Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Editing photos
Page <prev 2 of 2
Dec 8, 2011 12:45:19   #
phoenix Loc: England, but currently living in AZ
 
I think photoshop is very popular but also time consuming. As a longstanding photographer who was dragged kicking and screaming into the digital age, I limit my editing to Picasa. It's relatively simple (like me!) and doesn't take as much time as Photoshop. As far as cutting corners goes.... learn from the film photographers and "make every shot count and fill the frame". I used to have this mantra posted inside my gadget bag! Too many digital photographers take WAY too many shots IMHO on the basis I guess "that if you throw enough sh*t at the wall - some of it will stiick". Trouble is... it's still sh*t! In short: think before you press the button! You'll be a better photographer for it - promise!

Reply
Dec 8, 2011 12:45:41   #
nyweb2001
 
I use Elements 9 on a Toshiba laptop. I have to be looking at the screen straight on or everything is off !

Reply
Dec 8, 2011 15:26:30   #
GTinSoCal Loc: Palmdale, CA
 
I use CS5 and batch large groups of photos at one time.

You can apply any changes you want to as many images as you want, then batch them to JPG,TIFF or DNG.

GT

Reply
 
 
Dec 8, 2011 16:49:19   #
Mudshark Loc: Illinois
 
phoenix wrote:
I think photoshop is very popular but also time consuming. As a longstanding photographer who was dragged kicking and screaming into the digital age, I limit my editing to Picasa. It's relatively simple (like me!) and doesn't take as much time as Photoshop. As far as cutting corners goes.... learn from the film photographers and "make every shot count and fill the frame". I used to have this mantra posted inside my gadget bag! Too many digital photographers take WAY too many shots IMHO on the basis I guess "that if you throw enough sh*t at the wall - some of it will stiick". Trouble is... it's still sh*t! In short: think before you press the button! You'll be a better photographer for it - promise!
I think photoshop is very popular but also time co... (show quote)



Could not agree more. I still shoot some sports. I'll shoot what would, in the old days, be the equivalent one roll of film...give or take, and I'll have a substantial number of decent, usable shots. The younger shooters are mystified by this. They shoot hundreds of frames...often shotgunning...I tell them it's like shooting video and picking one frame out. In the end they often don't have nearly as many usable, quality shots as I do. Cartier-Bresson----The Decisive Moment...
Also, from my days as a photojournalist I still "fill the frame." But on the commercial side I get in trouble sometimes...client wants 8X10s, 4X6s and the ad people want a cover format with negative space.....sometimes if it was shot tight...your up the Kodak river and your only paddle is Photoshop.....know what I mean???

Reply
Dec 8, 2011 19:10:52   #
MtnMan Loc: ID
 
Very inexpensive if you buy a new Nikon...as in free.

But I have gone to Elements 10. It has many more features and at $50 can't be beat.

aammatj wrote:
I use Nikon Capture NX for 95% of my editing. It's easy to learn, intuitive, and relatively inexpensive. It doesn't do everything, though like CS5.

Reply
Dec 8, 2011 19:38:34   #
RMM Loc: Suburban New York
 
Mudshark wrote:
I found a recipe for Macbeth neutral grey used in building a homemade photo viewing box. I had the paint store mix the paint and painted the entire room in neutral grey. I put in color balanced lights and essentially made a darkroom that is neutral and color balanced. I use one of the moniter calibration monkeys and my monitor is recalibrated every month. And there's more.......AND STILL.......the fact that what you see on your monitor is transmitted light and what you see on a print is reflected light will make you NUTS!!!
And just like the old days when it seemed every client had a llight table that was way off and you were trying to make transparencies that looked perfect to everyone...well...nothing changes...now everyone has a different computer moniter and no matter what you do your image most likely won't look the same elsewhere...seems that way to me....
I found a recipe for Macbeth neutral grey used in ... (show quote)

I've seen pro shops where the equipment is calibrated every day. And, as Mudshark says, the rooms are enclosed, and the lighting is kept the same every day. What you see is influenced strongly by the available light, and viewing in daylight vs. tungsten light vs. fluorescent light can make quite a difference when you pull a print. For that matter, adjacent colors or frames in what you're working on can also cause perceptual changes.

As for available software, there's a ton of it. Start with a free package like Picasa (I said LIKE Picasa, so don't jump down my throat with your favorite other package) that is compatible with both Mac OS X and Windows. That way, you have only one set of tools to have to learn.

Reply
Dec 8, 2011 19:50:37   #
Mudshark Loc: Illinois
 
RMM wrote:
Mudshark wrote:
I found a recipe for Macbeth neutral grey used in building a homemade photo viewing box. I had the paint store mix the paint and painted the entire room in neutral grey. I put in color balanced lights and essentially made a darkroom that is neutral and color balanced. I use one of the moniter calibration monkeys and my monitor is recalibrated every month. And there's more.......AND STILL.......the fact that what you see on your monitor is transmitted light and what you see on a print is reflected light will make you NUTS!!!
And just like the old days when it seemed every client had a llight table that was way off and you were trying to make transparencies that looked perfect to everyone...well...nothing changes...now everyone has a different computer moniter and no matter what you do your image most likely won't look the same elsewhere...seems that way to me....
I found a recipe for Macbeth neutral grey used in ... (show quote)

I've seen pro shops where the equipment is calibrated every day. And, as Mudshark says, the rooms are enclosed, and the lighting is kept the same every day. What you see is influenced strongly by the available light, and viewing in daylight vs. tungsten light vs. fluorescent light can make quite a difference when you pull a print. For that matter, adjacent colors or frames in what you're working on can also cause perceptual changes.

As for available software, there's a ton of it. Start with a free package like Picasa (I said LIKE Picasa, so don't jump down my throat with your favorite other package) that is compatible with both Mac OS X and Windows. That way, you have only one set of tools to have to learn.
quote=Mudshark I found a recipe for Macbeth neutr... (show quote)


I'm told by people who are deeply involved in this subject that even the color of your clothes can make a difference when viewing color in a controlled room. I normally don't go that far because I don't need that much perfection. However, I do have almost everything in my digital darkroom painted MacBeth neutral grey and I have color balanced lights that are bounced off the grey ceiling creating a very subdued neutral light. I can tell the difference when the door is left open and the normal room light from the studio is crossing my monitor.
And just because I am an idiot...when I know I'm going to be spending most of a day on an important project...sitting in front of my monitor I try to wear a black T shirt or a grey sweat shirt of something of that nature. I avoid a bright red shirt for instance...O.K., I'm Anal Retentive.......

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.