# photo editing



## outkast (Jun 8, 2012)

I see some fantastic pics on this site and wondered what techniuqes and software people use for manipulating their pics.

I have been told its best to shoot in Raw as that makes the pics easier to enhance.

any advice on the above would be appreciated.

Thanks, Dave


----------



## Seahorse (Jun 8, 2012)

Depends what you are using to take your pics. If you are happy with what comes out of your camera, and just need simple editing, then stick with JPEGS and play with them using IRFANVIEW.

If you do shoot in RAW, I suggest that if your camera can do it, do JPEG AND RAW. You can compare the two. And if you think you need to dabble, get a copy of Adobe's Lightroom. Be aware though, it's a big learning curve.

If you are talking about some of the HDR'd images though, Photomatix is the way to go. But you manipulate JPEGs there. And it hurts my retinas.


----------



## krela (Jun 8, 2012)

Shoot in raw and learn lightroom.


----------



## nelly (Jun 9, 2012)

RAW and CS5 for me, if you shoot in JPEG then Sagelight is very good and easy to use


----------



## KingRat (Jun 9, 2012)

RAW and elements10, sometimes with a healthy dose of the Topaz plugin, but only if i want to burn peoples retinas out.


----------



## MD (Jun 9, 2012)

I edit mine while wearing a gas mask


----------



## TeeJF (Jun 9, 2012)

I shoot in jpeg and manipulate in Literoom, it's awesome. People tell me you can manipulate RAW with better results but personally I havebn't seen any benefit. But then I am new to graphic manipulation really.


----------



## PaulPowers (Jun 9, 2012)

personally I come from a photoshop background so I used photoshop long before having a camera

The way I see it that my camera shoots in RAW then uses its onboard processor to convert the pic to jpeg and in the process it discards a lot of information.

I'd rather use my laptop and decide what I want to keep or discard and not the tiny processor in my camera, but I shoot underground so I need to be able to correct chromatic aberration and my wide angle lens distorts the edges of pics so I correct that as well.

this is an interesting read

http://digital-photography-school.com/raw-vs-jpeg


----------



## krela (Jun 9, 2012)

Different raw processors and jpeg compressors have different qualities too, so at least if you shoot in raw you can choose how they're processed, rather than being hamstrung by the onboard camera processor. 

You can rescue a lot more detail on a badly exposed photo from a RAW file, that's one of the main benefits.


----------



## TranKmasT (Jun 9, 2012)

I can't be doing with RAW, I used to but not anymore although I'm aware of the benefits. Mainly because the file size is 4x as big. I find I have plenty of control with jpegs in Lyteroom four.


----------



## Ninja Kitten (Jun 9, 2012)

MD said:


> I edit mine while wearing a gas mask



he he that made me chuckle!

i shoot in both then put them through CS5..Elements or just leave them alone and resize them for the web.


----------



## sonyes (Jun 9, 2012)

I tend to shoot RAW+Jpeg then do any editing, colour correction, sharpening, cropping etc in CS5. I have just stated to dabble with very mild HDR processing and love it. ;-)


----------



## dangerous dave (Jun 9, 2012)

forget raw and just learn to get your exposures bang on 1st and do the main work in the camera if the shot is spot on in camera then you have a shed load less work to do. 
Raw files are better quality but a correctly exposed JPG will have just the same impact and speeds up your work flow saves hard drive space and lets face it if its for web use on here it will only be 600x800 pix so hardly need massive files


----------



## TranKmasT (Jun 9, 2012)

dangerous dave said:


> forget raw and just learn to get your exposures bang on 1st and do the main work in the camera if the shot is spot on in camera then you have a shed load less work to do.
> Raw files are better quality but a correctly exposed JPG will have just the same impact and speeds up your work flow saves hard drive space and lets face it if its for web use on here it will only be 600x800 pix so hardly need massive files



I agree with trying to get it right first time. Exposure simulation and framing in Liveview saves a lot of heartache rather than shooting from the hip as it were. Reduces the time having to post process.


----------



## Seahorse (Jun 9, 2012)

RAW is like keeping hold of your negatives. You might never need them again. But. What if you do?


----------



## Priority 7 (Jun 9, 2012)

JPG and RAW to be honest, many pics I post as shot but a few with "sun burn" through the openings I edit in RAW via CS5 and occasionally add a little Topaz Adjust to finish a select few off...


----------



## Pincheck (Jun 9, 2012)

My advice is to try and learn what settings do what on your camera and then you only have to do minimal editing, so much better to just go through sets and just check them as the time consumption is a pain.


----------



## magmo (Jun 10, 2012)

Seahorse said:


> RAW is like keeping hold of your negatives. You might never need them again. But. What if you do?



Spot on... I shoot in both and use the JPG's mostly but when you have that perfect shot but white balence is a bit out or somthing else you have the RAW file to make adjustments with same as you have the neg in the darkroom. Those who say they dont use raw.... did they also always used to shoot on polaroid?

In truth most people probibly had their film prossed by a lab and are not used to having the advantage of that extra contol. 

It is well worth shooting in both, you can always discard the RAW files if not needed but you can't magic one up if you only have a JPG.

mo


----------



## Mars Lander (Jun 12, 2012)

I did one splore with Jpg and raw and quickly went back to just jpg, I also remember once on the Gadget Show they assembled some image experts and photographers and they had them pick out which were raws and which were jpgs out of 3 sets they could just about do it with 1 !!! it was the Gadget show tho afer all , i think it just increases the workflow considerably


----------



## aquanuke (Jun 12, 2012)

Shoot RAW if you ever want to correct white balance or exposure. No point shooting raw+jpeg as converting raw to jpeg is a simple process.

Your not going to see a difference looking at a raw next to jpeg. Is not for that, just has the extra info so you can correct an image.


----------



## Ratters (Jun 12, 2012)

Always shoot RAW, into LR3, edit, export as Jpeg, either layer blending of exposures or Photomatix depending on look/location if needed, then resize a copy for web


----------



## Mars Lander (Jun 12, 2012)

Each to their own I say, I do film work and as most people are happy with or ignorant of or stuck with or all 3 in using codecs of 4:2:0 equiv in the photo world of jpg I guess, I only work with 4:2:2 which carries alot more info in the footage for expousre and grading etc, I guess the equiv of a raw file in the photoworld, but initially side by side they look almost the same, so i get where your coming from with the raw vs jpg but its a workflow i dont do myself


----------



## LulaTaHula (Jun 12, 2012)

I press the buttons and twiddle the knobs on my camera and hope for the best


----------



## Faing (Jun 12, 2012)

i do basic stuf on irfanvew and then meds to me harts content with paint shop pro versin8.must try raw but haven't done any yet.

SOme of you lot put some amazing pics up btw


----------



## outkast (Jun 12, 2012)

Thanks for all the help chaps, it seems I need to read up more on the subject.

BTW I use a canon 450d and mostly shoot underground, tripod and light painting, do you think the best way forward is to start trying different settins on my camera, I tried different ISO settings and found 200 to be the best but have tried any of the other settings yet.


----------



## Seahorse (Jun 12, 2012)

If you find your light painting skills are up to the task, then stick with 200 to reduce noise. Obviously, the wider you can manage to open your aperture, the more light you'll let in. But then you might not get sufficient depth of field to capture all you want to. So either manual or shutter priority would probably be best. Preferably manual so you can keep an eye on your aperture too.

There's no magic setting, as it will all depend on how much light you can manage, in whatever size of place you are snapping in. It will be a case of experimenting and taking your time. But it will be worth it.


----------



## krela (Jun 12, 2012)

Manual - ISO100, f/8 or above, bulb mode, practice light painting.


----------



## PaulPowers (Jun 12, 2012)

outkast said:


> Thanks for all the help chaps, it seems I need to read up more on the subject.
> 
> BTW I use a canon 450d and mostly shoot underground, tripod and light painting, do you think the best way forward is to start trying different settins on my camera, I tried different ISO settings and found 200 to be the best but have tried any of the other settings yet.



Manual mode all the way

I never go above 400 on the iso and rarely take it from 100

F never goes below F9 but normally sticks between F10 and F14 

25 second exposure, F13, iso 100 and focal length 60mm
http://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_powers/7248728154/in/photostream

and that's 100% light painting

Each pic underground requires different settings and the only way to learn is to play


----------



## Silent Hill (Jun 12, 2012)

All I do is tweak using photoscape. Simples


----------



## PaulPowers (Jun 13, 2012)

I've got a suggestion for the admin team

how about a tutorial section where members can post tutorials and peeps can ask this type of question


----------



## krela (Jun 13, 2012)

Because photography forums do it better.


----------



## glass (Jun 13, 2012)

Advice from when I used to have film in the camera, use a tripod and bracket your shots (take three, one at the correct exposure, one over and one under).

Now I need to follow my advice, as I just tend to point and shoot now. My Fuji camera has a bracketing option but resets every time I turn it off and i need a new tripod.


----------



## Seahorse (Jun 13, 2012)

glass said:


> My Fuji camera has a bracketing option but resets every time I turn it off and i need a new tripod.



Let us know if it still resets once you get a new tripod. 

Seriously though, why would you want to leave bracketing permanently enabled? And why would you bother bracketing underground anyway? And you haven't mentioned the point of doing this.


----------



## glass (Jun 13, 2012)

Was talking about photography in general was not aware we were talking about underground photography specifically

I seem to be getting things wrong on here.


----------



## PaulPowers (Jun 13, 2012)

HDR doesn't really work underground

forget bracketing pics and HDR until you know your camera and you're happy with the pics you take


----------



## pete37038 (Jun 13, 2012)

RAW and CS5 here, RAW is simply a country mile better than jpeg for many reasons, regarding your ISO if you have 100 use that, if not stick to 200, that will be fine on a tripod, without a tripod underground you're lookijng at seriously high ISO's of 1000 upwards, depending on your camera's spec this may be possible without much noise or the pics may look terrible (grainy), cure - just use a tripod. Bracketing (and HDR) works well in rooms where there is a lot of contrasting light goin on so you're able to capture the detail in both light and dark areas of the scene you're shooting, be careful with HDR though as a lot of photographs on FlickR for example are way OTT with the processing, that's something to pick up later on though once your happy with changing your ISO's etc etc, key is to get it as right as possible in camera then you have little to do processing wise.


----------

