AndyPiper
Established
Mountain ELMAR (105mm f/6.3) - but who's counting?
8^)
No such thing as a camera that is "too sharp". I'll take any amount of sharpness the camera can deliver. If I want soft, all it takes is a slow shutter speed or a Summar lens.
The technical term for a "hot" oversharpened edge is a "sharpening halo" - not that it's all that much more technical.
But what looks overly-sharpened in a 100% pixel view on the screen often just looks clean and crisp in a 250-300 ppi print. The printing process adds its own softening to the image.
Digital photography guru Bruce Fraser says that digital images (whether film or sensor based) should look "crunchy" at 100% when they are properly sharpened for print output.
http://www.creativepro.com/printerfriendly/story/20357.html
8^)
No such thing as a camera that is "too sharp". I'll take any amount of sharpness the camera can deliver. If I want soft, all it takes is a slow shutter speed or a Summar lens.
The technical term for a "hot" oversharpened edge is a "sharpening halo" - not that it's all that much more technical.
But what looks overly-sharpened in a 100% pixel view on the screen often just looks clean and crisp in a 250-300 ppi print. The printing process adds its own softening to the image.
Digital photography guru Bruce Fraser says that digital images (whether film or sensor based) should look "crunchy" at 100% when they are properly sharpened for print output.
http://www.creativepro.com/printerfriendly/story/20357.html
Bromo33333
Established
AndyPiper said:
Agreed on what you said - but it is still important to realize that a 'sharpening halo' is not resolution, just additional "pop" and processing on an image. Legitimate to use, but as in the picture I linked to, the window panes onthe film on the right side of the crop are clearly visible on the film scan (which isn't the full resolution of the 6 x 7 film) is clearly visible, but not visible at all on the digital, yet the digital image has the illusion of greater resolution.
Raw unsharpened digital looks quite soft and needs some sharpening to display some sharpness of an image. Make sone wonder about the importance of lens sharpness and digital in general ... ?
egpj
50 Summilux is da DEVIL!
Jon Graham said:
Jon, your MONEY baby!
Thanks for the link
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
AndyPiper said:
Thanks mate, fallible ancient memory and all that..
Film also exhibits this halo, the amount depending on the developer. Only then it is not called halo but " edge effect" but it serves the same function of enhancing the impression of sharpness.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jaap said:
If you had some pictures in your gallery, one might start to think that there was any photographic thought behind your posts. May I suggest that you start your gallery with a few views from your dwelling in the Norwegian mountains.....
Simbad
Newbie
I think that the image quality of these "high end" digital cameras is much closer to medium format quality. Perhaps it is something to do with the "16 bit"
processors in these Leica digital cameras as the DMR images also have the same quality. The digital backs of pro medium and large format cameras are also 16 bit compared to the usual 12 bit of "other" digital cameras.
Personally I prefer to start off with the best quality image that I can get.....it's always possible to dumb it down a bit in Photoshop to get the look and feel required.
processors in these Leica digital cameras as the DMR images also have the same quality. The digital backs of pro medium and large format cameras are also 16 bit compared to the usual 12 bit of "other" digital cameras.
Personally I prefer to start off with the best quality image that I can get.....it's always possible to dumb it down a bit in Photoshop to get the look and feel required.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I'm logged in and I can't see them either:Stephan said:
Fiddlesticken.
devils-advocate
Member
jaapv said:
If these are the same pictures of mostly black youth in London which they put on the promotional CD they gave out at Photokina, am I the only person who thought they were awful? The images on the CD were poorly sharpened, lacked contrast and had that icky, plasticky colour which is a hallmark of poor digitial post-processsing or incamera jpeg processing.
I'm sure the real think will be much better, but what I saw was downright lame.