|
|
|
Snap Shots: by Harry Flashman
|
|
Are your photos sharp or soft?
Two common words in photography are ‘sharp’ and ‘soft’, and photographically
speaking there is an enormous difference between them. Those terms are the ones
reserved for describing whether the final image is well focused. We speak about
‘sharp’ focus and ‘soft’ focus and everyone knows what is meant.
While ‘soft’ focus is not all that difficult to end up with, and you can buy
after-market filters to do this, ‘sharp’ focus is a lot more difficult to
attain, so I thought it might be worthwhile looking at what you have to do to
get pin-sharp photographs.
Forgetting all about Auto-Focus (AF) problems and camera shake for the moment,
the deciding factor on whether or not you get sharp pictures will depend upon
the quality of the optics in the lenses you use. Unfortunately quality costs
money - like most consumer items. “You get what you pay for” works in
photography just the same as it does anywhere else!
I came across this fundamental truth when I was becoming despondent with the
sharpness of my final prints many years ago. Even putting the camera on a tripod
had not helped. Asking around in my photographer acquaintances led to my being
loaned a very battered and well used journalist’s Nikon FM2N, with Nikon lens.
I took the “old” camera away and shot a roll of film. Off to the darkroom and
guess what? Every one as sharp as a tack. I had learned an important lesson and
went out and purchased some second hand Nikon equipment, and have never
regretted it since. In fact, old FM2N Nikons were still part of my camera
equipment till very recently.
So what was the difference? Well, the end result will always rely on super sharp
optics in the lens department. If they are not spot on, neither will your photos
be spot on. The actual exposures are close enough for just about any camera
these days with the latitude in the electronics being so wide, so the other
differences now will come down to ease of use, or user friendliness. Simple
mechanical cameras, like the FM2, have simple operations too. These new
electronic cameras with their “menus” and other operations I do not consider to
be as user friendly. It is easier to push a lever, surely. However, perhaps it
might just be that I am resistant to change!
The important lesson from all that is that to get good results you need a camera
that has good optics. There are plenty on the market these days, and although
the Nikon brand may be my favorite, there are other manufacturers which have
equally as good quality glass at the front. Unfortunately, the results from
these great cameras can become poor if you put a cheap “after market” lens on
it. Good lenses are expensive, but the end result is always worth it.
Having mentioned AF problems earlier, a few words on this again. While AF is now
almost 100 percent universal, it still is not 100 percent foolproof. One of the
reasons for this is quite simple. The camera’s magic eye doesn’t know exactly
what subject(s) you want to be in focus and picked the wrong one! The focusing
area for the AF system is a small circle or square in the middle of the
viewfinder, so if you are taking a picture of two people two meters away, the
camera may just focus on the trees in the far distance that it can see between
your two subjects. Those trees are two km away, so you get back a print with the
background sharp and the two people in the foreground as soft fuzzy blobs. The
fix is to focus on one person, use the ‘focus lock’ and recompose the picture.
Finally - camera shake. Cameras are supposed to be operated with two hands, not
one. The practice of holding the camera in one hand and raising one, two and
three fingers on the other can only lead to camera shake. Don’t do it. If you
must tell your subjects that you are about to trip the shutter, do it by saying
the words “one, two, three” - not by waving your fingers in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|