Hey everyone!

I had this early 21st birthday last night with my family and that (actual birthday is 24/2). My cousins gave me Canon EOS 1100D pack to me including 50mm f/1.8 lenses! Man Im so proud owner of this camera because I took so nice hot shot photos after I opened it up.

Now, how awesome is this camera is! Excellent for storm chasing and lightning photos

Welcome to the world of DSLR!!

Any weather photos to show us yet?

I got myself a new Cannon 50D with twin lens's the other week. I am so happy with the pics that I am getting.

Since it has rained just about constantly since I don't have too many outdoor pics. Not risking getting it wet.

Congrats and Happy Birthday to you Matthew.

Thats awesome Mathew. I look forward to seeing your pics

Congrats Mathew.... ahhh the nifty 50 great fast lens for portraits I bought myself one of these about 2 weeks ago.

Thank you everyone for very kind and warm regards. Here a picture of my camera pack.



However, I am going to muck around with it today, after I had plenty top notch excellent photos from yesterday. Some were like you going to fall off the chair!

Hey bunch I have a 50d also, and i love it, treated myself to a sigma 10-20 mm wide angle last year and Scott ur right about the 50mm- beautiful depth of field.

Happy birthday Matthew welcome to dslr!

Here are the first collection of photos that I have done so far.





















[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...011730398_n.jpg[/img]

[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...150614109_n.jpg[/img]

[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...181547008_n.jpg[/img]

I almost died after seeing the results. Couldn't believe how dangerous this is!

Yep, your now addicted and ur not alone, just wait until u get ur first lightning shot. I don't proclaim to be an expert in photography but I'm happy to share what I do know. If you need any help or advice if I can help I will..

Thanks. Can't wait for getting back to Townsville on Friday. Hope those storms stay there so I can snap the lightning!

Welcome to the world of Canon!! They aren't a bad little Camera

I have a 450D myself, I got it a couple of years ago as a birthday present from my Husband and my Parents.

Good stuff and welcome to the world of dslr..

For lightning photos set manual mode, f-stop of between 7 - 11 should be ok with that f/1.8 lense and shutter speed to 5 seconds or more (I would sometimes use 30 seconds) depending on how often the strikes are.. oh and run a low ISO if it can go down to 100 use that as this will reduce noise for night shooting.

Happy shooting!

Thanks for the tips! I think I can get carried away with bulb setting to get lightning shots...

I can't get over how Canon keeps updating its DSLR models. It was probably only 3 or 4 years ago that I bought a 350D and 400D.

I guess the later models are more for professionals, or enthusiasts keener than me.

Matthew, that 50mm is a perfect lens for the 1100D video capability. Excellent choice.

Nice. You guys had no idea what does bulb setting do?!? It seems new or something. I will use this for ny lightning shots!

I think most avid storm photographers here would be aware of benefits of using the Bulb setting. It is certainly not a new technique.

Bulb is not timed as such. You press to shoot, sensor is exposed, it stays open as long as you like till you release again. Some models have a limit eg 30mins, not sure about your model, it will be in the manual. It's good for doing very long exposures for things like star trails at night etc.

Maximum shutter on the camera is 30 seconds. Bulb is higher than that. It so much clearer by using bulb setting. Im very sure lightning shots will be epic!

I used about 2seconds off bulb setting to take that glow in dark sailing boat picture (see above). If I am going to take another 2seconds, it would be perfect. Just a practice.

OzThunder: Whats up with 50mm lenses for the video capability? Portrait HD video is that good and useful? Im still learning here LOL. But I know how to use the shutter settings, apertures and ISO as I have done in my photography subject last July.

Cool,

You would normally use bulb for exposure longer than 30seconds... or if you wish to control the shutter at your own leasure via remote control/laptop.

With my old 40D I did some star trails upto 15mins exposure, and then it takes about another 15mins to process the image. - newer processors with digic4 is much quicker.

The only thing to remember is that if the sensor gets to hot than it will power it self down during bulb mode or video.

Here a quick pic from a storm the other night from my brothers eos 7D

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/171/lightningic.jpg/

Camshaft: The camera is really HD. Like OzThunder mentioned about 50mm lenses would be useful for video capability. Won't be an issue about the speed. I got 30mb/s fast speed highest quality SD card!

lol not sure what you are refering too in my post.. but yes cool non the less

Now go get some pics!

Oh Matthew ..... shoot in raw! It's something that I wished I had done a lot more as a beginner..

I am lucky that my camera shoots both JPG and RAW format at the same time on 2 different SD cards. However, after more than 4000 shots on this new camera I have not yet used a RAW file for anything other than a disc space filler. I do have CS5 but I just find it all a bit of a bother to do it all.

I started taking pics in the Olden Days (film era 1990's) what you shot was what you got, and I guess I am still stuck in that train of thought (I even BKT under & over). I have however kept all my RAW files as I might yet be persuaded towards the 'Dark Side' one day.

I agree it's a pain in the butt regarding file size, but, as a beginner when ur shots probably need the most help, I find raw allows the greater outcome with post processing. Like u said, it all comes down to personal peference

With Bulb setting, try to get a cable remote to suit. Just pressing and holding the shutter open will introduce a bit of camera body movement and ruin a nice shot.

The IR remotes sound cool, especially for group shots, but I found them temperamental and un-reliable. Cable release is great especially for taking (tripod) macro shots with a slow shutter in low light.

Also, RAW has a big advantage in that you can adjust the exposure by +2..-2 stops and gain details that would not be available in a JPG. This especially helps for lightning as you can some features from the foreground that may be too dark or too light.

Have fun..

Darren

If you don’t have a cable release, and you still want to use bulb function you can do the following.
1. Steady the camera on a tripod.
2. Set bulb function, on camera
3. Use a piece of sturdy card or something similar to cover the front lens while you press the shutter release button. I use a piece of 6”x6” old black card that lives in my camera bag.
4. Once the shutter has opened and risk of shake has passed carefully pull the card away from front of lens. Presto sensor is exposed.
5. Reverse sequence when you close shutter, put your trusty piece of dark card across the lens front, press button. You’re done – no camera shake.

Just use 10 second delay, 30 second exposure and mirror lock up. Easiest way to avoid camera shake with out a cable release.

You will not need to use bulb mode for lightning. If anything bulb should be avoided as it can introduce unwanted noise.

You can pick up cheap cable releases for less then $20 delivered out of China on ebay which will do the job just fine.

My lightning photography is pretty poor but I will be going done the bulb mode path for lightning shots in the future. I have used the 10 second delay, 30 second exposure in the past and probably missed a few shots by lightning occurring either during the shutter delay or after the 30 s exposure. That's a pain. It's a good point about noise in bulb mode, though you can look at it the other way. If a lightning strike occurs after 10 s you can stop the exposure and start again. This should reduce noise and also increase your chances of getting another strike. This is assuming there is nothing else in the photo which you would like to correctly expose.

A solid tripod, a fast card and a cable release just make life so much easier. Pitty I have only seen one lousy storm with my new equipment, shame I didn't have this stuff earlier in the season when I saw a few quite lightning active storms.

The 50mm is a faster lens. That wider aperture allows you to keep video shutter speeds higher in low light.

It is also a very clear lens, although that is not so important for video as for images.

You can avoid missing shots by by using continuous shooting. The only problem with that is though if you have it set up to take say 10 photos in a row and you want to reposition half way through the 10.

has anyone here had experience with lightning triggers? (I think its cheating in a way ;),I love the gamble of the storm chase and lightning photography, it makes getting that one shot all that sweeter, but if I want my images to be up there with the big kids I may have to think about getting one.

thoughts? experiences??

Congratts on the 1100D Mathew ! You will have a lot of good times with your Canon and great shots so far. Well done , , & Looking forward to seeing some STORM Captures from you : )

Cheers



Hi Missy, I have Not a lighting trigger either : ) They are a great advantage primarily for daytime Lightning as you cant set very long exposures manually on a camera to aid in capturing strikes during the day time, is just too bright for longer exposures ? I doubt many cameras could open for more than a few short seconds, unless its a very dark storm and a very expensive camera, or ones that have ISO 50 may go a little longer !

Personally I have Not been overly impressed with daytime Lightning trigger captures as you dont quite get the contrast, well, for what I Like; and you only ever expose the bright parts of the bolts and miss a lot of the finer tendrals etc ?
In saying that, they are still advantageous 'cause any daytime Lightning captures are better than nothing : )
One other advantage of Trggers during night Lightning is your camera wont need to continually shoot, hopefully capturing a strike in some ? Running the camera continually causes the chip to become very warm, thus increasing the 'Noise' signal .

I also agree somewhat to you say it kinda like cheating, but I find it more relative as saying why I ride Motorbikes and drive Manual cars, Its Just Much More Exciting & Rewarding : )

Cheers, Hope this helps

Thanks for the tip, that's a good idea.

I too must say that I like the gamble of lightning photography (will lightning strike when I am taking my photo, will the lightning be in the frame? etc). I was not lucky this season so I am all for increasing the odds of success!

This is probably, the best and only real successful attempt I've made at lightning photography. Taken on 5 sec delay, 30 sec exposure, 8 image continous shooting...Xmas Eve...No remote, just rapid fire, 30 sec exposures...







SDS is killing me...would give anything to be back in the moment of that night!!!

Looks nice. Glad I have this camera that does support it!

Here are the following pictures that I have taken at Rockhampton, on the way to Townsville.















Do I need to create a thread of my own? It seems my photography is at quick fire. How you name a thread of my photos?

Just wanted to add my thoughts to your thread Matty,
I have only had a DSLR(450D) since December 2011 so I am about as “green” as they come, keeping that in mind…
Lightning triggers are expensive paper weights most of the time but for daytime they are invaluable IMHO, no point shooting a bucket load of continuous short exposure shots at a storm to try and capture a bolt which is possibly the only other way to nail daytime shots- because the exposure time is so much shorter than at night you will chew through cards and shutter life and most won't be the "lucky" shot that yeilds a bolt(or two), at night they are pretty blah especially for very active systems, just use the longer exposure times and shoot continuously(or atleast that’s what I do). Of course at night sometimes the trigger is useful if the system isn’t very active or in a dying state… or of course if you are feeling lazy and want to have a cigarette instead of babysitting the camera! Short of having a lightning trigger I think Magic Lantern has a feature that will do the job, I would say DO NOT install it though if your camera is under warranty!!!
On RAW, definitely shoot in RAW always!!! I couldn’t stress that enough, even if you yourself may not have the ability or the program to manipulate the image someone somewhere down the line may be able to help you or you may gain the skill to do so or increase your current skill overtime, always make a copy of the original and work with the copy and keep the original stored safely....forever! As proof I will provide these as evidence of why shooting in RAW is a must…
These are clickable thumbs- not full size,
Here’s the original shot in JPEG, completely screwed, over exposed and one for the desktop recycle bin!

Now here’s the fix using the RAW file and CS5…instead of being in the desktop recycle bin it’s now my desktop!


Haha Thomo, $20 for a cable release delivered from China, that would have to be the top of the line one, I got one delivered for $7...sufice to say, rarely does anything but add weight to the camera bag! If you(Matty or anyone else) are to buy one avoid the $7 model, there some around that do other better things like having the ability to also shoot timelapse ect, do the research and find a multiple feature one...that's what I would recomend from experince!

Your photos are pretty good Matty, you are definately on the right track to learning and that is keep taking photos, take the same photo numerous times if you can with different settings and then compare the results.I think using the camera is the best way to learn the camera!

Just my thoughts....

Matt, you are more than welcome to keep posting your photos in this thread. If you would like me to change the name of it, please let me know and I can do it for you.

Congrats on your new camera, by the way! Photography is an addictive hobby. With your last batch of photos, it looks as though the white balance is a little 'cool', as the photos have a blue/cyan tinge to them. As a simple test, take the same photo/subject several different times, and each time only changing the white balance setting and see how different each photo looks.

There is so much to learn when delving into the world of digital SLR's. 7 years and 2 cameras later, I'm still learning (granted I don't get much time!). Take on lots of advice, take lots of photos and experiment and ask as many questions as you can. We are all here to help you. But most of all, have fun and enjoy!!!

Hi Stormgirl. Yes thank you. You can change it.

Bulb setting for 2.5seconds. F5.3. 18mm and 800ISO.

Hi Mathew,

Nice photo, I lived very close to you there for about a week.

Just one suggestion, you obviously have the camera supported (ie a tripod I guess), therefore it might be a good idea to drop the ISO down to 100 or 200. Should give a nicer image with less noise.

I know, but the ISO was on automatic. It ended up like that way.

Hi, good tip, get it off Auto, even the P mode is much better. Keep the ISO at 100 until you feel the need to experiment. I never take anything with an ISO over 100, even night time shots.

Next challenge as others have said is to start using RAW mode instead of JPG's.

I thought JPEG is more appropriate use of professional photography these days? Hence the quality.

Ok no worries, keeping the ISO at around 100ish.

You thought wrong.

At least I going to change that on my settings next time I use the camera

This camera is really making me more fun than the previous one!

JPEG is COMPRESSED and if you try and edit that further, you will simply butcher the photo unless it is perfect from the word go. But that is very rare.

I used to shoot JPEG as well, but now shoot RAW. I cannot stress enough that you must always shoot in RAW if you want to be serious about your photography. Save the happy snaps for your phone camera if you don't want much fuss for a quick pic.

But with lightning especially, something I consider my strength in photography, I ALWAYS use BULB. Especially so, when the lightning is frequent and close. BULB lets YOU control the camera...but if you have it locked in at 20 10 or 30 seconds for example, once you press that button on your cable release, you can't do anything. With BULB, you control the exposure, the noise, EVERYTHING. If you get a bolt 1 second after you expose the pic, you may not want another bolt in that frame so with BULB you can close the shutter off. Similarly if you want many bolts and you have BULB, you can do so with a much longer exposure. It just gives you complete control. Always shoot ISO 100 to minimise noise, especially with exposures over 30 seconds. I generally try and keep mine between 15-35seconds on average depending on the frequency and brightness. Sometimes with bright bolts in rainshafts or near rain, you might only need a few seconds and the whole scene is bright. So BULB BULB BULB all the way if you want lightning shots.

You can get a decent cable release online these days for as little as about $3.50, that is what I paid for mine when my canon one became frayed from too much use (you get that in Darwin).

With regards to aperture, generally I find between f/5.6 and f/7.1 yields my best results, but for distant bolts, down to f/2.8 if your lens can do so is good. Also, for those really close and bright ones as tight as f/14-f/18 can be required. But that is rare.

TS

I have to disagree strongly about using RAW, especially for someone starting out on a DSLR. I think using RAW first up is a bad-bad mistake. Sure it’s great for Pro’s & experienced enthusiasts to tweak and massage their image to a final printable and publishable stage. But for a 19yo Uni student on his first DSLR, it’s pointless, and only restricts that person from learning about the real skills of capturing light through a lens on a camera.

Often people who promote RAW to newbies actually know very little about photography and everything about photo editing. To me photography is about capturing an image on the camera, not snapping a raw data file any which way any time of the day willy-nilly then turn that into a great pic with 9 hours of Photoshop work. That is not photography, that’s witchcraft.

I think it’s better to shoot in JPG first, learn what the camera is doing, understand how that differs from what you envisaged the shot to be, make changes till you get near the result you wanted , develop an eye for lighting, contrast and composition, once you get to a stage where you are mostly happy with the JPGs you are producing straight out of the camera, then switch to RAW and put the icing on the cake with adjustments in processing software. Doing that will make you a better photographer at the end of the day. It’s far easier to turn a great image into a masterpiece than turn garbage into art.

To use an analogy; you have to learn to walk before you can run. Honestly shooting RAW, and post processing is like running flat out in a 800mm final.

I can't put off the auto ISO because it changes the aperture and contrast settings. As well Can't change to RAW because each images going to reduce storage space dramatically and cause massive download usage on the computer.

Here are following pictures from Castle Hill tonight in Townsville.





















[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...690601031_n.jpg[/img]

[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...108777413_n.jpg[/img]

[img]https://fbcdn-sphotos-a.akamaihd.net/hph...351580979_n.jpg[/img]

Contrast settings? Not sure what you're talking about there. What mode are you using? If you're shooting in Av mode (the only mode you really need, apart from manual on the odd occasion), changing the ISO should only effect the shutter speed.
And yeah, You'll need a decent size sd card if you wanna shoot raw.

Hi Matt,

Some tips for the photos above:

- Set the ISO to 100 or 200
- Set to manual and set aperture to somewhere between f8 to f11 (as a rough guide)
- Set shutter speed to get the exposure right (probably going to be > 5 seconds in low light)
- Use a tripod!! If you are using a tripod, learn how to use it better.

Your camera can provide far sharper images if you stabilise your camera. This is absolutely vital in low light. I will agree with Sandfly, worry about raw vs jpeg later.

Matt, you have two of the best photographic technicians for weather photography as seen on this forum, for their knowledge and years of experience, Listen to what they say and I am sure from the days of slide film, which is as close to Raw Media as you can get , one had to learn to get your settings right or would cost you a lot of money in pre + maybe Drum scanning and printing, Digital Cameras offer the best of all ,
Raw, Jpeg, etc, so please use the best of it you can. I get so many clients come to me and want a print say around 1500 x 900 on canvas and its the most amazing photograph but the file is to small because its a jpeg and I cannot retrieve all the file information to get the print that big. A raw file I have room to interpolate to whatever the client wants .. so shoot raw + download more,

Thanks for great tips. I try to change the settings and that. I will change to RAW once I buy the larger memory card. They seem rather expensive!!

BTW I always set on manual, never the others.

The problem with shooting full manual, especially when you're starting out is you can end up spending quite a bit of time trying to get the overall exposure right. That's why I'm such a big fan of Av mode, lock in your ISO, adjust the aperture to suit what you're shooting (depth of field, quickly changing light if shooting storms etc.) then let the camera worry about how long the shutter needs to be open.

If you're serious about getting the most out of your DSLR, you should also Google "the exposure triangle". Once you wrap your head around that you'll be set.

Another VERY important tip for lightning is to make sure you get your focus SPOT ON. There is nothing more frustrating and painful than thinking you have some great shots only to get them on your computer and they are 'soft' or out of focus. Before sunset I ensure I focus on something as distant as possible zoomed in as much as possible for whatever lens I have. Usually it is a distant cloud or horizon point and I make sure I use AF (Autofocus) not MF (Manual Focus). Over the years. This is less important in the day but MORE important at night.

Once it is dark and you have to focus again, try your best to AF on a DISTANT (>5km if poss) light. Zoom in and try and get the centre focus point (the best one) to lock focus on that light by half-pressing multpiple times. This is important and don't be afraid to spend time doing this rather than rushing to set up. If the moon is out then that is my preferred option, especially when you are out in the sticks with no artificial light sources. If you do happen to find yourself out in the dark, I recommend that you mark a spot on your lens where the infinity marker is from a known focused point in the day and then go straight to that at night.

I do my best to avoid manually focusing on a star or a 'soft' light source in the dark because as good as the human eye is, it isn't as good as the cameras. Everytime I have manually focused on something distant at night I have had more blurry and soft shots than compared to autofocusing on the same distant light source. If you have a good lens and lens, trust it.

TS

You don't have an infinity marker on your camera, TS?

I agree with this, I do the majority of my photography with the Av mode and use exposure compensation to adjust if needed. I prefer manual in really low light (ie long exposures) though. Matt, probably worth looking into histograms to check your exposures too. Very useful tool though not something to worry too much about straight away.

Thanks for the tips Thunderstruck. So just clarifying this, if you were using a 18-55 mm lens, for example, you would focus at 55 mm and then go to the required focal length to take photos? I have been using the live view function recently for focusing (when using a tripod) and have found this very useful.

Look into that sometime as I place my hands on my camera

Yes I do, I have the Canon 17-40mm f/4 but for me just going to the marker is not good enough because focus varies with f-stops enough to cause slight softness...it's never quite ON infinity, usually a little to the left but how much really depends on what I am shooting. Finding the sweet spot definitely isn't a case of guessing where it should be.

TS

Here is one of my fav images that shows the worth of spending more time ensuring the focus is spot on, even double and triple checking, in case you bump it without realising in the panic to either change lenses or set up quickly because the storm is already firing. I only have a 400D so one can still achieve great images with a low end body.



I have others that are a bit soft and really do ruin the shot, so really getting that focus right is the key to a shot popping or just being 'any other shot'

TS

Here some shots I made.

1/13 f5.6 ISO 100




1/200 f7.1


1/60 f5.0 ISO 200


1" f10 ISO 100

I am with you Lennie (Thunderstruck) re setting up for the lightning shot at night can be rather tricky with focus in this particular. I have to do the same as what you did like last time. Low ISO is best to do too to steer clear of noisy images at night. They do still improve with iso with a lot less noise than years ago when first DSLR came out. Technology will not stop improving all the time. But be warned! in Canon camera, if you take photos with JPEG, and if you don't like pre noise reduction before post processing, switch noise reduction off for high iso and long exposure in the settings. That way you upload into computer and reduce the noise in your own way to a better quality result. Photoshop noise reduction I find is a lot better than incamera noise reduction. If you take with RAW, it ignores noise reduction means that you have to do post processing on the computer later time. I prefer RAW most of time. But I am encouraging you to keep practice taking picture, it is a lot of interesting time and fun time.

More photos from this evening. Used A-Depth setting. Its ridiculously good! No noise!!

Those pictures above have automatic aperture and shutter speed with ISO100. Its auto focus setting which is pretty excellent. No noise issues anymore. Will use AV for night shots.

As a fellow beginner I agree with raw. I am now a raw convert!
Another hint I can offer is the rule of thirds. Giving ur shots balance ( google it) its one of the best bits of advice I have had.... If I'm giving any wrong info out people please let me know! It will only help me improve

1/35s, f11, ISO100 and 4500K white balance.

I disagree with you, why encourage the capture of pictures in a lossy file format?
All canon cameras make adjustments in camera on JPG's so saying jpgs are best for learners is rubbish, RAW will show him what the camera is really taking. He can auto process his files in RAW with software and the changes do not affect the original file they are stored in meta data. If he ruins a jpg in software he ruins his shot. That is reason enough to shoot RAW and export from RAW to other output like TIFF also lossless.

i know this thread is old but seems relevent still
wow some really good info here. just got my first DSLR D7000 cant wait on doing some shots of lightning with above advice.
thanks all will be using some of the advice.
As for RAW after reading above, i had to look up more info on it and came accross a blog by IMRE of binary graphite http://binarygraphite.blogspot.com.au/p/episode-guide.html episode 18 and 19 great info on JPEG and RAW and another blogger Jared polin http://froknowsphoto.com/raw-vs-jpeg-side-by-side-comparison/

so i guess its sort of personal preference really. im yet to agree on which one ill fall in love with. as still need to learn and get experience. hehehehe
thanks all ill be posting up photo's soon over the weekend on seperate thread.

man i just cant wait for storms its a pain!

There's really no question mate . Raw will give u ultimate flexibility with any post processing u wanna do. The only reason u wouldn't choose raw is if u have minimal space on ur card.

would you reccomend a good post processing program? do they still use adobe photoshop? or is there a better option these days? thanks

I am not particular good at post processing but anyway - Adobe Elements is not a bad place to start. Adobe photoshop and lightroom are also very popular.

There are two types of phoyographers, those that choose to spend their time behind the camera, and those that choose to spend their time behind a computer screen. A RAW image is like raw steak, you have to cook it, and cook it well to make it great. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm

From more from Ken Rockell.

Today the photography hobby has retreated almost entirely away from shooting, and gone back into the computer.

Few photo hobbyists worry about taking pictures anymore. Instead, it's all about Lightroom or Camera Raw, workflows, profiles, HDR or whatever can burn away hours behind a computer screen.

Hobbyists actually believe that, armed with their computers, that they are now artists who can turn terds into great pictures, but bad photos never get any better than when they were taken.

Hobbyists created photography. Sadly, hobbyists today are usually too busy playing with the computrs to create any meaningful photographs.

If anyone doubts the foolishness of the current obsession with software shenanigans, have a look at an old photo magazine from the 1950-60s and see how much time was spent back then worrying about darkroom chemicals. Today we look back at all that and can't fathom how using one chemical or another had any significance compared to how much more important it would have been to take pictures of something interesting.
I see exactly the same problem today.
It's obvious looking back at old magazines that the only thing that mattered was getting to the right place at the right time to take a picture of the right thing, and the choice of developer and wash treatments, 90% of what the magazines went off about, was irrelevant.
Today, its the same thing. Magazines go on about how to "fix" your RAW pictures in your computer, but let's face it: the only way to fix them is, as always, get to the right place at the right time and see the right picture before you press the shutter.

Hobbyists are so distracted by wondering which RAW converter to use, worried about printer and camera profiles, wasting hours doing gigapan and HDR and pan-focus captures, and then wasting even more hours in front of their screens putting these all together back into photos and then screwing them up further with more plugins, that no hobbyists have any time left to get outside and look for better pictures.

The people who can pull off good photos are those who know exactly where the light will be, know where to set their tripods, or can see something interesting for making great photos. If you don't already have this knack, and few people do, then the worst way to try to get better is by handicapping yourself with a system that paralyzes you I front of a computer screen. Women don't have this problem, since they'd rather just go shoot, which is why they create a lot less crap photos than we men do.

If your interest is to make great photographs, let me do everything I can to pull you away from the computer. Take the simplest camera you can find, and learn how to see a good picture. Vision, seeing the picture first, is everything. Snapping and processing it is the trivial part, don't let it consume more more time than it should.


What kind of photographer are you?
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm

The old raw vs jpeg debate. Personally, I shoot in raw (though I used to shoot jpeg for a long time). Honestly, I think the amount of time taken to pull out a decent jpeg (or tiff) from a raw file is often exaggerated.

I do agree with you that there is a tendency for people to worry about minor things though.

Those views are too black and white I think.

RAW gives you more control. Doesn't mean you have to spend significantly more time on the computer compared to getting out there and taking photos. Some end up obsessing over the details but that's not everyone.

You don't have to spend hours 'cooking' raw files. When you choose JPEG the camera is cooking the files for you, which is fine. Some people just like to have more control over their finished product.

Reminds me of audio engineering some like to put effects like compression on an incoming signal (like vocals) before it gets recorded. That way you're stuck with those effects you chose at that moment, which is a positive to some. I like to record vocals 'clean' and then tweak later - keeps my options open... however, then you can have issues with TOO MANY OPTIONS - which is a major killer of creativity and 'flow'.

In the old days they almost always recorded audio to tracks with the effects on. Now a days they almost always record 'RAW' and defer any effects for post processing - mainly because technology has gotten better. The funny thing is when I look at old vs. new music I think the old stuff is much better - less choice lets you do more with what you've got, and spend more time thinking creatively rather than analytically.

That said -

With RAW vs JPG I'd always go RAW. If I somehow took a one in a billion photo, or a photo of something like ball lightning which has never been documented - I think I'd prefer to have it uncompressed

The problem of spending hours on my PC and not enough time taking photos? Little to no difference if I were using JPG.

Some of your points and general ideas have merit sandfly. People do get into photography and end up spending way too much time in front of the screen, half confused from all the options and information they've got.

More experiments.

Well said, Chris.

The issue of raw vs jpeg is irrelevent. When you shoot jpeg and depending on what mode your in, the camera will capture an image and add post processing to it, aka saturation, contrast, brightness, sharpening etc then COMPRESSES into Jpeg, a BIG issue and for one big reason. When your camera compresses to Jpeg, you lose a lot of information, the biggest ones being highlights and shadows. If you try pulling highlights or shadows from Jpegs you'll end up with colour banding very quickly, which essentially ruins the image forever. Basically your losing a major element of switching from point and shoot to a DSLR, DYNAMIC RANGE, which until recently was IMO the biggest drawback between film vs digital.

To give you an example, the nikon D7000 has a fantastic imaging sensor, probabaly one of the best APS-C sensors out there with its biggest achievement being dynamic range (something I hope canon can get its act together with soon).
I've heard the the D7000 can pull around 13.5 stops of dynamic range from raw (this varies from review to review, some say more some say less) whereas shooting in Jpeg you'd probabaly be looking at around 9.5-11 stops (as I said before reviews vary alot). The basic gist of it is, no matter what DSLR you are using, you will lose at least 2 stops dynamic range which is very impractical. Next time you're post processing drag the exposure 2 stops in either direction and you'll see how big of a deal it is.

Benefits of this dynamic range, when you are editing, when you drag highlight recovery, shadow recovery, even contrast, levels youl be able to pull detail from shadows and highlights and the image quality will barely be affected (to a point, can't really pull pitch black from shadows), simply impractical on a jpeg.

Now for people saying post processing is unnecessary and 'takes up too much time'. Good news! The raw processing program that came with the camera will generally have all the default processing that the camera would apply to Jpegs, even programs such as lightroom can do this. Say your an auto user and were shooting a landscape image with the landscape option that is on some cameras. You import the raw into the program, looking dull and flat and with one click of the 'landscape' post processing option, the image has had the processing that would have occured in camera to a Jpeg. This takes all of 2 seconds. Except now if you so desire, you can apply other small adjustments if you dont agree with how the program did it, say saturation was too high or contrast too little.

The other general benefits include fixing white balance issues if you screwed it up when taking the image, using 'superior' noise reduction in good programs, colours, etc. Unless you have serious storage issues with files (can get like 1TB harddrives these days for very little really) it's a good road to go down.

I shot in Jpeg at first, and after 4 months switches to RAW. Because of Jpeg I lost what could have been many great images, and actually regret shooting RAW.

Anyway that's my take on it, dynamic range is very important to me and when you see the benefits, I think you'll jump ship to.

Of course it is better to focus on composition and light when out taking photos, but considering the few seconds it takes to convert a RAW to what the camera would have done to the Jpeg anyway, it's a win win IMO

Actually regret shooting Jpeg*, I wish I had shot RAW.

Major downside to RAW is the time it takes to write to the card, and often when i'm shooting action ill shoot in Jpeg. Many pro sports photographers shoot Jpeg simply so they can fire of dozens of shots without hitting the writing buffer. When it comes to landscape and studio stuff however, the vast majority shoot RAW.

Hope this helps guys!

Cheers

Such an old fashioned opinion from supposedly one of Australia's best landscape photographers.

I will agree that having a good eye for composition and light is a vital thing to have, but let's not deny that post processing doesn't have a role in bringing those higher resolution RAW images back to the way we saw them in the first place.

Essentially RAW gives you more latitude to make up for the shortcomings of the camera without ruining the image, and there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion.