Canon 20D Canon 100-400mm L I.S. @ 350mm, 1/400 sec @ f5.6,
Manual exposure, Al servo focus, Raw, iso 200, Gitzo 1548/Arca B1.
Full frame,levels,slight saturation increase.
Hi,
Thought I'd continue with the garden birds, with a Great Tit this time.Taken back in January on a beautiful crisp Winter's day.
Not sure why, but for some reason the wing feathers have appeared a little jagged on the 720 pixel version,had a look in Photoshop and it isn't noticable at 50% or 100%.
Decided to try a larger version,which doesn't appear quite so jagged.
Posted by David Kjaer on December 11, 2006 at 4:48 AM
Hi Justin
Can't see how you could improve it - love the soft light and BG. Beautifully processed as usual!
David
Posted by John Varley on December 11, 2006 at 5:36 AM
Beautiful Justin. Love the detail in the larger version.
About the jaggies on the primaries - i think it is due to the image been very sharp you get beat patterns created with the pixels of the display device and the pixels in the file. With your large image seen full size it looks fine if i zoom out a step suddenly a beat pattern appears on the wings. The only way i've found to mitigate it is by reducing the sharpening on that area. It funny its much worse on some images than others - think it is also to do with the angle that the wings are at.
John
Posted by Philip Kirkham on December 11, 2006 at 6:30 AM
Hello Justin
Spot on in every way, useful info from John, too.
Best wishes
Phil
Thanks for that info,very interesting.I havn't really noticed it before.That's good advice regarding not sharpening that area,I did actually consider that,as I noticed that because the wing feather details were so much more clearly defined and detailed compared to the eye area,there could have been a danger of the wing appearing sharper than the eye.
Cheers John.
Posted by Dave Courtenay on December 11, 2006 at 7:45 AM
Very nice-love the mossy perch
Posted by Sean Bolton on December 11, 2006 at 2:09 PM
Hi Justin
Super shot, great pose, great detail, great colour. Can't think of anything to improve it really.
cheers
Sean
p.s. I think you must have the sharpest copy of the 100-400 in existence, the images you get with this lens look fantastic.
Posted by Graeme Lee on December 11, 2006 at 2:38 PM
Yeah a sharp lens indeed, plus good technique I'm sure, allows this kind of quality. Fantastic shot Justin. All been said really!
It doesn't appear to be the compression that's caused the jagged edges,because the 720 pixel image didn't actually require an awful lot of compression to keep it under the 200kb file size,if I remember correctly the quality setting in the Save for Web dialogue box was quite high at 95-96.
It also doesn't appear to be caused by the sharpening,although it certainly accentuated the issue to some extent.
Having looked at the full size image again in Photoshop it looks fine at 100%,50% and 25% even fine at 66.67%. It's when the image is 33.33% or 16.67% that the jagged enges really become pronounced.
I was aware that an accurate representation of the image quality is only evident at 25%,50% and 100% in Photoshop.It was just after the image was posted on the web that I became aware of the issue,I dare say it's ocurred many times before,it's just that I havn't really been aware of it untill now.
But like John mentions above,it's a lot more evident on some images more than others.
I don't find it a problem really at all,because it goes without saying that a small on-screen jpeg will never really do justice to an image,just that I hadn't noticed it before.
Discussion
13 repliesManual exposure, Al servo focus, Raw, iso 200, Gitzo 1548/Arca B1.
Full frame,levels,slight saturation increase.
Hi,
Thought I'd continue with the garden birds, with a Great Tit this time.Taken back in January on a beautiful crisp Winter's day.
Not sure why, but for some reason the wing feathers have appeared a little jagged on the 720 pixel version,had a look in Photoshop and it isn't noticable at 50% or 100%.
Decided to try a larger version,which doesn't appear quite so jagged.
LARGER VERSION
All comments always welcome and appreciated.
Phillip.
Tim
Top marks Justin in every respect!!
Can't see how you could improve it - love the soft light and BG. Beautifully processed as usual!
David
About the jaggies on the primaries - i think it is due to the image been very sharp you get beat patterns created with the pixels of the display device and the pixels in the file. With your large image seen full size it looks fine if i zoom out a step suddenly a beat pattern appears on the wings. The only way i've found to mitigate it is by reducing the sharpening on that area. It funny its much worse on some images than others - think it is also to do with the angle that the wings are at.
John
Spot on in every way, useful info from John, too.
Best wishes
Phil
Thanks for that info,very interesting.I havn't really noticed it before.That's good advice regarding not sharpening that area,I did actually consider that,as I noticed that because the wing feather details were so much more clearly defined and detailed compared to the eye area,there could have been a danger of the wing appearing sharper than the eye.
Cheers John.
Super shot, great pose, great detail, great colour. Can't think of anything to improve it really.
cheers
Sean
p.s. I think you must have the sharpest copy of the 100-400 in existence, the images you get with this lens look fantastic.
Graeme
A really nice portrait where all the elements come together.
Is the 'jaggies' problem arising from the amount compression undertaken when saving for the web rather than USM?
PS: Thanks for the comments on my Sparrowhawk post.
It doesn't appear to be the compression that's caused the jagged edges,because the 720 pixel image didn't actually require an awful lot of compression to keep it under the 200kb file size,if I remember correctly the quality setting in the Save for Web dialogue box was quite high at 95-96.
It also doesn't appear to be caused by the sharpening,although it certainly accentuated the issue to some extent.
Having looked at the full size image again in Photoshop it looks fine at 100%,50% and 25% even fine at 66.67%. It's when the image is 33.33% or 16.67% that the jagged enges really become pronounced.
I was aware that an accurate representation of the image quality is only evident at 25%,50% and 100% in Photoshop.It was just after the image was posted on the web that I became aware of the issue,I dare say it's ocurred many times before,it's just that I havn't really been aware of it untill now.
But like John mentions above,it's a lot more evident on some images more than others.
I don't find it a problem really at all,because it goes without saying that a small on-screen jpeg will never really do justice to an image,just that I hadn't noticed it before.