On Jul 13, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:41:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jul 12, 2018, Eric Stevens wrote
(in ):

On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 22:11:27 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

Check this shot and a 100% crop of the top of the sail.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-f5k8TQh/0/9ebe2259/O/i-f5k8TQh.jpg

Now that's better.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-xJ9w5gP/0/a2225efd/O/i-xJ9w5gP.jpg

... and that's interesting ... umm.

...and what exactly did you find interesting?
I was thinking that the edges look slightly fuzzy and the contrast is
soft. Here by way of comparison is a photograph I took some years ago when
I first got my D300
https://www.dropbox.com/s/usuksr9zjd...C1038.jpg?dl=0
and here is a 100% crop of the same image.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/s6v6tu0sin...8-100.jpg?dl=0

Now I am somewhat baffled that you find my windsurfer shot above in anyway
comparable to your postage stamp size kite shot.

Postage stamp?

I was refering to the kite, which is less than postage stamp size regardless
of your crop.

That is an artifact of Dropbox.

I don’t seem to get DB artifacts which shrink kites. Strangely enough I
don’t get any DB introduced artifacts of any type.

You should be able to down load the file.

Yup!

When I do that I get a full height image. On my screen the 100% shot is 180 x 165.

Strange? Your original downloads as a 6MB, 2848x4288 @ 300dpi, jpg.
Your 100% crop downloads from DB as a 656KB, 1056x1152 @ 300 dpi jpg.

ISO200, f/11, 1/400, 16-85mm



Here is a different example from the same shoot, with a 100% crop.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-sFT2N6g/0/2fd7f912/O/i-sFT2N6g.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-mRpmjJz/0/6d12881d/O/i-mRpmjJz.jpg

That is sharper. There is a fuzzy edge to part of the sail but I suspect that has been caused by highspeed flutter.

...and if it is a kite shot you need, there were kite surfers there, so here
is one which can provide a more meaningful comparison with a 100% crop.

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-qGmChmc/0/c22cf6b3/O/i-qGmChmc.jpg

https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-87wst94/0/84a9ac51/O/i-87wst94.jpg

I picked the kite photo because the way the camera was able to resolve
the full length of what was not a particularly large cord, which was
probably less than 1/3 of the diameter of the cords used by the kite
surfers in your shot.

....and that makes for a nice abstractish line in the sky.

No processing has been done other than converting from NEF to JPG.

Would it have mattered, given that the original target was so small?

I can't understand your comment about that, particularly because
Dropbox seems to have removed the EXIF data.

Nope! All the EXIF data was complete DB removed nothing. Here is what I got
after downloading your 100% crop.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/vui0lq9vhhjghr0/screenshot_338.jpg?

I considered your target to be the kite, and that was resolved so small in
both the original, and the 100% crop that determining sharpness of that kite
image to be near impossible. Therefore my thought that no amount of post
processing would have made a difference.

--

Regards,
Savageduck