RAW mode questions....

[hoover86]

Ok, so I've been doing a lot of studying up on cameras before dropping the money to get something and wish I had something else. From what I gather, RAW mode is deffinetly nice to have. I do have some questions in regard to it however.

1) I know you can convert this type to TIFF, but can it be converted to any other type of format? I use photobucket and they don't support TIFF.

2) It looks like A LOT of work to edit the photo in RAW format. The results look amazing, but am I gonna catch on to these ways before I go insane??

Thanks for the expert help, there are a ton of you who take amazing pictures in my book, that's why I'm asking for advice!!

 

[JR719]

Josh,

RAW is the best to shoot in IMHO. I only have a few gripes about it. Not a lot of programs support the format, and the file size is huge. I have a Nikon D1x and use Photoshop CS2, which supports the format. CS2 will also convert it to whatever you want.
I usually open the image in photoshop, do a few corrections, then open in the main window to convert to, well, usually jpeg if they are not going to be printed. If you like, you can "save for web" which makes it a small file size, but loose quality. It is not that difficult, just takes a couple of more minutes to work on. My main gripe is that I like to see thumbnails when I open folders, won't do that using RAW.

 

[hoover86]

Yea, I've heard the CS2 can run as much as a cheaper digital camera!! My main concern is getting used to the functions. I've heard it is very intimidating to get used to. Can I just take any old picture in RAW and Photoshop will pretty much clean it all up? Or does the base picture have to be really well too?? Again I'm a total newb to anything other then a disposable so bear with me here!! Thanks again.

 

[zenya]

Josh,

I think the best investment would be( if you buy PS CS2) to get a book by Scott Kelby to compliment it and learn everything there is about the program. I agree, it is a huge aplication and learning curve is really steep. I feel like a newb every time I open it.
Here's the link to the place to get a book, I just got one and really love it.
https://shop.scottkelbybooks.com/index.php?main_page=index

BTW, you can process multiple pictures in the RAW editor,IIRC.

 

[Frisco]

I take all my pics in RAW mode and highly recommend using it. With programs like Photoshop, you can convert RAW files to a variety of formats, including tiff, jpg, gif. All cameras that I've had that support RAW formats always come with a RAW editor, so you don't necessarily need photoshop and should be able to edit and convert to jpg if the cam also comes with its own software. The program that came with my Canon cam supports batch processing of RAW images as well (CS2 does it as well), which can significantly reduce time if you have a couple hundred pictures to go through. It's not that painful to use and the benefits far outweigh the disadvantages (honestly none in my mind if you have enough memory).

 

[reefrunner69]

Can I just take any old picture in RAW and Photoshop will pretty much clean it all up?

To an extent, you have a little leeway on exposure, but your best results will always be with the best exposure at the time you click the shutter. RAW processing is NOT a substitue for good photographic technique.

I use a program called capture 1 for my raw processing, I really like the work flow with C1 and it speeds up processing tremendously. I use the pro version and have access to straighten and crop in the converter as well as levels and curves adjustments. Basically, once I convert there is VERY little left to do in photoshop, for the most part. If you have PS CS2, their raw converter will do the same, just a little differently. No matter what software you use...once you get used to it, and learn what the software will do, your processing time will drop dramatically.

 

[hoover86]

Awesome guys, thanks for the insite. I've done quite a bit of research on the camera I'm most interested in, and one of the only gripes I hear on a regular basis about it is the software that it comes with. It doesnt' sound like it is very useful when shooting in RAW, so I'm sure I would need a second application to handle that. My only concern is paying all the money to get started, and getting too frustrated to ever use it. I guess it will just take a lot of time and research, like I've already done for the camera. It sounds like a fun project, and I'm glad to have a great source like RC for questions that I KNOW I'll have!! Thanks again everyone, and I'm sure you'll be hearing a LOT more from me!! I plan on ordering my camera tomorrow!!

 

[Frisco]

It's really not that bad - which cam?

 

[hoover86]

I'm looking into the Fuji S9000. I've heard really good things about it from most everyone. Everytime I hear a bad thing, the person updates saying they just didn't know how to use it! From what I've read most people that have it are really happy with the way it performs. Have you heard anything about it?

 

[astrogazer]

Doesn't matter which camera you buy ... Photoshop is still a MUST!

 

[hoover86]

Yea that's what I hear. It sounds like it will be DOUBLE learning for me.. the camera AND photoshop!! Photography has always interested me though, so it should be a lot of fun.

 

[astrogazer]

When you enjoy what you're shooting it IS a lot of fun!

 

[hoover86]

Ok guys, well after all was said and done, I ended up with the Pentax *istDL SLR. I've been pretty happy with it's AUTO picture ability, but I'm trying to step it up a notch now, and I'm LOST. I did a bit of research on CS2 and have been messing around with it, but I'm getting images WORSE then when I started It's really frustrating, and I'm wondering if I'm not expecting too much from CS2.

Here's an UNtouched photo with AUTO settings on..

Here's the problem....

I bought the standard 18-55mm lens, and I think this is my biggest problem. I'm trying to take pictures at a bit of a distance, and then crop them and enlarge them. WELLLLLLL when I enlarge the pictures after cropping, they look pretty grainy, and I can't get them any better....

Here's a picture UNtouched after being cropped and enlarged

I didn't think that I enlarged it that much that it should be distorting so much. Should I exchange this 18-55mm lens so I don't have to rely on blowing up the pictures in CS2, or am I doing something wrong here????

 

[jwedehase]

What's your ISO setting? Are you using a tripod?

Can you post a reduced size version of the original full shot of that last one?

 

[jwedehase]

BTW, Photoshop is world class. It is the standard.

Here's literally 30 seconds worth of tweak. Auto levels and sharpen. Then added a border.

 

[hoover86]

Welllll.... I'm at a loss for the re-sizing issue, ever since I got this new camera, no matter what I size it to in CS2, when I load it in photobucket it's huge..... no clue. But the ISO is set to AUTO...

 

[hoover86]

Oh and no tri-pod, trying to hone my non-tri-pod skills for the Henry Doorly Zoo

 

[Frisco]

It sounds like you just need to get a telephoto lens for the longer distance shots like their 50-200mm or something similar.

 

[hoover86]

Yea, I'm actually pondering exchanging this lens for that lens (50-200mm). I can't really see the advantages of having the 18-55mm... Just wish I would have researched it a little further before making the purchase, oh well..

 

[VoidRaven]

Keep the 18-55 lens. Trust me, you'll get into shooting situations where you would really like to have that shorter lens. My shortest is a 24-105 right now and I am trying to save up for a nice 18-70mm for tighter situations. Sometimes you only have so much space between you and your subject, or you want a wider field of view for a landscape, and having that shorter lens capability is very nice. Plus you can never have too much glass