Understanding Digital Photography and Photo editing

I'm off work due to man flu (a cold) so I thought I'd offer a few tips on the subject (Understanding Digital Photography and Photo Editing)
I base my experiences on a working knowledge that goes back many years professionally, so please don't think I'm a know-it-all!

A little bit about Cameras.
In a bygone age you could do very little with an image taken on film. Yes, you could adjust exposure and do a bit of burning and dodging in the darkroom but for most folk, the image you shot was the image you got. There was little that you could do to compensate the final image.
Digital cameras and image editing software changed all that.

A digital camera whatever make or model, cheap or expensive is a tool for taking images, nothing more. nothing less. The camera manufacturers produce these tools so that you can take a shot that reproduces an image, a collection of data, basically as good as it possibly can.
Unless though you are in a controlled environment, for example a studio, you would be hard pressed to get any sort of image that is acceptable for publication.

With the exception of photographs for news purposes, you will never see digital photographs published in the glossies that haven't been worked on.
This is because digital cameras, like film cameras have their limitations.
A digital camera will never take the perfect exposure, however expensive your piece of kit is. It uses just one formula, exposure time = shutter speed. In that respect nothing has changed since film.

Your eyes in conjunction with your brain is very clever and you can look at the subject, say a landscape you want to photograph and assume that the camera can capture what you're seeing. Cameras are not that clever unfortunately because it will only shoot at it's chosen exposure setting. Now for example in a landscape shot you can set your exposure to produce the perfect sky. Because the brightness levels are much much higher the land in your shot will appear much too dark (burn) If you decide to correctly expose the land the sky will be over-exposed and washed out losing all cloud definition. This is because a camera cannot reproduce exactly what the eye can see with one exposure setting.

My cameras and lenes cost a lot of money and people always ask me what camera I use. People presume the more expensive the camera the better the image. This is not true, far from it. I've seen some outstanding work exhibited from people who use point and shoot cameras! Their skill lies with their ability to compensate their cameras failings. After all, a digital camera however expensive is just a tool for collecting raw data that the manufacturer wants you to see as an image.

Software and image editing.

OK, this is a very broad subject but I'll just touch on a couple of it's uses. Camera manufactures will often supply you with image editing software to go with your camera. The main purpose of this is so that you can adjust your image to your liking such as brightness, contrast, saturation etc.

Other more sophisticated software does this also and it allows you to be more creative. Saying that the main purpose of any imaging software is to give you the ability to get your shot right thus overcoming your cameras shortcomings.
Now I find many people find out that their software can 'do things' and there's a tendency for people to radically alter an image. Overdo it if you like. It's great fun I spent many a happy hour when they first released Photoshop. alas though digital art was not my strong point and went back to using it to improve my imagery! My tip is to use the software sparingly and understand it's primary functions.

Hope this is of some use!

 

Great start to a thread Rob and I hope it continues and helps others who maybe are just getting to grips with the technology.
Like yourself I to went through the wet / chemical darkroom phase and spent many a happy hour working on just one image until It was as I wanted it.

 

Thank you Rob for that interesting post.
Your own images are amazing.
Hope we'll hear more from you on the subject - and hope your cold is wearing off.

 

I still use an old version of Adobe PhotoDeLuxe 4.0.1 (1996!) So far as I know it does pretty much everything I want it to but I would love to upgrade. I've tried one or two others but for the life of me I can't get to grips with the tools! My Adobe I know inside out and back to front! I suppose if I really had to I'd learn but I don't think I do too badly. :thumb:

 

Thanks Alice, I'm still of work but getting better.

 

I'm not familiar with that software Daisees. If you've mastered that you could look for an older version of Photoshop on Ebay or this may interest you for less than a fiver.....

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/PHOTO-EDITING...ting_Software_Software_SR&hash=item2a0b8b46bc

 

Interesting - I might have a punt at that. Thanks, Rob.

However, I took this from 6 feet away through double-glazing and not too terrific light.
I think it looks pretty good, don't you?
The rose just bloomed today, btw!

 

Your windows must be cleaner than mine, Daisees :D

 

I doubt it, Alice. But it is zoomed in a fair bit so any - ahem - blemished would be faded out some.

I just think it's an amazing symbol of triumph over adversity!

 

I started DTP prior to 1994 when what was Aldus merged with Adobe. Thought that Aldus PageMaker and FreeHand were the bees knees. I think it was also about then that I got my first version of PhotoShop (I'm pretty sure it was Aldus PhotoShop when it was first released).
My processing then was in various versions of Apple computers. Printing (mono only) on Apple LaserWriter which was a big step up from the dot matrix Paper Tiger I first used (made a sound like ripping silk).
My first digital camera in 1984 was an Apple Quicktake - all of 640x480 resolution and a capacity for a massive 8 photos! Cost just about as much then as a reasonable DSLR costs now and much less than a modern 'point and shoot'.

Technology has changed by leaps and bounds, but I'm still managing, just about, to keep up with it!

 

With Daisees agreement I have slightly enhanced the rose picture.
I first cropped and then used "Curves" in photoshop to brighten the highlights
and then some adjustments with the contrast and brightness and some"unsharp" to finish. Just goes to show what can be achieved.

 

If it wasn't for the colour of the rose, i'd swear it was taken in my garden!

Robert, that's a perfect example how software can compensate.

 

Comparing them, I am amazed!

BTW, I bought that software, Rob. :thmb:

 

Good on you!! If does half the things it says on the tin it will be well worth it!
Let us know how you go on with it. :thumb: