Ok, I'll post some photos pre/post processed that I want opinions on. Be honest. I want to learn and this will help. Just remember, I'm new to the DSLR world and photo editing. I'll be using the software that came with my Canon 60D. I have no clue what I'm doing with it but I adjust until it looks "good". Basically, let me know if the original image needs work...I know it does. Then tell me about my editing job. Pre Post Camera Model Canon EOS 60D Firmware Firmware Version 1.1.0 Shooting Date/Time 6/3/2012 6:46:53 PM Owner's Name Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/40 Av( Aperture Value ) 22.0 Metering Mode Center-Weighted Average Metering Exposure Compensation +2/3 ISO Speed 500 Auto ISO Speed ON Lens EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Focal Length 18.0mm Image Size 5184x3456 Image Quality Fine Flash Off FE lock OFF White Balance Mode Auto AF Mode AI Focus AF AF area select mode Automatic selection
Pre Post Camera Model Canon EOS 60D Firmware Firmware Version 1.1.0 Shooting Date/Time 6/2/2012 7:09:19 PM Owner's Name Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/200 Av( Aperture Value ) 22.0 Metering Mode Evaluative Metering Exposure Compensation 0 ISO Speed 320 Auto ISO Speed OFF Lens EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS Focal Length 29.0mm Image Size 5184x3456 Image Quality Fine Flash Off FE lock OFF White Balance Mode Auto AF Mode Manual focusing Picture Style Standard
In the first one, I think you went a little too dark. You've started to loose a lot of the detail in your shadows. I'd like to see it the point where you can still define the opening under the barn door. The second is too saturated. The blue is starting to look a little too turquoise for me. Beautiful shots though. It's really easy to take the editing a step or two too far. I know I do I think the overall exposures on the originals are pretty good. The first may be a tad overexposed.
I did a quick edit this morning. Another side note, on a photo like the first one, where the main subjest is backlit and you have time & a tripod, try taking to photos. One metering correctly off the building, the other off the background. Then in post production you can combine them and have the most light information for both. This is essentially what an HDR is, but if you do it correctly you can get some really stunning images. It's the same technique photographers have been using in darkrooms for ages. We just get to do it quicker and without chemicals Pre Post Fitz Pre Post Fitz
The first set is too underexposed after post-processing. You're sacrificing mid-tones in favor of the shadows. Since your sky is completely clipped, that's detail you cannot get back no matter how hard you try (you might regain some if shooting RAW, but that's a whole other subject for a different day). What Fitz was explaining about the metering issue is common with brightly back lit subjects. Your camera's metering system with take its reading and adjust exposure (or indicate what adjustment needs to be made on the exposure meter) according to the reflected light. If it's metering off a darker subject (i.e. the barn), it's going to recommend an exposure that allows more light in (slower shutter speed or larger aperture or even an ISO adjustment). While that will expose the barn correctly, they already bright sky gets blown out, or clipped. Clipped highlights are pixels that lose all detail (they are above a tonal value of 255), and it's not good. Just the opposite happens if you were to meter off the sky. The sky is bright, so your camera metering system would recommend a faster shutter speed and/or smaller aperture. The sky would expose correctly, and the darker barn would be more underexposed (dark). Basically, in a situation where you have two lighting extremes, you are going to have to sacrifice one for the other (or compromise). Otherwise, you're only option is a multiple exposure that is then combined into one via post-processing as Fitz mentioned. Since I'm not familiar with the software you're using, I'm going to assume it doesn't have HDR capabilities, so my recommendation? Expose for the highlights and draw back the shadows in post processing. I would have metered off the sky, adjusted the exposure, taken the shot. Then recover (brighten) the shadow areas. You can almost always recover shadow detail, whereas you can almost NEVER recovered clipped highlights. The second photo was actually pretty close to being perfect as is. Post processing just made it too dark, and shifted the colors too much. Fitz's correction was a little more in line with what you want to shoot for. Remember, the more you shoot, the more you're going to learn. You have a great camera, and good lenses to get started. Feel free to ask away as you take more.
Thank you both for the advice. IMO...the original photos looked a little boring and I guess that's why I went a little wild with the processing. I now agree that the original silo photo looks good....I also see the post processing looks terrible of the silo. The barn...I like the darker shades of brown that processing added. I need to retake that same photo in the morning with the sun shining on it. Do you guys find yourselves editing a lot of your photos? And I did tweak the exposure settings but had no clue what I was doing...mostly trial and error. I hope this all becomes less overwhelming the farther I go along. The short-term goal is for me to achieve great photos while in Alaska in August. I need to be on a photography crash course.
I do edit a lot of my photos, but it's often REALLY small and very quick adjustments (slighting warming or cooling the white balance, and then just some minor exposure tweaks). I rarely spend a significant amount of time on it. It will become much easier with practice. Don't be afraid to bracket your shots (look in your manual on how to do this). It will give you much better chances of nailing the shot as opposed to just one picture. I would strongly recommend that especially on vacation when you may not have a ton of time to sit and review your photos on your camera screen.
Thanks for the tip on bracketing...never knew the meaning. I will try it out tonight or tomorrow. I guess this is something I shouldn't become dependent on.
I'm sort of having buyer's remorse with my purchase. I wonder if I could have gotten away with buying the cheaper T3i. Its not quite as fast and doesn't have the convenience of the top LCD though. Being a beginner, was it a wise choice in making this purchase? I upgraded from my Pany Lumix FZ35 superzoom. I also considered going the mirrorless route since they are producing some good images but ultimately decided against them due to limited lenses and the price was about the same or higher than some good DSLR's. I wonder sometimes if I should have gotten another superzoom. My only complaint about my current one is the lack of speed.
I was referring to my current "superzoom" camera, the Lumix FZ35. The 60D is plenty fast for me. Here's one I snapped this afternoon. Playing with depth of field. I kinda like this pic.
I like it Finch. Don't sweat your camera choice. I personally don't like the Rebel bodies. Too much plastic, and too small for me. While it's true, the glass is the most important, you have a solid camera body that will suit you for a long time.
Thanks for the reassurance. I'm becoming attached to it. Don't laugh, but I'm actually going to return the camera with the 18-135mm kit lens and the 70-300mm USM back to the store. I've already got on order the same body but with the Tamron 18-270mm PZD zoom lens. If I bought the Tamron, then I'd be wasting money so thats why I'm returning my kit + 70-300mm. Best Buy doesn't have a restocking fee believe it or not. I've done a ton of research and from what I've seen, that Tammy 18-270 will do plenty for me. It will also be convenient while in Alaska. Check out some pics that lens took. Actually, it was the older style of that lens (which some say are better than the new PZD version). I've seen excellent photos from both though. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=599376&page=102 Now, I need to do a bit more research on a wide angle lens. Looking at the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, Sigma 10-20mm, and a couple others.
Tamron makes good glass especially for the price. Just make sure you test it out thoroughly once you get it (quality control isn't as stringent with third party lenses). As for the wide angle lenses, let me know what you decide. I've struggled with that decision for a while. The tokina is awesome for star trails and time lapse. It tends to suffer some from chromatic aberration which can be a problem if you don't have a program to correct for it. A lot of people like the Sigma, especially since it's MUCH cheaper than the canon 10-22.
I'll let you know what I decide. Any tips for buying a tripod? I "need" one of those too! I'd like something that I can travel with and it would be used on the ground as well as the ship, pavement, etc.
I'm not really versed in that (I'm in need of a major upgrade as well). I've been looking at Manfrotto heads and tripods, but here's a good article on the topic: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2812431567/five-of-the-best-tripods-for-under-450
Shot this photo this morning on my way home from work. I'm beginning to love this new hobby! I edited this a tad to make the background grass a little darker. I shot at first with a larger aperture to blur the grass but the cloud formations were also blurred. So I shot with a smaller aperture to achieve what I wanted.
