Image quality in full size ??

[harsh.kataruka]

Hi Guys,

call this an ameteur question, but has anyone ever felt that the image quality is not great at full size?

Whenever i make my pictures full size, i often find that it's grainy. Could this be cuz i'm not focussing properly or a limitation of my camera ( powershot SX10 IS )?

If its a focus problem, is there any way i can check this on my LCD monitor so that i can continue to improve on my focussing technique.

Any help on this would be welcome.

[jagoble25]

Both of my p&s's are Cannon Powershots. I keep them both on large and superfine. Love the images I get from them.

[harsh.kataruka]

Thanks, I will look at that today.

I think i'd changed it to medium and fine to increase the number of "snapshots" i could take on a holiday. would def revert it back!!!

[kencaleno]

Originally Posted by harsh.kataruka

Thanks, I will look at that today.

I think i'd changed it to medium and fine to increase the number of "snapshots" i could take on a holiday. would def revert it back!!!

99% of noise is caused by incorrect exposure:

Calibrate Your camera

Choose a fine sunny day, and a scene with all 5 stops of dynamic range.

Camera on tripod, matrix/evaluative metering, A/Av shooting mode.

Using Exposure compensation, make 7 exposures From +1 to -1

Enlarge to 100% (actual pixels) in photoshop -select the one that gives most detail in both shadows and highlights, without highlight being blown out.

This one is what you set your camera to.

Now your camera is calibrated for optimum performance

Set auto bracketing to 2/3 ev increments

One of your 3 shots will always be within 1/3 of an ev stop.

regards, Ken

[Doug Pardee]

Originally Posted by harsh.kataruka

has anyone ever felt that the image quality is not great at full size?

Whenever i make my pictures full size, i often find that it's grainy.

What do you mean by "full size"? 4x6? 5x7? 8x10?

If you mean "100%" on your computer screen, that's called "pixel-peeping". If you look at a photo where you can see every individual pixel, you will always have visible noise. The individual sensor sites respond a bit differently, and digital photography depends on your eye averaging the effects of the individual pixels together.

It's no different from film, which relied on your eye averaging out the effects from the individual chemical grains, except that with film you couldn't pixel-peep so easily. You either needed to inspect your photo with a loupe or go nuts when enlarging.

If you could inspect your fingertip at "full size", you'd see lots of atoms and electrons and stuff all scattered messily about, too.

In the standard digital sensor, neighboring sensor sites are picking up different colors. You'll have one picking up green, the one to its left picking up red, the one to its right picking up blue, the one above it picking up red, the one below it picking up blue, etc. The software that takes that data and makes a picture of it tries to average it out but has to be careful because if it gets carries away you'll just have a blurry mess.

The Foveon sensor used primarily in Sigma cameras doesn't do that—it picks up all three colors at a single sensor site. Unfortunately, today's Foveon sensors are still limited resolution (about 5 megapixels maximum right now).

But the bottom line is: don't judge noise levels while pixel-peeping. About the only time that you should pixel-peep is when you're applying sharpening, to watch out for "halos" developing around the edges in your image.

[harsh.kataruka]

Originally Posted by kencaleno

99% of noise is caused by incorrect exposure:

Calibrate Your camera

Choose a fine sunny day, and a scene with all 5 stops of dynamic range.

Camera on tripod, matrix/evaluative metering, A/Av shooting mode.

Using Exposure compensation, make 7 exposures From +1 to -1

Enlarge to 100% (actual pixels) in photoshop -select the one that gives most detail in both shadows and highlights, without highlight being blown out.

This one is what you set your camera to.

Now your camera is calibrated for optimum performance

Set auto bracketing to 2/3 ev increments

One of your 3 shots will always be within 1/3 of an ev stop.

regards, Ken

Thanks Ken, I will try to do this.. at least what all i could understand

Originally Posted by Doug Pardee

What do you mean by "full size"? 4x6? 5x7? 8x10?

If you mean "100%" on your computer screen, that's called "pixel-peeping". If you look at a photo where you can see every individual pixel, you will always have visible noise. The individual sensor sites respond a bit differently, and digital photography depends on your eye averaging the effects of the individual pixels together.

It's no different from film, which relied on your eye averaging out the effects from the individual chemical grains, except that with film you couldn't pixel-peep so easily. You either needed to inspect your photo with a loupe or go nuts when enlarging.

If you could inspect your fingertip at "full size", you'd see lots of atoms and electrons and stuff all scattered messily about, too.

In the standard digital sensor, neighboring sensor sites are picking up different colors. You'll have one picking up green, the one to its left picking up red, the one to its right picking up blue, the one above it picking up red, the one below it picking up blue, etc. The software that takes that data and makes a picture of it tries to average it out but has to be careful because if it gets carries away you'll just have a blurry mess.

The Foveon sensor used primarily in Sigma cameras doesn't do that—it picks up all three colors at a single sensor site. Unfortunately, today's Foveon sensors are still limited resolution (about 5 megapixels maximum right now).

But the bottom line is: don't judge noise levels while pixel-peeping. About the only time that you should pixel-peep is when you're applying sharpening, to watch out for "halos" developing around the edges in your image.

Thanks Doug, I will keep this in mind

[THE surfdog]

Ken and Doug both made good points that are worth a second look.

Jagoble25 though pointed out something that I think a lot of people miss: namely the quality they are capturing at in the first place. Maybe it's just me but I figure that if I took the time to buy a nice camera with decent resolution then it makes little sense to "dumb it down."

A print is only going to be as good as the original capture. You can't add data later that was lost because you where trying to save space on a card. I ALWAYS suggest that people shoot and save at the HIGHEST quality that their camera is capable of... More than likely that's one of the reasons they chose that particular camera in the first place.

Cards are relatively cheap these days. Just buy a couple more and get the most that your camera can offer.

(And don't pixel-peep...it will only drive you mad. )

[harsh.kataruka]

Thanks a lot Surfdog..

After Jagoble25's comment, i've pretty much locked my settings at 10M, and superfine...

[Gonzo13]

Harsh I recall when I compared photos from my P&S cameras and my DSLR, I thought that I had some of my settings wrong on one of them. I had both of them on the highest resolution and compared them. I was flabbergasted by the results. I saw all kinds of artifacts from the P&S. Granted I was comparing a 6 mp to a 10 mp.