pic blur n low contrast n no sharp

[steven010183]

any expert helps??

im using d5000 kit lens 18-55mm to take photo..

all the photo i took is blur, low contrast n no sharp.

is body problem,lens problem or setting problem....

please advice me...

 

[Rashkae]

Almost definitely a setting problem. Please post the images with the intact EXIF, or post the EXIF data itself (all the setitngs).

FYI, if you're shooting on a cloudy day, of course the colors will look more "flat".

Your first pic looks sharp, the focus is on her sunglasses.

 

[night86mare]

looks sharp enough to me

can you explain what is blur?

low contrast has to do with light, if you want to take photos in flat light, you will have low contrast. a dslr is not a magic box where you dump bad light and expect to produce good light.

problem is user problem.

 

[enzeru21]

don't pixel peep..

if you are not a professional you don't have to worry too much

 

[yc2005]

You should tell us your photo settings. EXIF pls

Sharpness looks ok, but for both pic the lighting is not good. Try shooting again at a 'better timing'

 

[ZerocoolAstra]

poor lighting is main culprit. Camera did a decent job, all things considered.

TS, please post EXIF data.

 

[catchlights]

any expert helps??

im using d5000 kit lens 18-55mm to take photo..

all the photo i took is blur, low contrast n no sharp.

is body problem,lens problem or setting problem....

please advice me...

look sharp enough from the screen.

#1, you need to apply USM when you resize your photos.

#2, zoom pass 100%, nothing will be sharp.

btw, most of the time the main cause of photos not sharp are on the users, but it is always the last thing people will really want to look at this issue.
Perhaps you want to eliminate this issue first before we can look at other causes?

 

[rainxp]

any expert helps??

im using d5000 kit lens 18-55mm to take photo..

all the photo i took is blur, low contrast n no sharp.

is body problem,lens problem or setting problem....

please advice me...

I think the photo look okay . Prehaps you can apply some PP to meet the sharpness you desire. I have tuned up abit, should be sharper now.

 

[teodesson]

I think the photo look okay . Prehaps you can apply some PP to meet the sharpness you desire. I have tuned up abit, should be sharper now.

uhmmm overcooked for me
Maybe change the WB will help, warm it up

 

[rainxp]

uhmmm overcooked for me
Maybe change the WB will help, warm it up

Agree is "overdo" , just to show that sharpness can be adjusted.

 

[kentwong81]

Just read this from KenRockWell website and want to share with you guys here. Ken Rockwell said that sharpness is not what the pros worry that much. If you worry yourself about the sharpness, you're probably new to the hobby.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm

Being sharp has little to do with being a good photo, unless you're doing forensic work. Many great photos use deliberate unsharpness to express their points, and if you look at sales and auction prices of photos as art you'll see that the fuzzier ones sell for much more.

Sharp photos are boring. Photos that are sharp all over are usually amateur attempts, which glaringly show too much detail for many unrelated, confusing and distracting elements. A good photo has impact and a punch line. The fewer things a photo tries to say, the more powerfully it says them. Things need to stand out. Having everything sharp edge-to-edge rarely makes for a strong photo.

Have a look at PDN's May 2008 Photo Annual, where there are at least 400 hand-picked examples of the best professional photography from every category from advertising to journalism to sports to stock. Look in the corners, and every single shot has fuzzy corners, or more likely, deliberately darkened, white or otherwise detail-free corners.

You don't put details in your corners. It distracts the viewer and weakens your image.

Some people think I'm a decent photographer. Do you know what limits the sharpness of most of my photos, even those made with crappy equipment? It's the same things I mention elsewhere: imperfect focus, limited depth-of-field, and subject and camera motion.

Sharpness. Just get over it.

 

[night86mare]

You don't put details in your corners. It distracts the viewer and weakens your image.

very true, the only exception where it is good is a leading line.

 

[kentwong81]

When I started photography as hobby, I care about sharpness a lot because I was influenced by the marketing gimmicks that promote the sharpness of their expensive lenses.
Now I've realized what makes a good photo: the way you compose the foreground and background, the right exposure and the colour that can lead the viewers into your story.
Sharpness, just forget it.

 

[night86mare]

When I started photography as hobby, I care about sharpness a lot because I was influenced by the marketing gimmicks that promote the sharpness of their expensive lenses.
Now I've realized what makes a good photo: the way you compose the foreground and background, the right exposure and the colour that can lead the viewers into your story.
Sharpness, just forget it.

nah, you can't just throw sharpness away either.

but the pecking order should not have sharpness as the top priority, i think that's the main point we should carry away here.

 

[kentwong81]

Yes, it's not the top priority I meant. For me, it's 4th after the factors I mentioned above.

nah, you can't just throw sharpness away either.

but the pecking order should not have sharpness as the top priority, i think that's the main point we should carry away here.

 

[coolthought]

The second photo looks like it is taken during a day whereby it is overcast with lots of cloud cover. The lights getting through the clouds are diffused.
Reason for low contrast??

 

[wcljack]

just shot on more colour place.... then you will get something better.....