First trip with new camera, need help with editing basics

[Larry Grady]

I received some great advice on this forum for a big trip my wife and I went on for our 30 year anniversary. Based on advice from this board, I purchased a Nikon Z6iii w/ two z lenses, the 24-120 f/4 and the 14-30 f/4. I was very please with the camera and the lenses, they served me well for the 3 weeks we were gone.

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

I did a lot of experimenting. I would take a couple of pictures of something in auto, and then I would take more playing with the aperture and shutter priorities, even manual mode. I was playing around with spot metering and different focus modes. It was a lot of fun and I'm very happy with my purchase. Now my wife is asking to see the pictures and I have started playing around a bit in NX studio and lightroom. I definitely need some help.

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general? I'm watching videos where someone will say "and obviously this needs more contrast and the greens need to be brought out" and there is nothing obvious to me at all. I need a very basic primer on light and exposure, and what basic controls like exposure, saturation, contrast, shadows, etc., are actually doing. Why I would change one or the other. It seems obvious how to do it, but I'm not sure why I would slide one over another. I've done some experimenting and had some accidentally good results, but I don't quite understand what I'm doing.

Also, watching these videos I'm asking myself a question. How much is too much? I had a picture of a waterfall in Iceland. It was nice. But then I loaded it into lightroom and used their auto setting and everything popped out. The greens got nicer, the sky was less washed out, the picture went from meh to wow, that's a cool picture. But how much of that is me? I didnt' really take that final image. How, the final is more of what I feel like I saw with my eye, it's closer to my memory of that place. It's also what I composed. But the original picture I took just wasn't a good capture or representation compared to what it looks like now.. It was a very dramatic difference. I had shot in RAW so I guess you can make pretty dramatic changes.

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed? It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture. Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

Thanks

 

[yardcoyote]

If you're only tossing a quarter of your pictures immediately as trash, you are doing pretty well.

 

[Martin_99]

I received some great advice on this forum for a big trip my wife and I went on for our 30 year anniversary. Based on advice from this board, I purchased a Nikon Z6iii w/ two z lenses, the 24-120 f/4 and the 14-30 f/4. I was very please with the camera and the lenses, they served me well for the 3 weeks we were gone.

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

My advice: DELETE is your friend. Going through thousands of photos is boring as hell. Choose 200-500 most interesting photos and create cool trip set. Take 80 the best ones and create photobook.

I did a lot of experimenting. I would take a couple of pictures of something in auto, and then I would take more playing with the aperture and shutter priorities, even manual mode. I was playing around with spot metering and different focus modes. It was a lot of fun and I'm very happy with my purchase. Now my wife is asking to see the pictures and I have started playing around a bit in NX studio and lightroom. I definitely need some help.

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general?

Did you shot also jpg files together with RAW files? I think, that editing and particularly such amount is too much for beginner to swallow. I would just sort through the jpg's and do just basic editing.

I'm watching videos where someone will say "and obviously this needs more contrast and the greens need to be brought out" and there is nothing obvious to me at all.

This will come with practice. It's YOUR creative process. Make photos you like. For start, I would not make too radical edits.

I need a very basic primer on light and exposure, and what basic controls like exposure, saturation, contrast, shadows, etc., are actually doing. Why I would change one or the other. It seems obvious how to do it, but I'm not sure why I would slide one over another. I've done some experimenting and had some accidentally good results, but I don't quite understand what I'm doing.

Also, watching these videos I'm asking myself a question. How much is too much? I had a picture of a waterfall in Iceland. It was nice. But then I loaded it into lightroom and used their auto setting and everything popped out. The greens got nicer, the sky was less washed out, the picture went from meh to wow, that's a cool picture. But how much of that is me? I didnt' really take that final image. How, the final is more of what I feel like I saw with my eye, it's closer to my memory of that place. It's also what I composed. But the original picture I took just wasn't a good capture or representation compared to what it looks like now.. It was a very dramatic difference. I had shot in RAW so I guess you can make pretty dramatic changes.

Don't make it, if isn't feel right to you. I also have limits how much edit is too much.

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed? It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture. Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

Thanks

 

[Running_Man]

The non basic editing is all down to storytelling so only you know the answer to that.

I zoom in and do a bit of distraction removal, fix bad exposure or ETTR, fix bad framing, beyond that what is it you’re trying to say about that image? What do you want to connote/enhance.

anyone who says it’s obvious this needs more greens or something like that (beyond exposure correction as per a histogram ) I would ask them why? if it’s just their personal opinion of what looks ‘nice’ then it’s irrelevant.

I might drain all the colour out of one image and colour pop another depending on what I’m trying to say

and yes in the old days of film you had similar kinds of controls.

 

[Running_Man]

I received some great advice on this forum for a big trip my wife and I went on for our 30 year anniversary. Based on advice from this board, I purchased a Nikon Z6iii w/ two z lenses, the 24-120 f/4 and the 14-30 f/4. I was very please with the camera and the lenses, they served me well for the 3 weeks we were gone.

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

My advice: DELETE is your friend. Going through thousands of photos is boring as hell. Choose 200-500 most interesting photos and create cool trip set. Take 80 the best ones and create photobook.

I did a lot of experimenting. I would take a couple of pictures of something in auto, and then I would take more playing with the aperture and shutter priorities, even manual mode. I was playing around with spot metering and different focus modes. It was a lot of fun and I'm very happy with my purchase. Now my wife is asking to see the pictures and I have started playing around a bit in NX studio and lightroom. I definitely need some help.

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general?

Did you shot also jpg files together with RAW files? I think, that editing and particularly such amount is too much for beginner to swallow. I would just sort through the jpg's and do just basic editing.

I'm watching videos where someone will say "and obviously this needs more contrast and the greens need to be brought out" and there is nothing obvious to me at all.

This will come with practice. It's YOUR creative process. Make photos you like. For start, I would not make too radical edits.

I need a very basic primer on light and exposure, and what basic controls like exposure, saturation, contrast, shadows, etc., are actually doing. Why I would change one or the other. It seems obvious how to do it, but I'm not sure why I would slide one over another. I've done some experimenting and had some accidentally good results, but I don't quite understand what I'm doing.

Also, watching these videos I'm asking myself a question. How much is too much? I had a picture of a waterfall in Iceland. It was nice. But then I loaded it into lightroom and used their auto setting and everything popped out. The greens got nicer, the sky was less washed out, the picture went from meh to wow, that's a cool picture. But how much of that is me? I didnt' really take that final image. How, the final is more of what I feel like I saw with my eye, it's closer to my memory of that place. It's also what I composed. But the original picture I took just wasn't a good capture or representation compared to what it looks like now.. It was a very dramatic difference. I had shot in RAW so I guess you can make pretty dramatic changes.

Don't make it, if isn't feel right to you. I also have limits how much edit is too much.

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed? It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture. Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

Thanks

Once you’ve imported them into a catalogue just blast through using the arrow keys & U and P. Or if you are less decisive then the number keys 1 to 5. I can do 30 images a minute, doing this fast is better IMO

Then just use your custom filters to show your four and fives or P’s, whatever, I don’t really like deleting any images. I sometimes go back through and review the U’s at a later date just to be sure

 

[New Wrycuda]

I received some great advice on this forum for a big trip my wife and I went on for our 30 year anniversary. Based on advice from this board, I purchased a Nikon Z6iii w/ two z lenses, the 24-120 f/4 and the 14-30 f/4. I was very pleased with the camera and the lenses, they served me well for the 3 weeks we were gone.

Well, at least you started with good gear!

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

Maybe a few too many. I spent 3 weeks in Canada and took maybe 500 shots, most of which were satisfactory. There was some “Exposure Bracketing” because of the presence of snow in many shots, and that kept the number up.

I did a lot of experimenting. I would take a couple of pictures of something in auto, and then I would take more playing with the aperture and shutter priorities, even manual mode. I was playing around with spot metering and different focus modes. It was a lot of fun and I'm very happy with my purchase. Now my wife is asking to see the pictures and I have started playing around a bit in NX studio and lightroom. I definitely need some help.

Too much experimenting. Aperture priority will be fine for 90% of the shots. Some form of AF that automatically selects (and tracks) the subject of interest should be available. If you have a histogram available, exposure should never be an issue. My Sonys have excellent exposure bracketing, but I’ve never needed to use it.

When I travel, I take a backup camera to document the trip, leaving the interesting shots to the main camera/lenses. Usually, the documentary shots are perfectly acceptable. Backup camera has been either Nikon D3200 or Sony a6000; good cameras for their time.

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general? I'm watching videos where someone will say "and obviously this needs more contrast and the greens need to be brought out" and there is nothing obvious to me at all. I need a very basic primer on light and exposure, and what basic controls like exposure, saturation, contrast, shadows, etc., are actually doing. Why I would change one or the other. It seems obvious how to do it, but I'm not sure why I would slide one over another. I've done some experimenting and had some accidentally good results, but I don't quite understand what I'm doing.

At your stage of development, you should not need to process your results, except for cropping.

Also, watching these videos I'm asking myself a question. How much is too much? I had a picture of a waterfall in Iceland. It was nice. But then I loaded it into lightroom and used their auto setting and everything popped out. The greens got nicer, the sky was less washed out, the picture went from meh to wow, that's a cool picture. But how much of that is me? I didnt' really take that final image. How, the final is more of what I feel like I saw with my eye, it's closer to my memory of that place. It's also what I composed. But the original picture I took just wasn't a good capture or representation compared to what it looks like now.. It was a very dramatic difference. I had shot in RAW so I guess you can make pretty dramatic changes.

You be the judge.

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed? It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture. Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

I started in the film era. That was a good discipline, particularly when depending on commercial processing. Even more important when money was tight.

Be satisfied with results that look like the subject.


Cropping was all that was needed.

 

[atom14]

Hi. I just had to pitch in on your plea. And straight-up apologies because I CAN'T suggest any good tutorial such as you're after. But pointwise...

...

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

I did a lot of experimenting. I would take a couple of pictures of something in auto, and then I would take more playing with the aperture and shutter priorities, even manual mode. I was playing around with spot metering and different focus modes. It was a lot of fun and I'm very happy with my purchase. Now my wife is asking to see the pictures and I have started playing around a bit in NX studio and lightroom. I definitely need some help.

^ This is invaluable learning.^

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general? I'm watching videos where someone will say "and obviously this needs more contrast and the greens need to be brought out" and there is nothing obvious to me at all.

^ And that is how it should be! ^ Who says it has to be "obvious"? Only thought practice can you start to arrive at such conclusions.

...

Also, watching these videos I'm asking myself a question. How much is too much? I had a picture of a waterfall in Iceland. It was nice. But then I loaded it into lightroom and used their auto setting and everything popped out. The greens got nicer, the sky was less washed out, the picture went from meh to wow, that's a cool picture. But how much of that is me? I didnt' really take that final image.

^ Don't fall into that that thinking trap! ^ ... And:

How, the final is more of what I feel like I saw with my eye, it's closer to my memory of that place. It's also what I composed. But the original picture I took just wasn't a good capture or representation compared to what it looks like now.. It was a very dramatic difference. I had shot in RAW so I guess you can ake pretty dramatic changes.

You DID take that picture. The basic INFO was ALWAYS there! And later you just brought it out a bit more.

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed?

^ Does it matter? ^

It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture.

^ Of course you can see what a disadvantage that situation was. ^

Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

^ In what way in creation can you be considered to be that???!!! ^ You produce the shot; you interpret it; you present it. ONLY if you MIS-represent something can it be considered fraudulent - but you knew that!

Thanks

HTH (or apols for just a rave).

atom14.

 

[Larry_T]

Greetings and welcome. My advice will differ from others. Find a camera setting you like, as others have said Aperture mode will serve you well most of the time. I have the Z6iii also and there are a lot of setting choices that can affect your photos, be sure you understand your settings. Learn composition and slow down. Take fewer but better pictures, then the editing will be more enjoyable as you work to get the photo you like. RAW or JPEG is subjective, but learn how to use your software. You are pleasing yourself, not others. No, it does not have to "be what you saw." Everyone has different taste. I shoot street and want to have a true representation of the moment. I have also seen plenty of landscapes with dramatic colors. Not my style, not my photo. Best of luck and post one when you are ready.

--
https://www.larrytrachtmanphoto.com/
https://www.instagram.com/larrytrachtman/

 

[hampshirejohn]

Larry Grady wrote

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage. Then, maybe less than another quarter that I look at and think "oh, that's not a bad picture". I may be overestimating. But that's still quite a few nice pictures from our trip that I'm happy with, for a beginner. Now, I am looking to start processing them and getting the most out of them.

My advice: DELETE is your friend. Going through thousands of photos is boring as hell. Choose 200-500 most interesting photos and create cool trip set. Take 80 the best ones and create photobook

i very much support the basic idea here, though maybe not deleting, nor necessarily the creation of a photo book. With the number of photos you have, you need to separate the storytelling from the learning and diagnostics. Focus on the story telling first, Certainly delete the junk, but to start with I would keep the rest. Identify photos that tell the story. If you have multiple candidates for one scene, then in the first instance don’t overthink it but just pick one. It’s a personal choice, but when I do this I rarely get beyond 50 for a 1 week trip, or 80 for two weeks. Many more than that, and yo start to bore the audience.

Once you have this reduced set, you will have some targets for looking at the various ways of using the camera (that’s why I suggest deleting only the obvious junk - on the first pass you cannot necessarily see what you may want to have for this second stage). You can now start some simple edits, and testing which variant of a scene gives what you think is the best starting point.

 

[New Wrycuda]

Greetings and welcome. My advice will differ from others. Find a camera setting you like, as others have said Aperture mode will serve you well most of the time. I have the Z6iii also and there are a lot of setting choices that can affect your photos, be sure you understand your settings.

It’s sometimes stated that it might take a year to come to grips with a fully featured camera such as the OP’s Nikon.

At the very least, I’d expect the OP to be familiar with the User Memories, an also how to use the EXIF data that is saved with each shot. Without those, there’s a good chance he’s flying blind.

Learn composition and slow down. Take fewer but better pictures, then the editing will be more enjoyable as you work to get the photo you like. RAW or JPEG is subjective, but learn how to use your software.

That can take time as well.

You are pleasing yourself, not others. No, it does not have to "be what you saw."

But that can be a good start, and somewhat reassuring.

 

[John Crowe]

I did not read every response, so I don't know if this got covered.

A RAW image is essentially like a negative. In the film days the negative looked nothing like the print, and neither does the RAW file.

A RAW file must be processed just like a negative. The RAW image has very little colour and contrast, and overall exposure can be dramatically adjusted.

I have always shot RAW because of my understanding of colour. You could try shooting RAW + jpeg in camera to get an idea of what auto processing does with the jpeg. Of course you can even change that processing in-camera too. Then take your RAW file and see what it takes to approximate the jpeg. Once you learn the process go back to strictly RAW.

Even in the film days prints from various films varied dramatically. Some people like their digital prints to look like Kodachrome or Velvia, and others prefer standard 100 ISO negative prints.

 

[Larry Grady]

Thanks for all the great comments. Below are answers to a couple questions and some comments.

I mostly shot RAW+JPG. I messed up some settings and reset my camera settings on day 1 and then shot JPG only for a couple days before I realized I had not changed it back.
I also shot most of a day in Iceland with manual focus on, I accidentally hit the switch on my lens when changing it. Live and learn, something I check EVERY time now.

I did try to keep in mind the idea of storytelling. I took some different pictures than I had in the past when traveling. I tried to think about what I was enjoying about this place or this experience, and shoot something that captured that. I don't think my pictures were dramatically different, but I took a lot less shots just to take a picture, and my mindset was just different. I hope, in time, I understand this a little better as I shoot. I like the idea, but may need some more experience to fully understand it.

Some very interesting posts about what to process, how much, etc.. I think I like what atom14 said, "only if you MIS-represent something can it be considered fraudulent". I guess I'll make things look as good as I can from the image I took and learn from there.

There are some comments about maybe less experimenting and fewer pictures overall. I would probably agree with that. There were times when I took the same picture 10 times but I was playing with settings the whole way because I wanted to see what it looked like when I got home. I have all the EXIF stuff in NX studio and I was trying to learn how different settings affect the same shot. I think as I shoot more and find what I like, the number of shots will decrease dramatically.

Also, as someone mentioned, I have no intention of sitting someone down to show them 500 pictures. My wife and I may enjoy that, it was our trip. But I'm hoping to put together maybe a 50 picture slideshow of our favorite places and pictures to show our kids and some friends. I know how boring it can be looking at a pile of someone's bad travel photos. I care about them, I'm glad they had a good trip, but I mostly want some highlights and not an hour by hour documentary. I enjoy SOME, but not all of your pictures.

From my original questions, I am still looking for a good series or course on processing. I'd like to start from the beginning. I can see a lot change when I'm moving all the sliders around, but I would like to know exactly what particular settings are doing and why I woudl use them. For instance, if I wanted to brighten something it seems I can do it with exposure, highlights, or whites. WHy woudl I use one over the other? Shoudl I just tine/temperature, or an individual color? Whey would I want my image to be less sharp? Probably very basic stuff, but I would like a basic overview. Thanks.

 

[New Wrycuda]

Thanks for all the great comments. Below are answers to a couple questions and some comments.

I mostly shot RAW+JPG. I messed up some settings and reset my camera settings on day 1 and then shot JPG only for a couple days before I realized I had not changed it back.
I also shot most of a day in Iceland with manual focus on, I accidentally hit the switch on my lens when changing it. Live and learn, something I check EVERY time now.

I did try to keep in mind the idea of storytelling. I took some different pictures than I had in the past when traveling. I tried to think about what I was enjoying about this place or this experience, and shoot something that captured that. I don't think my pictures were dramatically different, but I took a lot less shots just to take a picture, and my mindset was just different. I hope, in time, I understand this a little better as I shoot. I like the idea, but may need some more experience to fully understand it.

Some very interesting posts about what to process, how much, etc.. I think I like what atom14 said, "only if you MIS-represent something can it be considered fraudulent". I guess I'll make things look as good as I can from the image I took and learn from there.

There are some comments about maybe less experimenting and fewer pictures overall. I would probably agree with that. There were times when I took the same picture 10 times but I was playing with settings the whole way because I wanted to see what it looked like when I got home. I have all the EXIF stuff in NX studio and I was trying to learn how different settings affect the same shot. I think as I shoot more and find what I like, the number of shots will decrease dramatically.

Also, as someone mentioned, I have no intention of sitting someone down to show them 500 pictures. My wife and I may enjoy that, it was our trip. But I'm hoping to put together maybe a 50 picture slideshow of our favorite places and pictures to show our kids and some friends. I know how boring it can be looking at a pile of someone's bad travel photos. I care about them, I'm glad they had a good trip, but I mostly want some highlights and not an hour by hour documentary. I enjoy SOME, but not all of your pictures.

From my original questions, I am still looking for a good series or course on processing. I'd like to start from the beginning. I can see a lot change when I'm moving all the sliders around, but I would like to know exactly what particular settings are doing and why I woudl use them. For instance, if I wanted to brighten something it seems I can do it with exposure, highlights, or whites. WHy woudl I use one over the other? Shoudl I just tine/temperature, or an individual color? Whey would I want my image to be less sharp? Probably very basic stuff, but I would like a basic overview. Thanks.

A lot to think about.

Once you learn about your camera’s features, you’ll think nothing of the minor adjustments needed to the shooting parameters. “User Memories” are a big help in getting things in the ball-park. I’ve rarely used anything but the memory settings in the past 12 years or so, enjoying the convenience of changing about 10 settings when going from “Landscapes” to “Sports” with a single flick of the dial.

Once you get the camera sorted, you’ll find that there’s no need for processing, certainly not for your purposes. I use a couple of free utilities for minor adjustments, cropping etc. and this has proved satisfactory for publication in professional journals etc.

My only other suggestion is to get another camera body to avoid the hassle of changing lenses when you are on the move.

Good luck.

 

[jthomas39]

..snip...

Is this usually the case? When I'm walking around the state fair and looking at the pictures in the photo contest, are they normally modified that much from what was actually captured to what gets printed? It just surprised me how different it was. In the old days of film, I can't imagine having so much control over all of that, but now it seems like editing is as much a part of the process as the actual image capture. Is that considered legit or ethical in professional situations? I'm just a beginner, so I'm only impressing my wife and a few friends, but I also don't want to feel like a fraud. What's considered a good picture and where is the line where someone might say, well that's cheating? I'm just curious.

Thanks

Darkroom edits are historical!

From a Petapixel article on a pro darkroom expert:

Iconic Prints Were Edited in the Darkroom

The marked up test print!! Wow! They did "dodging", covering shadow areas to reduce the light hitting that part of the paper, which brightens it while it's being exposed, and "burning", adding more printing light to highlights to darken them. Yes, just the opposite of what we do in digital editing, since more light on the paper made it blacker.

This darkroom magic was probably a long and tedious learning curve. Now, with instant results and feedback, Undo, and "virtual copies" to try different sets of edits, we can get reasonably good at it.



~~~

And the iconic Ansel Adams photo, Moonrise over Hernandez!

A contact print of the negative vs a later print. I saw this and thought "OH. Of course the sky wasn't that dark!" But it captures the feeling of the scene, with the cemetery markers catching the very last rays of the setting sun.

from a photography blog post .

 

[jthomas39]

"I think as I shoot more and find what I like, the number of shots will decrease dramatically."

Yes, that's probably true. But after years with digital cameras, I still do experimental series, and usually just delete them all.

I still take lots of photos, but I've gotten more ruthless about deleting most of them. That took a while to learn. What helped was having a quick, but reversible way to delete photos, so I can go fast, but still change my mind.

For example, I use FastRawViewer, which is set to use the Del key to delete a photo from a folder by moving it to a subfolder named "_Rejected". It creates the subfolder at the first delete, and moves both raw and jpg if they are pairs (they have the same name DSC_1234.jpg and .nef). Then I can Undo, moving them back with Ctrl-Z, or go into the rejected folder and bulk copy, etc. The rejected folder can be deleted or kept for later consideration. I'm soo much faster this way, and delete marginal images too.

 

[bodeswell]

Can anyone point me towards a good tutorial, not just on those particular tools, but on photo editing in general?

Check this out on Amazon:

Scott Kelby

The Adobe Photoshop Book for Digital Photographers

 

[lost alaskan]

Wow, Kelby.

 

[lost alaskan]

Some hostry.

 

[skyglider]

I received some great advice on this forum for a big trip my wife and I went on for our 30 year anniversary. Based on advice from this board, I purchased a Nikon Z6iii w/ two z lenses, the 24-120 f/4 and the 14-30 f/4. I was very please with the camera and the lenses, they served me well for the 3 weeks we were gone.

I practiced a bit before leaving but quickly felt it had not been nearly enough once we were on our way. There was so much to learn once I was out in the wild. I ended up taking about 4k pictures. At least a quarter of them are bad exposures, out of focus, or just not well composed images... immediate garbage.

My view is that the two most important things when taking the usual still photos are:

1. Optimum exposure
2. Sharp focus.

As a beginner, maybe try the following:

1. Optimum exposure:
Per Google, the Z6iii only allows zebras in movie mode but not is still mode. That is a real bummer. However, it does allow the histogram overlay in the viewfinder (VF). If that's true, try the following:
..... a. Set the camera to P mode.
..... b. Enable the histogram overlay in the VF.
..... c. Frame the scene in the VF. Adjust exposure compensation so that the bottom right edge of the histogram mountains just touches the right side of the histogram display. (known as the ETTR method of setting exposure) This will give you the optimum exposures without blowing out the highlights.
..... d. Only do steps a and b once. Repeat step-c for every shot. This should result in optimum exposure for almost every shot.

2. Sharp focus:
..... a. Do not use auto focus.
..... b. Set the camera to use center point focus.
..... c. Set the focus square on the subject and half press the shutter button to lock focus. Recompose for the scene you want. Press the shutter so slowly that it surprises you when it trips. That should give your sharp focus on the subject you want.

Experiment with aperture and shutter priority modes as the situations require.

Hope this helps.

 

[Larry Grady]

Wow, this is amazing. That must have been quite a skill to do that with actual film developing/printing.