Home Forums Gear Photography A Tide of new Photo Posters

seems to have shown up here at the campfire. Very nice to see all the beautiful pics. My question for all..How many of you tweak your photos in an editing program before posting? Besides croping and resizing so they do not take up a ton of space.

With the new breed of cameras one hardly has to do much in relation to editing, except when taking RAW photos. However, in order to post the pictures here, one has to size the photo to perhaps under 1 MB of space, something like 600 x 600 pixels or a tad larger. Larger photos are automatically sized by PhotoBucket, but one can do that ahead of time.

Now, there are simple things one can do with photo-editing software. For example, to lighten/darken the shadows, make the subject softer/sharper, etc. However, one can make a photo look unreal if one goes too far.

Some of mine are tweeked but usually not more than adjusting the brightness or sharpness a little. That 'blazing sunset' one I posted is 'as is'. Somewhere on a CD I have a purple sunset that you won't believe is real. I'll dig it out and post it. I get some great sunset shots from my back step. I'm in a desert area and when we have a storm brewing, they get wild sometimes.

Dick

So Ray what your saying then is you don't have to think about your photo much because you know your cam is going to do a wonderful job for you? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I know about the size for posting pics here. I've posted one or two times.

That's true. My new digital camera can set everything for me. But they all need good lenses, and these are extremely expensive. I can only afford the kit lens on my Rebel XT (for the time being), and the next one I will buy is a Tamrom 70-300mm for around $180.00. A Canon "L" lens of the same power costs quite a lot. Some of the Canon lenses cost from $600.00 to $6,000.

Yup sure isn't a cheap hobby by any means but some times it's just as fun to see what you can produce without all the extra bells and whistles.

Cheap? I just bought an Olympus E500. So much for the kids' inheritance. If I set it on auto and use jpg or tif formatting, I don't have much else to do except crop. Olympus uses a 4:3 photo size ratio while some others use 3:2. That means that I have to crop for a standard 4x6. PS makes that very easy, though. I can do several dozen in a few minutes.

This one comes with a 14-45 lense (28-90 equiv in 35mm). For an extra $100, they toss in a 40-150 (80-300 equiv). With that one and a high resolution setting, I can do a lot. While they're not professional quality lenses, they're really pretty good. They're coming out with a 40-180 this spring that's supposed to be really good but it will cost close to $500, a bit over my fun and games budget.

Dick

Nope didn't say it was cheap....I know for a fact how expensive it can be. Just was wondering how many went out with just the basics to see what you can capture. Not help from auto settings. Does your eye see the beauty? Can you reproduce that same image with out fancy settings, lenses and filters?

Don't take me wrong( i love all the photos I've seen pop up recently) I'm just wondering out loud as I recoup from my accident. Haven't had the ability to go out myself and picture take.

When I look through my Leupold Vary-X III rifle scope set at its lowest power at dusk, the image is clearer than looking out my eyes. The sensor of my 8MP camera can capture quite a lot more detail than my eyes can. One always "sees the beauty," I guess, but it's much easier with a digital than a film camera to immediately see if one has captured the beauty one sees. If i don't like the picture I just delete it right after.

But one can experiment with the digital camera and change things manually, except that doing so requires lots of fidgeting with it.

I've been trying to get a really good picture of the moon. I haven't had a good clear night since I bought my SLR, though. I've tried many times with my older Olympus c-750 but it never works out right. I've found that none of the auto settings will work well. It always meters on the moon and I get a bright blob. Manual shutter speed and aperture settings are necessary. I'm looking forward to giving it a try with my new one...if we ever get a clear night. I set the f-stop about anywhere, then take a doz or so shots, each on a progressively faster shutter speed. Somewhere in there, hopefully I get one with the right brightness.

Dick

Do you have a time delay setting? Set it for x amount of seconds and see what you come up with. Just punt don't think and you might be surprised what you come up with.

BTW..Do you boys ever crack a joke? Think outside the box? or is it all technical 24/7? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

i have spent about 850.00 in the last year on digital ,but when i think about buying film and developing cost with my old 35mm. i've takin over 3600 shots with the fz20 in one year ,thats 150-24exp rolls of film.

Well...last fall my brother had knee replacement surgery. I made him a card. I found Mo, of the 3 stooges, dressed as a doctor. Then I added a photoshopped photo of my brother...with one leg turned backward.

My camera will handle setting up to 60 sec. That's why I just set the f-stop and took a bunch at different shutter settings. I'm anxious to see what my new SLR will do. It's 8mp vs 4 for the old one.

Dick

elf: In this photo, the only things I did with Elements to change it was to bring the size down to around 500KB, and also to lighten the shadows 30% to show the tree at the left a little more, as well as to lighten the houses at the right. All the colors are natural, exactly the way they looked the day I took the picture. Since the sensor can "see" through the darkness a little better than my eyes can, even though the detail in the shadows or dark areas don't show in the original photo, they do when I increase the light in those areas.

very pretty

Mount Baker...... 1/5/06

Wow! Beautiful photo!
It's so cool you can see Mt. Baker from SE Alaska!!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />
M

Alaskan454: I ran your picture through Photoshop to lighten the shadows in front of the mountain by 100%. I had to upload your picture to Photobucket so it can show here, but plan to delete the link tomorrow afternoon. It means that it will show here only until tomorrow afternoon.

Ray

Thanks Ray but its kinda nice to not see all the friggen houses...

Now that's a penis envy lens if ever I saw one!!!! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

so...MT, is Alaska in your future ?

The answer is? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

No, I live in Alaska... you know Los Anchorage... NotQuite Alaska, but you can get there from here. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
M

No way MT all this time I thought you lived inSouth Jersey.. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

Here are a couple of moon shots I took in October. The first one it was a little foggy outside. But the effect is good. The second one, a bit clearer. Both were taken with a 400 lens, the latter one on a fairly quick shutter speed, can't remember any exacts, either f stops or iso.
M

i really love those pis M. Very gorgeous.

Must be my "Joisy" accent! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
M

I thought so since you have been posting pictures of AK. I live near Squarebanks, but Los Anchorage is much closer to Homeroids. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

This is probably the best moon shot I've got so far. It's a partial eclipse that happened last fall. This was with a 4mp camera with a 10x zoom.

A while back several of us on another forum were all trying to get good moon shots. Then a guy with a Canon Rebel SLR and a $1200 800mm lense showed up. End of contest. The clarity was like he was standing on it.

The 2d photo was an accident. I was trying for a shot when the wind was blowing. The tripod sort of moved. A lot.

Dick

Taiyasanka Harbor, Alaska ( NOAA chart 17317 if ya wanna see where that is )...

This ole sow has been a regular for 10 years and her MO has always been triplets...

oh....now i get it. Los Anchorage being NotQuite Alaska

ya got that right... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Awesome photo!
Santa brought Sitka a new doubler, so the next full moon, I'm gonna put that with the 400 and see what I can do. I put the tripod on the deck, but I have to stand very still and make sure no none else comes out. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
M

Part of the reason that I bought an Olympus SLR is that it can be used with a remote. It's an option, but I had one with my old camera that works. It's far easier than using a self timer, just point and click. For shots in the dark like this, it's great.
I"ve thought about a doubler to go with my 300mm, but I haven't figured out what all this camera will do with what I've got yet. I need to quit buying toys until I'm done playing with my new ones.

Dick

Great Moon shot Rock Chuck!
Rather amazing what one can do when not crippled by only knowing how to use a camera in auto mode.

It seems it will be all we see in the years to come.
The art of taking a photograph is rapidly being lost.
I seldom see natural light photos with interesting shadows anymore.
The new digital age is making people auto dependent with the cameras they purchase. I have a feeling few have a clue what to do other than set it on auto and point and shoot.

Dear akasparky,

I agree to a point with you on that statement, kinda what I was getting at with the original post. There are some of us that have only recently begun to use the fancy super duper format. All the pictures are beautiful that get posted here. If all art was the same it would be a dull world. I myself had mostly used a slr 35mm on manual settings and just a little point and shoot digital also on the manual setting. So take a peek at some of my old posts and you'll see my version of unfancy photography. Though I would not hesitate to use a upscale model I'm perfectly happy with what I use as I shoot pics for the sheer joy of photography.

Elf

The new digital cameras are not any different than existing cameras. All the new SLR cameras allow you for doing everything manual if you want. You can even focus the lens manually if you want to. The main difference between film and digital cameras is that a film is not needed for taking a picture with the digital one, and also that you have a whole bunch of options at the touch of a button.

If you look at the photos in this forum, you will see that quite a lot of them are taken with the camera set to manual mode:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=28

You will notice some pictures where the water looks milky. Well, to take such a picture with a digital camera, one must set some of its functions out of fully auto. I use both a Nikon F3 film SLR and a digital camera, but in some areas i can't find 25 ASA films anymore, and if I use slide films, it takes a fortune to get it processed in New Jersey, and I have to wait for weeks to see how the pictures look.

Taking a picture with any film camera does not guarantee that what one sees through the viewfinder is what will appear on the film. That "beauty" we have talked about here exists mostly in one's mind at the moment one takes the picture, and it rarely shows on film they way one sees it when taking the picture. That's exactly what happens when one takes a picture with a digital camera, and that's why some of us take a whole bunch of pictures to keep the very few good ones and discard the rest. And yes, a digital camera set to full auto gives you a great advantage, since it increases the likelihood of increasing the number of good pictures. However, taking good photos always requires learned skills regardless of the type of camera used. Finally, we have had-for years now-fully automatic film cameras.

Until about 3 years ago I used an old Pentax K1000 35mm. It's totally manual except the light meter. I spent a lot of money on film trying to get good shots but some of the good ones came out REALLY good. The digital is great because you can see instantly what you have at no cost. I usually shoot several of everything and dump all but the best one.
I cussed my digital C-750 for it's horrible autofocus and shutter lag. Those functions take forever. Action shots are almost impossible with the lag time in the electronic view finder. What I see in the evf is past tense. A shot of a running dog will give you a nice blank background because Fido is already around the house. There's no comparison with a SLR where everything you see is real time, the focus time is measured in microseconds, and the shutter clicks when you push the button, not 5 sec later.
Lag time is one of biggest complains you will read of an almost any digital review.

Dick

I still have a Nikon FM, which is completely manual (except for the light meter). I used it a Chitinal last year, and it finally broke down. Technology is changing quite fast. I remember that not too long ago only a few of us had computers, and we had no idea about such things as "Internet" and posting pictures online. The same thing is happening to the use of cameras, and I bet that within a few years some sensors will have the capability of providing a clear picture in the darkness of night.

Ray....will photoshop straighten my horizons...???

I'm not Ray, but yes it will. However, you have to crop it a bit after turning it so you lose a little on all 4 sides. I turned this 2 degrees and it came out pretty close.

A good prevention for this is to carry a short 2x4 in your camera bag. You put your left foot on it when you take pictures to change the angle. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

That coon looks like Matt Dillon getting ready for a showdown. Did you eat his food?

Dick

That's real funny <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Nice picture. But the coon does look like he is getting ready to kick butt.

Thanks Dick.... I either gotta get photoshop, a level, or remember to take a second look at which way the water is going before I click the button... !

yep.... that coon is one a 4 regulars and I did disturb his meal as you can see his little tracks near his dish....but, I couldda just told you guys that I got him trained to stand on command.... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />