[IanCD]

[quote name='wim' timestamp='1323280213' post='13515']

Hi Frank,



It may indeed be helpful.



I do suggest you don't use hyperfocal distance DoF focusing, however, because the sharpness distribution with digital makes that an illusion IMO. You could read Harold Merklinger's article on DoF and focus: [url="http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/DOFR.html"]http://www.trenholm....mmerk/DOFR.html[/url]



Because of the way digital works, I'd suggest you make one important change, however: focus about 1/3 into the main subject in your frame, so that at least the main subject will be sharp in focus. By this I mean, if you are doing a landscape with, e.g., a beautiful barn as the eye catcher, focus 1/3 of the distance from the closest point of the barn to the furthest point of the barn into the barn. Use, e.g., the roof line in that case, so focus at 1/3 of the roofline, 1/3 from the camera side that is, therefore 1/3 being in front of the point focused on, and 2/3 behind. Making sure the most important point, the main subject, in your photograph is sharp, somehow makes the entire image look a lot sharper. And in addition, it also provides the so sought after and elusive "pop" <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



Or select a specific range for a particular DoF, embracing the important stuff. Essentially, look at what attracts the eye, and make sure that that is sharp. Everything else can be dealt with in postprocessing, especially if you shot (U)WA at F/8 or F/11 <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. Do select a slightly smaller CoC for Dof calculations, if you can, however, like 0.025 mm for FF (officially 0.03 mm), and 0.017 mm for APS-C (officially 0.0195 mm), to reflect better the pixel peeping we all do <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



Just experiment a little with different apertures and focusing distances when you next have a chance.



Even USM sharpening will do a great job - I normally use edge sharpening only for relatively extreme cases, like some of the trees in the background in my own picture and yours, and go easy on the slider <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. Generally I use selective sharpening most of the time, or a little USM plus selective sharpening for certain details. I've used Topaz Vivacity (option: Clean) for the edge sharpening here, but there is a replacement for it that will do the same, for this specific type of sharpening anyway, namely Topaz Clean 3, the Edges option. The technique this uses is borrowed from NASA image processing algorithms <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />. Be careful, because it can easily be overdone, although that may look quite artsy if not done too often. Essentially, it will require some experimentation first. BTW, Topaz plugins for LightRoom and Photoshop can be used for a month for free, and those are completely working versions.



Thank you kindly!



Kindest regards, Wim

[/quote]



Wim, you're a goldmine of information!

It's a real pleasure to read your posts...<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

..and thanks for the post, Frank... this is a good one <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />

Ian