TerminalTrotter

As a complete novice in photography, but one who has a couple of nice (not SLR) digital cameras, is anyone able to recommend a beginners guide to photo editing? I find I don't even understand most of the terms used in the photo editing software, never mind how to use them.

TT

foresight

If you are thinking of Photoshop or Photoshop Elements try the 'Missing Manual' series. Pretty comprehensive and very easy on the brain.

green granite

Try:

Digital Camera Tips and Reviews: Photonhead, The Essence of Modern Film and Digital Photography

Photpshop specific: Photo Editing on Your Computer With Photoshop : Beginner Guide : Tools for Adobe Photoshop CS2: A Beginners Guide | TechOnVideo

Gimp guide (probably the best free editor there is): Gimp Tutorials Beginners Guide to The GIMP TipClique Tutorials

Some thoughts before you buy software
Before You Buy Photo Editing Software

Barkly1992

As a GA pilot first (when I used to fly and I should I say it I worked for the Oz regulator), I learned a couple of things.

1. All pilots understand technology.
2. Therefore, they normally understand computers (and other electronic devices).
3. When they fly they normally carry cameras with them and take pics.
4. Therefore the best pics of aircraft are normally taken by pilots.
5. But they also use programs like photoshop and manipulate pics to make them real good.

Keep it up.

TerminalTrotter

Foresight & green granite

Many thanks. That has certainly given me somewhere to start. I have to admit that I have always found myself to have the kind of brain (such as it is) that needs to RTFM rather than wing it with occasional resort to the help file.
That lot will certainly keep me out of trouble for a while.
TT

innuendo

RE the posts on the ND grad filter effects available in CS4 Adobe Camera Raw, the same tool is in Adobe Lightroom, which also uses ACR. It is a very useful feature. For a tutorial on it have a look here:
Workshops-On-Demand

It is about three minutes into the tutorial.
I think the entire set of Lightroom tutorials are very worthwhile. If you were going to download the 30 day trial of Lightroom I would highly recommend looking at the tutorials before starting the 30 day clock ticking.
I attended a day seminar put on by JuliAnne Kost on Photoshop and she is simply excellent.

green granite

I must admit to liking lightroom, trouble is the last time i tried installing it into W 7 it screwed up the desk top icons, must try it with RC1 and see what happens.

That's a useful site innuendo thanks for posting it

Loose rivets

Now that I've got some good glass and a spiffing flashgun, do I upgrade the camera?

Mine's a D50, and the 18 - 200 lens does seem to work quite well with it, but there's a bloke with a D200 for sale on Craig's listy thing, and I'm rather tempted. At a little over half the cost of a D90, it really seems to be a step forward. However, it doesn't seem to have the same 'Auto for Dummies' setting that the cheaper ones have.

$650 is the asking price for the body. There is a battery/grip with it as well. The thing is that the 90 seems to be getting rave reviews, and it has video and LCD sighting option. Quite a leap forward.

What think you?

Bushfiva

I think you'd do way better with the D90 than the D200, which is now 2 or 2.5 generations behind depending on how you squint. They all have "auto for dummies", but if that's your criterion I wonder why you're considering leaving the D50, which is also a fine camera.

I see the D3000 has a "Guide" mode that "provides in-camera assistance for making camera settings and utilizing professional techniques"

Loose rivets

I think it will be worth waiting for the D90. I mentioned your post to my wife, and she likes you - a lot. "we don't need to be spending money on non-essentials right now."

How do you explain to a mere woman, that a nifty camera is an essential?

Helol

To be honest, I think the raw vs jpeg argument will contine until the end of time, a bit like the Mac vs PC. I suppose it depends what you want to do with your images. One thing to bear in mind, if you do shoot in raw, make sure you have a lot of space to keep those files. Having said that, there is no substitute for a well taken photograph. Prepare, know your subject, and know your camera.

I do a bit of bird photography, specialising in a particular bird of prey. I shoot in the highest quality jpeg; I also sell my work, and provide images for publishing, and no comment (thus far!) has been made about the image being in jpeg format.

My one piece of advice would be to purchase the best quality lens you can afford. You won't regret it.

green granite

A rough guide to Raw v JPEG but as Helol says it will run and run

When to use Raw

You need to post process the image
The white balance cannot be properly set with the camera
The scene contains high contrast
The image will be enlarged beyond the camera sensor's resolution
You can't decide whether to use Raw or JPEG
You are using infra-red filters

When to use JPEG.

All the Raw files won't fit in your memory card
You don't want to post process the image
You want to print the photos right away before you get to use a computer

bnt

Some of those "problems" in the previous post are not necessarily problems at all, and can be viewed as opportunities for creative control of the final image. For example: is there really one "proper" white balance, and why should you be tied to whatever the camera (or photographer) decides at the time?

Analogy: if you make a print from a negative, you can fine-tune the image at that point, while going straight to JPEG can be compared to a Polaroid print: one shot, live with the results. I could put in another way: with digital media, you can easily throw away information, but once it's gone, you can not get it back.

Remember, JPEG uses lossy compression - it throws some information away. I'd reverse that advise: only use JPEG when you can't post-process, or really don't want to.

Jofm5

One more reason to shoot JPG is the number of frames per second is higher - this is probably due to the time it takes to write the frames and the buffer space available.

Bushfiva

On most cameras you can shoot in RAW & JPG at the same time, which is useful when many of your shots are snapshots, but some aren't, and the camera's useless at making its own jpgs (and I'm looking at you, Ricoh GX200).

Helol

I know a professional wildlife photographer who does very well thank you very much, and he shoots in jpeg. On the other hand, another photographer shoots in raw. Horses for courses...

My personal opinion, is that (and I'll probably get shot down for this!), it is better to have taken a good photograph to start off with, needing just a little touching up (i.e. unsharp - especially with Canon, and possible levels), than to have taken a crap photo and spend endless hours on the computer trying to make it look good.

As someone mentioned, fps is quite important, more so if shooting action images with a fast moving subject (birds, F1, etc). However, I suppose if you are taking a shot of a castle or what have you, then fps isn't high on the priority list.

Tupperware Pilot

I shoot in RAW, then convert in Photoshop........only time i would shoot in JPEG would be when i need a fast multi shoot. I use a Nikon D300, and find my best lens for ground to air stuff is the 70-300 vr.
Photos: Canadair CL-600-2B16 Challenger 601-3R Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net

BUt i use a 55-200 vr for air-to-air work.

Photos: De Havilland DH-82A Tiger Moth II Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Cheers

green granite

Nice pictures TP, the only reason for I can think of for not shooting raw is either using the auto modes which don't allow you to save in RAW on the Canon, or if you're limited for space on the storage medium.

green granite

I make no apologies for posting this I think it's a brilliant piece of animated cad, and absolutely fascinating, you'll see it's relevance when you watch it.

YouTube - UC Berkeley E128 Final Project - Canon 10D DSLR v2

daved123

Brilliant GG, think I'll have to retire my can of WD40 now...
DaveD