Go Back   The TrekEarth Forums >


Thread Tools

Great bantonbuju 2006-12-05 2:26

indeed unusual,
but what surprises me most is the fact that these women seem not seeing you, i feel like as if you were completely behind their sight, on the other side of the fence all right, but was that other side invisible?
best wishes, j.

Old 12-05-2006, 12:54 PM
feather's Avatar
feather feather is offline
TE Expert
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North Yorkshire, England, UK
Posts: 3,381
Default To rosaline: D200

Thanks Aubrey. It's not easy though as I find it not as sharp as the D70. Prints look sharper than what you see on screen. I remember Mark Staples having the same problem when he got his D200. He actually wrote to Nikon and they said the softer result was deliberate. It's the first time I have ever had to sharpen photos before and after downsizing. I read an article in a photo magazine that says people who want to sell photos to agencies and magazines should not sharpen their photos either in-camera or later, so I assume it has something to do with print quality required for publication. All your photos look sharp. What do you do to achieve that?
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2006, 01:48 PM
rosaline's Avatar
rosaline rosaline is offline
TE Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 62
Default Re: To rosaline: D200

Hi Kath
A few points that I have picked up from numerous sources along the way:
1. With the D200 the pictures are softer and it is recommended that you do not sharpen them in camera or in post processing if you plan to print them out (with a high quality printer) or sell them. This is because D200 images are aimed at the pro/semi-pro arena and companies prefer to manipulate the final image themselves, including sharpening. Sharp pictures printed out on good quality printers may also look oversharpened when printed out, so a softer image is recommended.
2. The soft image helps to keep down mire and other artifacts that may occur on the picture. Digital photos are quite inferior to print film in this department, especially for night shots. Artifacts, additional flare, odd spots and colours, and noise are much more common than on print film. And these artifacts are likely to be enhanced if the picture has sharpening added in-camera. It is recommended to set the sharpening at "0" or normal.
3. Having said all that, I break the rules. I set the colour at Adobe RGB, the sharpness at +2 and the Jpeg setting at L (maximum). I seldom shoot on RAW, it is not my favourite medium. Personally, I think Jpegs are easier to work with and provide excellent quality for web publications and even commercially. A few months ago a company bought my picture "London Skyline", which is a jpeg.
4. In PP work I use Nikon capture to do the final sharpening. I do have to do some secondary sharpening after resizing for the web - though not always. I usually sharpen between 40 to 50% and set the radius at 5. Also, I don't use zoom lenses but prime, fixed focal length lenses: 50mm and 24mm which are sharper anyway. However, this Helmsley Castle shot is nice and crisp and you don't need a picture any sharper than this.
5. Finally, I have taken some shots with RAW with +2 sharpening and the pictures have come out very sharp. The pictures - Morining Path I and II were on raw, and the sharpness with very good - in fact a little too high. So you can try this combination if you haven't already. Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 06:02 PM.

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.