Camera raw??

Ambrola

I have never shoot in RAW (NEF) before. How does these look. Be honest, I can take it!



[URL="[IMG]http://i458.photobucket.com/albums/qq305/ambrola/Bees_0035.jpg[/IMG]"][/URL]

basflt

looks fine
but , the advantage of RAW is , that you can , and should edit then , so they look great

Ambrola

basflt wrote: »

looks fine
but , the advantage of RAW is , that you can , and should edit then , so they look great

I did edit them. But I don't realy know what I'm doing.

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

I did edit them. But I don't realy know what I'm doing.

that understandable , you need to learn that too ,
but it does help
editing is a part of digital photography

but your pics are OK
seems to me you also got flash working correctly

Ambrola

basflt wrote: »

that understandable , you need to learn that too ,
but it does help
editing is a part of digital photography

but your pics are OK
seems to me you also got flash working correctly

Yea, I think so thanks to you for your help. The main problem I was haveing was Apeture, which you helped me with. I was always told 8 to 11 on Apeture but what a difference it makes.

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

Yea, I think so thanks to you for your help. The main problem I was haveing was Apeture, which you helped me with. I was always told 8 to 11 on Apeture but what a difference it makes.

i know
i struggled with exactly the same when i started
thats why i understand U

Lord Vetinari

Photos look good- RAW gives you more control over correcting exposures and white balance. I always shoot RAW but do no de-noise and sharpening in RAW - I leave that to PS. If you do your RAW conversions well the amount of work you do after should be minimal.
RE the apertures. Nikon apertures are a bit confusing as they work on apparent aperture rather than relative apertures most other cameras report so if I set F11 on my canon when shooting at 1:1 - this is a relative aperture but is actually equivalent to an apparent aperture of F22 on a Nikon at 1:1 magnification. Hope that makes sense
BTW apparent aperture = (1+M)* relative aperture in general where M is the magnification.

Brian V.

basflt

Lord Vetinari wrote: »

Photos look good- RAW gives you more control over correcting exposures and white balance. I always shoot RAW but do no de-noise and sharpening in RAW - I leave that to PS. If you do your RAW conversions well the amount of work you do after should be minimal.
RE the apertures. Nikon apertures are a bit confusing as they work on apparent aperture rather than relative apertures most other cameras report so if I set F11 on my canon when shooting at 1:1 - this is a relative aperture but is actually equivalent to an apparent aperture of F22 on a Nikon at 1:1 magnification. Hope that makes sense
BTW apparent aperture = (1+M)* relative aperture in general where M is the magnification.

Brian V.

makes sense to me , thanks for info

but , is it useful ?
i mean , every setup is different [ camera + lens ]
also light and subject has a role
so , one cannot say ; this aperture is best or that shutter-speed
its determined on the spot , there are no strict rules , one can vary / experiment
or , am i wrong ? , tell us

Ambrola

Makes sence to me. For example, I was just now shooting water drops at a shutter speed of 1/2000. I then dropped it to 1/250 and the drops looked better. Y0u would think that the water would need a high shutter speed to freeze motion, but now I know that flash is king?

Ambrola

basflt wrote: »

i know
i struggled with exactly the same when i started
thats why i understand U

You understand me because I have a 58 Pan Head that I've owned for 35 years 100% original.

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

You understand me because I have a 58 Pan Head that I've owned for 35 years 100% original.

you kidding me ?
those are beautiful where are your pics ?
i been riding HD 25 years [ but you know , or you would not say that ]
all i had was shovels & evo's

Ambrola

basflt wrote: »

you kidding me ?
those are beautiful where are your pics ?
i been riding HD 25 years [ but you know , or you would not say that ]
all i had was shovels & evo's

I will send you some. I bought it from an old man when I was 19 years old. It even has the original tool kit. Eveybody that sees it wants to buy it, so I don't get it out much anymore. Looks like an old Police bike.

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

I will send you some. I bought it from an old man when I was 19 years old. It even has the original tool kit. Eveybody that sees it wants to buy it, so I don't get it out much anymore. Looks like an old Police bike.

no need to send to me
there enough places here on DGrin -forum you can post

here mine [ old pic's from before i started photographing ]

http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=1392550&postcount=15

GOLDENORFE

since no one noticed, the white ballance looks too warm in #1
the yellows look more orange and there is an overall brown cast to the image. unless the wasp was this colour
what program are you using to convert raw files?
you can alter wb in raw without causing any image degration.

second shot looks pale and flat to me, needs highlights increasing
when you view histogram when converting and make sure both ends of the graph just touch the ends.

Lord Vetinari

With regards to apertures there is no correct aperture - you should shoot at what gives you the results you want but often newbies ask for some guides and F11 relative aperture does give a good balance of sharpness and DOF at 1:1 as commented before though this translates as F22 on a nikon body.
WRT shutter speed if you are shooting flash as the major light source then shutter speed becomes slightly irrelevant as it's the flash duration that supplies the motion freezing. It's much more relevant for natural light shooting where if you are handholding you need to maintain higher shuteer speeds than the normal focal length guideline because the magnification also comes into play so on a 1.6 crop camera using a 100mm macro at 1:1 you need to be shooting around 1/320th handheld.

Brian v.

basflt

thanks , but nikons are limited to 1/200 , when using flash

Ambrola

I am using Adobe Bridge in PS. I am just now starting to play around with it. I can see what you are talking about in the photos Phil. You should have seen some of the others, real fuzzy. I don't know what I did?

I just captured a Black Widow Spider and don't know how to photograph it, I'm scared of it. It was under my well cover when I raised it. I do not like these kind of spiders, they are more dangerous that a Rattlesnake. Any suggestions??

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

I am using Adobe Bridge in PS. I am just now starting to play around with it. I can see what you are talking about in the photos Phil. You should have seen some of the others, real fuzzy. I don't know what I did?

I just captured a Black Widow Spider and don't know how to photograph it, I'm scared of it. It was under my well cover when I raised it. I do not like these kind of spiders, they are more dangerous that a Rattlesnake. Any suggestions??

take some pic's , then kill it

GOLDENORFE

put it one your hand to shoot

seriously, a small black deadly spider is not going to be an easy subject:D

try placing it on a piece of card under a glass, when it rests and stops moving remove the glass and shoot quickly, it works for Brian
remember to use + fec to compensate for dark subject.

Ambrola

GOLDENORFE wrote: »

put it one your hand to shoot

seriously, a small black deadly spider is not going to be an easy subject:D

try placing it on a piece of card under a glass, when it rests and stops moving remove the glass and shoot quickly, it works for Brian
remember to use + fec to compensate for dark subject.

when you say +fec, you mean + exposure compensation???

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

when you say +fec, you mean + exposure compensation???

no , flash compensation

edit
exposure compensation contols light generaly =/-
flash compensation sends more light to background [-] or subject [+]
try it

GOLDENORFE

yes,
your camera should have it in the menu "flash exposure compensation" , it is very usefull to use,to quickly alter flash output. i alter it constantly to compensate for each subjects lighting

Ambrola

GOLDENORFE wrote: »

yes,
your camera should have it in the menu "flash exposure compensation" , it is very usefull to use,to quickly alter flash output. i alter it constantly to compensate for each subjects lighting

On Nikon, Its the little button on the right that has +/- and a green dot beside it right?

basflt

Ambrola wrote: »

On Nikon, Its the little button on the right that has +/- and a green dot beside it right?

thats exporure compensation

dont know about D80 but
on my D90 i can use the button on left side + second dialer
otherwise its in menu [ using magnifier button , in my D60 ]

Ambrola

basflt wrote: »

thats exporure compensation

dont know about D80 but
on my D90 i can use the button on left side + second dialer
otherwise its in menu [ using magnifier button , in my D60 ]

The button on the left side raises the cameras flash? But you can stil adjust the flash if you hold it and use the secondary dial??

basflt

yes , it has a flash-icon with +/_
exposure compensation has only +/_

when adjusted other then zero ,they also appear in viewfinder