Nature Trail

[DavidS]

There is a nature trail just down the street from us. My oldest daughter loves to go there, primarily for the opportunities to climb.

My images all seemed a little soft, but I can't figure out why. My shutter speed was always greater than the focal length and I know I did not improperly focus on that many shots. Is this the way they should look at ISO 800? Am I being too critical? I was shooting with the Canon 28-135 IS, using IS. Any ideas? How are they otherwise? C&C welcome.

This is her after climbing a log. It was only about four feet off the ground, but she thought she was on top of the world.




A semi-posed shot in a tree.




She thinks the vines are the coolest thing.




I thought this tree trunk made a neat frame.




There is a deer stand in this tree she wanted to get to.




My two girls running down the trail

[Swartzy]

Since I too own that lens, it would be helpful if you could let us know what your aperature and shutter speed were. You say you shot this in ISO 800?

The overall lighting on these (especially for being in the woods) is incredibly flat but that's another issue. For now it would be helpful to know the focal length, shutter speed and f/stop.

[wxwax]

I like the second shot, very nice idea. A bit stiff and posed, but very nice composition.

I also like the idea of the last one: long path, two small children playing in the woods. it would be stronger if the two weren't so separated in the image, and perhaps not as small.

[DavidS]

Originally Posted by Swartzy

Since I too own that lens, it would be helpful if you could let us know what your aperature and shutter speed were. You say you shot this in ISO 800?

The overall lighting on these (especially for being in the woods) is incredibly flat but that's another issue. For now it would be helpful to know the focal length, shutter speed and f/stop.

They were all shot at f/5.6. Aperature Priority (I think this was as wide as I could go if I remember correctly)
1st 1/160; 2nd 1/60; 3rd 1/200; 4th 1/30; 5th 1/100; 6th 1/100
The first and the third one were heavily cropped
I was using fill flash (-2/3)
Raw files processed and converted to DNG in DxO, worked on exposure, white balance, tone curve and converted to JPEG in Lightroom, ran most of the JPEGs through i2e.


I went back and looked at a lot of other shots with than same lens and noticed the lack of sharpness. I am surprised I had not noticed it, or that it had not bothered me before. I guess I noticed it here because the faces were smaller in some of the shots and there is a heavy crop on a couple and lack of detail is more evident on them when viewed at 100%. Is this normal for a non L lens?

You mentioned the light is flat. Did I not process them well, or is it the light in the woods?

Thanks for taking the time to help me out on this Swartzy.

[DavidS]

Originally Posted by wxwax

I like the second shot, very nice idea. A bit stiff and posed, but very nice composition.

I also like the idea of the last one: long path, two small children playing in the woods. it would be stronger if the two weren't so separated in the image, and perhaps not as small.

Thanks for your comments and feedback Sid. I thought it looked a tad stiff too. I need to learn how to work with my kids when the shot is set up to get more emotion. She was playing on the tree, I saw a shot, and I gave her a little direction for the pose.

[Swartzy]

Originally Posted by DavidS

They were all shot at f/5.6. Aperature Priority (I probably should have used a wider aperature on most of them.)
1st 1/160; 2nd 1/60; 3rd 1/200; 4th 1/30; 5th 1/100; 6th 1/100
The first and the third one were heavily cropped
I was using fill flash (-2/3)
Raw files processed and converted to DNG in DxO, worked on exposure, white balance, tone curve and converted to JPEG in Lightroom, ran most of the JPEGs through i2e.


I went back and looked at a lot of other shots with than same lens and noticed the lack of sharpness. I am surprised I had not noticed it, or that it had not bothered me before. I guess I noticed it here because the faces were smaller in some of the shots and there is a heavy crop on a couple and lack of detail is more evident on them when viewed at 100%. Is this normal for a non L lens?

You mentioned the light is flat. Did I not process them well, or is it the light in the woods?

Thanks for taking the time to help me out on this Swartzy.

At ISO 800 those are fairly slow shutter speeds so one can only assume that it was fairly dark at that setting. That particular lens is soft at f/5.6 and works wonderfully at f/9.0. Also, I suggest you get closer to the girls....frame them up! Rather than having to do serious cropping (as if you were standing too far away even using 135mm).

The processing is ok for now but what is lacking is shadows....they are almost non existent. Shadows are a good thing as they add contrast, interest, intrigue to a frame. There are times when flash fill is a nice feature and balances out the subject's facial tones/light but often times, especially in shaded areas not always necessary. In some ways using flash fill removes all the shadowing (especially if it's camera mounted and dead on) making for an uneventful shot. Each setting takes experimenting and the need for varying lighting as there are no formulas.

ISO 800 @ 1/30th second at f/5.6 tells me it's really dark there. 1/30th second of course doesn't stop motion blur and often camera shake reigns the equation. Next time try manual mode, ISO 400, f/7.1-9.0 and set the shutter around 1/160th. Experiment with the power of the flash. Also try around 1/100...stay steady though but with the IS, there shouldn't be any problem. The slower the shutter speed, the more ambient light the sensor plane will capture. The faster, the less meaning the flash will be providing more of the light source.

One other thing to remember with digital, as our sensor plane doesn't have the same latitude as film (exposure speaking) is that the higher the ISO, the more sensitive to light making proper exposures difficult. When I'm out birding, I hate going over 400 ISO and many times don't want to go over 200.

Hope this is helpful.

[DavidS]

Hope this is helpful.[/quote]

Thanks Swartzy. That is very helpful. I see what you're saying about the flash potentially destroying shadows, which may be benificial. I will have to experiment. I usually crop in camera, but I did not see the better shot with the tighter crop, until pp. I should have shot both wide and tight. Live and learn. Thanks for all the other tips. I appreciate your help.

[Mike02]

Too much sharpening or filters, it adds an artificial look; but your pictures look okay otherwise.

[DavidS]

Originally Posted by Mike02

Too much sharpening or filters, it adds an artificial look; but your pictures look okay otherwise.

Thanks for the feedback Mike. Did you notice that on all the pictures? Was it evident on the pictures as they are, or just at 100% or higher? I'm still trying to develop an eye for this.