Why are my shots not coming out crisp?

[bigbrother]

Hey all. Was wondering what you thought about this:

I got a fairly modest setup to start doing some fashion photography, mainly for Instagram.

I'm using a Canon M50 primarily with a nifty fifty (the STM one) with the adapter. I shoot almost exclusively at f1.8 on Av mode, doing minor adjustments with exposure but little else, as I've found that setup just takes the most amazing shots I've seen possible on this camera. I've tried smaller apertures, I've rented $2K+ Canon lenses for a day to try, I've used the kit lens plenty, etc. etc.... nothing has produced better images thus far. Basically, nothing touches 50, f1.8, Av from what I've seen.

Anyway, all that said, I keep seeing fashion accounts on IG that just seem to have these razor-sharp, super-crisp shots. These accounts are good examples:

https://www.instagram.com/misspsychocat/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/iddavanmunster/?hl=en

This shot shows it well:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CHTMYk3D7D7/

(Note that on desktop these may very well not come out as they do on the phone, not least of which is however Instagram decides to display them.)

I have some theories as to why I'm not achieving this, but I don't know...

- Sensor size. This is my leading candidate. Going back to my background in computer graphics and imaging, this one is a prime suspect. Resolution is resolution. Maybe my source shots (taken at 5000x4000) just aren't sharp enough (?) But then for various reasons that doesn't make sense. Maybe there's something else at play with the higher-end cameras that my modest little M50 doesn't have? I just don't know.

- Stability. I suppose a tripod would improve things, but even with super fast shutter speeds I've noticed the problem isn't really solved. And I know plenty of fashion photographers shoot handheld so I can't imagine it's this (?)

- Aperture size. I've heard both ways that aperture size does and does not affect image sharpness. In any case, I do shoot on 1.8 almost exclusively, but when I've shot with the kit lens, which has a much smaller aperture, or with various rental lenses at various apertures, no improvement was observed.

- Downsampling. You might think the final image is suffering along the way as it gets ferried over to the digital badlands of Instagram and their image formats. But I've checked all the settings in Lightroom for what people recommend. The images are being exported at the appropriate, native resolution. Plus, to be honest, even in the M50's preview the images don't look as crisp as what I'm seeing out there.

- Post-processing. Perhaps these photographers are running major sharpening ex post snapo, but I don't know, I feel some cameras/setups are capable of this. Right?

Anyway, would love to get your help with all this. Thanks!

[Ray-uk]

---

@bigbrother wrote:

- Aperture size. I've heard both ways that aperture size does and does not affect image sharpness. In any case, I do shoot on 1.8 almost exclusively, but when I've shot with the kit lens, which has a much smaller aperture, or with various rental lenses at various apertures, no improvement was observed.

---

No lens will perform best at it's widest aperture, the best results will usually be obtained at least 2 stops below maximum.

You will probably find that the shots you are comparing with were made using full frame and not a crop camera. It is pointless making comparisons unless you have all the information about equipment used and exposure/post processing information.

For maximum sharpness and quality you need to shoot raw not jpeg then you will have complete control over the finished photo.

[SBK]

"I've tried smaller apertures, [...] but even with super fast shutter speeds I've noticed the problem isn't really solved."

Maybe if you could take a few samples of pics with smaller apertures and with fast shutter speed and low ISO ?

You can also try to take a few pics of a motionless subject, with your camera on a tripod, and low ISO, so you would eliminate those speed and handshake variables ?

[ebiggs1]

"Sensor size

 Stability

 Aperture size

Post-processing"

I hate to say it but most if not all of what you have read or think is wrong of false.

Sensor size, FF vs crop. The cropper can produce sharper images. However, it does depend on how much you intend to crop or enlarge your photo. There is more to IQ than sensor size. You can not make a blanket statement that FF is always sharper.

In the case of stability of course the more steady you can make BOTH the subject and the camera/lens the better. However it does not mean you can't hand hold a sharp shot.

Larger apertures, f1.8, are almost always less sharp the smaller ones, (f4-f5.6-f8).  This may not affect the center of the shot but it will do so on the outer parts. Add to this a low ISO number is usually best, I.E. ISO 200 will tend to be better looking than ISO 1600. Correct exposure is critical.

Post processing is the most important part of this whole process.  All great advertising shots are post edited. It is how you go about it that is the important factor.  Lens correction and some sharpening needs to be done on every photo.  It can be an auto preset in Lightroom. All your shots should be done in Raw format, not jpg.

[shawnphoto]

---

@bigbrother wrote:

Anyway, all that said, I keep seeing fashion accounts on IG that just seem to have these razor-sharp, super-crisp shots. These accounts are good examples:

https://www.instagram.com/misspsychocat/?hl=en

https://www.instagram.com/iddavanmunster/?hl=en

This shot shows it well:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CHTMYk3D7D7/

Anyway, would love to get your help with all this. Thanks!

---

You do realize that the accounts you linked show photos that are heavily edited right?? 

Not to mention that both these accounts are BS. Whatever they're trying to do they're backed by a lot of money. The models are most likely someone's employee.

This is the trick of Instagram, you think you're following some random person but in reality it is a front for a corporation.

It's sort of like asking why your M50 photos don't look as good as the Vogue cover from last month. 

Hope that helps!

[RexGig]

I am not a fashion photographer, but have had to make good images of people, for serious purposes. Some thoughts:

1. Stop using f/1.8. Try f/5.6. Why? Your models, and you, are breathing, and making other tiny movements. Your movements will move the plane of focus back and forth. Your models’ movements will move them in and out of the plane of focus. A deeper Depth-Of-Field allows more movement to occur, before these movements become a problem.

2. Crispness/Sharpness are independent of sensor size.

3. If you, or your models/subjects, are actively moving, try using AI Servo. Notably, the AF confirmation light and beep will be inactive during AI Servo

[ebiggs1]

"... try using AI Servo"

If the shots are like the samples I would avoid Ai Servo completely. Use One Shot and just the center focus point. Focus it on  what is the most important thing in the shot.

[RexGig]

Quote: "If the shots are like the samples I would avoid Ai Servo completely."

Normally, I would agree, but if the OP is having trouble, in the existing conditions, it is an option to try. We normally think of using AI Servo only for truly active subjects, but, sometimes, the combined motion of a relatively static subject, plus the photographer's own involuntary or unintended motion, can combine into a perfect storm of motion, that exceeds the depth of the plane of acceptable focus.

My usual human subjects, from 2010 to early 2018, were living, breathing crime victims, usually shortly after the events which caused the inuries. Even when sitting still, these people were not at their steadiest, and, I tend to be the empathetic type, so, my steadiness would go downhill, too.

It does take a measure, of faith, in one's AF system, to shoot without the reassurance of visible or audible AF confirmation.

I actually learned this from a Nikon shooter, who used Nikon's AF-C by default, for almost all of his auto-focused shooting. ( In Nikon-menu speak, C = Continuous, though some Nikon shooters will use "servo" as a general term.) I first tried it with a D700, then, tried it with the Canon equipment I was using while on duty, which at the time, was either my 7D or 7D Mark II, and mostly my EF 100/2.8L Macro IS. I would usually keep my other camera, with the zoom lens, set on One Shot AF.

I do concede that AI Servo can become a crutch, and would recommended that a shooter train, at least some of the time, without using AI Servo. I often shoot with manual-focus lenses, which are skill-builders, in this regard.

[bigbrother]

Thanks for all the help, all!

After running through a bunch of hypotheses, I finally have (what I strongly think is) my answer. TL;DR: it was shutter speed, and remained undiscovered till now due to the Av mode on my M50 being *way* too liberal with it. Plus I had a secondary win described further below.

So as you know I considered sensor size, post processing, aperture, file format (not listed in the OP, but it was one of my considerations), stability, etc.

My strongest candidate was aperture. As mentioned, I had previously been shooting almost exclusively at 1.8 with my 50 and it made plenty of technical sense that that could cause the murkiness in the detail. So for my next shoot, I went between 2.5 and 4 for my shots, but that didn't really solve it, so I went back to the drawing board.

I had my model put on a few different-patterned fabrics. We did some shooting and only one shot came out super crisp. Hmm. I saw in the EXIF that it was the only one shot at 1/200, all others were at about 1/100-1/80. I'll spare you all the in-betweens and just show you two clear examples:

vs.

Note that that second one exhibits exactly what was driving me mad- that sharp but not really tack-like quality. A little fuzziness, a little aberrated.

I did a few more experiments and really at this point I think this is what it was.

Av mode, for whatever reason, tends to err on the 1/80-1/100 shutter speed zone for the vast majority of my photos (I'm shooting on Auto ISO, btw). Perhaps it expects tripod-stable shots. But it seems 1/200 is roughly the cutoff I need for handheld.

So it's Manual mode for me from now on! In reality it's no more difficult than Av as I was used to constantly adjusting aperture and exposure. In Manual it's just a matter of setting the shutter I want, say 1/500, and continuing as before to adjust aperture and exposure. I don't think I need to mess with ISO for the time being, as it seems exposure is handling that just fine.

OH! I almost forgot: a secondary win in all this- for AF I had been using Face Detect + Tracking mode exclusively, assuming the M50 knew what it was doing. But as a result of my posts here and elsewhere and independent studying I found that single point is far and away preferred. Who knew? I assumed the gear/software was good enough to where I shouldn't have to worry about that anymore. Nope. I was focusing and reframing before, but probably with the wrong zones for many of the shots, I think.

Thanks all for all your help and suggestions! I never expected Av to be so liberal with shutter speed, nor Face Detect + Tracking to be so... piss poor :). So there you have it. Any other tips while we're at it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!!

[Waddizzle]

"Av mode, for whatever reason, tends to err on the 1/80-1/100 shutter speed zone for the vast majority of my photos (I'm shooting on Auto ISO, btw). Perhaps it expects tripod-stable shots. But it seems 1/200 is roughly the cutoff I need for handheld."

Glad to see you seem to solved your issues.  There are still a couple of things you have yet to discover.  One, is that you can set a minimum shutter speed for Av mode, when combined with Auto ISO.  Personally, I do not shooting like this.

Another is to never allow the camera to control more than one leg of the exposure at a time, which is why I do not like shooting as I just described above.  I have been shooting in M mode with Auto ISO capped at some value, which I have found to be very useful for action photography where light can vary from one shot to the next by a stop, or more.