Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi All!

 

I am new to the forum and new to High End Camera's.   I come from Point & Shoot cameras, which have served us well for many years.  But I have 2 kids that play hockey and wanted to capture pictures of them shooting and my goalie stopping pucks.  I don't know much about cameras and Upon asking the expert at the store I was directed to the Sony A6000.

 

The shutter speed is amazing and it saves the rapid pictures to the memory card instantly and the camera is ready to take more rapid pictures in a second or two. Perfect!

 

I brought the camera home and sifted threw the pictures and found a few I wanted to print.   They are saves in 6000x4000 350 DPI JPEG.

 

I took the picture, did some basic cropping in Photoshop (I only have very basic knowledge of Photoshop) and printed the picture.  I have a Samsung C18660FW Color Laser printer that has a 9600 x 600 dpi print ability.   I have had Inkjets for YEARS and went with a laser because even though their DPI was lower, the prints looked better than Inkjets with 2x the DPI...

 

Anyway, I have had this same problem with Inkjets also..

 

The picture looks HD crystal clear on the computer screen, unless you zoom WAY in.  Then it get's grainy.   When I print, it's ALL grainy,  like it's zoomed in.  But I'm only printing 4x6.

 

I don't know what I'm doing wrong?   I'm sure I am missing something.  I'm sure there is some photography secret that I don't know..    How do I make these pictures print good?   I was going to attach one of the photo's to this post, incase it would help, but It's too large and if I modify it to fit the size requirements, it'll defeat the purpose of supplying the raw image.

 

Thanks in advance for the help!

 

-TheChad

Link to post
Share on other sites

When you print from computer your display needs to be calibrated as well as the units of colors.

 

The pictures print size ( inches ) is what matters as well. I assume the image information is higher then 300DPI. 300DPI is the least amount could be as is the standard size of 8.5 X 11". Usually the MP/resolution makes up for the loss. There is printers formula for this as well.

 

Let say you crop the picture. This means that you have virtually cut the picture from that units of measurements and made it smaller. After that you would want to resize the image itself to a layout that matches what you intend to print.

 

If you have a smaller display sometimes it is kind of hard to know what the outcome is. Unless the units of measurement is corrected.

 

If the pictures are 4X6 inches ( which is really small ) there should be no grainy/washed out issues

when printing asides for looking too close the image itself.

 

There is a couple of photo enhancers programs/apps that cost around $20-$60 dollars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Jaf-Photo

Printing is a bit of science, or even black art. I don't really have enough information to know what is happening in your workflow or how your prints look.

 

An inkjet printer is typically more suited to photographs than a desktop laser printer. I print lab/exhibition quality photos on my large Canon inkjet.

 

That said, you should be able to print a decent picture with a JPEG file from Photoshop. I feel there is a whole lot of confusion regarding resolution etc, which may well be one of the problems.

 

My best tip would be to use some form of printing software, perhaps the OEM programs that accompanied the printer. Open the printer software and print the jpegs straight from there on delault settings.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Part of the problem is that it may be the printer software which is "zooming way in on the photo", hence it causes distortions.

 

Try to zoom in on the specific area you want in Photoshop and crop it, and save it. This way the printer software will not have to zoom in.

 

You can also increase the physical size of the photo in Photoshop while cropping. It helps a lot. Many people increase the DPI while NOT increasing the physical size of the photo. Blow it up to 30x30 and then crop and resave at your desired size. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • I've been using this lens extensively without any sharpness issues. At long focal lengths, you'll have to factor in the need for a faster shutter speed (< 1/500-ish at 350mm) and other factors like atmospheric distortion, fog/dust haze, etc. All these factors contribute to a deterioration of image quality at longer focal lengths.
    • That's supposed to be a pretty good APS-C lens. Can you try it on a different camera just for the heck of it? Friend? Camera shop? The lens is noted for sharpness, so if you're having as much trouble as you say, you may want to look into a replacement or repair. 
    • Hi everyone, I’m reaching out to the community because I’m facing a persistent image quality issue with my Sony 70–350mm f/4.5–6.3 G OSS lens, and I’d like to know if this is normal behavior or if my copy is defective. Problem description: I’ve extensively compared the 70–350mm G OSS with my Sony 18–135mm f/3.5–5.6 OSS, using a Sony A6700, under controlled conditions: • Identical lighting and background • Same subject and position (LEGO figure, consistent framing) • Tripod or steady support • Manual focus or AF with center point • Same shutter speed (e.g., 1/200s), similar ISO (ISO 4000–6400), RAW + JPEG • OIS turned on (and also tested with OIS off) My observations: • At 135mm, the 70–350mm G OSS delivers softer, flatter images than the 18–135mm, even when stopped down. • At 350mm, the sharpness drops significantly – the center is soft, and textures (like LEGO tiles or fabric) appear blurred or smudged. • Contrast and micro-detail are noticeably inferior across all focal lengths. • The 18–135mm at 135mm (even cropped) retains better edge sharpness and detail definition. • Both JPEG and RAW files confirm the issue – this is not just JPEG processing or noise reduction. Question to the community: • Have others experienced similar softness with the 70–350mm? • Is it possible I have a decentered or optically misaligned copy? • Is there a known issue with OSS introducing softness at long focal lengths? I wanted to love this lens due to the range and portability, but currently it’s unusable for anything where image quality matters. I’m considering returning or sending it for service. Thanks in advance for any feedback or comparison results you can share.  
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...