GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-21-2013, 20:33   #51
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,678
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patchman View Post
Good reminder about the need to do some degree of photoshopping for pretty much all digital photos.
Why the need for photoshopping? I'm just getting back to digital photography with a D80. I know nothing about image improvement/enhancement, so your statement grabbed my attention. Thanks.
PhotoFeller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 20:36   #52
686Owner
NRA Life Member
 
686Owner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 8,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Why the need for photoshopping? I'm just getting back to digital photography with a D80. I know nothing about image improvement/enhancement, so your statement grabbed my attention. Thanks.
To make the image look it's best, some adjustments are usually required. Higher end DSLRs especially can turn out a flat looking image (at least for Canon) Most people like a little more contrast and saturation, especially if you are shooting RAW.
__________________
My Gun Photos
686Owner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 20:36   #53
kalashluvr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by 686Owner View Post
85mm is a bit too long for indoor pictures on a crop camera. On a full frame, it would work pretty well.
This is true. I guess I forgot how long it was on the DX camera.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
__________________
G27, G17
kalashluvr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 20:42   #54
686Owner
NRA Life Member
 
686Owner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 8,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalashluvr View Post
This is true. I guess I forgot how long it was on the DX camera.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire
Still great for outdoors shots. I just wish I could use my 85 1.2 more indoors.
__________________
My Gun Photos
686Owner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 20:52   #55
Gregg702
Gold Membership
 
 
Gregg702's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 6,424
Quote:
Originally Posted by 686Owner View Post
IIRC it can take a few months to make it to market after Nikon makes an announcement, if that's all that happened.
The announcement said March. No biggie though, I am loving the D7000 and will continue to after the D7100 comes out, just thought the timing was almost coincidental. I just picked up an old Nikon AF 1:1.8f 50mm prime lense I have been playing with.
__________________
Shooting guns in the following calibers: .22lr, 38spl, 9x19mm, .357 magnum, .40 S&W, .45ACP, 5.7x28mm, 5.56x45mm, 6.8SPC, 12 Gauge
Gregg702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 20:56   #56
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by AudiGregg View Post
I know, and none of it is stuff that will make or break anything, but it is still just my luck that a new one would be announced a week after I bought mine.
Sorry, I thought everyone knew .....

If you want the latest and greatest you wait until the next product is announced. You pay a premium for the latest and greatest.
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 21:08   #57
Patchman
Florist
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Land of Flora, Fauna & Merriweather
Posts: 11,519
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Why the need for photoshopping? I'm just getting back to digital photography with a D80. I know nothing about image improvement/enhancement, so your statement grabbed my attention. Thanks.
That's the nature of digital photography. A little more contrast, a little more saturation... whatever. For example, with the D80, I find the D80 firmware makes the images a little less sharp than I like. So usually, I photoshop the images on many of the photos to make them slightly sharper.

And of course, photoshopping software does so much more than was possible with regular film, so that it's become one of "because you can..."
__________________
Sounds like he has nothing left but be a monkey's uncle. It's not like he's got a monkey's manhood left.

And thank YOU for being perfect, all the time, every time. Go forth and reproduce. We need more of you.
Patchman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 21:18   #58
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Why the need for photoshopping? I'm just getting back to digital photography with a D80. I know nothing about image improvement/enhancement, so your statement grabbed my attention. Thanks.
It depends.
If you shoot RAW the photos will probably look a little flat most of the time. The images just don't look real. Load them up in photoshop and in two minutes I can make them pop.

JPGs on the other hand are altered in the D7000. If set right, there is no need for me to make changes.

And then....
I took many photos last weekend of my niece playing basket ball. They are just snap shots. They look fine as is.

I took another group of photos a few weeks ago. I made a HUGE pan. I then altered some to remove people. I then recovered a bad shot.

If you just want to take snapshots, don't worry about it, you don't need photoshop. If you want to take something impressive..... Photoshop is the new dark room of the digital age where the average shot goes to become something more.
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 22:24   #59
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,678
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by RWBlue View Post
It depends.
If you shoot RAW the photos will probably look a little flat most of the time. The images just don't look real. Load them up in photoshop and in two minutes I can make them pop.

JPGs on the other hand are altered in the D7000. If set right, there is no need for me to make changes.

And then....
I took many photos last weekend of my niece playing basket ball. They are just snap shots. They look fine as is.

I took another group of photos a few weeks ago. I made a HUGE pan. I then altered some to remove people. I then recovered a bad shot.

If you just want to take snapshots, don't worry about it, you don't need photoshop. If you want to take something impressive..... Photoshop is the new dark room of the digital age where the average shot goes to become something more.
Sounds like Photoshop is in my future, because I want crisp images. Most of my photos will be 'snapshots', but I want them (the few that I keep) to be good snapshots.
PhotoFeller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 22:32   #60
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Sounds like Photoshop is in my future, because I want crisp images. Most of my photos will be 'snapshots', but I want them (the few that I keep) to be good snapshots.
Crisp is not an issue. That is a matter of Fstop and quality lens.

But odds are you will want photoshop to fix a snap shot. We all take bad pictures and if you can not re-do them....fix them.
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-21-2013, 22:45   #61
stopatrain
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
stopatrain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 2,143
The D7000 is an awesome camera.
stopatrain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:05   #62
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,678
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by stopatrain View Post
The D7000 is an awesome camera.
I understand the D7000 is 'advanced' in terms of features and controls, many of which would be beyond someone new to digital. On the other hand, it provides plenty of room for the amateur to grow and improve.

I'm wondering if the D7000's 'complexity' would be manageable for someone new to digital...or is it better suited for someone a bit higher on the learning curve?

For still photography, is the 7000 'harder' to master than earlier models like the D80?
PhotoFeller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:22   #63
kirbinster
Senior Member
 
kirbinster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 233
A D7000 is no harder to use than a D80. Things really don't get harder till you step up to a full frame like my D800e. When you have 36 megapixels you really have to have much better glass and much better handholding techniques.
kirbinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:31   #64
686Owner
NRA Life Member
 
686Owner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 8,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
A D7000 is no harder to use than a D80. Things really don't get harder till you step up to a full frame like my D800e. When you have 36 megapixels you really have to have much better glass and much better handholding techniques.
This is true. Exposure is exposure and composition is composition.

And unless you are looking at your pictures at 100%, your pictures will be just as good with a 36 pixel full frame as they were with any other camera.
__________________
My Gun Photos
686Owner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:39   #65
kirbinster
Senior Member
 
kirbinster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by 686Owner View Post
This is true. Exposure is exposure and composition is composition.

And unless you are looking at your pictures at 100%, your pictures will be just as good with a 36 pixel full frame as they were with any other camera.

No, 36 megapix does have both good and bad sides. I find that you need much better glass. My 28-300VR that I loved on my DX bodies and even on my D700 does not resolve as well on the D800e. Further you will introduce blur from hand movement on the D800 unless you shoot faster than you would typically do on a camera with fewer pixels. That said, you can't beat the image quality or the ability to crop down and still be able to produce a massive print.
kirbinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:49   #66
686Owner
NRA Life Member
 
686Owner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 8,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
No, 36 megapix does have both good and bad sides. I find that you need much better glass. My 28-300VR that I loved on my DX bodies and even on my D700 does not resolve as well on the D800e. Further you will introduce blur from hand movement on the D800 unless you shoot faster than you would typically do on a camera with fewer pixels. That said, you can't beat the image quality or the ability to crop down and still be able to produce a massive print.
But at the same print size, you will have the same amount of blur with either camera. You only see the blur when you zoom in and see the pixels that aren;t resolved with the lower resolution camera.

Here's an article that can perhaps explain it better than I can, although it talks about diffraction too.

http://www.gdanmitchell.com/2011/05/...ore-megapixels

Quote:
But, one of them says, “the blur” (whether motion or diffraction caused) “covers more pixel widths!” Right. It does. But that doesn’t change the fact that the size of the blur relative to the size of the print or other final display is no larger at all.
__________________
My Gun Photos
686Owner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 07:53   #67
kirbinster
Senior Member
 
kirbinster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 233
Well all I know is real world shooting with the camera, and experience of lots of other photographers I know. You need better lenses like my 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 and 50% greater shutter speeds when not using a tripod. Will you notice anything in a 4"x6" print - probably not, but one does not typically use a $3,000 body for that.
kirbinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:18   #68
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
I understand the D7000 is 'advanced' in terms of features and controls, many of which would be beyond someone new to digital. On the other hand, it provides plenty of room for the amateur to grow and improve.

I'm wondering if the D7000's 'complexity' would be manageable for someone new to digital...or is it better suited for someone a bit higher on the learning curve?

For still photography, is the 7000 'harder' to master than earlier models like the D80?
I don't think the D7000 is any harder for the newbie to learn than the D80/90. In fact it is probably easier to learn because the camera can be set to automatic this and that and then it is just a point and click, but a very intelligent point and click.

The flip side of the equation is the D80/90 has less functions. You can learn all those functions and then pick up a D7000 and have more functions.

I will not say I have mastered my D7000, because I have not used ALL the functions.

Here is a function I know about, but have not worked with. To do time laps, you take one photo every hour or day. Then you stitch them together for a movie. Well, I have never been willing to set my camera up and watch it for an extended period of time. One day I will, but not right now. The D80 and D90 do not have this function as part of the base camera, it has to be purchased as an add on.
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 09:36   #69
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
Well all I know is real world shooting with the camera, and experience of lots of other photographers I know. You need better lenses like my 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 and 50% greater shutter speeds when not using a tripod. Will you notice anything in a 4"x6" print - probably not, but one does not typically use a $3,000 body for that.
The lens does make a big difference.

But I will argue the 50% greater shutter speeds. I think it depends on what you are trying to do, your target, and how you hold the camera.

If you are trying to shoot a moving target from a moving target and it is reasonably close, I agree with you.

But if you are shooting a still target from a still position....I can get away with a lot less.

If you are swinging the camera with the race car passing you, there is a perfect spot where the car is not blurry and the background is. This shows speed.





I will also argue about prints.....who prints? It is all about viewing on the computer or projecting.
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 10:35   #70
686Owner
NRA Life Member
 
686Owner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: KY
Posts: 8,471
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
Well all I know is real world shooting with the camera, and experience of lots of other photographers I know. You need better lenses like my 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 and 50% greater shutter speeds when not using a tripod. Will you notice anything in a 4"x6" print - probably not, but one does not typically use a $3,000 body for that.
One more post so as not to derail the thread...

Most people don't even print anymore. Or at least most of their shots don't get printed.

The problem is when you view the picture on the computer, you are looking at per pixel sharpness when you zoom in to 100%. When looking at the same size picture, the picture sharpness (or lack of) due to motion will be the same. As Rabbi would say, it's just math. Here's another article on the subject.

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/09/mo...el-count.aspx/
__________________
My Gun Photos
686Owner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 22:47   #71
fiveoboy01
Senior Member
 
fiveoboy01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 988
Regardless of the complexity of the body, you're still dealing with the exposure triangle. Master the use of that and you can generally always get a (technically)nice image. Composition, of course is a whole different matter. Really any body can be mastered easily with the basic functions, the advanced stuff can be confusing though... but a beginner doesn't need to utilize all those advanced functions.

I shot for quite a while with a D300(this was a few years ago when it was their top of the line DX body), but sold everything.

I'm really considering going back into it. A hobby I enjoyed a lot.
__________________
Rimfire Club #6923
Walther Club #310
Niners Club #8989
fiveoboy01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 06:27   #72
kirbinster
Senior Member
 
kirbinster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhotoFeller View Post
Sounds like Photoshop is in my future, because I want crisp images. Most of my photos will be 'snapshots', but I want them (the few that I keep) to be good snapshots.
I would suggest Adobe Lightroom over Photoshop for most people. It does most everything that photoshop does except bit level editing. It is a database for all your photographs and allows you to do 95% of anything you would ever want to do. It is much easier to use and was designed for this purpose by the people that created photoshop.

As for not printing, well then why do you need such a good camera. To display stuff on a computer screen any $99 point and shoot camera is good enough. I routinely make 20" by 30" prints, and when you do that you need resolution. I will admit I am a newbie when it comes to guns, but far from that when it comes to photography. Even Nikon says that you need higher shutter speeds when using their D800 / D800e cameras than with other cameras to get quality images.

Last edited by kirbinster; 02-23-2013 at 06:31..
kirbinster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 08:56   #73
PhotoFeller
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midwest and south
Posts: 2,678
Blog Entries: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
I would suggest Adobe Lightroom over Photoshop for most people. It does most everything that photoshop does except bit level editing. It is a database for all your photographs and allows you to do 95% of anything you would ever want to do. It is much easier to use and was designed for this purpose by the people that created photoshop.

As for not printing, well then why do you need such a good camera. To display stuff on a computer screen any $99 point and shoot camera is good enough. I routinely make 20" by 30" prints, and when you do that you need resolution. I will admit I am a newbie when it comes to guns, but far from that when it comes to photography. Even Nikon says that you need higher shutter speeds when using their D800 / D800e cameras than with other cameras to get quality images.
Thanks for the tip on Lightroom. I'm really at the bottom of the curve in these areas, so guidance is appreciated.

To the OP's point about just missing the introduction of Nikon's D7100, I'm thinkin' you may be better off. I try to avoid the new model of anything when it is first introduced. I would rather wait until the bugs have all been worked out.

Finally, just a personal observation about my recent return to photography. I see the world differently these days. I see colors and shapes and light again that my mind has been closed to since I put my 35mm equipment away some years ago. I know you guys understand this even if you don't think about it. For me, picking up a camera again has been great.

Last edited by PhotoFeller; 02-23-2013 at 08:57..
PhotoFeller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 22:20   #74
RWBlue
CLM Number 120
Mr. CISSP, CISA
 
RWBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 27,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by kirbinster View Post
I would suggest Adobe Lightroom over Photoshop for most people. It does most everything that photoshop does except bit level editing. It is a database for all your photographs and allows you to do 95% of anything you would ever want to do. It is much easier to use and was designed for this purpose by the people that created photoshop.

As for not printing, well then why do you need such a good camera. To display stuff on a computer screen any $99 point and shoot camera is good enough. I routinely make 20" by 30" prints, and when you do that you need resolution. I will admit I am a newbie when it comes to guns, but far from that when it comes to photography. Even Nikon says that you need higher shutter speeds when using their D800 / D800e cameras than with other cameras to get quality images.
IMHO, Picasa for DB of photos. It has facial recognition. It can be used for uploading if that is your thing. AND It is free.

If you don't want all the features of the full blown Photoshop, look at Elements. I would also suggest looking at a student version. The Student version is the same as normal, but costs less.

Most point and shoots have pretty good resolution. The difference between a reasonably priced P&S and a high end Nikon/Canon is the lens, no-delay when pushing the button, shooting in raw,...
__________________
One day, I shall come back. Yes, I shall come back. Until then, there must be no regrets, no tears, no anxieties. Just go forward in all your beliefs and prove to me that I am not mistaken in mine.
RWBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 19:36   #75
Gregg702
Gold Membership
 
 
Gregg702's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 6,424
I just picked up an SB-700 speed light to go with my new D7000. I love the remote function, and the light options completely change the feel of the camera, for the better.
__________________
Shooting guns in the following calibers: .22lr, 38spl, 9x19mm, .357 magnum, .40 S&W, .45ACP, 5.7x28mm, 5.56x45mm, 6.8SPC, 12 Gauge
Gregg702 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:46.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,335
390 Members
945 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42