On 3/29/2013 4:06 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
> I see Mike used an Olympus SP350 - a camera I had not previously heard
> of. An 8 MP camera as well.
>
> Timing and light are critical components which Mike has nailed, but it is also
> sharp.
Digital sampling ALWAYS softens edges - ALWAYS. The original capture of a
subject, scanning an analog source and
resizing an image are all cases of this. I wrote at some length about this,
with a thought experiment and examples, on
Zone-10 over five years ago. If you read this and the following three pages,
perhaps you will understand what is
happening.
<http://zone-10.com/cmsm/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149&Itemid=1&limit=1&limitstart=1>
Mike uses post downsampling (re)sharpening. He's done a good job here. My eagle
eye sees just the tiniest signs of
sharpening artifacts, just about perfect for the display size (i.e. nobody else
will likely notice them, but they will
find the image 'sharp'.) (For printing, more sharpening would be better.)
(Brian, pay particular attention where I talk about the decisions the JPEG
engine must make, and why they may not be
ideal for all uses.)
> I doubt that my E-3 could give that resolution.
Resolution at the camera level is only loosely associated with a sharp
appearing web image (or print, for that matter).
I have posted images from rather soft original Raw files that look tack sharp
on the web. Other people post web images
from very high detail originals that don't reflect the quality of those
originals.
> I'm getting increasingly dissatisfied with my device.
If you were doing scientific work, your equipment regularly produced less
accurate results than identical equipment used
by others, what would you conclude? There are two leading candidates:
1. Your equipment is faulty, in need of repair or calibration.
2. There is a flaw or flaws in your technique in using the equipment.
Yet you have proposed a third, logically inconsistent alternative:
3. The basic design and/or manufacture of the equipment is at fault.
Now I happen to think the E-3 and E-5 were underwhelming cameras, but because
of too little too late, relative to the
competition. They are not incompetent in their basic functions. Tests when they
came out and use by many, many people
have shown that they are capable of first class, sharp images.*
You are really stuck with 1 & 2 above, not 3. Now, if you want to update to a
newer camera, that's just fine, there's
some great equipment out there. However, if no. 2 is true, you are headed to
disappointment with new equipment, as well.
I've railed at you about software before, and you make excuses** or just ignore
me (Which is fine, but why are you then
back over and over again, complaining about the same problems?)
So let me say it straight. Back in the film days, shooting slides, you got the
best you could get when the film came
back from processing. That is simply no longer true. Post processing is how the
images you envy come to be the way they are.
Your insistence on shooting JPEG only, processing those images with free,
second rate software and not spending time to
learn how to use software to best advantage for your images is holding you
back, and will continue to do so, new camera
or not.
Back to Mike's image and your dissatisfaction with yours. Down sampling an
image so that it retains much of the
character of the large original is a tricky business. Using free software to do
so, without comparing it to the best, is
just asking to end up with poor apparent sharpness in web size images. Finding
a good combination of down sampling and
resharpening software and appropriate settings for them is crucial.
Testy Moose
* Send me the camera and a good lens, and I'll show you that it can easily take
excellent, sharp images. ;-) Or turn
on Raw, take 2-3 careful shots, and send me the ORFs.
** Often about money, and here you are, talking yourself into buying new
equipment.
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|