Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Home | Photography Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures(new!!!) | Search | Login | Register | Help
Canon vs Nikon: Which is better?
One camera setting that ruins your pictures
(and more, keep reading):

Among our users, we have some of the most talented photographers in the world share advice that you won't find even in the most expensive subscription magazines. That's because some of them only post on our website, so you won't find this information anywhere else! Some of them post under an alias, others disclose their studio name, it's up to them. But in either case you get to read and discover photography techniques that will make you very good at taking pictures.

Unlike other websites, we don't try to pitch DSLRs, lenses, and other gear, while collecting sales commission. We don't sell photography tutorials, books, DVDs and courses, while promising that your photography will improve only if you buy what's being promoted.

Instead, we have other people, who are either professional photographers or serious amateurs, some with decades of experience, share with you what they learned, what gear they use, which products really work and which are useless, which techniques work and which don't.

It's all completely unbiased. Our users simply have no reason to lie to you. They are people just like you.

And we provide a free platform for you and them to communicate. So you get to discover this information straight from the source, from people just like you, not from editors of some magazine or sales reps of some company.

This is what makes us different from other photography websites out there that try to sell you something while claiming they are trying to help you.

If you are a beginner, intermediate, advanced, or a professional photographer, then the benefits of signing up for our free daily photography forum digest are:

• We cover both film and digital photography.

• We talk about professional (D)SLR cameras, mirrorless cameras, mid-range/prosumer models, point-and-shoot, and camera phones.

• We cover all types of photography from portraits to landscapes to action shots to macro photography. (Which one interests you the most? Stop and ask yourself right now. You'll need to be able to answer that in just a minute. No matter what you shoot, you'll get better at just that. Read below to find out why.)

• We cover all aspects of photography from picking gear to composition to working with models, and everything in between.

• Each week you'll be receiving new tips and techniques on how to take the kind of pictures that will make your friends, relatives and peers just stare in amazement, speechless, when they see your work. Yep! That's how good your photography will become.

• Daily, you'll be receiving a photography forum digest with the latest photography tips, tricks, reviews and discussions.

• If you ever have a question or need help, you can always ask, and we'll cover your question in the following newsletter issue.

• And of course, it's all completely FREE!

• Let me repeat that. Since for some reason a lot of people contact us asking if the membership is really free: we are a social website for photographers, so we don't sell anything, and we don't charge any fees. It's as simple as that.

Here is how to proceed and what to expect:

Enter your name and e-mail address below, and you'll be instantly added to our photography mailing list distribution. You'll receive a one-time confirmation e-mail. Right after that, the first e-mail with today's digest will be forwarded to you. The signup process is completely automated, so you are just a few minutes away from discovering what our existing users already received earlier today. You'll get up to speed right away on what's the latest on our website, without any long introductions or other delays.

First name:

E-mail address:

Going forward, the next digest will be released in just a few hours. So if you don't sign up now, you'll also miss everything covered in it too.

Main Photography Discussion
The more I look at it the madder I get...
If you would like to post a reply, then please login (if you already have an account) or register (if you don't).
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
Jan 11, 2017 07:17:58   #
Don't look back. It results in nothing more than a stiff neck.
Jan 11, 2017 08:35:46   #
JCam (a regular here)
pithydoug wrote:
Going back to jpeg would be like going back to no indoor plumbing.

Not really, the input is the same; the only difference is the amount of time you dedicate to getting the usable product. Is it waste or a photographic "marvel"? I find that it takes me about twice as much time processing a given shot from RAW vs. "fixing" any faults in JPEG shots, and in the end, I don't usually see much difference in the results. I'll admit my old less critical eyes and attitude may account for some of my JPEG preference. I'm not a Professional, and am retired, but why should I spend even more time on the computer for comparable outputs?

A survey to know what percentage of UHH shoots in RAW only, RAW+ JPEG, or JPEG only and how much time is invested in their final GOOD photos. The ones discarded, even after processing, don't count; junk in-junk out. Unfortunately, a survey wouldn't work as typically only the really dedicated usually reply, and I suspect the greatest proportion of UHH'ers consider photography to be a hobby.
Jan 11, 2017 08:42:17   #
ptcanon3ti wrote:
Don't live in the'll waste the time you have left.

Very well put. I should frame that. I'm constantly beating myself up over lost time at things other than photography and you're right about what a waste of time and energy it is.
Jan 11, 2017 09:17:35   #
Uuglypher (a regular here)
dragonfist wrote:
Don't look back. It results in nothing more than a stiff neck.

In the words of Satchel Page:

"Don't look back; someone may be gaining on y' !"

Jan 11, 2017 09:29:29   #
I have tried shooting I RAW of and on over the years. I keep going back to jpg. If you can't get a shot right with the equipment available now too bad. I have worked a few jpg images here and there. Although I'm retired I still don't have time to sift thru all huge files to fix all these so called mistakes. No thank you. My d7200 takes great shots with having to manipulate them afterwards. The person takes the photo not the computer
Jan 11, 2017 09:39:28   #
SusanFromVermont (a regular here)
Kuzano wrote:
Interesting. I first started shooting RAW in 2005. I discovered the wasted time in PP RAW, and stopped in 2010.

I turned to SOOC and learned all the settings in my image processor, and the advantages of knowing without hesitation the advantages of custom profiles.

Have not shot much RAW, or done that much post processing since 2010. I PP in the image processor, and using custom profiles, BEFORE the image goes to the memory card as a JPEG, or a TIFF. Both of those formats can be post processed if needed.

SOOC.. you heard it here more often than elsewhere, and with better time savings and IQ results.

I begrudge the four years wasted on RAW. Wasted time when you are selling your work. I sold more work with film.
Interesting. I first started shooting RAW in 2005.... (show quote)

Everyone has their own concept of what constitutes "wasted time". And if your system works for you, that is great. But it does not sound like you are interested in putting something of yourself into the final product other than taking the picture! Sounds like your method is kind of like buying "assemble it yourself" furniture or using a cake mix to make a cake. You take the picture, mix it with a preset, and present the final assembled product. This is letting the camera do the thinking for you...

Perhaps I misunderstood what you are describing, but this is what it looks like to me. I actually find PP a RAW image satisfying even though it IS time-consuming!
Jan 11, 2017 09:59:40   #
What ever floats your boat. It takes all. It takes all kinds to make the world go round
Jan 11, 2017 10:00:20   #
cthahn (a regular here)
I shoot everything in RAW. Then into LR. Then I can do anything that I want to do with it, now or years from now. I have been shooting RAW for about 15 years and there is no reason to stop. Quit listening to everything you hear on UH and take some courses on photography and learn something if you want to be kind of a photographer,
Jan 11, 2017 10:08:07   #
DirtFarmer (a regular here)
Rongnongno wrote:
My first raw shooting started in 2008. It became systematic in 2011.


I lost three years!!!
My first raw shooting started in 2008. It became ... (show quote)

My first DSLR was in 2005. I started shooting raw+jpg in mid 2007, so I lost 2 years. I started shooting raw only in late 2007.

Shooting raw only forces me to put my images through Lightroom (since that's my conversion program of choice). I look on this as an advantage, not a time waster. At my age I need a way to find an image among the tens of thousands in my catalog. Lightroom affords me the tools to do that when my memory isn't up to the task.

And you young whippersnappers should remember that, while your memory may be at its peak now, you are heading for my age whether you like it or not.
Jan 11, 2017 10:15:41   #
bull drink water (a regular here)
sometimes I shoot raw and convert to jpeg or tiff. other times I just shoot jpeg, it's not that big of a deal for me.
Jan 11, 2017 10:34:12   #
BJW wrote:
I switched to RAW after a year of JPEG. Real easy to fix all the underexposed shots. And other imperfections. I'm sticking with RAW and big memory cards.

What are underexposed shots? And the word "all" to me indicates many. After 50+ years shooting kodachrome, we strived for correct exposure as there was no fix. I would work on my shooting skills.
Jan 11, 2017 11:25:09   #
imagemeister (a regular here)
Rongnongno wrote:
My first raw shooting started in 2008. It became systematic in 2011.


I lost three years!!!
My first raw shooting started in 2008. It became ... (show quote)

Sorry for your religious obsession !
Jan 11, 2017 12:27:47   #
Some times, you mite be better off just keeping your opinions to yourself
Jan 11, 2017 13:27:32   #
I have always shot raw except with my first digital camera, an Oly CZ2000. Prior I shot Kodachrome and Ektachrome. Yes, you had to get it right, but I did custom printing so a fair amount of post processing was involved. It's far easier now.
Jan 11, 2017 13:34:38   #
jpintn (a regular here)
pithydoug wrote:
Going back to jpeg would be like going back to no indoor plumbing.

Page: <<prev 1 2 3 next>>
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use - Forum
Copyright 2011-2016 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.