Sharper Indoor Portraits

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Fred on October 14, 2009 at 10:42pm

The 50mmf/1.8 is a very sharp lens and normally gives very nice clear and sharp pictures. The clue is in how you have set the camera.

f/1.8 to f/2.8 and ISO 200. If I set my camera to that I have a shutter speed of 1/20. That means camera shake will appear on the photograph (that is under my lighting). Set the ISO higher to get a shutter speed of at least 1/50. Do you focus on the eyes? If I am shooting a portrait indoors I would use f.4.5 to get the whole head in focus, f/1.8 and f/2.8 will drop the focus in some ares, if that is what you want.
For the picture you have shown, use a tripod, that would help reduce camera shake.
For me the lighting, to the right, is too harsh. Move the light away or reduce the lighting. Try a reflector to the right to help reduce the shadows.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Staale Sannerud on October 15, 2009 at 1:43am

From your example, it is obvious that the blur is caused by camera shake. This in turn is caused by a too-slow shutter speed. For a 50mm on your camera, you will generally want to have 1/100 second shutter speed or faster.

Bump the ISO to 800, this will quadruple your shutter speed, and try again. If it's still unsharp, go to 1600. Throw in a bit of fill flash if necessary.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by nathan mccreery on October 15, 2009 at 11:04am

Nonsense - use a tripod!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by nathan mccreery on October 15, 2009 at 11:00am

Two things. Use a tripod!!!! the heavier the better and a remote release of some type. 2. Usually, this type of photograph will be created using a studio flash set up. There are more problems here than just "camera shake". There is also a problem with mixed light sources. This is indicated by the color of the girls face on the camera's left (slightly warm) vs. the models skin tone to camera right (slightly cool). In order to do really good portrait work you will have find a way to balance the color left to right so you don't have mixed light sources. Next, if this was intended to be a portrait, and not just a snapshot, the light direction isn't very complementary to the subject. The main light needs to be elevated to slightly above the models eye level; just enough to cast a slight shadow under the eyebrow and off axis enough to cast a slight shadow on the opposite side of the nose and jaw line. As the portrait stands you have two light sources of equal strength. Usually you will want to have one side of the face in stronger light than the other.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony Hill on October 15, 2009 at 3:43pm

Interesting that the outside shots were clearer (less softness) - I didnt use a tripod - I have a manfrotto so will use from now on - point taken with the lighting as I am not a professional I just used a standard lamp that threw off way too much light across all areas - any suggestions on what to use for better lighting

First one 1/2000sec @ f2.8 Iso 200 - Second one 1/8 sec @ f2.2 iso 400

Attachments:

• dp1.jpg, 311 KB
• dp2.jpg, 248 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Needham on October 15, 2009 at 4:44pm

"Interesting that the outside shots were clearer (less softness)...

First one 1/2000sec... Second one 1/8 sec..."

Outdoors you had a lot more light and a faster shutter speed. The old anecdote is that minimum safe hand held speed is 1/focal length. With a 50mm lens that's 1/50th. 1/2000th is way faster than that, and 1/8th is much slower. Personally I feel much safer at 3x 1/focal length.

http://www.strobist.com has all the info you need to light with speedlights (small flash units).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony Hill on October 15, 2009 at 7:59pm

so better to use manual setting say 1/150th - is it better at 2.8 or 1.8 do you think ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Needham on October 21, 2009 at 7:23am

You may not be able to get up to 1/160th, but yes the faster the shutter speed the less you have to worry about you or your subjects moving.

The common advice is that lenses tend to be their sharpest with the aperture closed down a few stops. There are issues that affect sharpness with both too large of an aperture and too small of an aperture. But I wouldn't worry about that too much. Unless your lens is a lemon it should look plenty sharp at f/1.8 for almost all print sizes (this assumes you aren't having problems with the narrow depth of field). I think too slow of a shutter speed is much more detrimental to your sharpness because of camera shake and subject movement than using a modern lens, particularly a prime, with the aperture wide open.

Also google how to hold your camera. Some ways are better than others, and there are techniques that can help with camera shake.

Don't dismiss processing. All photos (daguerreotype, collodion, film, digital, Polaroid, whatever...) must be processed. Sharpening doesn't have to be difficult.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt Needham on October 21, 2009 at 7:36am

Another option is to reconsider what is really important in the photo. We tend to obsess over sharpness, but there are many other aspects that will influence how the viewer perceives the finished photograph.

Henri Cartier-Bresson on sharpness...

"Sharpness is a bourgeois concept."

and

"I’m always amused by the idea that certain people have about technique, which translate into an immoderate taste for the sharpness of the image. It is a passion for detail, for perfection, or do they hope to get closer to reality with this trompe I’oeil? They are, by the way, as far away from the real issues as other generations of photographers were when they obscured their subject in soft-focus effects."

:)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony Hill on October 21, 2009 at 3:21pm

Matt, Once again thank you

My issue mainly is indoor with both lighting & DOF I feel. I have just purchased an SB400 speedlight to bounce up to 90degrees to see how I go

Also the sharpness issue is in the eye of the beholder - my subject thought the shots were ok so go figure

Cheers

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony Hill on October 21, 2009 at 3:23pm

I do have problems I feel with DOF - hope not a silly question - if I am shooting with my prime lens at 1.8f on Aperture priority how far show should i be from the subject ?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brian McNea on October 22, 2009 at 3:04am

Hi Tony,
just thought I would chime in. I think Fred and Staale are right. These shots do seem to be suffering from "camera shake". I have this problem when I drink too much coffee, and that is pretty much all the time. Your subject moving isn't the problem. It happens to me when I press the shutter, even on a tripod. Nathan is right about locking the camera down using a tripod and remote release. These will rid you of any movement on your end of the camera.
Shutter speed and ISO will then not be an issue, and you will be free to use whatever f stop - shutter combination you think creates the depth of field for the best image. Lower aperture numbers usually give narrower depth, and playing with this can be fun. I like a nice blurry background and your 50mm 1.8 can produce a very dramatic depth of field. I don't have your prized 50mm 1.8 (great for low light and natural light situations) so you will have to experiment with f-stops and distances from subject to camera and subject to background, but that is part of the fun. I like to keep my subjects completely in depth so I usually use f4.5-f8 from about 8-12 feet but again I don't have your 50mm so I can't say what distances work well for me with that lens. I would like to see what you come up with, so keep us posted.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page