Photography

steve@thaib · #1 26-03-2006, 05:20

Sorry if this gets dull, but the new camera shoots such high res pics I am having terrible trouble getting them down to a size suitable for use here.

I am now using Photoshop Elements, so if anyone has a quick method (or any other tips generally) for reducing file size I would be happy to hear them.

Most of these pictures are just under the 100kb limit allowed on the forum, so I'm going to post them one at a time and say what I think. I'm just trying to learn here, so all opinions are welcome.

steve@thaib · #2 26-03-2006, 05:26

I had trouble with this guy because the focus just does not seem right.

steve@thaib · #3 26-03-2006, 05:28

Not the same picture, and to me this one seems far better. I really wanted a good pic of him because the colours were great, but I just could not get it right

steve@thaib · #4 26-03-2006, 05:30

I'm not sure about this one, Photoshop ran riot with the colour of the water

steve@thaib · #5 26-03-2006, 05:32

Now this one I like a lot. Colours are sharp and the detail is superb, to the point where you can see the drops of water on his back (well I can!) I like.

steve@thaib · #6 26-03-2006, 05:34

Again, I like this picture. Good detail and soft background. On my computer without any re-sizing the detail, round the eyes etc, is amazing

steve@thaib · #7 26-03-2006, 05:37

I like this one too. The longer lens seems to mean that I can keep cropping to a minimum. Saggy tits never looked better

steve@thaib · #8 26-03-2006, 05:40

I was looking for the backgound to be gone, or at least out of focus, with this one. I know I cut his (her?) ears off a bit but I think it works.

steve@thaib · #9 26-03-2006, 05:41

They just sat still for ages and let me take pictures of them, stand by for more

steve@thaib · #10 26-03-2006, 05:44

I really like this shot, but I'm not sure if the one at the back should be in focus or not. For me, he is background, but maybe I'm wrong?

faultytowers · #11 26-03-2006, 05:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve@thaib

Most of these pictures are just under the 100kb limit allowed on the forum, so I'm going to post them one at a time .

steve , I may be wrong but I think it is 100kb per picture , and you can post 5 at a time.

By the way , nice pics.

steve@thaib · #12 26-03-2006, 05:46

This was actually a tricky little shot to get, and to be honest my son got this one. I love the picture and can't see a lot wrong with it.

steve@thaib · #13 26-03-2006, 05:49

There is no cropping on this picture. I got a few of them but this is the pick of the bunch. I had a hell of a time getting it below 100kb for here so I hope you can still get the idea of it, but this one I am knocked out by.

steve@thaib · #14 26-03-2006, 05:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by faultytowers

steve , I may be wrong but I think it is 100kb per picture , and you can post 5 at a time.

By the way , nice pics.

Bugger! I thought it was 100kb per post! Anyway, am not changing anything now 'cos it took me 'king ages!

swiftdave · #15 26-03-2006, 06:07

Thanks for the pictures Steve....your family is lovely!!!

steve@thaib · #16 26-03-2006, 06:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by swiftdave

Thanks for the pictures Steve....your family is lovely!!!

That's what all the primates say!

jimholio · #17 26-03-2006, 08:09

http://www.download.com/FastStone-Ph...ml?tag=lst-0-2

FastStone Photo Resizer 1.4
Resizes photos in batches.

syeatman · #18 26-03-2006, 12:08

Some good pics there. I like the one your son took best

Did you apply any sharpening to any of these? If not, then I highly recommend you do, most digital pics benefit greatly by a touch of sharpening to really bring out the detail.

Were these all with your new lens? and did you use a tripod?

syeatman · #19 26-03-2006, 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve@thaib

I really like this shot, but I'm not sure if the one at the back should be in focus or not. For me, he is background, but maybe I'm wrong?

If you put up the shooting details for this shot it will give more info as to why the back lemur was out of focus. To be honest if you were quite a way away form them and using a long lens then it is unlikely you will have both in focus due to the aperture used. I will take a wild guess here and say that it was F5.6 or thereabouts

steve@thaib · #20 26-03-2006, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by syeatman

Some good pics there. I like the one your son took best

Did you apply any sharpening to any of these? If not, then I highly recommend you do, most digital pics benefit greatly by a touch of sharpening to really bring out the detail.

Were these all with your new lens? and did you use a tripod?

It's a mix of both lenses. The peacock is taken with the kit lens, but most of the others are with the longer lens and it was really not practical to use a tripod. The one my boy got is a real beauty I agree.

To be honest, I only got photoshop yesterday, so am learning that at the moment too. All I did with these was crop and auto-enhance them, I don't know enough about the software to do anything else.

steve@thaib · #21 26-03-2006, 15:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by syeatman

If you put up the shooting details for this shot it will give more info as to why the back lemur was out of focus. To be honest if you were quite a way away form them and using a long lens then it is unlikely you will have both in focus due to the aperture used. I will take a wild guess here and say that it was F5.6 or thereabouts

I will dig out the shooting date and post it, it's in my other computer.

syeatman · #22 26-03-2006, 15:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve@thaib

It's a mix of both lenses. The peacock is taken with the kit lens, but most of the others are with the longer lens and it was really not practical to use a tripod. The one my boy got is a real beauty I agree.

To be honest, I only got photoshop yesterday, so am learning that at the moment too. All I did with these was crop and auto-enhance them, I don't know enough about the software to do anything else.

Yeah Photoshop is definitely a sharp learning curve to start with. I don't actually use it unless I have to touch up photos. I use Bibble which is much more simplified and has all the tools easily avaialble.

To learn more for Photoshop I think it's easier to use the Photogrpahy website tutorials as they are more specific to what you do and don't need to know.

jimholio · #23 26-03-2006, 19:03

Photoshop for image editting is definitly not that hard to learn. Producing pictures from scratch in Photoshop is different story. But as for editting pictures.

Ill give you a few hints.

For color corrections.

Go to Image>Adjustments - Lots of usefull tools in there. A few of my favorites are Color balance and Levels.

Another very important tool is. Clone stamp tool, for removal of unwanted things in the photo, for a face, to remove a pimple a birthmark or a stone on the beach etc etc. Takes a little bit of practise but you'll get it right.

For cutting of images try to use the Pen tool, this tool requires practise and is totaly useless for cutting hair etc, for that you need to play around with channels and masking.

As for filters, there are not realy that many filters to use for image editting, and normally it looks VERY unprofessional if you use the filters too much. You can produce every single effect made with those filters without it, and with more control, you just need to practise.