Thinking of stepping up to DSLR. Have question

[Stangpilot]

Hi guys, I'm thinking of stepping up to a DSLR, it seems in alot of posts I've seen they seem to talk about post processing.

Will I have to do alot of post processing to get my pictures right with a DSLR or is that something that alot of DSLR pro's like to do?

I know if I shoot raw I'll always be post processing but I'll probably be shooting mostly JPEG's and looking to get good results out of the camera. I don't mind post processing once in a while but would like to keep it to a minimum. Thanks for your feedback.

Gus

[Jason25]

If you don't want to do a lot of post-processing, set up the camera how you want it (sharpening, color space, etc.) and shoot jpg. Many camera's built-in image settings don't apply to RAW files, so you wind up doing it yourself if you shoot RAW.

[TheWengler]

When you see the increased quality you get with RAW you might change your mind. Even if you just shoot jpg the quality will be better than images from fixed lens cameras.

[r3g]

As they said, tweak your in camera settings and make sure you get exposure right and PP will never be a requirement. Its always an option to spice up your pictures though ;)

[Jason25]

When you see the increased quality you get with RAW you might change your mind. Even if you just shoot jpg the quality will be better than images from fixed lens cameras.

This is very true, RAW holds a hell of a lot more detail, and gives more elbow room for tweaking. I started shooting RAW + JPG recently (instead of just RAW) for more serious stuff, and there's just no comparison when looking at them side by side.

[GaryS]

I shoot RAW exclusively now.... specifically because I don't always know what I'm doing.

A RAW files gives you a HUGE amount of leeway to fix exposure problems and white balance issues after the fact. You just can't do the same in jpg.

If you transfer your photos to your computer and they are all great, then just tell your RAW software to convert them to JPGs and delete the RAWs. And for the ones where you made a mistake, you can use your RAW editor to try to save it...

[fionndruinne]

You can certainly get by with a minimal amount of post-processing. Check out the free Picasa 2.0, which is an easy and handy photo manager as well as basic editor. A click here and there will spice up your shots quite a bit. If you later decide you want higher-quality editing, you can move on to a more detailed and intensive kind of PP with a more serious program. But if minimal PP is your goal, use the in-camera settings like they mentioned above, and use Picasa.

[DonSchap]

For most average folks, popping for a new DSLR out of the box ... sticking with JPG is probably a good idea. You can also leave the camera in the AUTO mode and reduce your setting changes to about nothing.

When you do feel comfortable enough to experiment ... start switching modes to manual and just see what happens with your various shots, if you have the time. Remember to jot down a few notes to keep track of what your mindset was at the time you started ... and most of all, be patient with yourself. Rome wasn't built in a day and neither will be YOUR photography skills. It takes time to understand just how your camera sees the world ... and what you can do to adjust for it and get it to follow the vision you have of it.

Most of all, learn the controls to your machine. Then ... when you feel you've gotten about all the controls understood ... switch to RAW and begin adjusting you images before they become JPGs and are chopped to death. Remember, RAW files stay uncorrupted, when they are saved by the camera. In a sense, you have all your original shots with RAW, so if you hose up the post-processing, you can usually start again. If you do that with a JPG ... all you do is reduce its quality, over and over, image data is lost ... until it cannot be resurrected.

One unfortunate side effect of Camera RAW is that you have to have a RAW-reader program (such as Adobe Photoshop CS3, otherwise you can do much with your images. ANd don't forget to download the Adobe RAW update plug-in to get to at least version 4.2 to see Canon EOS 40D RAW and SONY A700 RAW files) You will definitely get nothing on a standard computer w/o some kind of reader. JPGs can be read almost anywhere ... when you go to RAW, you instantly limit yourself to some type of software solution.

Of course, you can always shoot in RAW + JPEG style ... which takes up a ton more room on your memory card, but at least you can transfer those redundant JPG images to a standard PC and "see" them.

Anyway ... that's how I see it (pun intended). Enjoy your DSLR. ;)

[GaryS]

Auto mode...

We were out this weekend at a local farm for a pre-Halloween event. I was taking my boys into the haunted barn, so I tossed my camera bag on the ground near my wife and daughter, who were waiting outside.

As we got near the front of the line, I noticed my wife had gotten my camera out of the bag, so I ran over to her, flicked it into Auto mode and unlocked the zoom lock. Now she is good to go.

As we come out of the barn, she is standing in front of us with the camera in portrait orientation, and she presses the shutter. Auto mode decides the flash is needed so it pops out... and whacks her in the forehead. Now she is telling everyone who will listen that my camera attacked her.

[DonSchap]

Auto mode...

We were out this weekend at a local farm for a pre-Halloween event. I was taking my boys into the haunted barn, so I tossed my camera bag on the ground near my wife and daughter, who were waiting outside.

As we got near the front of the line, I noticed my wife had gotten my camera out of the bag, so I ran over to her, flicked it into Auto mode and unlocked the zoom lock. Now she is good to go.

As we come out of the barn, she is standing in front of us with the camera in portrait orientation, and she presses the shutter. Auto mode decides the flash is needed so it pops out... and whacks her in the forehead. Now she is telling everyone who will listen that my camera attacked her.

Well, if you shot with a SONY DSLR, you wouldn't have nonsense like that. I hated fighting that thing with the Canon. With the SONY, to use the built-in flash, you have to manually pull the flash head to its 'operating position' before it can be used, AUTO or not. :cool:

No head bonks, although I am curious ... what side of her head was she using BEHIND the viewfinder? :rolleyes:

[Stangpilot]

Thanks for the info guys! Looks like I got some great info to start with. I think I'll definitely start with JPEG but try to work my way to RAW shooting sometime down the road...

Gus

[Stangpilot]

Auto mode...

We were out this weekend at a local farm for a pre-Halloween event. I was taking my boys into the haunted barn, so I tossed my camera bag on the ground near my wife and daughter, who were waiting outside.

As we got near the front of the line, I noticed my wife had gotten my camera out of the bag, so I ran over to her, flicked it into Auto mode and unlocked the zoom lock. Now she is good to go.

As we come out of the barn, she is standing in front of us with the camera in portrait orientation, and she presses the shutter. Auto mode decides the flash is needed so it pops out... and whacks her in the forehead. Now she is telling everyone who will listen that my camera attacked her.


My Canon S1 IS does that. I'm sure Canon changed it on my S3 IS to avoid any aggravated battery lawsuits. LOL

Gus

[GaryS]

She was using her right eye on the viewfinder, shutter button up top...

And Don, are you kidding??? Did you read the result? She is never going to use my camera again.... I would advertise it as a feature :)

[crum]

hi guys,

i am using a d80, am i correct that any adjustments like sharpness/color/wb etc only affect the jpg whilst the raw remains unadjusted? therefore if only capturing in raw would leave these settings redundant?

off topic, when i transfer the photos i've taken via the cable and picture project (thru the pop-up open-as box when connected) the size is smaller on the hdd than the sd card, is data lost and is there a reason for it??

[fionndruinne]

off topic, when i transfer the photos i've taken via the cable and picture project (thru the pop-up open-as box when connected) the size is smaller on the hdd than the sd card, is data lost and is there a reason for it??

No, data is not lost in the transfer. When you say the size is smaller on the comp', do you mean the images are smaller in size than the camera specifies for the given image size/quality? Those are just ballpark figures; an individual image can vary in actual bit amount, based on how many color gradations were in the original scene (at least this has been my experience. Am I wrong here guys?). If you mean the size of all the images on the card, there is also some card space taken up in formatting the card to work in conjunction with the camera.

I'm thinking, incidentally, of uninstalling PictureProject, but hanging onto the "PictureProject InTouch Downloader", which is listed as a separate program in my Add/Remove Programs list. Has anyone done this? I find the InTouch downloader to be handy, but don't want rather useless PictureProject popping up as soon as I'm done transferring.

[Razr]

A RAW files gives you a HUGE amount of leeway to fix exposure problems and white balance issues after the fact

You flat out do not have time to "shoot and Chimp" at or in most venues. While you're Chimping your RAW iamges, the world/venue you came to shoot is passing you by. You cannot, as the quoted photographer implies, have time to "fix exposure problems" on the fly.
In essense, RAW covers up mistakes and is no proof you've "learned" anything.

Shooting flowers or macros or coins with no time pressure? Make your RAW images, as the quoted photographer noted: "after the fact.
But when time is a factor and chimping is not possible and you really-really need* to document the venue? JPEG.
*Waiting for your camera to finish writing a burst of RAW images to your buffer let's the action pass you by, be it a kid taking its first steps or a close-up of a Hollywood starlet, RAW sux-big time.

Reserve RAW for when you are shooting on a tripod with portraiture or scenery or ebay items.

[fionndruinne]

I disagree with that. You shouldn't necessarily need to take a large burst or raw images very often (sporting events excluded), and the slowness can be mitigated with a super-fast memory card. But the extra quality (let alone retouchability) of raw is more than enough reason to use it for any but a totally impracticable situation. I've been shooting almost entirely raw nature/scenery lately, and have yet to have lost a shutter chance due to my camera's being slowed down.

When do you have to document an event without some time afterwards to edit? Is it some kind of leave-your-images-at-the-door-on-your-way-out kind of thing, or what?

[Razr]

I disagree with that.

With what "that" do you disagree: that it takes longer to write RAW files? And longer still to write a burst of RAW files?
You shouldn't necessarily need A "qualifier" (caveat) which does not obviate the truth contained in my “it takes longer to write RAW files than jepgs" conclusion.
(SNIP) often (sporting events excluded), Here I can demonstrate the utter futility of "Chimping" as in if you are shooting a wedding and the B&G are on the move. Or when they are coming up the aisle or at the bouquet toss: Or when the graduate you came to shoot has already taken her Diploma in hand and is marching off the stage, jpeg is the only practical mode (unless you are using an E-3 which can continue to shoot until you run out of card memory).
slowness can be mitigated with a super-fast memory card. But the extra quality (let alone retouchability) of raw is more than enough reason to use it for any but a totally impracticable situation. Of which I have offered up only a few such situations.
I've been shooting almost entirely raw nature/scenery lately, "Riiight"! You make my case since nature/scenery/macro makes you show down, compose, work for the chosen composition; which makes my point; the venues and chosen subjects make the RAW technique viable when you have time.
When do you have to document an event without some time afterwards to edit? You won't mind that I point out the fallacy in your argument? As here: " without some time afterwards to edit"?, "afterwards" and time to edit" being the operative thesis for your side while ignoring the gist of my observation altogether.
Is it some kind of leave-your-images-at-the-door-on-your-way-out kind of thing, or what? “Or what?”.
Actually that comment tells me you missed the import of my observation, to wit:
RAW when you have time to compose and review-otherwise .jpg, rig on “P” or “Auto” when you do not have time to Chimp, review-compare shots etc.: like all the Paparazzi “Pros” do: cameras on “P”/”A”-hammer down, praying your flash recycles quickly enough at night.

[fionndruinne]

What I disagree with is the importance of your argument altogether. Only in some rare cases is the slight slowdown of writing raw files a real inconvenience, and personally I consider higher quality worth a few possible missed shots. Most people, most of the time, can use raw and not be hampered by it.

I know no one in the world who cares about their images who has no time to edit them. It's part of the process.

The "gist" of your argument is just, well, largely unimportant. Obviously if someone needs a 50-shot burst of photos, all they need to do is look at the camera specs to see that odds are the raw burst won't go that long at the same fps.

[crum]

fionndruinne: appologies if i was unclear, i meant when i transfer the files from sd to hdd, the quoted files space used was lower for every shot on hdd

i got lost in the discussion, does raw not just allow the flexibility later to adjust if required or necessary whereas jpg limits touching up due to compression? does in cam adjustments like wb/colorspace affect raw data as well?

[Rooz]

i got lost in the discussion, does raw not just allow the flexibility later to adjust if required or necessary whereas jpg limits touching up due to compression? does in cam adjustments like wb/colorspace affect raw data as well?

yes all those adjustments affect raw files aswell but in a non-destructive way.

in a nutshell, with jpeg, the cam takes the shots with those settings and embeds it into the file and it cannot be changed later. with raw, the camera applies that setting to the file so you will obtain the effect but it allows you to change it later. eg: if you incorrectly set a photo to sunlight WB, you can change the WB in PP to say cloudy, the exact same way you would do it in camera without any IQ loss at all. in fact changing that setting in PP maintains the exact same quality as it would if shot straight out of the camera.

same applies to contrast settings, sharpening etc