Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by boatman37210, Oct 13, 2012.
At what viewing percentage do you consider your pictures acceptable?
It depends what they're for, surely. If they're for posting on the interweb and they look reasonably sharp at about 1000 x 700 (the photoshop equivalent of about 25%) then it's all good. If they're for a 36 inch print, I put slightly more thought into it. I assume that's what you're getting at?
I'm a long way past stressing out about less than perfect quality at 100% zoom, though, thankfully
Yes, that is what I'm talking about. I'm new to photography, so I started viewing at 100% to evaluate pics and ended up being disappointed most of the time. I finally figured out that for my uses I do not need sharp pics at 100%.
I now use 50% view as an evaluation point. Even that is probably more than I need. But I seem to be able to achieve a pic that looks good at that percentage pretty easily, so that is where I landed. Could probably go higher, but just don't see the need personally.
Was just wondering what other people used as an evaluation point. Does anyone have a need for pics that look sharp at 100%?
Just if you're cropping them to hell or printing them huge. Otherwise: if it looks OK, it's OK.
I don't know if it's a question of need, but if I'm going to be storing 12 or 16MP files, I wouldn't be pleased if 1/2 or 3/4 of the data wasn't actually there. Looking at 50% is like looking at a 3 or 4MP image. To me that defeats the purpose of shooting with a current camera. But I suspect most people take a different view!
I view at 100% to adjust sharpness, because that's the "correct" way to adjust sharpness in Lightroom, but other than that I just look at the image at a "fit in screen" mode.
Imagery is ... I hesitate to use absolutes like "always" but ... about evoking an emotion. How does the image make the viewer feel? Does it evoke some emotional response? Flawed images are just as capable as "perfect" images for this. Often, the flaws that a photographer might notice are completely ignored by the viewer. Some might argue that emotion can be lost in the pursuit of perfection.
tl;dr -> focus on the "feel" of the image and only worry about the details that take away from conveying that feeling.
But if the pic looks the same in full screen before and after, why sharpen? Are you saying you can tell the difference?
From what I've been reading most people do not need 12 or 16MP. We shoot what the manufactures give us. More MP's sell more cameras. Maybe it is not just about MP's. The sensor in the OMD I assume is a better sensor than previous cameras, but did it need to be 16MP? Could it have stayed a 12MP camera and still produced the great pictures that it does? I know from a marketing standpoint it could not have stayed 12MP. Just asking.
As far as viewing at 50% is the same as having data missing, not sure I quite understand that. All the data is there. I'm just viewing at 50% of it's size. If I were to print the pic at 50% of it's size, this is how it would look. Since I don't need a pic any where near that size, I can assume all pics that I produce that are smaller will look the same or better. I could go 100% view and sharpen, but would it make a difference in my pics at the size I use? Again, just asking. Trying to learn and understand the process.
Since I still shoot film, my % of keepers is rather high. I shoot digital like I shoot film. I.E. number #1 rule is don't rush the shot - thoroughly thinking through all aspects of composition....:smile:
I think this depends entirely on how big your screen is too.
Please consider disabling your ad blocker for our website.
We rely on ad revenue to pay for image hosting and to keep the site speedy.
Or subscribe for $5 per year to remove all ads and support our efforts.