DSLR Photography Forum

Llangrannog
Canon 1100d
Opinions? [attachment=2457]

(Dec 30, 2013, 16:11)bethanhearne81 Wrote: [ -> ]Llangrannog
Canon 1100d
Opinions?

Making it Smaller blurred it too help?

It certainly is not in focus. Making the picture smaller should not affect sharpness. I don't know how you did this, but if indoors you need to use a tripod, and if a wild flower outside, switch the lens to manual focus, focus as well as you can and then finesse the focus by moving the camera slightly to and fro.

Are you saying that it has better focus on your monitor?
There are no EXIF details, so no settings info. What were your settings?
Personally, I have never focused on subject, by moving the camera, would have difficulty doing so on a tripod. To each his own though. Ed.

If you move the camera to focus when doing macros you can make much finer adjustments than you can by rotating the focus ring on the lens. It is a recognised technique for macros, not just something I have thought up.

John, I never inferred or otherwise, you thought this up. Never even gave it a thought that you did.
All the pro macro work I did, I never used it, was not even aware of it. never heard any fellow Pro's mention it either, and, as I said, would find it awkward to move an average tripod, even on a dolly, minutely, to "finalize the focus. A lot were taken with a Bellows attachment and Bellows lens. But, also a lot without. I also said, "To each his own". Regards. Ed.

HI, it is in focus when I have the picture on my computer screen, and in focus on the camera screen, however when I went to upload it onto the thread, it said that it is too big, so I made it 800 by 600 and uploaded it, and it is blurred. However before I made it smaller, it was clear? I just used photoshop touch. Any ideas?

(Dec 31, 2013, 11:32)EdMak Wrote: [ -> ]Are you saying that it has better focus on your monitor?
There are no EXIF details, so no settings info. What were your settings?
Personally, I have never focused on subject, by moving the camera, would have difficulty doing so on a tripod. To each his own though. Ed.

Try making it about, 850K/bts. Ed.

Thanks, should be sharper now.

(Dec 31, 2013, 16:59)EdMak Wrote: [ -> ]Try making it about, 850K/bts. Ed.

Does not look sharp on my 10inch Tablet. What were camera settings. Ed.

It was on macro, however I didn't use a tripod, seems sharp on my tablet. No worries, will hope my next pic is better. Thanks. Beth.

(Dec 31, 2013, 17:45)EdMak Wrote: [ -> ]Does not look sharp on my 10inch Tablet. What were camera settings. Ed.

Dependant on settings, camera movement is a possibility. Look forward to next offering. Regards. Ed.

took this at a lovely garden near me 2013

I think the guys have given you some great pointers her Beth , from a purely observers point of view I love the picture and love how the white seems to burst out from the green background, reminds me of a firework !

cheers

Watty

Thank You very much.
Means a lot.
Beth.

quote='Watty' pid='92473' dateline='1388964646']
I think the guys have given you some great pointers her Beth , from a purely observers point of view I love the picture and love how the white seems to burst out from the green background, reminds me of a firework !

cheers

Watty
[/quote]

(Dec 31, 2013, 17:23)bethanhearne81 Wrote: [ -> ]Thanks, should be sharper now.

(Dec 31, 2013, 16:59)EdMak Wrote: [ -> ]Try making it about, 850K/bts. Ed.

It looks sharp on my end Beth. Nice one.