Worst Digital Photography Suggestion/Tip?
Feb 13, 2018 10:57:03 #
davyboy
Loc: Anoka Mn.
MadMikeOne wrote:
Iām with you 100%. Itās just not for me. May be fine for those who donāt mind spending their time at their computers ātweakingā an image. Me, Iād much rather be out there working on āgetting it right in cameraā. You and I seem to be in the minority. JPEG and some cropping wors just fine for me.
JPEG for me with some editing and cropping š
Feb 13, 2018 10:58:19 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
anotherview wrote:
Worst tip: Buy, carry, and use an expensive tripo... (show quote)
Hmm... I think we have new winner for "absolute worst tip"!
Using a tripod is about a lot more than just getting a steady shot and it is every bit as applicable today with digital and image stabilization, as it was in the days of film.
And buying a cheap, flimsy tripod is more often than not just a waste of money. Bought right, a decent quality tripod might last a lifetime and be a pleasure to use the whole time. A "cheapie" will usually only last a year or two, so you'll be re-buying them and not really saving money. It's also likely to be a less than enjoyable experience to use. And, the first time $3000 worth of camera and lens take a nose dive into the dirt when that $100 tripod fails to do it's job, you'll wish you spent more.
Feb 13, 2018 10:59:48 #
leftj
Loc: Texas
davyboy wrote:
JPEG for me with some editing and cropping š
I recently purchased a Fuji XT-1 in order to stick my toe in the mirrorless water. The fantastic colors and film simulations has driven me back to mostly jpg.
Feb 13, 2018 11:01:37 #
leftj wrote:
You seemed to intimate that most bad information comes from UHH. Thus my comment.
I didn't say "most". You did. I generally say what I mean.
Feb 13, 2018 11:05:58 #
leftj
Loc: Texas
Jim Bob wrote:
I didn't say "most". You did. I generally say what I mean.
Using the term "much" and then naming only one source can be taken to mean "most". Now, saying "I have received a lot of bad information from many sources, including UHH" might be a better way of saying it.
Feb 13, 2018 11:17:59 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
For digital - advice to underexpose "for saturation" is the worst DSLR advice I've heard and occasionally still read. You only get noisy underexposed images, nothing quality. Rather, expose for the highlights, up to the edge of over-exposure, whether JPEG or RAW. Address saturation and vibrance in Post using an image captured at the best possible digital exposure.
HI CHG. Its a matter of how much to underexpose. In my business I photograph youth sports clubs where I bring umbrellas/lights etc... I purposely "slightly" underexpose looking at the histogram, why? Because young people have very little facial color, and the lights make the face look blown out. In LR I add the correct amount of exposure/highlights, while adjusting for the blacks.. I do agree that in other types of photography the shadows might show noise... As to "saturation", my canon, tends to boost the reds normally.. So again LR to the rescue. Portraiture, shoots are much different than outdoor shoots.. Positioning the lights is important, and not like adjusting to the sun position.... For me keeping an eye on my histogram is the key to getting consistency..
Feb 13, 2018 11:52:16 #
Rick from NY wrote:
Care to elaborate on why you think this is poor advice? I suspect you are going to find a whole lot of photogs are going to disagree with you. In fact, I would argue that "shoot raw" was the single best piece of advice I ever received when I switched from film to digital.
Shooting RAW only makes sense if the photographer invests the time to adequately learn how to make all the fine adjustments in RAW to bring out the best in each image. What I'm noticing, many do not seem to know what they are doing.
Feb 13, 2018 12:00:33 #
ballsafire
Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana
ChackbayGuy wrote:
Couldn't agree more with bkyser! Worst advice I ev... (show quote)
Pardon the correction --"Les ses bonne tonne roulet" -- is actually "Laissez les bon temps rouler." meaning "Let the good times roll." and that's what we're doing here in Lafayette, LA today. The GOD OF MISSRULE is at work today for Mardi Gras (Fat Tuesday). Today we eat and drink- tomorrow, Ash Wednesday ( priest anoints our heads with black cinders mixed with oil to show that you are a religious person, and during the following (90 days) of Lent we deprive ourselves till Easter. I should mention that photographers have a field day taking photos of the Mardi gras.
Feb 13, 2018 12:05:49 #
Take yer pick.
You can fix it in post processing.
My dog doesn't bite.
The water's not that deep.
A rattlesnake can only strike half the length of it's body.
You don't need vibration reduction at 1/125 or faster.
Shoot wide and crop.
You can fix it in post processing.
My dog doesn't bite.
The water's not that deep.
A rattlesnake can only strike half the length of it's body.
You don't need vibration reduction at 1/125 or faster.
Shoot wide and crop.
Feb 13, 2018 12:15:21 #
rook2c4 wrote:
Shooting RAW only makes sense if the photographer invests the time to adequately learn how to make all the fine adjustments in RAW to bring out the best in each image. What I'm noticing, many do not seem to know what they are doing.
I shoot almost exclusively in RAW even though the image is flat when first brought up. The DSLR camera shoots at 18% Gray scale. RAW files allow you to construct an image you like. You donāt have to fight the jpeg/tiff algorithms. If you donāt like or know how to use post processing, donāt shoot RAW. I know photographers the push the limits of images and photographers (like me) that try to recreate the image my eyes see.
The eyes see much more than the camera does. They see more color, detail and actually sets a certain DoF that you can get close to with RAW, however it takes effort in post.
Feb 13, 2018 12:26:46 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
Actually, Av mode is a good mode for shooting bird... (show quote)
Im sorry, but this post makes no sense to me. If your goal is to shoot with the aperture "wide open", why use Av mode? Use shutter priority, and crank up the SS until you are there. Or do it with ISO adjustments. Controlling SS directly is way more important for fast moving objects than making sure your aperture is wide open.
So as to not be off topic, I think this post is bad advice (but in fairness, not the WORST advice). Av mode for birds...sure it can be done, but it falls short of best practices IMO.
Feb 13, 2018 12:27:24 #
Feb 13, 2018 12:38:02 #
Feb 13, 2018 12:38:38 #
Feiertag wrote:
Au contraire! I don't know what I'm talking about? What if wide open is f/5.6 or higher with some zoom lenses and you are in low light situation? Now you have to hope your shutter speed stays around the 1/000th when the bird takes flight, which btw is too low of a setting in this case. You don't have that control with Av mode like you do in M or second best, S mode.
I think you are describing a situation that requires a different lens, not a different mode.
Feb 13, 2018 12:46:50 #
tayho wrote:
I think you are describing a situation that requires a different lens, not a different mode.
Read jeep_daddy's post. I was referring to his logic on the subject "A" mode for shooting birds.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.