I just came across a website with some articles on image sharpening, it
seems to be well written (though I haven't read it all yet).
This is the link to the intro:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/image-sharpening-intro/
...Wayne
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus
[mailto:olympus-bounces+wayne.harridge=structuregraphs.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
] On Behalf Of Chuck Norcutt
Sent: Wednesday, 28 September 2016 9:06 AM
To: Olympus Camera Discussion <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [OM] Look here Brian...
But don't forget that it's all relative to display size. f/22 works for
that image since the output size is little more than 1 MP. The full
resolution of the E-M5 should support a large wall print of 18.4 x 13.8"
at 250 dpi. Blow your original image up to 100% and you'll see where the
resolution is missing as it most certainly is.
Chuck Norcutt
On 9/27/2016 8:14 AM, bj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
>
> Moose wrote
>
> On 9/26/2016 4:10 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> No, I don't
> accept that. Pixel pitch of the E-M5 and 6D are about the same. Also
> remember that Ken said the image was heavily cropped. As Moose has
> said, you can't shoot the E-M5 at f/22 and then be surprised that
> there's not much detail or sharpness to the image.
>
> In fact, since the
> 6D has about the same pixel pitch you can't shoot it at f/22 and
> expect razor sharp results either.
>
> Weeelll, correct, but easy to
> misunderstand. The 6D is FF, so for the same display size,
> magnification is less and one may stop down further for the same
> visually apparent loss to diffraction. I'm sure you can run your
> calculator on it, if you wish. My experience says 1.5 to 2 stops.
>
> Ken was shooting at
> f/4-f/5.6. Brian should probably stay at f/9 or less for sharp images.
>
>
> Yup, although without deconvolution "sharpening", f5.6 is safer for
> maximum resolution.
>
>
> .......................................................................
>
>
> When I shot the Sigma 90 macro images at f/16 and f/22
>
>
> http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=20781
> http://zone-10.com/tope2/main.php?g2_itemId=20784
>
>
> I did so in order to obtain the maximum DOF. Which I did. What's more
> that was achieved in the 1200 pixel image easily, with fine detail
> showing from the fine hairs on the ovary to the tips of most of the
> stamens.
>
> Any loss of that goal due to diffraction effects is negligible. At one
> end or other of the flower the image would be quite out of focus which
> in my opinion would be much worse than what diffraction effects might
> do, by several orders of magnitude.
>
> I've
> just spent the last 2 hours (it's now 1.11 am) watching a video of the
> Clinton/trump 'debate', I've had a long day touring around distant
> countrysides with my daughter, so discussion of other matters will
> have to wait.
>
> Brian
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|