New answers tagged blur
*We are photoExodus, a professional photography post production company and we specialize in getting photographers off Lightroom and Photoshop, and back out into the world with a camera in their hand.
There's no "universal" answer. Some shots are unrescuably destroyed by even a moderate amount of grain; another ones are easily tuneable in post. In my practice, ISO usually is the easiest one, then comes the sharpness. Remember that each of these "bad" things you can use to tell a story. For example, blur is great for showing motion, eg. silhouettes of ...
Some lenes perform better on either of it's ends. Another root of your problem might be this: on the wider end, your lens's aperture is wider. This let's it capture more light, but also enhances the lens blur. Vice versa, on the longer end aperture is narrower, which "hides" the blur.
The picture is badly out of focus, and most of the details are gone. You can do things like running an unsharp mask, high pass filter, or other sharpening filters but you are not going to get television csi level recovery. You can also adjust the contrast of the picture and downsize the picture to increase the perceived sharpness. In this picture I used ...
The photography method of isolating a person from the background where the background is blurry is called "shallow depth of field" (also called shallow DoF or DOF). The way to achieve this in-camera is by using a wide aperture, the wider the aperture (the smaller the f-stop number) the less of your subject that is in focus and the more the background is ...
Top 50 recent answers are included