Nikon Users

Comment

Comment by manjot on August 22, 2009 at 5:37am

u r quality is better then world,i would like to prefer ur cam

Comment by SassoMoso on July 23, 2009 at 9:16pm

Thanx, glad you like them ;o)

Hmm, whether you're starting out or not, RAW has almost only advantages. Only disadvantage is the additional time needed to convert them. If you shoot JPEG and you have the slightest intention of editing a picture, whether that's just cropping or more saturation, you just eliminated the disadvantage of RAW. Because the workflow then becomes the same.

Actually, you might be better off as a beginner with RAW as you can salvage more mistakes where JPEG just has its limits. I'm not saying you shouldn't try to do the best you can in-camera, but unwanted things happen and you can better correct them with RAW files.

As for the applications, Photoshop CS is fine to a certain degree. It's just that Photoshop isn't really meant for photographers, so the workflow is cumbersome. That's why Aperture was developed, which is entirely based on feedback of professional photographers that were unhappy with Photoshop. They just wanted to have an easy way to adjust (not retouch) their images and manage the thousands of files they generated. Apple listened and delivered. - Adobe, realizing their ignorance towards photographers, brought out almost a year later Adobe Photoshop Lightroom, which was of course, similar to Aperture. So there you have two similar products to chose from, competition is always good. I personally have been using Aperture since its release. I tried out Lightroom but that didn't work for me. So you should try out both and see which one works better for you. There's a difference though in academic pricing: Aperture is $179 while Lightroom is $99. Retail pricing is $199 for Aperture and $299 for Lightroom. If you decide for Aperture, you might as well buy the retail version since it's only 20bucks difference.

So my suggestion is, stick with the Photoshop version you have and get either Aperture or Lightroom. There is not much difference between CS and CS4 in terms of functionality you will probably need. Aperture and Photoshop or Lightroom and Photoshop work in tandem, they are not meant to compete with each other. In Aperture/LR you will process, adjust and manage your images while you will retouch and composite images in Photoshop. This gives you pretty much unlimited potential.

My images are mainly processed with Aperture. This can accomplish 50%-100% without opening Photoshop. However, I often use an additional plugin called Tiffen Dfx which eliminates the use of Photoshop almost entirely. Only when I need heavy retouching or compositing, I launch Photoshop, which can be done directly from within Aperture/LR. Once the editing in Photoshop is done, the image goes back into the Aperture/LR library. It's pretty sweet!

Don't be scared of RAW, it's really a good thing and an 8GB should be sufficient. That's the biggest card I have and always shoot with. I have a backup 4GB but I have never used it so far. Well, I have a D80 which has only 10MP, so I get some more images on the card. I think about 600 RAW. But unless you're a sports- or otherwise action photographer, you really do not want to take too many pictures. You will spend all that time having to go through the images and finding the ones you really want. Then you have to edit them... so less is more!

In terms of gear; whatever you have, just make it work for you somehow. I wish I had a D700, some Elinchrome lights and a studio but I don't (...yet :oP). For now, I have a D80, two speedlights and shoot everything on location, that's it. Add some post-pro and it looks pretty decent... ;o)

Comment by Simone on July 23, 2009 at 7:29pm

Wow, that was quite a thorough suggestion! Thank you! Btw, your images are amazing on your website and on Snap.

That's correct, I shoot in JPEG Fine. I have heard of people shooting in RAW and all the benefits of it. Now I recall one photographer who asked me at Snap why I wasn't shooting in RAW? I think my reply was, "I'm just starting out, I'm not that good!" Hence, I'm the one getting in the way of me being "that good" and having those expert looking images, not my camera or my camera settings! ::Sigh:: That's usually the case with most things in my life.

As far as applications, I have Photoshop CS on my Mac and sad to say Photoshop 5.5 v.Academic from my college years on my Windows (which I tend to use most because it's more available than my Apple =/) However, that might soon change. Amazon is having a special on Photoshop CS4 for college students (I know a few). I've heard some good recommendations for Lightroom. I'll definitely check out Aperture as well. Does that mean you mainly edit your images with the two you mentioned and rarely with PS?

I've been so scared of RAW. I was afraid I wouldn't know what to do with it when I have it or not be able to post images in time, plus I only have one 8GB card. I'll probably do RAW + JPEG, but I can only take about 300 photos with that setting; about 400 solely using RAW. So far the most I've taken at a Snap event was a little over 500. Maybe that will lessen as I get better at this? Hmph, well, I love challenging myself. Hey, if I can stand up to a woman scoffing at me for being a novice in photography and choosing a D300 as my first DSLR to learn on, then I can jump on the RAW bandwagon. She was just being snooty because she just got the D300 too and have been doing photography for years. I want to be the best in things that I do so I get to keep breaking through my barriers! Thanks again for the support! BIG HUGS!!!!

Comment by SassoMoso on July 23, 2009 at 2:12pm

Hey Simone,

I assume you're shooting JPEG. I would recommend you switch to shooting RAW instead. RAW provides a much higher color and dynamic range than JPEG. It's basically uncompressed data, whereas JPEG has by nature a quality loss to it. This is important especially if you further edit your images. You should always start with the highest quality, which is RAW. Editing an already lossy format like JPEG incurs further quality loss.

However, if you're shooting RAW, the pictures right out of the camera will look fairly bland. It really is just the raw, unprocessed data, exactly the way the camera sees it. So what you need in addition to that is a RAW-processing application like Aperture (Mac) or Lightroom (Mac & PC). You could use Photoshop as well although the other applications offer a far better workflow when it comes to photography. You can download both apps as free 30day-trial and try it out (www.apple.com/aperture, www.adobe.com/lightroom).

Once you import the images into one of those RAW-processing apps, they will automatically apply some color adjustments based on the camera you shot the images with. Now your images look about the same as if you had shot in JPEG with the setting "standard". But now the fun begins, you have total control to further adjust the look and feel of the image with intuitive sliders. You can add more vibrancy, de/saturation, sharpness, etc. The best thing about it, all edits are non-destructive. Meaning, you can change/remove them at any point and time.
Once you are done with editing, you can export the images as JPEG or TIFF and in whatever size you need them. While this seems overall more work than just shooting JPEG and be done with it, you have so much more control over the way your images look when shooting RAW.

So, to answer your main question about settings for the camera: if you're shooting RAW, it does not matter! In RAW mode, all the camera cares about is aperture, shutter, ISO, EV and *maybe* WB. All the rest of the settings you make will be ignored. Those "Vivid", "Portrait", "Monochrome", etc. settings you have, only apply when shooting JPEG. Even if you're changing the sharpness setting, it only matters for JPEG. Basically, with JPEG you're setting the mood/look of the image beforehand. But what if you would have liked a different look after you've taken the picture or let's say you forgot to change the settings and you're doing a whole shoot with the wrong settings? - And that's the main problem with JPEG; whatever settings you make upfront, you will have them backed into your final image. You can still make some color adjustments after the fact but only to a certain degree. Also, you edit an already compressed (lossy) format that you then will re-save with more compression. So you have twice the quality loss.

RAW is much more flexible and forgiving in that sense. Even to the point of WB. Unless you really want a specific look with your WB, you don't have to worry too much about it. If the white is a bit off, you can easily correct that for one image and then apply the correction to all remaining ones. So, for most of the time, you can just leave your WB set to automatic.

If, for whatever reason you need the pictures right away after the shoot, you will have to shoot JPEG. But, do yourself a favor and shoot in the combined mode RAW + JPEG. That way you will get both and you can fine tune the RAW file later on when you have more time.

Personally, I only shoot RAW, unless there's a really pressing reason for me to shoot JPEG as well. Also, 99% of my images have some sort of edits applied to it. No matter how good you set your camera and lights, there's always room for making a great picture just simply amazing by just touching a few little sliders! ;o)

Hope that helps~

Comment by Simone on July 23, 2009 at 9:24am

Story + Questions: I realize I've had my Picture setting on Vivid this whole time since I did a Food Photography workshop with Lou Manna May 2008. Scott Kelby happen to be there. I had just started playing with my camera so I was pretty clueless to almost everything. I hadn't adjusted any settings on my camera back then, but he did for me. Now I'm really use to how the colors look at Vivid, but the colors don't necessarily look right. Neutral or Standard don't look as great, but back then I didn't have an external flash. I notice some photographers (not all of them Nikon users) post really amazingly accurate, but lively, colored photos. I'm sure it's more than just a Picture setting and probably involves a combo of WB, ISO, Shutter, Aperature and even lens (I mostly use a Sigma Macro HSM 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5). I will play around with my settings at the next Snap I attend, but what Picture settings do you guys recommend for portraits? Any other suggestions?

Comment by Tsimoka Rabetokotany on April 1, 2009 at 6:20pm

U can ask wutever u want!! no problem.

Comment by Kenny G. on April 1, 2009 at 2:51pm

Nikon Rocks....

Comment by Abiel "Sence" Ruiz on March 30, 2009 at 10:34pm

I <3 Nikon! lol

Comment by ERIC JAMES BROWN on March 28, 2009 at 1:21pm

Thank You for having this site, and I hope you guys don't get tired of me asking so many questions.

Comment by Simone on February 10, 2009 at 4:58pm

Hello! I am very much a beginner at photography, but decided to start learning with some good quality equip. I got the D300 last year and just got the SB-900. I'm excited when I get awesome shots and frustrated when I don't know how I got those awesome shots. I will probably be at Snapmup possibly modeling a bit, but mostly there to learn more about my equipment. Thanks for having this site and these events Taryn and co. =)

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last