There are a lot of reasons why a photo may be soft. But usually the main reason is camera movement during exposure. This is why manufactures have resulted in technologies to combat camera shake and vibration. Nikon have introduced VR (Vibration reduction) and Canon IS (Image Stabilisation) just to name a couple. But even with these technologies people are still producing soft photos.
At a recent club meeting, I had brought along an Epson 2100 A3 printer to print some member prints. One member was astounded when I told him his photos were blurred and they wouldn’t print up as well as they looked on his laptop screen. It turns out that this was the case with all of his favorite images from his India trip.
I have learned from past experiences to be very critical of my selection process. One needs to inspect images at 100% and to learn to be critical if excellence is to be achieved. Usually upon first inspection on the back LCD screen, our photos look O.K. until we actually check them on a larger monitor at 100%. A lot of our photos may not be sharp because during a relatively slow exposure we may unintentionally shake the camera or the vibrations from the camera itself such as mirror slap, may affect the image during the recording process which may only show if a large enough enlargement is made.
Even though camera shake can show its ugly head under any condition, the most dangerous shutter speeds that need extra care are from 1/30 sec and slower. This is usually tripod territory and strangely enough most people not only continue to ignore the tripod but have gotten rid of theirs since the introduction of digital - since according to them, digital has liberated them of such a constraining tool.
Amazingly, a lot of photographers today don’t use a tripod even when the situation cries out for one. This is the biggest difference between a good photographer and a bad one. If you are guilty of the above, please stop being lazy and use a tripod for those scenes that require one. The difference is not only noticeable but also impressive.

In the above comparison, both images look quite alike and both seem acceptable to the naked eye. Yet under closer inspection we can see that the use of a tripod has really paid off.

If you liked this article, please leave a comment or post a link to this review at your favorite hang-out so others can get to read it as well. Donations through PayPal (at bottom of page) are also welcome - Thanks for the support.
1 comments:
Hi John,
I agree with your recommendations wholeheartedly...I always shoot using a tripod and cord release, and probably won't even bother to take a shot, IF it's not possible for me to use one.
Why, simply because my photography is much better when I use a tripod. Pure & simple, a tripod improves image quality (and offers the shooter more photo options) by about 25-30% right across the board.
In the studio all my still-life and designer-floral shots are taken with a reverse low-lighting/long exposure technique to completely reduce any potential unwanted reflections and glare.
Without a tripod & shutter cord release - none of that would be possible.
Thanks for all the informative reviews and the opportunity to hear a fellow photographers perspective on things.
Yiamas!
KEV
Vancouver Island, Canada
Post a Comment