Can't seem to get "it" CC on baby in tie greatly appreciated.

[Steven G Webb]

Here's what lead me to my suggestion. 1st the assertion was made that no one can hold a camera at 1/25th, valid statement but non-applicable in this instance as the OP included the use of a tripod. Now, camera vibration would create a global blur to the image. I'm not seeing that the subject, foreground, and background appear to be unaffected. Subject movement on the other hand could be an issue when the subjects movement is fast enough to be blurred during a longer exposure. Again, the baby is parked on its butt and looks fairly stable. I'm not seeing motion as the primary culprit here. I can't be sure that depth of field is the problem either. I see definition in areas that would say the image is in focus, though that definition is not crisp. This appears to be more of a clarity issue than a physical focus issue. The shot looks diffused, not out of focus. If its not the glass or some property of the lens, like sweet spot f-stop then the next deduction I make is that the camera's shooting preferences are adjusted or need to be adjusted. In image enhancement, many times "Portrait" images are less sharp than those set to "Vivid" where the camera pumps up both the sharpness and the saturation in some channels.

I did not want to split hairs over semantics. I do also agree that some people may not grasp that eliminating camera movement doesn't eliminate subject movement. I think we should make it clear that we've read a statement like "I used a tripod" and the subject still blurred, that we understand "tripod used" and not suggest that the shutter speed was too slow for hand holding. Agreed, the shutter speed might have been too slow but for a different reason.

[stef@apl]

The focus looks good on the eyes in both, but there's a depth of field issue in the 2nd one.

When you're close to the subject, the DOF is even thinner, and this is clear from the 2nd. You're at 27mm which will mean you're about (guessing) ~4 feet away. That will give you only a few inches (guessing again, maybe 4 inches?) of clear focus. If you were farther away at the same aperture and zoomed in, you would have more to work with.

So, when you get closer, you need to stop it down a little bit. You should probably try F/8 when you're using short focal lengths. You can get away with wider apertures when you're shooting long, and this works really well to separate someone from the background, too. When shooting short with wide apertures, you'll probably catch the edges of them out of focus (which is often desirable in portraits -- especially faceshots -- as long as that's what you want).

Also, where was your focus point? If it was NOT on the eyes, you should check the calibration of your lens on your camera. If it was the eyes, then you're good. You should be using the center focus point, if possible, and not all the AF points. (You can check your AF point on your current shots by firing up DPP that came with your camera, and hit alt-L I think.)

[photonovice]

First off, THANK YOU so much to all the replies! I'm going to get my notebook out and take down advice to try out. Time and effort given here is muchly appreciated.

Originally Posted by Song4themoon

It sounds like you may have to adjust your aperture to something higher than 5.6

Do you have light in the room to help the lens focus or is it dark until the flash goes off. If the light is very dimn then you might want to get some more light into the room

Thanks for posting! Will try some higher apertures next time. I've included a picture of my set up. I have no external flash and did NOT use the on camera flash, because I thought that would make the photo worse. I had thought there was enough light for using mainly natural light, but I may have been mistaken on that.

Originally Posted by hawkeye61

1/25 and 1/30 shutter speed are too slow.

Thanks. I will make sure I get faster shutter speeds then. I had the camera on aperture priority, and my understanding was that this meant the camera "knew" the right shutter speed for the amount of light. I may just not have enough light to do indoor photos. I'll keep trying with different settings...

Originally Posted by Song4themoon

Oh wow, I didn't even look at the shutter speed. Hawk is right that is way to slow. Nobody can hold a camera at 1/25 of a second and not get camera shake. Try 1/100 and faster, adjust the flash or ISO to let in the light

Tripod used, but there could still be shake from hitting the button. I'll make sure I use a remote next time. If you (or anyone) have a chance to look at the set up... without an external flash or proper studio lighting, is there any hope of being able to take a photo in this existing light? When I set the shutter speed to 100 or above the camera says it is 2 stops underexposed and they do come out VERY dark. The photo of the set up was taken about 2 hours after the actual photos, so there is a bit more light when I am taking photos.

Thanks again for looking and helping!

[photonovice]

Originally Posted by sportster

Denise,

What a cute little guy and a very cool idea for a portrait.

I noticed your shutter speed was 1/30 sec. that’s fairly slow.

I have problems getting a sharp image when I my camera with a 1/30 sec. flash sync so I never use it for portraits any more.

Your flash sync is 1/200 sec. so there is no need to below shooting at 1/30 sec. I would suggest using a shutter speed of at least 1/125 sec. Also I usually use F8 on my portraits.

Using a higher shutter speed and stopping down a little should yield more in focus images.

Keep practicing (and posting) it will get better, I promise.

Toby

Toby thank you SO much for your specific feedback and your kind words and encouragement. I will definitely keep practicing! I tried your aperture and shutter speed settings, but they left the photos way too dark. I may not have enough indoor light to take pictures that way (see photo of available light in post above) as I don't have an external flash. I will try your recommendations in an outdoor setting. I really like the work you've posted on camel, so am happy to see what I can get with your advice!

Originally Posted by akrab

the shutter speed issue has already been brought up so aside from that I will say I think the photos are adorable! And I love the fact that he is in cloth diapers

Thank you! I love the fact he's in cloth diapers too They are so easy to use, have so many advantages and there are such fun colours available.

Originally Posted by transcape5

What a cutie he is. As commented already, if there's one adjustment to make it would have to be the shutter speed, Denise. The tripod only helps remove camera shake from the equation but not the subject movement. Using flash will help with subject movement but not at that low of a shutter speed. It's especially true for any kid under 5 that aren't sleeping.

Thank you for the kind words! And thank you for the feedback. I'll be trying faster shutter speeds with outdoor light.

Originally Posted by Rogue

Also if he doesn't have a remote shutter release he could be bumping the camera on the tripod.

Thanks for the idea! I always forget about my remote when I'm not in the picture. I'll try that for a better result.

[photonovice]

Originally Posted by Songman45

Uh, hate to be a wet blanket but didn't the data also say "Tripod Used" I think the shutter speed is OK at 1/Th. The child seems to be sitting quite still on a stable support.

I know the web sized image I'm looking at doesn't have the resolution of the original. The catch lights in the eyes looks focused right, the image overall just doesn't look crisp. You lens may not produce a crystal clear image when opened all the way. Stopping down might yield a better result, not that I think you need the additional depth of field. Your subject's distance to the background will become an issue as you stop the f-stop down.

I assume this is a jpeg capture. Your camera may have some settings in the custom menus for sharpening. If your setting in there is portrait or softer then the camera is editing for you a little bit. My camera gave me fits for a while back until I tweaked the settings for image enhancement.

Best wishes

Steve

Steve, don't worry about being a "wet blanket" I'm thrilled that you posted here, as I lurk on camel a lot and always find I have a lot to learn and take in from your posts. I did indeed use a tripod, but not a remote. I will try stopping down and thanks for the warning to move the subject more away from the background when I do.
Sadly this was actually a RAW capture, so I can't blame jpeg compression for the lack of clarity. I will read up in the manual to see if I can custom sharpen in camera, thanks for the suggestion.
The lack of crispness is one of the things I most want to overcome in my photos, I know I don't have professional equipment to get the full professional look, but I also know my equipment is capable of much more than I am currently getting.

Originally Posted by akrab

The camera may not move on a tripod but a child will most definitely move.. so camera shake, or child movement, will be an issue at that slow of a shutter speed... look at the childs right arm in the 2nd photo

Post processing may also be responsible for part of the blur there, but I'm sure my little guy also didn't sit still enough to eliminate blur either, he's usually waving his arms around or shouting or being somehow active

Originally Posted by Songman45

Here's what lead me to my suggestion. 1st the assertion was made that no one can hold a camera at 1/25th, valid statement but non-applicable in this instance as the OP included the use of a tripod. Now, camera vibration would create a global blur to the image. I'm not seeing that the subject, foreground, and background appear to be unaffected. Subject movement on the other hand could be an issue when the subjects movement is fast enough to be blurred during a longer exposure. Again, the baby is parked on its butt and looks fairly stable. I'm not seeing motion as the primary culprit here. I can't be sure that depth of field is the problem either. I see definition in areas that would say the image is in focus, though that definition is not crisp. This appears to be more of a clarity issue than a physical focus issue. The shot looks diffused, not out of focus. If its not the glass or some property of the lens, like sweet spot f-stop then the next deduction I make is that the camera's shooting preferences are adjusted or need to be adjusted. In image enhancement, many times "Portrait" images are less sharp than those set to "Vivid" where the camera pumps up both the sharpness and the saturation in some channels.
...

Yes, you've hit my main frustration with my work (I know there are other issues, but this is the one I most want to conquer) the lack of crispness. How does one find the f stop sweet spot? Practice and trial and error? or is there a formula? Thanks again for giving your feedback and thoughts.

Originally Posted by stef@apl

The focus looks good on the eyes in both, but there's a depth of field issue in the 2nd one.

When you're close to the subject, the DOF is even thinner, and this is clear from the 2nd. You're at 27mm which will mean you're about (guessing) ~4 feet away. That will give you only a few inches (guessing again, maybe 4 inches?) of clear focus. If you were farther away at the same aperture and zoomed in, you would have more to work with.

So, when you get closer, you need to stop it down a little bit. You should probably try F/8 when you're using short focal lengths. You can get away with wider apertures when you're shooting long, and this works really well to separate someone from the background, too. When shooting short with wide apertures, you'll probably catch the edges of them out of focus (which is often desirable in portraits -- especially faceshots -- as long as that's what you want).

Also, where was your focus point? If it was NOT on the eyes, you should check the calibration of your lens on your camera. If it was the eyes, then you're good. You should be using the center focus point, if possible, and not all the AF points. (You can check your AF point on your current shots by firing up DPP that came with your camera, and hit alt-L I think.)

Thank you so much for all the feedback and suggestions here! I'm excited I have so much to work with and practice. You are right I was about 4 feet away. I'll try the zooming in and wider aperture. I like the look of diffused background and edges, but I long for more crispness in the eyes and face. The eyes were indeed my focus point. I used focus hold and then recomposed.

Well, off to spend some time trying to absorb all this info and work it into practice!