Thank you gvarner, I had never thought to look into why it was called RAW. A simple and seemingly obvious reason, but honestly it had never occurred to me. Thank you for the explination!

Thank you Ozmon and 8by10. I too have noticed the extensive amounts of blue from my kit lens. In the near future I plan on replacing it with a better lense for landscape, especially since the focus ring wobbles horribly often ruining a shot. I have a few new photos where I attempted HDR and also using Post processing to enhance. I just haven't had much time to post them.

I don't mind at all, in fact I encourage it! Being so new to the art of editing images after the fact, it's nice to see how it can be adjusted to improve it. It also helps give me something to compare my attempts to. I'm also thinking of finding one of the images I consider to be my best RAW photo I have edited and save it with all the layers so someone can see what I have done and maybe point me in the right direction of how I could have done it better. On some of the ones I've tried the blues are unrealistic and almost a turquoise, and the green trees almost neon when the actual scene wasn't even close to that. I've been working on 2 or 3 images and saving about 4 or 5 edits to compare what I liked and didn't like to try getting the picture it is supposed to be.

Thank you for explaining that the RAW images are more dull than, as you put it, a well exposed JPEG. I couldn't figure out why I really liked the picture when it showed up on my LCD, but when I opened it on my computer there was so much color missing and more bland. Minor tweeking most certainly made it vibrant and lively but I didn't realized that went along with being shot in RAW. It's nice to know I'm not losing my vision (or sanity for that matter).

I thought I had already replied to these last 2 messages, but apparently not. Terribly sorry for the delay! Thank you for the description of Hyperfocal distance R.G., I'm wanting to get a manual focus lens that has the distances marked on the barrel so it takes out some of the guess work of looking through my view finder and turning my ring until it "looks" like everything is in focus (ruined some good pictures that way). Should also help with night time photography when I can't see anything to determine what's in my DOF. I know there are other techniques out there to help with it that I've started researching, but this seems like rather large helpful step in the right direction.

Cheineck, you are absolutely welcome to "tweek" my photos! Thank you for taking the time to make adjustments to share with me, it looks marvelous. I have been experimenting a little with the post processing since my last post, as well as re-taking some of these photos in RAW. It's remarkable the difference it makes in the PP. Now that I have found how quick and easy it is to make adjustments in post, all my landscapes and portraits will be shot in RAW. Thank you for helping me to "see the light." :D Still having trouble making it look authentic and not obviously enhanced, but I didn't learn to shoot in manual mode over night, so I am sure PP is the same. It's another fun adventure in my hobby of photography!!!

Congratulations!! That's a beautiful shot. I can imagine the excitement of finding out your picture was chosen for the cover! Really happy for you!

Awesome, I look forward to it!

Great shot. Would have been cool if you could have gotten the guy bowing into the frame. I'm hoping to make it to a field day eventually, sounds fun.


73

R.G.,

Thank you very much for your long and in-depth suggestions! I will look and see if my 5000 has an HDR mode, which I think it does. I have gotten far enough into my "studies" of photography that I was able to digest just about everything and it makes great sense. The one thing I would greatly like to have explained is the hyperfocal distances. I understand focus, a little. As well as a rough estimate of where I should be focusing for shots; however, while looking at prime lenses and wanting to understand what the copious amount of numbers all over the lens means I searched youtube and was first exposed to the term hyperfocal about 3 days ago. I have heard it referred to very often, but don't know what it means to me and how to use it for composing my shot. The video described rather well how to adjust and use it, but no mention of what it is for those as green to lens terminology as myself.

I don't typically ask for hand-outs of things I can google or find in my books, but I feel some of the more important details of lenses, how they work and how to most accurately manipulate them for a shot may better be explained by people I know are knowledgeable in the subject. Let's face it, the internet has a plethora of not-so-accurate information. So if someone would be so kind as to at least give me a starting point, a basic explanation, I will gladly go from there.

Thank you very much for your pearls of wisdom! I appreciate you taking the time to reply, as well as adding the diagram on how to find the HDR. I wasn't able to find it on my camera, but it may be in a different spot than with your D5200. I'll check my manual and get back to you.

Thank you very much Jerry!!! I will give that a try. Even if it only fixes a few minor issues on my images, it's still better than a completely unedited picture. Especially for free, just to help me until I have the money for something better.

Thank you for wishing me luck on my exams.

Thank you all for your input. I am very pleased with all of your different suggestions. As Charlie stated, my current priority is my RN. I have one last semester and then have to take my board exam which is around $200, so for now the PP will have to wait. I will, of course, be considering this once I have my job and steady income. Thank you for your suggestions as well as wishes for success on my RN.

I would especially like to thank you all for your feedback on the lighting and how to better set the frame up for the shot. Being new, I have only scratched the surface when it comes to placing my subjects. I love the variety of ideas and can't wait to go and try some of them. I definitely need to read up some on the metering systems. I briefly read a little about each, but have yet to really grasp fully the benefits and drawbacks to each.

From a combination of reading, as well as spending time out shooting, I have a relatively good grasp on the aperture settings and rudimentary start on focal lengths. Typically for my landscapes I use an f/32 to get the maximum amount of depth when conditions are permitting, and my lowest appropriate ISO to get the least amount of noise. I know the relationship of the f stops and shutter speeds and how a full stop of the shutter is the same as a full stop of the aperture in respect to the light it allows in, and a decent grasp on how changing one or the other will affect stop motion abilities and DOF. This photo shoot was a little of trial and error (more error than trial) to see how using a slightly lower f stop would change my results especially with the bright clouds. That's probably why the images appear to be more "flat" than I would prefer. One of the reasons for the longer focal lengths, and I hate admitting this, is because I was very short on time and shooting from the driver's seat of my truck :'( Something I rarely ever do because of the MASSIVE restrictions. I chose a little give and take on this photo trip to aim more at gaining the proper exposure than necessarily the greatest depth of field. In order to shoot out the passenger window, I had to zoom. In a few of the other instances, I set the distance for shorter and leaned over the center console to try getting a little better detail. It's not something I'm terribly proud of, but I'm trying to isolate one variable at a time so that with better knowledge on exposing the pictures, when I take the time and have my tripod set up and do it correctly it will yield a far better picture. Only about half of them were done in the truck and are evidenced by the zoom (definitely NOT the one with my daughter).

rpavich and CPR, thank you for your post about finding the subject I want to stand out. Sometimes I get caught up in the moment, and I have a hard time deciding what I want the main picture to even be and try just getting everything. With this in mind, I will start trying to bring out what I want the main theme to be and build my shot from there based on what needs to be done to capture it.

PhotoPhred, These were taken between 6PM and 7:30 PM Eastern time with the sun shining almost directly into the lens (in hind sight, probably not the best idea I have had).

Mundj, I would like to thank you and a few of the others who have given recommendations on lenses. As I am wanting something to replace my short kit lens, I'm having a hard time choosing what would best suite me. I still have much to learn about the pros, cons and uses of each focal distance and your recommendations are well received!

I really appreciate you all taking the time to offer advice. I really enjoy all the ideas you are offering and will be referring to this post often as I try each of them to produce better photos. The more feedback I receive, the more difficult it is waiting for another chance to go out and apply your suggestions with some fresh shots.

Thank you Richard and Mundj. This is all some very sound advice! I have dabbled a few times with silhouettes with a close foreground of some trees and plants but have a long way to go on that road. I know the higher end lenses won't magically make me a better photographer, but I've noticed some "wobble" in my 18-55 when I try focusing it. I didn't realize that it was largely plastic components holding the glass until about a week ago (still learning about lenses). This is why I am looking to purchase just 1 or 2 prime lenses, to largely (but not entirely) replace my short telephoto. Also to aid in the low-light shots such as sunset or later.

Thank you all so much for your valuable advice. I will definitely continue learning and practicing. I can't tell you how happy I am to have found this forum and that you are all so friendly and eager to provide input.

That is absolutely remarkable!!! I'm glad to see that with just my kit lens and some basic knowledge of photography I was able to capture enough detail to make it rather decent. I can't wait to have a better selection of lenses and a little more knowledge (and the experience that goes with it) to capture even better quality. You definitely have me sold on getting some software and perhaps even attending a class to learn how to use it. I'm am utterly in awe my friend!

Bob, sir, my jaw just hit the floor!!! Thank you for showing me just what a little photo editing can do. I always strive for the best possible image I can get in-camera first both to save time, and so I can get an even better end-result. All the suggestions I have gotten so far are immensely helpful!!!! I will take a few shots in RAW next time for comparison.

That makes sense. I think since I was rushed the flash completely slipped my mind. And all evening I was shooting landscape where a tiny on-camera flash wouldn't reach a few hundred feet to the tree line and I just never got in the mindset of it being portrait now. I appreciate the friendly reminder that I have that option :)

Thank you. I will try the matrix metering and see what I can do with that. I appreciate your feedback greatly! When I am able to get some software I will switch to the RAW. In the mean time since I don't use the fn button, I have it set to change the format to RAW, so I can do a shot here and a shot there using the RAW without using up much space or frequently going into my menu.