I usually prefer to tweak the Exposure Compensation wheel as needed, poor little thing. I use manual mode when shooting wildlife.
Great idea. Imagine rehab boot camps for gun addicts after the US had finally banned lethal weapons (probably in the next eon). They would have to storm dummy schools with that thing and they would get rewards according to the number of school girls and boys they had shot. The best shots would be posted on-line.
Nick
Are you JK in disguise?
Thankfully that was far from my best and was spoiled by shake, not focus - which backs up your point about shake versus exposure.
What the photographer is or isn't wearing doesn't usually have much effect on the final photo, except occasionally in the subject's facial expression.
I don't think that Vaseline has too much of a negative effect on camera electronics.
Why is it that any attempt to investigate thoughts like these leads into deeper waters? I certainly accept that in text JPEG as an acronym should be capitalised, and whilst the usage is extremely common capitalised RAW is indeed weird. However jpg, jpeg and raw are all listed as valid file type extensions, for which I believe there is no preferrred case. In which case FILENAME.RAW and filename.jpeg are acceptable.
This is a disturbing mental image.
That's what Topaz Sharpen is for :-)
Not every photograph needs to have sharp focus.
Ah -- the "supersonic seagull" phenomena (inside joke -- apologies!). But, yes, any technical element can be discarded for artistic intent. To be honest, it takes no small amount of skill to make missed focus work (as opposed to an accident that worked out). I think this:
is the only photo I've taken where I intentionally missed focus and got the result I was actually trying for.
Unfortunately, that manages to wreck some of the other bits that make it a good photo.
I also shoot RAW + JPEG simultaneously but I never use the JPEG in the final version, I merely use it as a means enabling me to judge pictures instantly on the pixel level as the JPEG's to an extent reflect the actual RAW quality but never provide the same level of flexibility.
Most excellent post b.t.w. :)
Although little OT, I would encourage anyone to try that challenge again. It is very informative and interesting, and arguments are quite good.
Last time I did this with Canon (again), and I don´t see how LR/Topaz/DXO cannot do better job at sharpness, details and such.
Upon closeup inspection, in-camera output looks like overcontrasted halo plagued oversharpened mess, while the custom edit provides "life like" thin edges with razor detailed sharpness.
Now back to my advices:
1) First live, then shoot. Live your life in front of the camera, not behind it, and behind the display. Prioritize what is important, and what is viewable likable content, what memories you want to preserve.
2) Shoot with what you got. I am a pixel peeper, and had many images ruined or deleted or not attempted to shoot because it didn´t have the photographic qualities. Big biiig mistake! It´ s the moment, not the quality.
3) Set a mainstream format and try to follow it. In these days, usually something around 4k Is more than enough. If you have bigger better, it will not be much appreciated. If you have lower/smaller, it´s the moment again, what matters. Keep the image as long as it brings you memories and emotion.
If RAW is an actual word and JPEG isn't, then RAW would be an acronym and JPEG would be initialism, no? LOL at your last comment, if by NSFW, you mean Jared Polin, then I think I agree.
Hmm, my advice would be very different:
1. take lots of pictures
2. have fun
3. experiment
4. if its not working or doesn't make sense, ask questions.
Does your camera support Back Button Focus? You can just point the centre of the camera onto the subject wherever it is, press and release the BBF button and focus distance is locked in until you press the BBF button again. Then just recompose to suit and press the shutter button.
There is parallel discussion going on the forum with this. Welly steak tartare is still raw. Yet it is processed. But it is raw. You cannot blame people to call processed file as raw, as long as there is obvious rawness to it. Less information in the file doesn't mean it is not raw.
Thanks for writing this, Bobn2. I have always done the same, though I read (perhaps on DPReview!) that the method is deprecated nowadays. So it is good to see that the experts also use this method.
David
Not on any Unix system, or any filesystem that is case-sensitive.
Charge the batteries.
Take the camera with you.
Turn on the camera.
Remember to insert a memory card.
Point the camera toward the subject.
If you can't see anything through the viewfinder, mount a lens on the camera or remove the lens cap.
Both are acceptable. It’s just that you may end up with multiple unique files all seemingly (to the non-geek reader) bearing the same name.
