Old 02-17-2017, 03:36 AM   #1
ATSF666
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
Default Focus - soft???

I get nailed once in a while for focus - soft photos. I don't see it, but maybe someone here can tell me what the heck the screener is seeing that I don't.

Thanks in advance.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...31&key=4951216

I don't care if this one get's on, I'm not going to waste my time messing around with it, I just need to figure out what they see that I don't.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 01:59 PM   #2
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 360
Default

Short answer - sharpen more and hope>.

I don't think unsharpened means soft focus(as they explain)??? I assume you did sharpen already. I use smart sharpen and if they want more I just give it a lot unsharp mask and then fade the edit watching the number boards, even if I don't agree with the rejection. If you over sharpen and then fade you can actually watch the image change.

I think that could use a little punch also(vibrance)???

Blurry probably covers motion blur as well as focus as in my rejection.? and can't be corrected. I have a lot of night photos accepted but they don't seem to bend too much for low light.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...48&key=8295235

Bob
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 03:14 PM   #3
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
I get nailed once in a while for focus - soft photos. I don't see it, but maybe someone here can tell me what the heck the screener is seeing that I don't.

Thanks in advance.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...31&key=4951216

I don't care if this one get's on, I'm not going to waste my time messing around with it, I just need to figure out what they see that I don't.
Moderate additional sharpening wouldn't hurt.
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 03:24 PM   #4
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
Blurry probably covers motion blur as well...and can't be corrected.
If just the nose has motion blur, you can definitely reduce it manually.
Simply zoom in, identify the offending pixels, and clone 'em out.

As in this one:
Image © miningcamper
PhotoID: 506498
Photograph © miningcamper
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-17-2017, 05:58 PM   #5
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,630
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
...if they want more I just give it a lot unsharp mask and then fade the edit watching the number boards, even if I don't agree with the rejection. If you over sharpen and then fade you can actually watch the image change.
This is what I've always done as well.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 02:21 AM   #6
ATSF666
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by miningcamper1 View Post
Moderate additional sharpening wouldn't hurt.
So what are you seeing that leads you to that conclusion? Thanx.

I use smart sharpening in Photoshop CS, so I'm pretty much aware of how it works. I just don't like overly crispy photos.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 03:14 AM   #7
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
I just don't like overly crispy photos.
RP does.

The ballast doesn't look sharp, that is one of my go-to indicators.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 04:00 AM   #8
ATSF666
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
RP does.

The ballast doesn't look sharp, that is one of my go-to indicators.
Ah, that's helpful! I agree, it doesn't. Now I'm sure there could be a debate about the importance of sharp ballast in the larger world of photography, but I suspect that would be a losing debate with the powers to be here.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 04:44 AM   #9
John West
Senior Curmudgeon
 
John West's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mill Valley, CA
Posts: 1,041
Default

I think the high sun angle detracts more than any lack of sharpness.
__________________
John West
See my pix here and
here and here
John West is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 12:18 PM   #10
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,152
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
Ah, that's helpful! I agree, it doesn't. Now I'm sure there could be a debate about the importance of sharp ballast in the larger world of photography, but I suspect that would be a losing debate with the powers to be here.
I have poor sensitivity with respect to sharpness. I use the ballast as an easily-observed indicator of an underlying problem that is more general. I don't mean to say the shot is fine but for the ballast.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2017, 11:50 PM   #11
RobJor
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 360
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATSF666 View Post
So what are you seeing that leads you to that conclusion? Thanx.

I use smart sharpening in Photoshop CS, so I'm pretty much aware of how it works. I just don't like overly crispy photos.
Sorry to be ... but I don't understand the question? that is what the rejection says in living B/W, I not even sure why the post when the rejections says it directly:
================================================== =
Most digital photos 'come out of the camera' soft, which is different than being blurry, and can normally be corrected with additional sharpening (and selective sharpening, where required) in a photo editing program.
==========================================

I believe they are too picky on sharpness but that is a little bit of the nature of the beast. Read a lens review, Sharpness charts. Read comments: Sharp as a tack(i love that one). Sharp at the edges, sharp at wide open soft at?????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????/

bob
RobJor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2017, 05:54 AM   #12
ATSF666
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 89
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobJor View Post
Sorry to be ... but I don't understand the question? that is what the rejection says in living B/W, I not even sure why the post when the rejections says it directly:
================================================== =
Most digital photos 'come out of the camera' soft, which is different than being blurry, and can normally be corrected with additional sharpening (and selective sharpening, where required) in a photo editing program.
==========================================

I believe they are too picky on sharpness but that is a little bit of the nature of the beast. Read a lens review, Sharpness charts. Read comments: Sharp as a tack(i love that one). Sharp at the edges, sharp at wide open soft at?????

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????/

bob
Sorry, I have no idea what the ____ you are talking about. Aside from the ballast, the photo looks sharp to me. The number boards look sharp, the UP wings look sharp, the MP indicator looks sharp to me. I don't know what the screener saw aside from the ballast and I sure as heck have no idea what the ____ you are talking about.
__________________
ATSF666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2017, 11:19 AM   #13
miningcamper1
Senior Member
 
miningcamper1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 785
Default

We can argue 'til the cows come home whether it's sharpened enough, but the alternatives are: appeal, humor them, or post it elsewhere.
__________________
flickr photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/11947249@N03/
miningcamper1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.