Maybe I am different. As I read through the topics here and read various threads, I find some very interesting thoughts and opinions.. I look at my self as a Professional, since I get...

breezy Loc: Foxville, MD

As I read through the topics here and read various threads, I find some very interesting thoughts and opinions..
I look at my self as a Professional, since I get paid to do what I do, I absolutely love what I do and the genre I work in.. and I consider myself not only as a Professional, but also an artist..
For me, I don't use nor want to use Photoshop.. If I can't make what I want out of the the RAW file, then I just didn't take a good enough shot..
Below is what my art form is..
Camera is a Nikon 5100, I am using two flash filters and a camera old-school cokin filter on the lens.. After that I take it and work the RAW image with Lightroom.. Lightroom is the only program I use.

I rarely will post this stuff, since it is all for a private party.. but figured I would show some of the hobbiest what can be done with a mid-range camera and lightroom.. You don't have to have a $3000. camera, just your imagination and the passion to drive it.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

well, I'm mostly a straight outta the camera sort of person. I don't like using Photoshop but do if I have to fix something (I do a lot of sports where the light isn't always as controlled as with studio or with speedlites). However, 99% of the time, I just download straight from the camera and export to jpg. I might add a small amount of saturation.
I wish I could afford to have Lightroom. The only reason I have Photoshop is because someone gave it to me (and it's an old version).

I'll add that when I shoot a game, I always end up with 100 to 200 images. That would be a nightmare to Photoshop all of them.

debbiesweds

amazing photo!

Mr.Ed Loc: Houston, Texas

Very cool pic. I started using iPhoto. I recently got Aperture. I don't yet know whether to regret the upgrade or not.

I would rather spend more time using the camera than using the computer. There are very few shots that I would do much more with if I knew how.

There is an exception to the mostly out of camera preference. I love HDR.

breezy Loc: Foxville, MD

les_stockton wrote:

well, I'm mostly a straight outta the camera sort ... (show quote)

When I used to do "Sports Photography" it was before digital.. usually shot positive film, since that is what most publications wanted if they wanted color.. But I too used to shoot off about 100-200 shots, you have to to get the action documented throughout the game..
Save up and get Lightroom.. It is an awesome program for "developing" your RAW shots. You really won't be sorry about spending the money once you start using it..

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

Mr.Ed wrote:

There is an exception to the mostly out of camera preference. I love HDR.

I enjoy HDR. I also enjoy occassionally turning one of my photos into a comic just for fun. And sometimes the fractalius filter is fun.
I only do those things when I'm bored and can't get out to photograph anything.

MWAC Loc: Somewhere East Of Crazy

Quote:

For me, I don't use nor want to use Photoshop.. If I can't make what I want out of the the RAW file, then I just didn't take a good enough shot..

Not to be nick-picky but LightRoom is an editting tool, I know there are many professionals that use LR for 95% of their editing needs. You can clone out distracting elements, adjust lighting, brightness, contrast, etc. There is even a plug-in to create layers so you can mask back just like PS, it's a lot more effective/powerful than people give it create for.

Don't under estimate Light Room, it's a wonderful editting program at a pretty great price.

Your image is wonderful by the way.

breezy Loc: Foxville, MD

MWAC wrote:

quote For me, I don't use nor want to use Photosh... (show quote)

My point exactly.. It is an editing tool... And it is what I also use for about 99% of my needs.. I don't use or have the need to own PS for what i do or create.. The photo above is strictly done in Lightroom.
And thanks for the kudo on the shot..

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

During the years I have shot thousands of what I consider superb 35mm slides (Kodachrome mainly) and I enjoyed the fact that lighting, composing and selecting exposure time and lens opening was done on camera prior pressing the shutter release button; at that instant, what was recorded on film was the final product: no retouching, no re-framing... nothing.

After going digital, I feel the same way and I find myself taking the time to make sure all of these elements are taking into consideration prior making the shot.

I consider PS a "patch" for carelessly planned photography though the software has its place in fixing the proverbial and occasional "accidents".

I use Lightroom 3 strictly for sorting and filing; so far it has performed admirably.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

Julian wrote:

After going digital, I feel the same way and I find myself taking the time to make sure all of these elements are taking into consideration prior making the shot.

In sports photography, there is little "careful planning" that can be done. You get there early and take test shots and a reference for white balance. You try out various shooting locations. But other than that, the only thing you can do is to be familiar enough with the particular sport to anticipate when things happen, what is likely to happen next (and where). And even then, with different players, this can vary.

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

That is why sports photography has the looks of "sports photography": dramatic and sometimes blurry pictures that are labeled as "great shots" but that greatly depend on the capability of the equipment--focus tracking, fast lenses, etc.--and not necessarily on the skills of the photographer.

les_stockton Loc: Eastern Oklahoma

Julian wrote:

not necessarily on the skills of the photographer.

I consider that an insult. I'm not following this thread any longer.

PS. I've had numerous people with better photo equipment than mine that couldn't get the results that I do with lesser equipment. It's because I have the skills and they haven't acquired them yet. They just assumed that buying a better camera and lenses would make them a better sports photographer.

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

No insult intended, just my personal feelings. This is what forums are all about. Great fun!

lindysuewho

Seriously? He quits a thread because he doesn't like what's said? LOL

I recently got LightRoom and love working in it. It seems the new trend in wedding photographt is having these images look washed out. Personally, I'm not a fan but I use presets in LR to give them what they want.

les_stockton wrote:

Julian wrote:

not necessarily on the skills of the photographer.

I consider that an insult. I'm not following this thread any longer.

PS. I've had numerous people with better photo equipment than mine that couldn't get the results that I do with lesser equipment. It's because I have the skills and they haven't acquired them yet. They just assumed that buying a better camera and lenses would make them a better sports photographer.

Julian Loc: Sarasota, FL

Thank you!!! This forum is about what we do and what we like. Sooner or later someone will be expressing a critique or opinion about something we might not agree with; that is the nature of a forum, and as members, we need to accept such comments as constructive and not as personal attacks or insults. Peace!