[Adam]

Yes, the bokeh is messed up, but aside from that, I can read the writing at the bottom of the bottle in the 3rd photo, which is not clear in the first. Assuming the focus point hasn't changed, how is the "top picture better by a substantial margin"?

Since the subject moved, it looks like so did the focal point.

Notice how the big apostrophe is softer in the MC photo.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[wizofoz]

Go easy please fella's. I didn't mean to start an argument. I just put some images up for comparison and discussion.

Yes I used PDCU 5.something which came with the k-1. My mistake. I'll edit the post.

Focus may have moved slightly, as may have subject distance. These are handheld shots at a relatively low shutter speed after all. For reference the focus point in all images is the top rh corner of the blue Monteiths label. I will do as suggested and do the same in much better light.

I was just messing around to see what is possible. No need for anyone to get bent out of shape.

And apologies to the good burghers of Greytown. No offence was intended.

[Tan68]

... I usually don't have a great first move, but i usually have a hell of a counter punch. ...

Yes, that was quite the counter punch !

---------- Post added 05-16-16 at 05:14 PM ----------

Since the subject moved, it looks like so did the focal point.

Notice how the big apostrophe is softer in the MC photo.

Well, given all the beer talk, that apostrophe could be the shadow of a hand reaching for the bottle. A hand preparing to lift the bottle to lips or toss it out the window.. that is the debate.

[RobA_Oz]

I will do as suggested and do the same in much better light.

That will be even more interesting, from an experimental point of view, probably sociologically, as much as photographically...

No offence was intended.

Well, you're no fun...

[wizofoz]

Ye gods! I failed to notice this was an East Island brew!!
What sort of heresy is this wizofoz?

It was a choice of the Monteiths or VB, Sandy. Pretty easy choice to make.

[Sandy Hancock]

It was a choice of the Monteiths or VB, Sandy. Pretty easy choice to make.

Fair enough. Definitely the lesser of two evils

[wizofoz]

OK, here is another set of images with our lovely model.

Play nice please

First image is single shot
2nd image is with PS but no correction
3rd image is PS with correction

All hand held. All with the attempt to focus on the blue upper right corner of the label @ f2.8

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[RobA_Oz]

The plot thickens. The banding in number 3 is no longer present, but there's an odd OOF artefact on the corner of the purple area. Shutter speeds in this series are actually lower than in the first one. Does this mean consumption of the object contents have steadied your hand, or to the contrary?

[Ex Finn.]

It was a choice of the Monteiths or VB, Sandy. Pretty easy choice to make.

So what`s wrong with VB? Not as good of a bokeh!

[wizofoz]

The plot thickens. The banding in number 3 is no longer present, but there's an odd OOF artefact on the corner of the purple area. Shutter speeds in this series are actually lower than in the first one. Does this mean consumption of the object contents have steadied your hand, or to the contrary?

Its the same empty bottle Rob, so consumption has no bearing (unless it is the lack of consumption which is having an effect )

Interestingly, I did not see the banding until I uploaded the images, so perhaps something to do with internet loading has caused it. It may be spurious data.

I took a series with higher shutter speeds, but deleted them accidentally. As I'm working during the brightest daylight hours means and as 'winter is coming' I either have to slow the shutter, raise the ISO (which is hugely impressive btw) or stop being lazy and get some lights out.

I was thinking as I wrote the above that I would use flash, but of course flash and PS will not be compatible. I will need either continuous light or daylight ....hmmmm

---------- Post added 18th May 2016 at 11:41 ----------

So what`s wrong with VB? Not as good of a bokeh!

To be honest, VB is full of preservative chemicals. Serious hangover territory. Besides not tasting as good as other beers (despite its huge popularity) it is also worse for you.

VB is a little like canikon. Huge marketing to sell an inferior product to the masses.

[Sandy Hancock]

So what`s wrong with VB? Not as good of a bokeh!

VB is rat poison. I wouldn't serve it to my worst enemy

Back to the photos: the third image is much improved this time around, especially in the bokeh department. The single shot still looks sharper to me. The middle one is of course unusable as one would expect.

I still think pixel shift will ideally be a tripod-only technique.

Here are a couple I took last night - first is a single shot @ f/8, second is PS + MC @ f/11. 30 second exposure, but it was a very still night - not a breath of wind. It is hard to tell at the uploaded image size, but the single image actually has slightly more detail. I prefer the PS one though because the exposure is better and the starbursts are nicer.


Night


Night PS

[Schraubstock]

but i usually have a hell of a counter punch.

That is the sort of unnecessary counter punch that precedes a bar room brawl.

With this reply, it is as well I live on the other side of the world otherwise I could finish up with a fat lip.

No I think you are too civilized, aren't you ?

[Gimbal]

It is hard to tell at the uploaded image size, but the single image actually has slightly more detail.

That is somewhat disappointing, but I guess it’s due to f/11 being used instead of f/8.

[Sandy Hancock]

It could be a number of things. This was far from a scientifically rigorous test

[wizofoz]

Firstly, Sandy you have a beautiful home.

Secondly, I too prefer your PS shot for the starburst. Is this because of the stacked frames in the file or was the cause the exposure differences? Have we found an unexpected bonus or am I dreaming? (a la the bloke in 'the Castle')