Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: foxpawpress
Nov 11, 2012 22:50:17   #
I have a Canon 20D EOS, with interchangable lenses. It cost more than I wanted to pay, and it took me a long time to learn how to fiddle around with the controls---steeep learning curve! But now I can use it on manual under low light conditions with an ASA of 1600 and get fairly decent shots with my stabilizer zoom lens, as I did a few nights ago to take a few photos of Robert Kennedy Jr., who was speaking at our local college. With this ASA, I could shoot a few shots unobtrusively without flash. I use the zoom lens with the stabilizer, more often than not. I have another wide angle lens, which is really useful for landscapes. The macro lens is prohibitively expensive, at the moment, but would be nice to have. The problem with my system is that it is fairly heavy and bulky and I initially recommended the Canon 100 which looks like it's a point and shoot, and it's very portable, but it takes good quality photos with high enough resolution for most of what I ever want to do. And its not expensive. If you want to shoot wildlife photos, you need a system which will give you a good quality long lens--at least 300 mm--and that will be expensive, so you really have to decide what your goals are. I take photos of landscapes and my dogs, weird things that capture my attention, and sometimes flowers. I also recently have taken a lot of photos of things I want to sell. My system is quite versatile for my needs, except for the weight and bulkiness of it.

The Canon has made a number of newer EOS models, since mine came out, but I'm quite happy with what I have. I can take photos with up to 12 million pixels--should I really want a very high resolution enlargement, but most of the time, I'm taking photos for other purposes, and edit for the number of pixels, to save space. The biggest problem with digital photography is you can shoot far more photos than you'll ever need. Once you choose a camera, 1) set up a filing system and ruthlessly get rid of photos you know you'll never want to look at or use later and 2)get an external drive for back-up storage of your files.

If you are interested in the Canon products, look at their refurbished lenses, which can save you a lot of money, and look for used cameras, as people decide to buy newer models (why I don't know, but we're programmed to think that whatever is the latest model must be the best one!) If you buy an older model Canon, then decide you want a newer one, the lenses will be interchangable.
Go to
Nov 9, 2012 07:22:20   #
Look at the Cannon 100

Rachel
Go to
Mar 23, 2012 01:28:33   #
Wow: Does anyone make a camera with a beryllium casing? Or, maybe it would be enough to wear rubber gloves :o)


With all of this good advice for shooting lightning, don't forget that your digital camera is an electronic device, and, as such, can attract lightning. Back in NJ, one afternoon, a young man in a parking lot, was struck and killed by lightning, just from opening his car door, from the spark of the dome light, in his car clicking on. It doesn't take much to draw lightning, and most if not all lightning starts from the ground, going up and back down to earth again! "Nuf Said"![/quote]
Go to
Mar 21, 2012 21:48:40   #
Although, you don't have to worry about the camera "trying to focus" if you put the focus on the "manual" setting.
Go to
Mar 21, 2012 12:34:50   #
Hi,
I had the misfortune--or good fortune--depending on how you look at it, to be caught in a lightening storm in a campsite near Witchita, KS, last spring. Just after arriving, and shortly before sunset, I was walking my dog around the park when I saw lightening in the distance. I braced my camera against a tree for a few shots at dusk. However, soon the wind began, in strong gusts, up to at least 50 mph, and I ran for my trailer. The lightening storm continued for about 20 minutes to half an hour, accompanied by golf-ball sized hail part of the time. With my EOS 20D Canon camera on manual, steadying it with my knees, I took exposures of approximately three to six seconds, using a 70--200 zoom Canon lens with a stabilizer. I was lucky enough to get several good photos--check my picasa web album, Rachel A Scott, picasa web album, "severe thunderstorm warning" to see the photos. So, mostly, my tip is to be in theright place at the right time, and if you have a tripod and an inexpensive shutter release (I didn't) so much the better! As another tip, focus on infinity, or the trees or landscape likely to be highlighted by the lightening. Try different exposure times; as the only light in this case was from the lightening, a longer exposure was better, as it captured several flashes of lightening on a frame, at least a few times. It was great to be inside the trailer, as I had a good, unobstructed view of the storm through the window, but was sheltered and didn't have to worry about either my camera or I getting wet, or pummeled by hail. Fortunately, the window was clean enough (and close enough) to my lens, that it did not cause spots on the photos. I think the wind gusts were severe enough that I would have had great difficulty keeping a tripod and myself upright if I had been outside. The plastic step to my camper blew away in the storm. I was also fortunate that the storm was somewhat distant, and it didn't rain, which could have interfered with the clear photos of the lightening. I notice that one of the photos shows multiple scattered dots, which are probably from the golf-ball sized hail, seen because of reflected light from the lightening--maybe the lightening reflected off the white side of the trailer, and illuminated the hail--just my best guess as to why it is so visible. Any one else have any better ideas? The lightening itself was so far away....
Go to
Mar 14, 2012 15:05:19   #
Hi again--I re-read the posts, and gather that the photos you plan to publish are photos taken by the descendants of the mutineers and not the ones you took and posted here. You might want to confine yourself to the historical photos, but you have so many great photos you've taken that I think it would add to the project to include the best of your own photos. Sorry I misunderstood.

The comment about the difference between rouge and rogue makes an important point. No matter how good a writer is, we ALL needed editing! I think the comments about university publishers are very helpful. To cut to the chase, you might start by writing to the Harry Ransom Center, which is a part of the University of Texas, Austin, and apply for a fellowship or grant for this project. Contact Margie Rine, Associate Director for Development, Harry Ransom Center, PO Drawer 7219, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78713, email: margierine@mail.utexas.edu, and tell her Rachel Scott suggested you write to her about this. I've donated my father's miniature book collection to them, and also steered another miniature book collection their way. In addition to having 2 million books (!) among other collections, they have an extensive collection of historic photos, from the works of David Douglas Duncan to Walker Percy, and I think they might very well jump at the opportunity to add these to their collection!

Good luck. A very worth-while project. I think the most critical information you need to concentrate on is getting documentation as accurately as possible about the names of the people in the historic photos, the names of the places, inscriptions on the cemetery stones, names of everything you can document! I will send Margie a note, and alert her to your project--I think it is very highly collectible, and another plus is that the original photos could be preserved by professional conservators at the Ransom Center. Copies could be made of the originals and sent to Pitcairn Island, in addition to the published book that results, if this idea works out, and is acceptable to the Pitcairn people.
Best of luck; Rachel Scott/Fox Paw Press
Go to
Mar 14, 2012 14:14:25   #
Hi: Great photos and subject! You have a book in the making IMO, but as I'm avoiding doing something more productive myself, at the moment, here are some tips to make the project more professional and more publishable, whether you self-publish or find a publisher: Think about editing the 1400 shots down to 100, or 60. You have the same problem I had shooting Hawaii--every scene is so scenic, it's hard to winnow them down. How many shots of palm trees on the beach is too many? Actually, more than one, unless there is something unique and interesting about the others!

You have far too many of the island from a distance, and far too many of hilltops which are all beautiful, but not particularly distinctive in most cases. Some are unique, and those are the ones to use.

I'm a bit confused about your comment about "vintage photos." I don't see any photos you've posted which would be from the 1800's--they didn't have color at that time!

Most look quite contemporary. If you have some earlier photos that's great.

My comments are with regard to the contemporary photos, which is I assume, the photos posted here. Of course with older photos, it would be difficult or impossible to reshoot them.

Start by selecting the best one of each topic--I saw 50 of the island--getting bigger, getting smaller--#1205 had dramatic color separation in the water, and was far more interesting than any of the others--look for the best one, with something special to offer.

People eating--there was one shot of the people I loved for the composition, as they were gathered into a tight circle, and the food was colorful, but the entire shot was out of focus, which makes that shot unusable. But you're making another trip, and can set up a similar shot that will work: Use fill flash, a high ISO and a high f stop if you need to, and recreate that shot; Take along a second slave flash if you can afford it; it might make all the difference in lighting some of the inside photos.

On the boats--lots of shots, but there was no specific focus to hold my interest in the photos of the boats filled with people--get close to one interesting guy--maybe the captain steering the boat, or someone hauling in a sail, or otherwise at work, or the guy with all the necklaces, and get that person cropped close in the foreground looking off to sea, with the other people in the back ground, using a wide angle, to get in as many of the people and as much of the boat as possible.

Or you can use some feature of the ship to provide a foreground--a life bouy, for example, or a chair with an umbrella--something you can move to create your foreground is always a plus. Position someone where you want them, if you need to. Use some of the preliminary photos as studies for more polished more dramatic shots. If you can't reshoot it, it would try taking the best one--maybe with the two boats crossing, and crop it more tightly.

Pick one of the dock coming in, pick one with a boat full of people going out. That's enough of the dock, believe me.

Take the artifacts out of the cases, and group them on a suitable neutral background--maybe sand. It looks like there are several categories of artifacts, and I think you could get separate shots of each group of like objects. I like the one with a girl holding a stone in each hand. There's another nice one of a man holding a piece of metal--from the ship, I presume--it's a close-up, with just his hands in the photo--it works nicely.

Be brutal in editing--I liked the guy in the red shirt climbing, but get him closer to the lens, let us see his face, but stage it if need be--he's working hard to climb and shouldn't be smiling, maybe grabbing onto a rock, and use a wide lens to get the background with a a high f stop and a sharp shot with depth of field. If it can't be re-shot, consider cropping it more tightly.

Use ONE wave splashing on the rocks--we've all seen millions of waves.

I love the hermit crab, but pick only one, or two, if you can get him doing something interesting. Consider giving it some extra angle for better dramatic effect. There's one that would work as is. If you want to try for a more dramatic shot, try to catch him climbing from the sand onto a rock. Also, did you know that hermit crabs change out their shells as they grow? They frequently will try on a new shell if one is provided for them, as I've discovered with my own aquarium.

Try putting a new shell about the same size near the crab, and if you're lucky, you can get a shot of him trying out a new "home." They are quite vulnerable when switching shells, so they'll do it fast; you have to be set up and ready. Maybe for safety, they'll only do it in the water. Try setting up a shot in shallow water. Shots like that take time and patience, but give you something special, which makes it worth your time.

The two young guys in the bow of the boat are really great--look for photos like that, which tell more than one part of the story. You've got two local guys relaxing, and enjoying being on the boat.

I like the guy with all of the native necklaces--that's great by itself. I also like the couple kissing, but would consider a re-do with a gentle kiss if possible, or if you could get them dancing cheek to cheek, even better. No rules against staging a shot!

No photos of kids making faces, mugging--those are vacation snapshots.

Happy people are fine doing happy things like eating or socializing. Edit out all the ones of the friendly guy with his hands in the air--the best shot of him is going to be one with him DOING something purposeful, and not smiling. He's photogenic, but put him to work!

Pick one sign--if it is the one with miles to distant places, that's OK, but I would find it more interesting to see a local one--I like the guy with the sign, but pose him maybe with folded arms--we can see the sign is there--it's trite to have him pointing at it.

Use ONE sunset per scene--if you have two or three great sunsets of different locations, that's OK, but pick the best of the best. And what about a sunrise? Look for mist; look for rainy weather, different moods.

If the little boat is being pulled aboard the big boat--is that the point?--get on the boat, and get a close up of the boarding with someone hauling the boat on-board, or helping people to board, in the foreground, using a very wide angle lens to emphasize his arms and encompass the rest of the scene.

That whole series is too far away; the boats need to be much closer--if you need to, get in a boat yourself, and get a close dramatic wide-angle shot. You probably need to find a way to waterproof your camera to accomplish such shots--you can do a lot with zip-lock bags and rubber bands, fairly cheaply.

There are a few great close-ups of kids. Be sure to get signed releases and names for all the people you photograph, except for outside crowd scenes--gotta have them, although it is a pain.

Birds: use a long lens, get close enough to show detail, good lighting, a good gliding shot would be nice, or especially a shot landing, where you can see the feathers working, and some land in the photo to anchor the picture, unless the bird is really spectacular on its own--the ones shown look too much like snapshots. Use them as inspiration for your upcoming trip to improve on the shots you will ultimately publish.

Surely there is more than one species of bird on the island? Take the time to shoot more species--you may need a blind, if they're really shy--use bait--a fish on the dock will do it, if they're not shy and used to people fishing from the dock, to get close-ups of a few other species.

Usually when fishermen are cleaning their fish, there will be plenty of birds hanging around looking for a hand-out. This is where your fast-action multiple shot feature of the camera can come in handy. Shoot a burst, in good sunlight, and you're likely to get at least one great shot. If birds hang around the dock to fish on their own, wait around and you could get a series of a shorebird hunting, striking and then swallowing a fish whole!

ONE shot of the dock with a boat leaving is plenty. Getting in front of the boat, and shooting from another boat could give you a more dramatic shot.

Use only the most dramatic shots of the island from the water, and the most historic. You must have a few dozen, which are a few dozen too many. I like the shots from the airplane, but again, one is enough. What's the line running off the stern of the boat? Fishing line? Get a shot of them bringing in the fish! A shot of a fish fry with people gathered close-in, wide-angle, would be a great opportunity to get the community shot you need.

Two or three of the cemetery, as some are of important historic interest, and only ONE of the petroglyphs--if you MUST do more than one, give us a close-up shot for the second one of a feature not otherwise well seen.

Getting the shots of the people on the boats is a great way to show the people, but find a way, again, to frame the shot or give it a point of interest. Shoot between two people holding hands, for example, or else get the people doing something more organized--a group hauling in fish with a net, for example. Maybe it's just me, but the photos you have with a group of people on deck looks too chaotic. Having the two boats passing helps.

If you can re-shoot, with most everyone on one boat, looking toward the other, some of them engaged with work to keep the boats apart, or pull them together would help give focus. Solve the problem in your own way, but give it more focus, if only by cropping it tighter.

What are the shots of the pit about? The shots you have aren't working. Get in tight, and focus on one piece up close, maybe a native holding a piece, or squatting just at the edge of the pit, holding one and examining it, facing toward or to the side of the camera, but not looking at the camera, to tighten up the shot, with the other pieces in the background, if it is historically significant; make it look like more than clutter.

Woman writing--is she cataloguing artifacts? Pose her with a group of artifacts, if only two or three, and get in tighter--use a wide angle to get a little of the white clapboard surrounding her, as it does add a sense of place, but right now, it lacks drama. Get a good sharp shot of her face, and the artifacts surrounding her--use fill flash if you need to, or back-lighting to make it dramatic, but with good detail of her face. Shoot from at least the side, if not in front of her--consider whether you can shoot from outside, through the window.

If there are people in the photos, make them more about the people, with better composition, looking for unusual angles, and think about what best captures the personality of the subject.

I like the wooden fish--who carved them? A photo of the guy carving, or even pretending to be putting in a finishing touch with a knife could help. Or at least get closer to the subject--with either a long lens or a ladder, or take them off the wall (if possible.)

Photos which show the front of an ATV and a trail look too much like vacation snapshots--get on either the front or the back ATV, and get a photo of a group in the foreground, or from the front or the side. Get them to slow down if needed, as you can't shoot and hold on at the same time! But, again, make it about both the people and the scenery--use it as a foreground for one of the spectacular scenes.

One of the avocado(?)--better to have the guy cutting the avocado open, surrounded by people seated and waiting to eat makes more sense, or alternatively, harvesting it would also work--and if so, best if you take a ladder, and shoot from above. WORK the scenes.

At the cemetery, have a native cleaning a stone, or kneeling and praying, or laying flowers, or an offering, at the stone of an ancestor, depending on what are the local customs; not leaning on a stone, as though it is a hitching post, and not looking at the camera. Cemeteries are sacred sites. I don't get that feeling from the current photos.

Consider a shot in the early morning with long shadows, maybe with luck, there will be fog or a little mist.

You have great shots of some of the buildings--one seems to be a church--can you get a photo of a religious service? A minister or priest opening the doors, looking out (but not at the camera) with the church framed around him would be awesome. I know that's probably asking too much--but would be great if it is still a church where worship is held.

Those photos with a focus on the exteriors are among the best, and even better are the shots looking out from the buildings--again, you get more information--the building style and the scenery.

Film early in the day and late in the day for mood shots, to add more drama, when you can get some long shadows, using fill flash if needed. Consider a few night photos as well; bring your tripod. Watch for the full moon, and where and what time it rises--you could get a spectacular shot from the right position, at the right time.

Do these guys have favorite games? Get them playing a native game, whether dice or cards or a ball game--doing something besides standing by an anchor. CLEANING or polishing the canon would be better than standing by the canon. Maybe two people polishing it, one on each side, to take it from a snapshot to a photo with a story.

Have them sitting in close, leaning in, to crop tighter, and shoot from the end; try a wide angle close up from the end, stopped down to f16 or f22 with lots of light, if possible, to get good depth of field, and sharp focus of the people.

Do they play music, or dance? The kissing couple: doing a slow dance with a close-up, getting the detail of the necklaces would be even better than the kiss.

Can you shoot a wedding or an anniversary? Or is there a time when they dress in costume for re-enactments? Walt Disney did a one hour video in the 1940's of "The American Eskimo" in Hooper Bay, Alaska, and got them all to wear native costumes; the local church allowed them to make masks (which had been forbidden) and dance just for the film. It was completely staged, but historic and invaluable as a documentary, because these people still remembered.

Your people with modern clothing are OK if that's all they wear--just trying to give you more ideas.

The photos of the cave and passageways might benefit by adding people going through them, not for every scene, but some; have someone bring a lantern----try it both ways--and keep the people focused on the scenery, and away from the camera.

You have a lot of shots that are great just the way they are; you need in some cases nothing else; in others, maybe crop in a little tighter--although I think I've been accused of cropping too tightly. Your series has too few close-ups--it will be more interesting if you have more of a mix.

And with what you have, at least half of the project or more is spectacular just as it is; get rid of the dozens of scenes of mountain or hill tops that don't say anything, except, here's another pretty hilltop. Some of the unusual rock formations are great just as they are; but don't give us more than one of each, and even then, maybe pick only the best, and give us half as many.

There must be more native flowers--get as many close-ups as possible of flowers, and mix them in with other scenic shots. There must be butterflies and bees--getting a few with the flowers would be more exciting. Also, a little girl or two, posed with or picking flowers, is a little hokey, but it will work, if you want to add more variety with flower photos.

If you can find a publisher, great--go to the bookstore, or go on-line and you will find probably a few dozen possible publishers. However, the publishing business is changing dramatically. Meredith, in Des Moines, Iowa, used to do a lot of table-top books, but closed their whole table top division, which tells you something about the way publishing is going!

If you don't find a publisher, these days, with the web, anyone with a few thousand dollars can self-publish; you will have to be prepared to market the book--marketing can be varied--from advertising on the web, to local bookstores, to contacting big publishers, or attempt to peddle the finished book to one of the big chains.

You can always start with a small first edition, and print more if you can build a market, or get a publisher to print more--they may be able to get a better discounted deal, to cut publishing costs. I've seen books published in Taiwan, lately--maybe they are one of the most cost-effective sources.

There's a site on-line--a clearing-house of sorts--to match buyers with main land Chinese manufacturers. You simply specify in as much detail as possible--how many pages, what kind of paper, what size the book should be, etc., the typeface and amount of text, an idea of the layout-- and various manufacturers will contact you and quote a price for the project. I would ask for references and at least one copy of a published book to check the quality of their work, but it is one way to get an inexpensive publisher. If the price seems high, ask about what could be done to cut the cost to one more in your price range.

Or, you can go the other way, potentially, and make it a limited edition book with fine marbled endplates and even leather binding, working with a private press in the States or the UK. Advertise on Briar Press for a private press that might be interested. Check with University presses, art and design schools with Graphic design programs, or "Art of the Book" programs too. It's just a thought. You may or may not find someone receptive to the idea.

You will want to add well-written copy. And check carefully to make sure it is historically accurate. Consider whether you're writing anything which could be libelous and if so, run it past a lawyer....Spending $200 to $300 in advance could save big $$$ liability later. Get copies of previously published history of the expedition for checking facts; from the library if you can! Consider adding a few historic maps for completeness. Again, for the map, maybe you can reproduce one which is off-copyright (anything pre-1900 is safe). Or, if you want something extra, advertise for a cartographer with Briar Press (they're on line, you can type in Briar Press on Google, and find the site.) Or just do a search for cartographers.

If you can't write, find someone to write it for you, or at least hire an editor. You don't need a lot of copy--probably 3,000 to 5,000 words would do it. My critique is probably longer than that.

Take detailed notes, with the names and what's going on, for each photograph. If someone else does the writing, they can't divine that information. YOU have to supply it; and the more detail, the better. Full name, (correctly spelled!) of anyone in a close-up, or portrait, is a must. For contemporary photos, signed dated release giving permission to publish is a must for all portraits and close-ups, unless the person photographed is deceased; still try to get a release from the next-of-kin, especially if the photo is of a child; you want to avoid a lawsuit for invasion of privacy later! Get parents to sign the releases for children. Don't ask the children, as the release must be from their parents.

If people are reluctant to sign, be persuasive but respectful; point out that this will preserve their memory for all time.

Showing respect, and taking great care with facts and details will go a long way toward gaining cooperation with the most reluctant subjects. If someone still balks, after you have respectfully tried everything, give up gracefully. Give them your card, in case they change their mind, but realize not everyone will cooperate. You must preserve your integrity with the whole group, and cannot do that without respect for each individual.

Name the boats, the harbor, the dock, the inlets; special rock formations probably all have local names. If you want them detailed on a map, you must supply that information, correctly spelled and located, for the cartographer. Name the cemetery and the church, and any public buildings, for the private homes, the last names of the owners. Name the beaches, name everything that has a name! The species of birds, flowers, fruit, the artifacts and what they were used for, if known. Dates of historical importance; write down the inscriptions from headstones that are pictured. Document everything you can.

Study a typical National Geographic story to see how many words is in one of their photo-journalism main spreads, to get a better idea. Go to the library, check the Smithsonian and National Geographic, to get the names of a few dozen free-lance writers who might be interested in the project, as another way to find a writer. Look also at writers who free-lance for the airline industry magazines. Maybe one of the local islanders can write and is willing to write the copy--if so, all the better!

Hope this helps, and that I haven't offended you with my critique. Rachel Scott/Fox Paw Press
Go to
Mar 11, 2012 22:32:01   #
You make some good points. My father didn't keep many "throw aways." He told me once, "If you want people to think you are a good photographer, only show them your best photos."

However, there will likely be a chance to do some winnowing--there will be photos of events past which no longer hold any significance worth preserving. Some photos were taken for the Iowa State yearbook, the "Bomb," without any further value now, etc.

And, I'm under no obligation to scan all of his photos--I can pick the subjects and photos I like the most and ignore the rest.

I appreciate your advice regarding backing up files; I'm interested in the opinion of other photographers as to which are the best quality hard drives. I think the nature of my work is such that jpeg files will be fine for most of my photos; I can keep working files in TIFF, for highest resolution for my best work. They can be converted to jpeg files later if I see any need to do so.

Most of my prints are 8X10, although I have the capability of making prints with my Canon Pixma printer at least 13 inches wide, and can use the local University printing lab to make larger images, potentially. I have been doing cyanotypes recently, but of course, I'll probably want to try other alternative printing as well, thus, the reason to keep my best photos in larger TIFF files.

My opinion as to which are the "best" or most important may change as my goals change...I suppose that is a good argument for saving the jpeg files as fairly large files, and throwing away those I consider duplicates or so close to duplicates as to be unnecessary. I often find a subject, then take multiple photos of it, from different angles, to study again at home; this is where I think I need to do some editing and throwing away. I hope this sounds reasonable.
Go to
Mar 11, 2012 01:33:34   #
I recently took a photo course at University of MN--Duluth, and our professor recommended saving in TIFF format.

I'm sitting on 81,000 photos from my Dad's files--color slides and color and black and white negatives. Somehow I want to transfer these to digital format.

I also have zip files, floppy disks, and now the issue of how to best save digital files.

It comes down to having to plan, and keeping up with changes on a regular basis--I'm not completely sold on CD or DVD files, as I've had some inexplicably fail to open. I've had USB files fail to open too.

My current plan--and I'm open to other recommendations--is to systematically back up my files with a copy on DVD, and a second copy on a portable accessory hard drive. They've gotten to be smaller and less expensive, fortunately.

It's a daunting task, as to date, I have not organized my digital files other than sequentially. Coming from a long history of shooting with film, I never imagined how many more digital photos I would take.

Keeping track of my black and white negatives was never a problem; it was easy enough to put them in a sleeve, and label them.

I hope those starting out will set up a system, delete out of focus or unneeded photos, and edit large files to manageable size, saving only the most exceptional in a large file format. I am not an expert, but the TIFF format may be the best for large files, and jpeg for those of smaller size. I can get a good 8x10 photo from a 1.5 million pixel jpeg file; I think that is a reasonable size for saving most of my files. Only a very few are exceptional enough to justify saving in large files, and I plan to save those as TIFF files.

The needs of those who are doing commercial work, involving layering and extensive editing will be different, of course.
Go to
Mar 10, 2012 01:12:56   #
Compatibility with changing technology is a serious issue. The early photoshop programs automatically saved in Photoshop format, and I now have Photoshop 3 files that I don't have the ability to open. I have found jpeg files to be consistently available from one generation of Photoshop to the next, and with other photo editing programs, such as Mac's "iPhoto." Personally I think Photoshop should provide readily available technology to recover early files. The compatibility issues are frustrating and irresponsible, especially given the high cost and necessity of buying new Photoshop programs.
Go to
Mar 9, 2012 13:16:19   #
Saving copies takes up space. Especially if you start with a RAW file. Ideally, it would be great to copy all of the originals to DVDs to create a master file, then keep the edited copy on your working hard drive. I've gotten more brutal about deleting photos, unless I feel they have some extraordinary redeeming feature.

It is so easy to shoot five or ten photos when one would do, simply because you can. When files might have another potential use later, it would be nice to have the original to work from. I think it's a very personal decision, and one I struggle with, too. I have found working copies in which I've started with a RAW file, changed it to a black and white, inverted it and made it into a negative, and in those cases, it's an easy decision to delete all but the original, or, if editing is sorely needed, save the original improved version.

I'm now using a Canon EOS20D, and my RAW files can eat up a lot of space at about 12 million pixels per shot. I've concluded that it is a very rare and exceptional photo that deserves to be saved in that format. Sometimes I use the advantage of the extra image to crop a photo, then save that photo to a Tiff file.

You are the only one who knows what future use you might make of your photo files, so you're the only one that can answer the question; but those are some of my thoughts.

Rachel A Scott
Go to
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.