Pixel Peeping/Viewing quality

W

wolfyccfc

Suspended / Banned
Messages
217
Name
Martin
Edit My Images
No
I have been into photography for around 18months and i am getting hooked more and more by the day and also learning every day. One thing that i still struggle with is for my equipment is what i should expect when viewing on my mac.

I now have a 5D Mkiii along with a 24-105L, 100L F2.8 and 50 1.8. I have a 24" 2009 imac and when viewing pics downloaded with EOS utility set at the 'fit to screen' setting my images do look ok but a little digitized is the best way i can describe it. When using this setting the image takes up the whole height of the screen and leaves around 1.5 inches either side horizontally. When changing the view to 100% they obviously look worse and a lot less detailed/sharp. Is this what i should expect? I understand from previous threads that this is a minefield in terms of pixel peeping but just wanted to check what i should expect as my screen is a little larger than most screens.
 
Pixel peeping has its place - when you need to do pixel level improvements. On a day to day basis, it's a most unrewarding passtime! The best way to look at photos to see what needs doing to them is to get them to their final intended use - for many that'll be a 600px x 400px, 72ppi file for Farcebook/t***ter, for others an A3 (or even larger, although for huge prints, pixel peeping might be in order) print.

When I started using digital, I was as guilty as most of over processingf, adding saturation to a garish degree and sharpening until the haloes were thicket than hairs! These days, I'm the other way, a resize and that's it in most cases, although some photos need a tweak in sharpness and maybe something cloned out, although for 6x4s I tend not to bother too much, treating them as first proofs to decide which need or deserve furter action.

If you enjoy PP, carry on! Enjoy it! And don't be disheartened by the way your shots look at 100% - that's NOT the way they should be viewed.
 
Very frustrating when looking at a DSLR image up close and seeing that it's not as sharp as you'd expect. Things taken from some distance away will never be critically sharp, but things up close should retain some very good detail on a 5DII

On a headshot, on my 27" screen, eyes at 100% can be very sharp, but full length shots, or anything else in focus ten feet or so away will always be slightly blurred.

What you're seeing is pretty normal. Disappointing though, I know.
 
As Nod says, nobody else will be viewing your images 100% - and it is normal if you're talking landscape, where it's a lot harder keep everything sharp over say, eyes on a portrait. Especially if flash is being used for the portrait, much easier keep things nice and sharp.

I find when I do a portrait, close in, it'll look amazing still at 100%, but I'm often disappointed with landscape attempts. If it looks good enough as a whole, that'll do most times, unless I really want to print large.
 
Thanks all for the quick responses, you have put my mind at rest.

Your comments regarding landscapes and distant object sharpness do strike a chord with me as i recently had a thread going on the subject of a landscape shot as the distant trees looked very mushy. A fellow member pointed me towards the subject of viewing sharpness/ DOF on a pc/mac screen which got me thinking a lot more about it and i started to wonder what should my specific screen be like. Thanks again for your comments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top