Reading mode: Light Dark

Image clarity when zoomed?

Go to last post
J

jpegScott

Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
18
I have a question about image clarity with a T4I ? As it has a reasonable number of MP's (18). I have used various setting and lenses. But continue to get the same issue with every photo. The pictures seem Ok. But if I try to enlarge them to look at finer details,the picture shows a sort of fuzz. Irfan-view says max printable size up to 72.00 x 48.00 inches. But I will show 2 photos. 1) full,2) cropped portion. As you can see in the cropped one, there is the snow-fuzz look on the photo. Is this caused by limitations of the camera? Or a settings issue? Thanks -Scott



a9965636b1e841e18537c911a49fdafb.jpg



af41e75ac488443e9ae2c99b06e7889d.jpg
 
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
Yes, he's "digging".

When you get tired of "playing",

just remember to place him on your "ignore" list,

as it makes life much more pleasant and peaceful. :-)

Cheers!
 
tbcass said:
Erik Baumgartner said:
Certain critical settings, sharpening/NR in particular, require at least a 100% view to see what’s actually going on with your image when fine tuning adjustments. Anything less than 100% and you really aren’t doing it right. Call it pixel peeping if you like, I call it learning important lessons about how various adjustments will interact and either compliment or detract from each other. Folks who don’t routinely evaluate their images at 100% are probably leaving a lot of potential image quality on the table - yes, image quality that is obvious at “normal” viewing sizes.
Click to expand...
Even if you are not editing 100% viewing is the only way to see details in an image that are not visible at normal size. That's the main reason I do it and if someone else doesn't like it tough Shi**. I'm sick of people being judgemental about pixel peeping and will make no apologies for it.
Click to expand...
Dang it people now you have me agreeing with tbcass! :)

Joking aside, pixel-peeping sharpness is both overrated and necessary, depending on the application.

If you're posting vacation pictures to Facebook to be viewed on phones and 13" laptop screens, no one is going to be able to tell if the original image was impressive at 200% or not.

In the context of say bird and wildlife or insect macro photography, you're almost never going to get close enough to your subjects without additional cropping. So tons of detail is vital to making the subject large enough to be pleasing.
 
David1961 said:
Thank you for your opinion, but I disagree :-)
Click to expand...
Please take jshen808's advice and put me on your ignore list. I will be ever so pleased.
 
Last edited:
jshen808 said:
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
Yes, he's "digging".

When you get tired of "playing",

just remember to place him on your "ignore" list,

as it makes life much more pleasant and peaceful. :-)

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't use the ignore list but I fully understand why some people choose to use it.

The downside for me is that if I put someone on an ignore list I then wouldn't see any misleading or incorrect replies to my posts and so wouldn't be able to respond.

I have been around the www for quite a few years now, coming from a website development and database administration background, have seen all the mind games some people try to play and rest assured I am big enough and ugly enough to look after myself on the www :-D
 
I am sure somebody has already suggested this by now so I am going to reinforce the suggestion that you set up a shot on a tripod and take all of the precautionary measures one would take to maximize resolution. If the resultant image appears tack sharp @ 100%, then the images below are the result of poor technique. If you do not get a tack sharp image, then the equipment or some portion of it may be at fault depending on how you define "fault". Not every camera and/or lens seems to be engineered to produce tack sharp images at 100% viewing.

Ignore anyone claiming that an image viewed at 100% is somehow a bad test. Ignore suggestions that your monitor may be at fault. Ignore suggestions that ISO had something to do with the images below.
jpegScott said:
I have a question about image clarity with a T4I ? As it has a reasonable number of MP's (18). I have used various setting and lenses. But continue to get the same issue with every photo. The pictures seem Ok. But if I try to enlarge them to look at finer details,the picture shows a sort of fuzz. Irfan-view says max printable size up to 72.00 x 48.00 inches. But I will show 2 photos. 1) full,2) cropped portion. As you can see in the cropped one, there is the snow-fuzz look on the photo. Is this caused by limitations of the camera? Or a settings issue? Thanks -Scott

a9965636b1e841e18537c911a49fdafb.jpg

af41e75ac488443e9ae2c99b06e7889d.jpg
Click to expand...
 
Horacecoker said:
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
That is a total nonsense.
Click to expand...
I think both of you are getting way too involved in this one upmanship. It's the reason why I put David1961 on my ignore list after he did it to me to remind me not to get engaged with him which always ends up in an endless back and forth.
 
David1961 said:
jshen808 said:
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
Yes, he's "digging".

When you get tired of "playing",

just remember to place him on your "ignore" list,

as it makes life much more pleasant and peaceful. :-)

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't use the ignore list but I fully understand why some people choose to use it.

The downside for me is that if I put someone on an ignore list I then wouldn't see any misleading or incorrect replies to my posts and so wouldn't be able to respond.

I have been around the www for quite a few years now, coming from a website development and database administration background, have seen all the mind games some people try to play and rest assured I am big enough and ugly enough to look after myself on the www :-D
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand your viewpoint,

and in many ways I fully agree with you.

I felt the same way, wanting to read every post,

but after being in the forum after several years now,

only have decided this year to start using the "ignored".

So not to worry, I'm with you on your thinking on this matter.

Cheers!
 
To mention,

I'm also a "pixel-peeper".

Even though I agree that seeing an image at "full-size",

that many times things may look just fine and no problems.

However, for me, would like to examine my images at 100% view,

so to examine the quality of my images, to look for jaggies and halos.

By doing this is not to impress others, but it's for me and my quality of work.

Cheers!

--
....................Cheers, John.....................
.....If I don't respond to your post,.....
...it means you're on my ignore list,..
...................words matter!...................
 
Last edited:
tbcass said:
Horacecoker said:
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
That is a total nonsense.
Click to expand...
I think both of you are getting way too involved in this one upmanship. It's the reason why I put David1961 on my ignore list after he did it to me to remind me not to get engaged with him which always ends up in an endless back and forth.
Click to expand...
I realise that now. I thought the 'discussion' had ended ages ago but he would come up with another dig even though I hadn't replied to his last one. And the bizarre thing is he's twisted it round to say I'm doing the digging. He's too clever for me! But thank's for telling me this guy has a history of winding folk up. I'll keep clear in future.
 
Last edited:
jshen808 said:
To mention,

I'm also a "pixel-peeper".

Even though I agree that seeing an image at "full-size",

that many times things may look just fine and no problems.

However, for me, would like to examine my images at 100% view,

so to examine the quality of my images, to look for jaggies and halos.

By doing this is not to impress others, but it's for me and my quality of work.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm pretty much the same especially when I plan to make a large print.
 
David1961 said:
jshen808 said:
To mention,

I'm also a "pixel-peeper".

Even though I agree that seeing an image at "full-size",

that many times things may look just fine and no problems.

However, for me, would like to examine my images at 100% view,

so to examine the quality of my images, to look for jaggies and halos.

By doing this is not to impress others, but it's for me and my quality of work.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm pretty much the same especially when I plan to make a large print.
Click to expand...
Cheers!
 
tbcass said:
Horacecoker said:
David1961 said:
At the moment he's just going through my posts and using a scatter gun approach in his attempt to try to find something not accurate.
Click to expand...
That is a total nonsense.
Click to expand...
I think both of you are getting way too involved in this one upmanship. It's the reason why I put David1961 on my ignore list after he did it to me to remind me not to get engaged with him which always ends up in an endless back and forth.
Click to expand...
I don't blame you for putting him on your ignore list.

To come straight into a discussion thread in a reply to you when you were just trying to give somebody advice with this opening gambit is not the type of guy I want to converse with. I think I got off lightly!

"Where I live at the moment, what you say is totally wrong and bordering on garbage".
 
And no-one proved that wasn't correct.

I gave the op my opinion in that thread that he should get proper legal advice regarding his copyright issue, given the contradicting advice others were posting.

No-one gave the op a definitive yes or no regarding his original question.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top