Santa Fe Garden

[shutterpup]

A September garden with storm clouds looming. It never did rain. Comments and critique please.
[attachment=14644:Lorraine...iPhoto_1.jpg]

[RSL]

Pup, It's a wonderful composition, but on my screen the whole picture appears soft -- slightly out of focus. Strange, I don't think I see camera motion in it, but things just don't seem quite as sharp as they should be. I can't seem to find a point that is in focus, unless the distant clouds are the focal point. Did you shoot off a tripod? What aperture did you use? Can you re-shoot it? This kind of beauty is typical of Santa Fe and you really caught it.

[shutterpup]

Pup, It's a wonderful composition, but on my screen the whole picture appears soft -- slightly out of focus. Strange, I don't think I see camera motion in it, but things just don't seem quite as sharp as they should be. I can't seem to find a point that is in focus, unless the distant clouds are the focal point. Did you shoot off a tripod? What aperture did you use? Can you re-shoot it? This kind of beauty is typical of Santa Fe and you really caught it.

Russ,
First thing that entered my mind about the softness was that when I took it out of Aperture and resized it that it may have gone soft. I've noticed that problem and I always check it. This does not seem to be the case however.

No tripod. Aperture was 7.1 according to the metadata. It was taken with Canon 17-85 IS USM at 17mm. I think that could account for some of the overall softness; I have since learned not to shoot at the extremes of any lens to get the sharpest photos. Looking through the loupe at the photo on Aperture, it looks to me that the sharpest point of the garden material is the foliage that is at the back of the wall, about center. And just above that are the clouds. This probably would have been better taken stopped down more.

I would love to return for a reshoot. This was at a bed and breakfast that we stayed at on the outskirts of Santa Fe. Not this year; maybe next.

[dalethorn]

Soft or not, the comp and colors are terrific.  I applied the LL page 1 local contrast trick to this edit.  How's that?

[RSL]

I would love to return for a reshoot. This was at a bed and breakfast that we stayed at on the outskirts of Santa Fe. Not this year; maybe next.

Pup,

Which B&B? It'll probably be early fall before I get down to Santa Fe this year, but I'd love to check out the scene.

In any case, the problem's a technical thing. The composition and the idea are excellent. It's easy to learn to overcome that kind of technical glitch. This is one of those cases where you learn a lot more from your near misses than from your successes. Keep the eye you used for this one. It's a very good eye.

[shutterpup]

Pup,

Which B&B? It'll probably be early fall before I get down to Santa Fe this year, but I'd love to check out the scene.

In any case, the problem's a technical thing. The composition and the idea are excellent. It's easy to learn to overcome that kind of technical glitch. This is one of those cases where you learn a lot more from your near misses than from your successes. Keep the eye you used for this one. It's a very good eye.

Russ,
Thanks for the kind words. I take it that you agree with me about the probable reason for the softness, namely shooting at the extreme of the lens?

The B&B is The Bobcat Inn. I have a still life I did on it's back porch that I may share here.

[RSL]

Russ,
Thanks for the kind words. I take it that you agree with me about the probable reason for the softness, namely shooting at the extreme of the lens?

The B&B is The Bobcat Inn. I have a still life I did on it's back porch that I may share here.

Pup,

I'm not sure. You'd need to shoot some more pictures at 17mm and compare them. I have a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 that's sharp from extreme to extreme. I also have a Sigma 17-35 that does quite well at 17mm. It's hard for me to believe that the lens normally is that soft at 17mm. The problem may be camera motion that I can't see on a computer monitor, though that lens is image-stabilized.

[shutterpup]

Pup,

I'm not sure. You'd need to shoot some more pictures at 17mm and compare them. I have a Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 that's sharp from extreme to extreme. I also have a Sigma 17-35 that does quite well at 17mm. It's hard for me to believe that the lens normally is that soft at 17mm. The problem may be camera motion that I can't see on a computer monitor, though that lens is image-stabilized.

I was looking at some other photos taken with this same lens, and they show a problem both at 17mm and 85mm. Other photos taken with this same lens have no problems as long as they are not at the extremes.

[RSL]

I was looking at some other photos taken with this same lens, and they show a problem both at 17mm and 85mm. Other photos taken with this same lens have no problems as long as they are not at the extremes.

Pup,

Okay then, the answer to that one is pretty easy. What I'd do next is shoot a series starting at 17mm and moving up gradually for a few mm to see where the lens sharpens up. Lesson learned. Don't go shorter than the place where things clear up.

[shutterpup]

Pup,

Okay then, the answer to that one is pretty easy. What I'd do next is shoot a series starting at 17mm and moving up gradually for a few mm to see where the lens sharpens up. Lesson learned. Don't to shorter than the place where things clear up.

Russ,
Great suggestion; thanks.