01-08-2021 03:40 AM
01-08-2021 09:33 AM
Probably choosing a picture "style"
01-08-2021 02:40 PM
01-08-2021 10:43 AM - edited 01-08-2021 10:43 AM
Greetings,
This article is for a Rebel, but the premise is the same:
Canon Knowledge Base - Using Scene Intelligent Auto (EOS REBEL SL1 / EOS 100D)
~Rick
Bay Area - CA
~R5 C (1.0.7.1) ~RF Trinity, ~RF 100 Macro, ~RF 100~400, ~RF 100~500, ~RF 200-800 +RF 1.4x TC, BG-R10, 430EX III-RT ~DxO PhotoLab Elite ~DaVinci Resolve Studio ~ImageClass MF644Cdw/MF656Cdw ~Pixel 8 ~CarePaks Are Worth It
01-10-2021 12:27 AM
@shadowsports wrote:Greetings,
This article is for a Rebel, but the premise is the same:
Canon Knowledge Base - Using Scene Intelligent Auto (EOS REBEL SL1 / EOS 100D)
After reading the article you linked to, I'm left with the impression that using Scene Intelligent Auto works to optimize exposure, focus and color tone, and possibly white balance. But you shouldn't really expect to see any changes as far as contrast or sharpness are concerned. Does that sound about right?
01-10-2021 09:33 AM
@BurnUnit wrote:
@shadowsports wrote:Greetings,
This article is for a Rebel, but the premise is the same:
Canon Knowledge Base - Using Scene Intelligent Auto (EOS REBEL SL1 / EOS 100D)
After reading the article you linked to, I'm left with the impression that using Scene Intelligent Auto works to optimize exposure, focus and color tone, and possibly white balance. But you shouldn't really expect to see any changes as far as contrast or sharpness are concerned. Does that sound about right?
When i select Scene Intelligent Auto on a T5s it shows that the Auto Picture Style is selected. Going to the Picture Style menu the displayed sharpness and contrast settings are the same as the Standard Picture Style.
This early discussion of Auto Picture Style states that different programmed Picture Styles will be selected based on the analyzed scene:
"Auto (EOS T3i only): This option will automatically applies a Picture Style (other than Monochrome) based on the EOS Scene Detection System’s analysis. Auto may therefore produce slight differences in rendition from one image to the next, depending on the scene. The other Picture Styles are applied consistently to all scenes."
I wouldn't expect Canon to regress in its capabilities, so I would think that current cameras would use the same process. Thus the actual sharpness and contrast applied to an image would change depending on how trhe camera analyzed the scene.
in any event, the results would only apply to a camera-produced JPEG or a RAW processing software that could read the picture style data in the image file. DPP can do that and the latest version of Lightroom Classic and be configured to do that for cameras using the .CR2 file format.
01-10-2021 04:20 AM - edited 01-10-2021 04:20 AM
Well, the problem has been solved (my bigger problem of trying to eke out razor sharp pics from my M50/50 f1.8) and now I'm going through answering any threads I started if anyone cares about the answer and to share the small war story:
The bad: the answer was a lot simpler than a lot of the suggestions I received. It was literally just sharpening in post. Yes, some suggested this but many insisted I was shooting wrong. I shot and shot and shot and shot and shot and even the most perfect shots with plenty of light and perfect focus and fast shutter etc. etc. etc. never produced what I was aspiring to match. I felt there was *some* limitation in my gear (ended up being a limitation in the workflow) and that all the photography basics in the world wouldn't produce it, so I was convinced it was a hard limit, like the sensor size of my relatively modest little camera. No shot got it. Well, just recently, an owner of a local art repro studio heard it and in one second, when looking at the aspirational shots, said, "oh, that's unsharp mask." Sure enough, gave it a shot and pow- there were all the little fibers and eye lash details and fine stitching, etc. that the "pro" shots had. So no, it wasn't a $6K setup... but it also wasn't the shots themselves. Even my less-than-ideal shots could pop as I needed.
The good: but it sure as hell improved my fundamentals! 🙂 Aperture, shutter speed, comfort shooting in manual, and, most importantly, knowing which focal mode to use (I naively thought face tracking was the way to go when I needed single point on the eyes) all improved as a result.
So I do wish I could've saved weeks of frustration by being told this unequivocally rather than having to defend some of my choices that I knew weren't the issue, BUT, I'm a better photographer for it and the raw images being produced are now better as a result. And to be fair, some certainly did say it was post/sharpening.
Anyway, thanks so much, all! Chapter closed, next level of quality here we come...
01-10-2021 06:10 AM
@bigbrother wrote:Well, the problem has been solved (my bigger problem of trying to eke out razor sharp pics from my M50/50 f1.8) and now I'm going through answering any threads I started if anyone cares about the answer and to share the small war story:
The bad: the answer was a lot simpler than a lot of the suggestions I received. It was literally just sharpening in post. Yes, some suggested this but many insisted I was shooting wrong. I shot and shot and shot and shot and shot and even the most perfect shots with plenty of light and perfect focus and fast shutter etc. etc. etc. never produced what I was aspiring to match. I felt there was *some* limitation in my gear (ended up being a limitation in the workflow) and that all the photography basics in the world wouldn't produce it, so I was convinced it was a hard limit, like the sensor size of my relatively modest little camera. No shot got it. Well, just recently, an owner of a local art repro studio heard it and in one second, when looking at the aspirational shots, said, "oh, that's unsharp mask." Sure enough, gave it a shot and pow- there were all the little fibers and eye lash details and fine stitching, etc. that the "pro" shots had. So no, it wasn't a $6K setup... but it also wasn't the shots themselves. Even my less-than-ideal shots could pop as I needed.
The good: but it sure as hell improved my fundamentals! 🙂 Aperture, shutter speed, comfort shooting in manual, and, most importantly, knowing which focal mode to use (I naively thought face tracking was the way to go when I needed single point on the eyes) all improved as a result.
So I do wish I could've saved weeks of frustration by being told this unequivocally rather than having to defend some of my choices that I knew weren't the issue, BUT, I'm a better photographer for it and the raw images being produced are now better as a result. And to be fair, some certainly did say it was post/sharpening.
Anyway, thanks so much, all! Chapter closed, next level of quality here we come...
More times than, if you create a post complaining about how your photos do not look good without posting any sample images, that is the reaction that you will get. "You do not know what you are doing."
In cases like that, most people will ask you to post a sample. They will ask questions about what it is you are doing, etc. If you push back, then you will get the same reaction. Do I agreee with it? Yes, I do.
All you're doing is making noise without reason. Forums are filled with such posts, mostly from people who are not looking for help but rather somewhere to vent. It is a vicious cycle, that often spirals out of control, with both sides frustrated.
01-10-2021 04:13 PM
@Waddizzle wrote:
@bigbrother wrote:Well, the problem has been solved (my bigger problem of trying to eke out razor sharp pics from my M50/50 f1.8) and now I'm going through answering any threads I started if anyone cares about the answer and to share the small war story:
The bad: the answer was a lot simpler than a lot of the suggestions I received. It was literally just sharpening in post. Yes, some suggested this but many insisted I was shooting wrong. I shot and shot and shot and shot and shot and even the most perfect shots with plenty of light and perfect focus and fast shutter etc. etc. etc. never produced what I was aspiring to match. I felt there was *some* limitation in my gear (ended up being a limitation in the workflow) and that all the photography basics in the world wouldn't produce it, so I was convinced it was a hard limit, like the sensor size of my relatively modest little camera. No shot got it. Well, just recently, an owner of a local art repro studio heard it and in one second, when looking at the aspirational shots, said, "oh, that's unsharp mask." Sure enough, gave it a shot and pow- there were all the little fibers and eye lash details and fine stitching, etc. that the "pro" shots had. So no, it wasn't a $6K setup... but it also wasn't the shots themselves. Even my less-than-ideal shots could pop as I needed.
The good: but it sure as hell improved my fundamentals! 🙂 Aperture, shutter speed, comfort shooting in manual, and, most importantly, knowing which focal mode to use (I naively thought face tracking was the way to go when I needed single point on the eyes) all improved as a result.
So I do wish I could've saved weeks of frustration by being told this unequivocally rather than having to defend some of my choices that I knew weren't the issue, BUT, I'm a better photographer for it and the raw images being produced are now better as a result. And to be fair, some certainly did say it was post/sharpening.
Anyway, thanks so much, all! Chapter closed, next level of quality here we come...
More times than, if you create a post complaining about how your photos do not look good without posting any sample images, that is the reaction that you will get. "You do not know what you are doing."
In cases like that, most people will ask you to post a sample. They will ask questions about what it is you are doing, etc. If you push back, then you will get the same reaction. Do I agreee with it? Yes, I do.
All you're doing is making noise without reason. Forums are filled with such posts, mostly from people who are not looking for help but rather somewhere to vent. It is a vicious cycle, that often spirals out of control, with both sides frustrated.
This recent thread is a classic example of what I am talking about. The guy's camera is a relative antique.
01-11-2021 01:25 AM
@Waddizzle wrote:
@bigbrother wrote:Well, the problem has been solved (my bigger problem of trying to eke out razor sharp pics from my M50/50 f1.8) and now I'm going through answering any threads I started if anyone cares about the answer and to share the small war story:
The bad: the answer was a lot simpler than a lot of the suggestions I received. It was literally just sharpening in post. Yes, some suggested this but many insisted I was shooting wrong. I shot and shot and shot and shot and shot and even the most perfect shots with plenty of light and perfect focus and fast shutter etc. etc. etc. never produced what I was aspiring to match. I felt there was *some* limitation in my gear (ended up being a limitation in the workflow) and that all the photography basics in the world wouldn't produce it, so I was convinced it was a hard limit, like the sensor size of my relatively modest little camera. No shot got it. Well, just recently, an owner of a local art repro studio heard it and in one second, when looking at the aspirational shots, said, "oh, that's unsharp mask." Sure enough, gave it a shot and pow- there were all the little fibers and eye lash details and fine stitching, etc. that the "pro" shots had. So no, it wasn't a $6K setup... but it also wasn't the shots themselves. Even my less-than-ideal shots could pop as I needed.
The good: but it sure as hell improved my fundamentals! 🙂 Aperture, shutter speed, comfort shooting in manual, and, most importantly, knowing which focal mode to use (I naively thought face tracking was the way to go when I needed single point on the eyes) all improved as a result.
So I do wish I could've saved weeks of frustration by being told this unequivocally rather than having to defend some of my choices that I knew weren't the issue, BUT, I'm a better photographer for it and the raw images being produced are now better as a result. And to be fair, some certainly did say it was post/sharpening.
Anyway, thanks so much, all! Chapter closed, next level of quality here we come...
More times than, if you create a post complaining about how your photos do not look good without posting any sample images, that is the reaction that you will get. "You do not know what you are doing."
In cases like that, most people will ask you to post a sample. They will ask questions about what it is you are doing, etc. If you push back, then you will get the same reaction. Do I agreee with it? Yes, I do.
All you're doing is making noise without reason. Forums are filled with such posts, mostly from people who are not looking for help but rather somewhere to vent. It is a vicious cycle, that often spirals out of control, with both sides frustrated.
Oh, in my main post here about this subject, I did post pics:
https://community.usa.canon.com/t5/EOS/Why-are-my-shots-not-coming-out-crisp/td-p/327621
This post here was more about that special mode in pursuit of this, so pics weren't really apropos. My solution reply was more copy pasting the overall answer I was putting in the other threads on this, where some of the points are more relevant.
09/26/2024: New firmware updates are available.
EOS R5 Mark II - Version 1.0.1
EOS R6 Mark II - Version 1.5.0
07/01/2024: New firmware updates are available.
04/16/2024: New firmware updates are available.
RF100-300mm F2.8 L IS USM - Version 1.0.6
RF400mm F2.8 L IS USM - Version 1.0.6
RF600mm F4 L IS USM - Version 1.0.6
RF800mm F5.6 L IS USM - Version 1.0.4
RF1200mm F8 L IS USM - Version 1.0.4
Canon U.S.A Inc. All Rights Reserved. Reproduction in whole or part without permission is prohibited.