local mid-tone contrast.

Anyone thinking that USM is crude may not yet know how to use USM effectively.

No doubt, there are several valuable shapening techniques, and the key is understanding which techniques are best used with which image, or part of an image in the case of local sharpening.


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

All of this is true of HPS as well, and teh two techniques are extremely related and similar.

Though, I also haven't used PS in forever.


----------



## Solarflare (Jun 11, 2012)

Sharpening is a process that looks for structure that might not have been there in the first place.

Its a guesswork and a crutch. Anything will look unnatural with too much sharpening.

The really thing one would want to have is something like 3ccd or these Foveon X3 fotochips or the 3ccd on a chip patent of Nikon (not realized yet): actually know for each pixel of the image what color it had for real.


----------



## unpopular (Jun 11, 2012)

well. it more amplifies structure that may not be readily visible. The a99 is rumored to be a 3mos configuration, but I'd think 3mos in a full frame SLR would be WAY too large.

I've always liked the idea of the Foveon, but until now it lacked in physical resolution (though some cite that it performs better optically). Though this has changed with the Sd1, and the price is now somewhere near normal.

Still, as cool as Foveon is, it seems equally as sharp as the a55 in this test, and not as sharp as the M9, which also lacks an antialiasing filter:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/sigma_sd1_review.shtml


----------



## TCampbell (Jun 12, 2012)

msaha said:


> Thanks everybody, this has been helpful to the most extent.
> Now I think I know the problem I am facing which seems to be "sky sharpening".
> How can I sharpen everything but the sky, I mean what if there where clouds?
> Should I use USM "unsharp mask" rather than Adobe Camera Raw sharpening?
> ...



You're still thinking on a larger scale than most photographers.  Don't sharpen "everything but the sky".  You can control depth-of-field for a reason.  There are often just a few areas in a photo that you want sharp.  Say your taking a portrait.  Typically you'd want very sharp eyes.  You usually want the facial skin to be smooth and soft... so sharpening the model's skin may not achieve a flattering effect.

Rather than sharpening everything (but the sky), be _very_ selective.  Sharpen a detail for a specific reason as sharpness everywhere is not necessarily better.

As for how to do it.  In Photoshop, the chant is "You have to select it, to affect it."  There are a LOT Of ways to create a selection in Photoshop.  I've noticed that part of being good at Photoshop is to be adept at the use of the various selection methods.

I use Aperture, which allows nearly any adjustment to be "painted on" - this is easier since you don't need to make a selection, just use a mouse or stylus and "paint on" the adjustment.  It's pretty easy to just sharpen... "eyes" for example... without sharpening an entire image.  I never apply sharpening globally to an entire image.   I don't have Lightroom, but I'm fairly certain it has the same feature (Aperture is made by Apple so it only runs on Mac - Lightroom is Adobe and it runs on Windows or Mac).


I still have Photoshop, but I don't use it for the vast majority of adjustments and this really speeds up the workflow.


----------



## greybeard (Jun 12, 2012)

1) good glass
2) good focus
3) steady hands or a tripod.
4) reasonably low iso (depends on your camera)

As for #1 (good glass), the better the glass, the better chances you have of that tack sharp look over a broader range of apertures.  The cheap stuff (like I use) will usually give you good results but over a narrow range of apertures.  My 18-55 is good over only a 2  f/stop range (f/8-11)  from about 24-50mm.  My 55-200 however is pretty descent from f/5.6-16 ..... 55-150mm.  If you have to go cheap, go prime like a 35 or 50mm.  Let your legs do the cropping.........lol 

#2 Sharp focus means taking your time and finding out how your cameras auto focus really works.  In my case with the d5100 is choose the mode that uses only one spot in the center of the frame.  I pre-focus with that spot and then compose my shot.  This works very consistantly for me.  This is for stationary objects of course.  

#3 Goes without saying, steady hands....faster shutter speeds or a tripod.  The best glass in the world can't help much if the camera isn't steady.

#4 The lowest possible ISO.........This is a balancing act because the higher the ISO, the faster the shutter speed you can use.  This is something that only experience with your camera can provide.  My old Sony F828 really sux at any ISO over 200 but, my Nikon D5100 holds up pretty will at 1600.  (depending on the amount of crop)


----------



## DigitalDave (Jun 13, 2012)

Maybe it's just me, but I think one point hasn't been mentioned surprisingly...

As in 'what shutter speed are you using'?

The faster the shutter speed due to a decent amount of light (if on automatic, faster is what your camera will likely choose due to too much light if you're shooting into the sky) will also increase the amount of noise (potentially). It's not only the ISO you should be caring about.

Put it on manual, set it up and try 1/60. If your metering doesn't like it then play with the aperture.

slower shutter speed = More light = less noise, and something must be affecting the light adversely in your shots, and I can only guess it's the shutter speed.


----------



## greybeard (Jun 13, 2012)

I haven't read all the posts yet so forgive me if this has been already written.  I use both LightRoom and PS together so sharpening is often a 2 step process with me.  In most if not all cases, the sky doesn't need any sharpening so I use the MASKING slider when I sharpen in LR.  1st I add sharpening and then I  hold down the ALT key and move the masking slider to the right.  The farther I move the slider, the lesser amount of the image will be sharpened.  It starts out sharpening the entire image and as you move the slider to the right it starts leaving out blank smooth sections and only sharpens the lines. This will leave your sky alone and only concentrate on intricate objects in your image.  When using PS, I select the portions I want sharpened and then use the "Smart Sharpen" filter.  This works for me.


----------



## Terenas1986 (Jun 22, 2012)

Hello Msaha!

To answer your original question: I agree with a few things people said before me and also would like to add some things for folks who read this for the first time.

I'm not sure if you have your terminology right.. you say "sharp" and "crisp" image... but the sky is not really sharp, is it? It's creamy or gradient blue, only clouds that look like "ice-cream" are really "sharp" (that e.g. a lens can focus on). Plain blue sky !might! a*ctually *give some hard time for your lens to autofocus. So I* think what you're looking for is more like the other term you used: "clear".

*The noise at ISO100 when photographing a well-lit sky should be around 0. You probably did a lot of sharpening (?) to achieve this much noise. If you *do* get noise in the original image without touching it still, you need Noise reduction - as other have said it before so well.
I have the 1000D's little older brother, the 'EOS 350D' and have *absolutely no noise *in such photos. *Check your !Parameter! settings if the sharpening is turned up or not.* All gauges there should be in middle at all times. 

However: Your lens does not really determine the amount of noise you have in your image... how could it? It's not made of pixels... it's just smooth glass! Only the speed (lowest f-number) determines what ISO can your camera use with that lens, thus determining noise in the image! *E.g.:* With your 50mm 1.8 (set to f/2) at a certain situation, you can use ISO100, but if you put on a lens that's lowest setting is f/4... that's gonna need to be (for the same exposure, keeping in mind that maybe you *need* to keep your shutter speed) at ISO200. _(Double f/number means half as much light, thus you need double ISO speed for the same exposure time. And double ISO means more noise. [Not neccesarily double noise!])
_
One more thing, for situations where you really need "sharpness": stopping down your lens (increasing f/number to f/11, f/16 or more) *does not* give you absolute sharpness, especially with cheaper lenses, so don't expect that. It just gives you "in focus". Don't ask me why, it just works like that. If you look at a tree that's 400meters away and the branches are not in high contrast with the blue sky - don't be surprised!  Also all lenses have an optimum-area of sharpness: which is in most cases the middle... and sharpness decreases as you move to the edges and corners of the image, especially for the 18-55mm Kit lens. (I have that, and the 50mm prime.)

About dust on sensor: they do not appear as you would think.. this is definitely not dust. You can check for dust on your sensor using this simple test:
- go to A*v *mode and stop down your lens fully, but ~*f/22* would do the job quite fine
- set *ISO100*
- set m*anual focus* and *focus to infinity* (e.g: the 50mm 1.8 prime if focused to infinity at its longest state, but its usually when you turn the focus ring to the left - from photographer point of view)
- set White Balance to Auto.. that should be quite ok.
- set exposure compensation to 2/3 or 1/2 stop (maybe +1 is okay too)
- open notepad on your computer, maximize it - make sure you have pure white on your monitor
- *fill the frame with the white *on your monitor (make sure *nothing else is in the view*, but the whiteness)
- *shake your camera a little bit,* so when you *start your *(usually 1-3second) *exposure*, you won't have monitor pixels on it!
- view your image *in the PC, not your LCD!* - check for ugly parts where you see big black dots and maybe bubbles that come from water or whatever... maybe even cleaning fluids!

*IF* your sensor is dirty: turn it in to a professional photo-store! *NEVER* ever attempt to clean your sensor at home... don't blow on it, don't use any stuff that's at home.. it's never good.

So... there you have it: keep *ISO at 100*, *shutter speed at high *(to avoid motion blur... but not TOO high [higher shutter speed means less color vibrance]... maybe around 500), and keep your *aperture *as wide *open *as possible with that shutter.. (but *never *fully open... 1-2 stops down worked best for me), and *check your parameter settings *in your camera. Turn off (put them to the middle) sharpening and contrasting and all that built-in stuff. You can have all those in post-production!
_This way you should get your results quite nice. 
_
One additional bonus tip: Color space. I'm not sure from these 2 images, but for first view it looks like your camera is set to sRGB. (The sky is a bit greyish.) I suggest you put your camera to Adobe RGB. (I hope you're using Adobe Lightroom to edit your images... that's the ultimate resource a non-pro needs. Believe me. ) You can set Lightroom also to work in Adobe RGB, and when/if you're exporting JPG files it also stores them that way, keeping the richness it provides.
Why use AdobeRGB, you ask? Simple: colors are much brighter, saturated, vibrant *and *realistic, than those produced in sRGB mode. I simply cannot switch back to sRGB anymore, after seeing what AdobeRGB is capable of. 

I hope I didn't confuse you too much, if there are any questions, please ask! 

Happy shooting!


----------



## The_Traveler (Jun 22, 2012)

Three points where Terenas and I differ



Terenas1986 said:


> *IF* your sensor is dirty: turn it in to a professional photo-store! *NEVER* ever attempt to clean your sensor at home... don't blow on it, don't use any stuff that's at home.. it's never good.




Millions of people clean their own sensor. First using a rocket blower and then, if needed, one of the sensor cleaning kits that are readily available.
It is not difficult and, if you can tie your own shoes, you are dextrous enough.

Sensor cleaning supplies and instructions




Terenas1986 said:


> for first view it looks like your camera is set to sRGB. (The sky  is a bit greyish.)
> Why use AdobeRGB, you ask? Simple: colors are much brighter, saturated, vibrant *and *realistic,  than those produced in sRGB mode. I simply cannot switch back to sRGB  anymore, after seeing what AdobeRGB is capable of.



One can't tell the color space from a single color.  Colors in an image in RGB displayed on the web will be more muted and muddy than sRGB because most monitors can't reproduce all the colors in RGB and most browsers aren't color managed and thus different tones will be mixed.




Terenas1986 said:


> One additional bonus tip: Color space. I'm not sure from these 2 images,  but for first view it looks like your camera is set to sRGB. (The sky  is a bit greyish.) I suggest you put your camera to Adobe RGB. (I hope  you're using Adobe Lightroom to edit your images... that's the ultimate  resource a non-pro needs. Believe me. )  You can set Lightroom also to work in Adobe RGB, and when/if you're  exporting JPG files it also stores them that way, keeping the richness  it provides.
> Why use AdobeRGB, you ask? Simple: colors are much brighter, saturated, vibrant *and *realistic,  than those produced in sRGB mode. I simply cannot switch back to sRGB  anymore, after seeing what AdobeRGB is capable of.



AdobeRGB and Prophoto are much better color spaces to edit in and to send to a high end printer shop.
But, most mass-market printers (such as mPix, Costco and WhiteHouse, etc.) will only use sRGB)

And, most important, you must convert to sRGB before posting on the web because the default color space for viewing on the web is sRGB.

all of these references agree
SmugMug | sRGB vs Adobe 98 Colorspace
sRGB vs. Adobe RGB
Working Space Comparison: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB 1998
The Great sRGB Versus Adobe RGB Debate - Photo Tips @ Earthbound Light


----------



## chuasam (Jun 23, 2012)

If there comes a point where the grain/noise is really an issue, perhaps you should think about taking more interesting pictures


----------



## Steve5D (Jun 23, 2012)

I've never understood the hangup with viewing things at a 100% crop. It means little, simply because no one is ever going to pull out a loupe and inspect your photos. 

You provided a 100% crop, and then that crop with some contrast, clarity and sharpening. How about posting the entire original image?


----------



## unpopular (Jun 23, 2012)

^^ you should see some of my images at 100%. They look like garbage.

I agree that what things look like at 100% not only doesn't much matter, but often is not representative of the image. We often use tricks to imply detail and local contrast which is only apparent at smaller magnifications.


----------



## unpopular (Jun 23, 2012)

Terenas1986 said:


> *IF* your sensor is dirty: turn it in to a professional photo-store! *NEVER* ever attempt to clean your sensor at home... don't blow on it, don't use any stuff that's at home.. it's never good.



Lord all mighty! If'd I had to have my sensor professionally cleaned every time a speck of dust fell of the sensor, I'd go broke! Not sure where you live, but in this neck of the woods dust is a continuous issue.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 23, 2012)

Did anyone notice that the exposure time on that sky shot was 1.3 seconds... long enough for some sensors to heat up and produce noise. Not familiar with her bodies... but I know that is an older small sensor body....

18mm
F11
ISO 100


----------



## unpopular (Jun 23, 2012)

^^ especially at 104° F

Why would someone need a 1.3sec exposure at f/11 on what appears to be mid-afternoon?


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 23, 2012)

Totally!

Here is the exif.. for anyone that is Exif challenged!


----------



## unpopular (Jun 23, 2012)

This must have been shot in the evening. 1.3 sec would be blown at the time of day that I initially thought.

But yeah. High ambient temperature, entry-level, older DSLR, long exposure: some noise, especially in the sky, is prob to be expected, even at ISO 100.


----------



## cgipson1 (Jun 23, 2012)

unpopular said:


> This must have been shot in the evening. 1.3 sec would be blown at the time of day that I initially thought.
> 
> But yeah. High ambient temperature, entry-level, older DSLR, long exposure: some noise, especially in the sky, is prob to be expected, even at ISO 100.



Definitely! I was surprised no one caught that! Gotta remember to check the Exif when you can.. it don't lie! lol!


----------

