ISO settings, and other ramblings

Humansvillian wrote:

Guy Parsons wrote:

Humansvillian wrote:

I didn't tell them, that I had a lot of help, from my friends on the internet, selecting automatic ISO settings.

I think that we have to make it a condition of your photo taking that you have to publicly announce at each venue the names of all the people who helped you get the results.

It's only fair that we get credit for our work.

Regards..... Guy

Today my wife and I went out driving around, and she wanted to take the PM2 and maybe learn how to use it a little better.

And I told her that an Australian man named Guy Parsons, was saying that it was always best to shoot the camera in a setting called RAW, if you really cared about your pictures.

She asked me why I didn't set my cameras to RAW, if RAW was the best.

I told her the biggest reason was that if you use RAW, the camera makes huge computer files of about 15 megabytes, and you have to use a program that can decode the RAW files like Olympus Viewer 3, and that if you use the JPEGs then you can load them fast over the Flash Air card to the smart phone, and the files are many times smaller, even ten times smaller, if you use Basic quality JPEGs.

She asked if I was running out of room to store pictures on my computer, and I said I have a one TB hard drive and I've not used even a fifth of that space yet.

She then asked why would I buy a fancy camera and then not use all the photo quality the camera had to offer, especially since I had loads of room on the computer to store the best pictures, and besides, didn't we have an extra external hard drive to back up our computers, anyway?

She was of the opinion that when she was taking pictures, she'd like to use the RAW setting and stay away from Basic settings.

I didn't even mention Normal, Fine, and Superfine quality JPEGs, just set the PM2 to RAW.

And it all worked out, pretty well, thanks to Guy Parsons.

Mennonite couple at Dutch Market

That last one, I was playing with the keystone correction, and i got the silos straight, but the shed is sort of tipping over forward, and I guess need to play with the thing a bit more, but the picture itself is an improvement over the JPEG, I think.

That Guy Parsons uses something called Faststone, and they might have that in Missouri, too, and it might be better than the free viewer from Olympus.

But I do have a free DxO somewhere in my computer programs, and I might try that first.

I'm learning all this, as I go along, with a little help from my friends on the internet like Guy Parsons and the rest of you'ns.

Maybe a touch more on the keystone, as I don't think the silos are that straight. I processed it through DXO viewpoint as an example. When the keystone is right, then all verticals should be straight.

However, occasionally a full correction looks weird. In this example it feels like the image is stretched front to back. I actually prefer your original shot.