Managing your photos

Shaktipalooza · Mar 31st, 2007, 11:25

Full Frame sensors. There are currently just two full frame dSLRs in existence. The Canon 5D and Canon 1DsII. No other brand makes them.

Canon has Full Frame, 1.6 crop for their prosumer models, 1.3 crop for their pro 1D line. I believe Nikon has only 1.5 crop.

You can however buy digital medium format backs but I think entry level starts at over $20,000.

I'd agree with LArkitekt on noise reduction. Relying on in-camera noise reduction isn't a great idea if you're getting serious about photography. For example, my 5D will output JPGs but the image isn't nearly as good as what can be accomplished with manipulating RAW in Photoshop. Dynamic range, sharpness, noise, are all much better handled by the very filters and plugins that are available. I've been using Noise Ninja on low settings for nearly all my pictures.

gautam · Sep 28th, 2007, 21:22

After reading few pages of this thread i have decided to install Picasa once again.

I have tried it once before & did not like it. Lets see what happens this time

gautam · Oct 11th, 2007, 03:59

Have installed picasa today, lets see how things work this time

nomad · Oct 11th, 2007, 09:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by LArkitekt

this may be an issue if you have a wide-angled lens and weant to use with your new digital camera and it becomes not so wide angle anymore...
...

i am planning for a wide angle lense but then the APS size sensor is pushing it beyond my budget. stitching pictures is not that cool. will it look better if i add barrel distortion?

this place has some good wide angle lens talk

http://photo.net/equipment/wideangle-dslr.html

Quote:

some1 has suggested to enable noise reduction in camera when shooting dark or low light due to film speed setting...i would do color/luminance noise reduction in post-processing myself in photoshop...also there are some very good plugins that automate noise reduction extremely well...

yes. shoot in raw and do it your self

Fotuman · Oct 15th, 2007, 00:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomad

i am planning for a wide angle lense but then the APS size sensor is pushing it beyond my budget.

Rahul, Incase you are planning to stick to a APS size sensor for some time, you could look at the sigma 10-20mm. Works well on 1.5/ 1.6 crop sensors. Retails at arnd 450- 500 USD if i remember correctly.

Cheers
Ajay

nomad · Oct 15th, 2007, 09:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fotuman

Rahul, Incase you are planning to stick to a APS size sensor for some time, you could look at the sigma 10-20mm. Works well on 1.5/ 1.6 crop sensors. Retails at arnd 450- 500 USD if i remember correctly.

Cheers
Ajay

Thnaks Ajay

abracax · Oct 15th, 2007, 10:01

I second the recommendation for the Sigma 10-20. I've used it on both my Canon bodies (Rebel and 40D) in all sorts of conditions and it has worked very well (even a good nighttime lens). It's not quite up to the optical or build standard of my 24-105 IS L lens, but then neither are any of the other super-wides currently available, including Canon's own offering. As for the shooting RAW issue, I find the 40D's "small RAW" a useful intermediate option between RAW and JPG. The trick during traveling is to carry several high-capacity flash cards and an iPod to download pictures onto for mid-term storage until one has access to uploading and/or a DVD burner. Half of the time I just shoot big jpg's anyway.

the opoponax · Dec 5th, 2007, 00:04

The main thing to consider with RAW (outside of everything that's already been said) is that if you have a camera that shoots RAW and you don't have the software to actually work with it, you might as well not have taken any picture at all.

This means that you basically have to be working with CS2 or later, because earlier versions of photoshop don't work with RAW images.

Obvs most people who are semi-pro or "top seeded amateurs" will already have access to these programs. But if you were thinking of making the switch and don't have all the gear, just buying a camera that shoots RAW isn't the end of the story.

Shaktipalooza · Dec 5th, 2007, 00:43

Any DSLR sold on the market will come with software that does the RAW conversions so this is a non-issue.

Consider RAW your digital negative, the actual data that came off the sensor. JPEGs are wildly affected by the camera's 'styles' and white balance. Contrast, color, exposure, sharpness, etc. are all controlled in camera for the resulting JPEG.

Much of the time shooting JPEG is OK but it's guaranteed you'll have a better file when you shoot RAW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the opoponax

The main thing to consider with RAW (outside of everything that's already been said) is that if you have a camera that shoots RAW and you don't have the software to actually work with it, you might as well not have taken any picture at all.

This means that you basically have to be working with CS2 or later, because earlier versions of photoshop don't work with RAW images.

Obvs most people who are semi-pro or "top seeded amateurs" will already have access to these programs. But if you were thinking of making the switch and don't have all the gear, just buying a camera that shoots RAW isn't the end of the story.

Hyderabadi · Dec 5th, 2007, 01:21

Picasa, from Google, which is a free program supports RAW. You can also do the same basic editing as with JPEGs.

Quote:

Picasa currently supports RAW images from most of the cameras by the following manufacturers:

Canon (.CRW, .CR2)
Nikon (.NEF)
Olympus (.ORF)
Pentax (.PEF)
Kodak (.DCR, .KDC)
Sony (.SRF,.SR2)
Minolta (.MRW)
Fuji (.RAF)
Adobe (.DNG)

EXIF data from RAW images is only supported with CRW files that have associated .THM files.

the opoponax · Dec 5th, 2007, 03:01

There's very little point in shooting RAW if you aren't going to be able to edit in RAW. If your only photo editing software is what came with your camera, you probably aren't at the caliber of needing to shoot RAW.

Kind of a catch-22, innit?

Shaktipalooza · Dec 5th, 2007, 03:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by the opoponax

There's very little point in shooting RAW if you aren't going to be able to edit in RAW. If your only photo editing software is what came with your camera, you probably aren't at the caliber of needing to shoot RAW.

Kind of a catch-22, innit?

Even the limited software that comes with the camera has far more capability than the in-camera JPEG processing. Many professionals do use the software that comes with Canon and Nikon cameras. Don't know about other manufacturers but I imagine it's a similar story.

Working on a RAW file isn't rocket science.

One person alluded to the notion that shooting RAW was in part, a bit of snobbery on the side of some end users. I have to say that's really just silly. RAW benefits everyone. If you're a pro, you have the ability to tweak the images more than if you'd shot in 8-bit jpeg mode. If you are an amateur you have a better chance at recovering images when you're limited skills were unable to get the proper exposure in original capture.

Ultimately it's the end users choice to shoot jpeg or raw, just irritating to see so much disinformation.

the opoponax · Dec 5th, 2007, 03:31

Depending on what editing you're talking about, I have to say I don't know anyone (in the world of graphics, anyway) who doesn't use Photoshop. Most photographers I've worked with have brought in their untouched photos for us to start from scratch on, with Photoshop. If they do any retouching, in camera or out, I've certainly never noticed it.

Hyderabadi · Dec 5th, 2007, 03:46

Here is another free program RawShooter Essentials 2006

the opoponax · Dec 5th, 2007, 04:15

Stepping out of this one for now. I'll let the real photo experts take the floor!

Mar 31st, 2007, 11:25	#61
Shaktipalooza Maha Guru Member Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Portland Oregon USA Posts: 896	Full Frame sensors. There are currently just two full frame dSLRs in existence. The Canon 5D and Canon 1DsII. No other brand makes them. Canon has Full Frame, 1.6 crop for their prosumer models, 1.3 crop for their pro 1D line. I believe Nikon has only 1.5 crop. You can however buy digital medium format backs but I think entry level starts at over $20,000. I'd agree with LArkitekt on noise reduction. Relying on in-camera noise reduction isn't a great idea if you're getting serious about photography. For example, my 5D will output JPGs but the image isn't nearly as good as what can be accomplished with manipulating RAW in Photoshop. Dynamic range, sharpness, noise, are all much better handled by the very filters and plugins that are available. I've been using Noise Ninja on low settings for nearly all my pictures. __________________ IndiaGroove - Train finder now in beta! Pics from India 2006 Traditional Indian Dance

Sep 28th, 2007, 21:22	#62
gautam Super Mode Join Date: May 2005 Location: Chandigarh - Blore NON-STOP Posts: 708	After reading few pages of this thread i have decided to install Picasa once again. I have tried it once before & did not like it. Lets see what happens this time __________________ "Your thoughts could be your prison" My pics on flickr Kerela backwaters - by beach

Oct 15th, 2007, 10:01	#67
abracax Mahaguru Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Canada Posts: 435	I second the recommendation for the Sigma 10-20. I've used it on both my Canon bodies (Rebel and 40D) in all sorts of conditions and it has worked very well (even a good nighttime lens). It's not quite up to the optical or build standard of my 24-105 IS L lens, but then neither are any of the other super-wides currently available, including Canon's own offering. As for the shooting RAW issue, I find the 40D's "small RAW" a useful intermediate option between RAW and JPG. The trick during traveling is to carry several high-capacity flash cards and an iPod to download pictures onto for mid-term storage until one has access to uploading and/or a DVD burner. Half of the time I just shoot big jpg's anyway. __________________ He travels fastest who pays for a cab.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Best photos	Shark	Chai and Chat	0	Sep 5th, 2006 12:16
photos	marzoryy	Chai and Chat	7	Mar 24th, 2006 23:08
Some Photos	Anoop	Photography	3	Dec 11th, 2005 14:35
My photos	DianeN.	Photography	10	May 3rd, 2004 18:56
Photos	parvati_overdrive	Photography	2	Jan 25th, 2004 06:40

Oct 11th, 2007, 03:59	#63
gautam Super Mode Join Date: May 2005 Location: Chandigarh - Blore NON-STOP Posts: 708	Have installed picasa today, lets see how things work this time

Dec 5th, 2007, 00:04	#68
the opoponax Maha Guru Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brooklyn, via New Orleans Posts: 1,052	The main thing to consider with RAW (outside of everything that's already been said) is that if you have a camera that shoots RAW and you don't have the software to actually work with it, you might as well not have taken any picture at all. This means that you basically have to be working with CS2 or later, because earlier versions of photoshop don't work with RAW images. Obvs most people who are semi-pro or "top seeded amateurs" will already have access to these programs. But if you were thinking of making the switch and don't have all the gear, just buying a camera that shoots RAW isn't the end of the story.

Dec 5th, 2007, 03:01	#71
the opoponax Maha Guru Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brooklyn, via New Orleans Posts: 1,052	There's very little point in shooting RAW if you aren't going to be able to edit in RAW. If your only photo editing software is what came with your camera, you probably aren't at the caliber of needing to shoot RAW. Kind of a catch-22, innit?

Dec 5th, 2007, 03:31	#73
the opoponax Maha Guru Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brooklyn, via New Orleans Posts: 1,052	Depending on what editing you're talking about, I have to say I don't know anyone (in the world of graphics, anyway) who doesn't use Photoshop. Most photographers I've worked with have brought in their untouched photos for us to start from scratch on, with Photoshop. If they do any retouching, in camera or out, I've certainly never noticed it.

Dec 5th, 2007, 03:46	#74
Hyderabadi Maha Guru Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: GA,USA. Posts: 1,121	Here is another free program RawShooter Essentials 2006

Dec 5th, 2007, 04:15	#75
the opoponax Maha Guru Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brooklyn, via New Orleans Posts: 1,052	Stepping out of this one for now. I'll let the real photo experts take the floor!

User Name		Remember Me?
Password