A Girl...

Hey - I remember you making your flickr photos private, and I remember we were supposed to email you or something if we wanted to be able to see them. And I didn't at the time...but I'd like to. So how do I go about that again?

And as for the topic at hand, I photoshop the hell out of most of my photos because I have a cheap (and several year old) point and shoot and well, results are not always optimal. I'd like to get a better camera in the future but it's not in the budget right now. I don't do anything very complicated, mostly just contrast/brightness/ tone/etc (but I do it to almost all of them). I do my best to refrain from cropping, mostly to force myself to work on framing shots better when I actually take them. It makes me feel like I'm cheating if I'm always fixing bad shots with crops.

Are you familiar with the HDR (high dynamic range) technique? I don't use a tripod or have a nice enough camera, but I've seen quite a few photos done that way that REALLY have the 'wow'.

While I'm at it, I'd like to compliment the way you display your photos on the website, with the narrow white frame/drop shadow. It really makes them stand out.

Seejanebee: Sign up for a free Flickr account and either add LeahK as a friend or email me with your Flickr username.

Although it's been a while since I've played with it, I have done HDR before (and without a tripod, shock horror). See here for my first shot at it: http://www.agirlandaboy.com/journal/archives/001038.html

Tv is shutter priority automatic exposure. You set the shutter speed, the camera selects the "appropriate" aperture.

I've never been one to complain about post processing in photoshop, even though I'm grounded in the world of film. Whatever makes the final product say what you want it to say is ok with me. In general though, the more the post processing, the less likely the image will have anything to say to me.
Since so much of what I do is monochrome, the vast majority of my images undergo quite a bit of PP. How else can you describe the conversion to mono? Over time though, I find I use a lighter and lighter hand on these things. My original capture is far less likely to 'need' significant PP than it would have needed some years ago.
Also, I very seldom crop. In fact, most of my landscape shots are printed to 8x12 vs 8x10. I can't stand to cut the wide out of my wide angle.
It's all up to the photographer. Whatever works for you is the right thing to do.
Email me (I enter my address in this form, so you have it?). I'll send you a link to my flickr account.

BTW, I very much enjoy your pics. You have a great eye. The technical stuff either comes in time, or doesn't matter.

Tv is probably the shutter priority setting for when you wanna tell your camera exactly how long you want it to keep the shutter open. . . the camera then automagically chooses the appropriate aperture size for what it thinks should be the proper exposure. . . it's pretty fun to goof around with. . .

i kinda suck as a photographer so you probably don't give a hoot about what i do, but i tend to not do much processing of photos other than some color-correction and cropping. . . oh, and if it's an important shot that i fucked up (like the kiss at a friend's wedding), i'll duotone it to help cover up my inept skillz. . . it's not that i think of processing as cheating (i quite like the look you give your photos), i'm just too lazy. . .

personally, someone tweaking with hues and saturation and contrast and whatnot generally doesn't bother me as long as it doesn't look like a mistake (e.g. when my dad is set loose with photoshop's "unsharp mask" filter). . . the main fakey fake that bugs me is when someone tries to change the photo itself (like by adding a person or taking out a tree or something) and you can totally tell. . .

the main websites i hit are:
* dpreviewDOTcom for general techie-ness, awesome reviews (reading the reviews of a camera you've already bought can teach you a few things you might not have been aware of that your camera can do), and forum discussions. . .

* photoDOTnet and photosigDOTcom just to browse photos taken (and processed) by people way more talented than me. . .

the day i learned it was me and not the camera was when i was cruising cable and came across a documentary on the photographers of the SI swimsuit issue - there was one photographer who sole piece of equipment was a point and shoot (well, that and reflectors and lights and a buttload of assistants). . . it was funny to watch him do a fashion shoot looking like your average tourist, but his shots were great. . .

i don't have permission to view your flickr shots, but i really dig the fish head shot and i think a part of it is 'cuz you lopped off the woman's head. . . not so much 'cuz i think it looks like she's searching for her head, but 'cuz (and i'm not sure since i can't see the original shot) i think if her head were visible it would detract from the fish head being the focal point of the shot. . .

jeez, i'm sorry, i always ramble on like a motherfuck in my comments on your blog and i never mean to. . .

ps, i've always dug how you do that gif slideshow thingy with your photos.. . i'd never seen anyone do that before and thought it was a really cool idea. . .

I stole the animated gif slideshow idea from SAJ, who makes everything prettier: http://www.secret-agent-josephine.com/blog/

You have a natural eye for taking great photos. Nothing wrong with tweaking them after the fact. I use Picasa (because it's free), but after reading your post I just added Photoshop to my Christmas wish list :)

Angella (and everyone else): Photoshop Elements is all you need. It's around $75 American, as opposed to something horrific like $600 for the full deal.

This was a great post - I really love reading how other people do this sort of thing, and I think you have a great talent for photography.

I just have your basic point and shoot right now, and I use an older version of photoshop to adjust saturation and the levels/curves, but beyond that I don't know how to do much in photoshop. I'm constantly trying to master the quirks of my particular camera, and I waste a lot of time drooling over the specs of the Digital Rebel/Nikon D50/70/80 etc. One of the things that makes me proud, though, is that while I don't think I'm that great now, I know I've improved a whole hell of a lot since I got my camera two years ago. I just started Project 365 (ie take a picture every day and post it), which I'm hoping will help me get better. (http://www.photojojo.com is a great resource, too.)

I was wondering why you decided on a Canon Rebel. I've been drooling over the new Nikon D80 for the past few weeks, reading reviews and comparisons to the rebel and I can't make up my mind. Were you considering a Nikon at any point, what was the criteria that ultimately made you go with the rebel?

I occassionally use Photoshop but usually only for minor tweaking, I have really been trying to get better at understanding and using the features on my camera.

Have you considered joining a local photography club? There is a lot to learn there and often they organize trips, speakers and critique sessions.

One last question - why were catfish heads lying all over the pier?

Teej--What ultimately made me go with the Canon over the Nikon was how the two cameras felt in my hand. The Nikon felt big and bulgy and plasticky, and the Canon just seemed more solid. Nikon owners will tell you the opposite, so it's really just a matter of personal taste. I bought my camera online at B&H (highly recommended!), so I just went into a local store and held both cameras with the appropriate lenses attached. The cameras really are comparable, and most of the things that make them different are too subtle for an amateur like me to understand or notice.

One other thing to consider if you have or have access to film SLR lenses is that they can be used on the digital SLRs. Simon happened to inherit a few Canon lenses and flash attachments, so now I have those at my disposal, although I need to get some adapters to make them work.

As for the fish heads, they were just there, laying around all gape-mouthed and cloudy-eyed. There were probably thirty of them spread out at the very end of the pier, and surprisingly the seagulls weren't the least bit interested. I've been on that pier before and not seen even one fish head, so this is just as much a mystery to me. Cool though, huh?

I have added you to my Flickr account, but still don't seem to be able to access the private photos noted in your blog entries. Is there something else I should do, or does it just take time for the entry to get through the system?

I love your attitude about picture taking and manipulation. I use Photoshop quite a bit. Have had it since Ver. 1.0!

Judie Ashford

Hey, I randomly found your site and I am a huge fan of your photos. I am trying to make a website for my college ultimate team and was wondering how you do the slideshow of photos? I thought it would be a really good way to show our action shots. Could you send me a tutorial, or direct me to where you found out how to do it? Thanks!

I used to belong to the photo-snob club who thought that any post-production altering of the photo somehow detracted from its authenticity. In the last few years I've come way around on that subject. I now own Photoshop Elements, Pixmatic's Rawshooter Essentials, and the sweet program you sent me after, who's name completely escapes me now.

I realized that by not shooting in raw and formatting my own pics, I am basically letting the tiny processor in my camera make all the decisions for me, and I like to be in control. I still prefer to get the shot "right" before shooting it, choosing the right settings for the occasion, but that doesn't seem to happen as often as it should.

Most of what I've learned has come from books and several years of standing with my camera, shooting 50 shots of the same image, changing one setting at a time and then viewing the results to see how each change affected the end product. Very tedious work, but I have learned a thing or two along the way.

But most of the time I still feel like a rank amateur.

And you do have a great eye for composing unique shots. Your skills behind the camera are part of what initially drew me to your site and what keeps me coming back every day.

Finally, I have to weigh in on the Canon / Nikon debate. After reading far too many reviews of both, I was at the point of flipping a quarter to decide which to buy. I ended up with the Nikon D70s because I found a ridiculously good deal on one. The one thing I do love about the Nikon over the Cannon is that it is compatible with any Nikon lens made. But having held both, I do love the way the Canon feels.

If anyone is in the market, I think that's one of the most important factors in your decision. Make sure the camera will do everything you want it to do, but also make sure you like the way it feels in your hands. If not, you're not going to want to lug that thing around, and you'll end up with an expensive toy put up in some closet somewhere.

Now please allow me to apologize for rambling on like I own the place.

Photography is about pictures, not equipment. It might be luck, might be years of accidental experience, but we've taken some of our best photos with a crappy digital point-and-shoot. The problem with the DigiRebel is that it's too easy to take photos and it becomes a process of wading through the junk shots.

Back in the day (good grief) when I was shooting for a tiny daily newspaper, rolling my own film into canisters, taking pics with my grandmother's old Olympus OM-1 (totally manual and mechanic), developing the b&w film and printing my own pictures, I was much more thoughtful and selective about what I shot. A lost art, maybe, but I wish I could recapture that thoughtfulness.