WPF - World Photography Forum
Home Gallery Register FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Welcome to World Photography Forum!
Welcome!

Thank you for finding your way to World Photography Forum, a dedicated community for photographers and enthusiasts. There's a variety of forums, a wonderful gallery, and what's more, we are absolutely FREE. You are very welcome to join, take part in the discussion, and post your pictures!

Click here to go to the forums home page and find out more.
Click here to join.


Go Back   World Photography Forum > General Photography > The Photography Forum


The Photography Forum General Photography Related Discussion.

Love digital photography ~ hate computers!!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #21  
Old 29-12-07, 22:50
Roy C's Avatar
Roy C Roy C is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greypoint View Post
Photoshop - when paid for in full [!]- may be the best photo editor there is but can be overkill for most amateurs. It may be the best and the 'industry standard' but there sometimes seems to be a bit of 'must have' about it rather than really needing it. Great if your hobby is centred round pc work and you enjoy all that editing and manipulation but certainly not essential for everyone. I sometimes feel the way we're all supposed to spend hours converting RAW files and improving our results is a bit of a let off for the camera makers - digital cameras should be capable of giving you what you want direct from camera if you spend a bit of time on setting up your shots. All DSLRs should be able to give you good JPEGs - if you'd rather shoot RAW fine, but you should'nt have to if you don't want to.
Spending time setting up your shots or even shooting in jpeg is ok for static objects but if you are, say, a bird photographer you very often have a second or two before the bird has come and gone and in these situations I defy anyone to get it right all the time. This is where shooting in RAW is a must. Also in Bird photography there is almost always some cropping to do as the focal length is never enough and when you start to crop you then run into other problems like a severe enhancement of noise. I think the type of photography you do plays a big part in it. I know that with my Landscapes I normally do very little in the way of editing but with my bird shots it is a different kettle of fish.
__________________
Roy

MY WEB SITE
MY PHOTOSTREAM
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 29-12-07, 23:29
greypoint's Avatar
greypoint greypoint is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northants, England
Posts: 2,545
Default

There's a difference between a bit of cropping and tweaking and full scale processing. All my pictures are cropped a bit and tweaked but that can be done with free software. Having spent time shooting almost exclusively in RAW when i had a 30D I found I did'nt actually do much other than tweak shots as I'd do with JPEGs. After a year with Olympus whose cameras can usually be relied on to produce good JPEGs then swapping to a 40D I was relieved to find the 40D can produce JPEGs that are OK for me. But this is getting perilously close to another of those boring JPEG v RAW discussions!
__________________
so many swans...so little time

http://www.flickr.com/photos/greypoint/sets/
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 30-12-07, 01:27
mw_aurora's Avatar
mw_aurora mw_aurora is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Westford, MA, USA (was UK)
Posts: 271
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greypoint View Post
Photoshop - when paid for in full [!]- may be the best photo editor there is but can be overkill for most amateurs. It may be the best and the 'industry standard' but there sometimes seems to be a bit of 'must have' about it rather than really needing it. Great if your hobby is centred round pc work and you enjoy all that editing and manipulation but certainly not essential for everyone. I sometimes feel the way we're all supposed to spend hours converting RAW files and improving our results is a bit of a let off for the camera makers - digital cameras should be capable of giving you what you want direct from camera if you spend a bit of time on setting up your shots. All DSLRs should be able to give you good JPEGs - if you'd rather shoot RAW fine, but you should'nt have to if you don't want to.
I couldn't agree more
__________________
Mark Wilson

Updated: www.rusticolus.co.uk
Tumblelog: mjmw.tumblr.com
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 30-12-07, 01:40
Roy C's Avatar
Roy C Roy C is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by greypoint View Post
There's a difference between a bit of cropping and tweaking and full scale processing. All my pictures are cropped a bit and tweaked but that can be done with free software. Having spent time shooting almost exclusively in RAW when i had a 30D I found I did'nt actually do much other than tweak shots as I'd do with JPEGs. After a year with Olympus whose cameras can usually be relied on to produce good JPEGs then swapping to a 40D I was relieved to find the 40D can produce JPEGs that are OK for me. But this is getting perilously close to another of those boring JPEG v RAW discussions!
I agree about the Jpeg v Raw, each to their own. In a way the better photographer you are then the less you would need to use RAW because you would have got it right without too much tweaking . I am a novice who is in need of all the help I can get, so for me it is RAW. Maybe when I reach the level of some of the fine Photographers on this site I will be able to shoot jpeg only
__________________
Roy

MY WEB SITE
MY PHOTOSTREAM
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 30-12-07, 09:12
Chris
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This thread has gone way off what Matt was wanting comment on and is also introducing some misconceptions and feel it should be stopped
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 30-12-07, 10:52
Birdsnapper's Avatar
Birdsnapper Birdsnapper is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincs
Posts: 5,666
Default

I love my computer: it gives me the chance to try to make my images as attractive as I can (but generally with not much success). Some photographers believe that they do not need PS or similar. However, I think that they are not self-critical enough to get the best from from their photos - near-blown highlights, colour casts, lack of sharpness, and lack of contrast are all common faults that are easily remedied with the magic of the computer.
__________________
Mike
Nobody ever erected a statue of a critic
http://www.pbase.com/sunnycote
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 30-12-07, 11:15
Roy C's Avatar
Roy C Roy C is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
This thread has gone way off what Matt was wanting comment on and is also introducing some misconceptions and feel it should be stopped
Not sure that it has gone far off. It is evident that those who enjoy computers and processing are far more likely use it for things like RAW and PS whereas those who view the PC as a necessary evil are more likely to shoot in jpeg and do minimal processing.
I really enjoy processing .With some of the weather I have been trudging around in lately I have enjoyed the processing more than actually taking the shots.
__________________
Roy

MY WEB SITE
MY PHOTOSTREAM
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 30-12-07, 12:56
greypoint's Avatar
greypoint greypoint is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Northants, England
Posts: 2,545
Default

I think the thread is still addressing the main point. What's important is to as much or as little pc work as you want and not feel pressed to lay out cash on the most super powerful software just because others use it. If it's your hobby then do it the way that gives you most enjoyment. I count my pictures as snapshots and don't very often take anything that's worth spending hours manipulating - sad but true!
__________________
so many swans...so little time

http://www.flickr.com/photos/greypoint/sets/
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 30-12-07, 13:40
Birdsnapper's Avatar
Birdsnapper Birdsnapper is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Lincs
Posts: 5,666
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris View Post
This thread has gone way off what Matt was wanting comment on and is also introducing some misconceptions and feel it should be stopped
What misconceptions?
__________________
Mike
Nobody ever erected a statue of a critic
http://www.pbase.com/sunnycote
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 30-12-07, 14:13
Roy C's Avatar
Roy C Roy C is offline  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Barnstaple, North Devon
Posts: 2,543
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by birdsnapper View Post
I love my computer: it gives me the chance to try to make my images as attractive as I can (but generally with not much success). Some photographers believe that they do not need PS or similar. However, I think that they are not self-critical enough to get the best from from their photos - near-blown highlights, colour casts, lack of sharpness, and lack of contrast are all common faults that are easily remedied with the magic of the computer.
Very nicely put Mike. Everything I believe but was incapable in putting into words. I some times feel very frusterated when I see a shot that can be made so much better with a very simple tweak ( very often as little as 20 seconds or so).
__________________
Roy

MY WEB SITE
MY PHOTOSTREAM
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:53.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.