New Tools Being Added.

"Just Shoot Me" wrote:


"Tony Polson" wrote in message
.. .
"Just Shoot Me" wrote:

Talked it over with the wife and I have about another $1,500 - $2,000 for
photography tools.
I am thinking
Better Tri-pod.
Photoshop
580 EX II flash and perhaps 1 slave or remote flash.
I would rather stay closer to $1,500

as far as the flash goes, some of you suggested different gizmo's.
Are there any that I should look at as a must have for indoor photography?


Tuition?


Adobe Photoshop CS3 One-on-One Essentials.
Maybe a book on flash photography - there are lots of web pages on the
subject.
perhaps a book on indoor photography if there are any.
Rec.photo.digital.slr-systems


Buying books is not the same as receiving expert tuition. Usenet
discussions about the latest equipment won't teach you how to use it
to best effect. Buying more expensive equipment doesn't make you a
better photographer. Equipment is very rarely the limiting factor.

Tuition can be very cost effective. Adult education classes in
photography and imaging can be a lot of fun and you will gain an
enormous amount from the input of fellow students. Many companies
offer photographic vacations and weekend trips that are very
enjoyable. You learn at your own pace and watching others learn can
be very instructive. Why not give it a try?

Here's just one example:

http://tinyurl.com/336v6g

"Just Shoot Me" wrote in message
news:uqcOi.947$q42.104@trndny06...

1. 18% grey card:

I have read about these things. at this point I have no idea how I would
use them.


Photoshop is a good idea.

looking at the price I wish it wasn't such a good idea.

Canon did give you two raw convertors:
"RAW Image Task" that duplicates the camera controls, adds click and custom
white balance, exposure offset, rotate, copy dev conditions, export to
different formats, transfer to PS etc.

"Digital Photo Professional" that does all of the above plus a lot more
editing and noise reduction. The next version is said to have chromatic
aberration correction.

Canon also gives you a photostitching program, Arcsoft editor, and
zoombrowser EX that can do some basic edits and crops.

You might have enough software already to do what you need without spending
any money and Canon keeps upgrading these tools so they keep getting better
without more outlay.

"Just Shoot Me" wrote:
Talked it over with the wife and I have about another $1,500 - $2,000 for
photography tools.
I am thinking
Better Tri-pod.

Please, no hyphen. Also, don't buy a lightweight tripod; you'll just replace
it with a sturdier one. I bought the Velbon "730" legset (2.2 kg CF, US$550
or so) back in my medium format days, and it's an incredible joy having a
no-compromises tripod that's seriously steady whatever the height. (Velbon
has a bad reputation beacuse of their cheap models, but the 730/740 and
830/840 are excellent. But hard to find most places outside Japan.)

I bought a 3-section tripod, and I think that, even though it doesn't get
very small, it's the right idea for 2 reasons: (a) it's faster to set up,
and (b) you can just use a single section for a very stable but not too
painfully short tripod.

I really think that a 3-section tripod that's at least one size heavier than
you think you need is the right idea.

Photoshop

Adobe occassionally offers upgrades from lesser programs (e.g. Photoshop
Elements) for US$300, so I'd hold off on Photoshop.

In the meantime, Photoshop Elements and maybe Lightroom (a tad pricey:
US$300). I like Lightroom, but it's pricey.

580 EX II flash and perhaps 1 slave or remote flash.

You might consider the cheapest Canon automagic flash plus Sigma flashes for
the remotes. The high-end Canon flash is really expensive. But the low end
one doesn't swivel for bounce. (Don't listen to me he I bought a flash to
use with my MF cameras, and it still fires on the original AA batteries that
came with it. I don't use flash a whole lot.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

"default" wrote in message
news:BaeOi.1756$Da.865@pd7urf1no...
"Just Shoot Me" wrote in message
news:uqcOi.947$q42.104@trndny06...

1. 18% grey card:

I have read about these things. at this point I have no idea how I would
use them.


Photoshop is a good idea.

looking at the price I wish it wasn't such a good idea.

Canon did give you two raw convertors:
"RAW Image Task" that duplicates the camera controls, adds click and
custom white balance, exposure offset, rotate, copy dev conditions, export
to different formats, transfer to PS etc.

"Digital Photo Professional" that does all of the above plus a lot more
editing and noise reduction. The next version is said to have chromatic
aberration correction.

Canon also gives you a photostitching program, Arcsoft editor, and
zoombrowser EX that can do some basic edits and crops.

You might have enough software already to do what you need without
spending any money and Canon keeps upgrading these tools so they keep
getting better without more outlay.

they are great programs and I have even set up elements to open DNG files.
but I take lots of pictures. the other day I did 3 - 3 bedroom apartments,
1 - 2 bedroom and a 1 bedroom.
the day before that another 3 apartments.
in every room I take pictures in each corner of each room at different
exposures, heights and angles.
I am also taking the same pictures using different metering modes to learn
just what that does.
Digital Photo Professional does what it does better than elements but can
not do all that elements can.
and I really never know what photos I will use until I am done and then
sometimes I wish that I would have made more changes in DPP before sending
it to Elements. I also have lots of other things to do and feel I need 1
program that does it all.
I have also worked with temp employment agencies and learning Photoshop just
might open more doors for me.
right now my main web site is down but I posted some pix on my other web
site that I wouldn't mind people telling me what they think good or bad.
http://www.takebetterpix.com/pictures.html

thank you

Tom

"David J. Littleboy" wrote in message
...

"Just Shoot Me" wrote:
Talked it over with the wife and I have about another $1,500 - $2,000 for
photography tools.
I am thinking
Better Tri-pod.

Please, no hyphen. Also, don't buy a lightweight tripod; you'll just
replace it with a sturdier one. I bought the Velbon "730" legset (2.2 kg
CF, US$550 or so) back in my medium format days, and it's an incredible
joy having a no-compromises tripod that's seriously steady whatever the
height. (Velbon has a bad reputation beacuse of their cheap models, but
the 730/740 and 830/840 are excellent. But hard to find most places
outside Japan.)

I bought a 3-section tripod, and I think that, even though it doesn't get
very small, it's the right idea for 2 reasons: (a) it's faster to set up,
and (b) you can just use a single section for a very stable but not too
painfully short tripod.

I really think that a 3-section tripod that's at least one size heavier
than you think you need is the right idea.


I do agree heavier is better but I was in bed with sciatica problems for
most of the last
2 1/2 years. I am pain free a few months now .
I ride around on my motorcycle on the bumpy manhattan streets and right now
my backpack is about 25lbs. So I do need to compromise a little bit.
to tell you the truth I am using a dirt cheap 20 year old tripod that does
not even have any of the screws that used to lock
it in position and only sometimes does it mess up on 30 second exposures.



Photoshop

Adobe occassionally offers upgrades from lesser programs (e.g. Photoshop
Elements) for US$300, so I'd hold off on Photoshop.

In the meantime, Photoshop Elements and maybe Lightroom (a tad pricey:
US$300). I like Lightroom, but it's pricey.

580 EX II flash and perhaps 1 slave or remote flash.

You might consider the cheapest Canon automagic flash plus Sigma flashes
for the remotes. The high-end Canon flash is really expensive. But the low
end one doesn't swivel for bounce. (Don't listen to me he I bought a
flash to use with my MF cameras, and it still fires on the original AA
batteries that came with it. I don't use flash a whole lot.)

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

even tho you don't use your flashes all that much you were right on.
the swivel I do need and I also feel the 580EX II has a bit more help for
someone with
my skill level. I am very thankful for the advice on cheaper ways to go.

My business web site is down today so I might just go and pick up a few
things for my camera today.

Tom

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" ritaberk2O04 @aol.com wrote in message
...
Just Shoot Me wrote:

as far as the flash goes, some of you suggested different gizmo's.
Are there any that I should look at as a must have for indoor
photography?


Tuition?


Adobe Photoshop CS3 One-on-One Essentials.
Maybe a book on flash photography - there are lots of web pages on the
subject.
perhaps a book on indoor photography if there are any.
Rec.photo.digital.slr-systems

Best bet is to visit www.strobist.com before you buy anything. Read the
forums for a few weeks and you'll figure out exactly what you need. Don't
be afraid to ask question there. Good luck.






Rita


that is a very nice way to ask me to leave .
at this point tho I kinda like this group and have a lot of info that I
still read in my older threads.
mostly now its take pictures and really study how different set ups effect
the out come and its really
great to talk to real photographers.

Tom

I just down loaded Photoshop CS3.

The only thing I don't like is that it seems white balance has to first be
adjusted
in camera raw and then sent to the standard editor. I would have liked to
be able to change
that during making changes to the photo. No big deal.
Looks like a fantastic program and I have my learning to do.

Tom


"Just Shoot Me" wrote in message
newsb8Oi.201$q42.100@trndny06...
Talked it over with the wife and I have about another $1,500 - $2,000 for
photography tools.
I am thinking
Better Tri-pod.
Photoshop
580 EX II flash and perhaps 1 slave or remote flash.
I would rather stay closer to $1,500

as far as the flash goes, some of you suggested different gizmo's.
Are there any that I should look at as a must have for indoor photography?

Thank you

Tom

"default" wrote in message
news:BaeOi.1756$Da.865@pd7urf1no...
Canon did give you two raw convertors:
"RAW Image Task" that duplicates the camera controls, adds click and
custom white balance, exposure offset, rotate, copy dev conditions, export
to different formats, transfer to PS etc.

"Digital Photo Professional" that does all of the above plus a lot more
editing and noise reduction. The next version is said to have chromatic
aberration correction.

Canon also gives you a photostitching program, Arcsoft editor, and
zoombrowser EX that can do some basic edits and crops.

You might have enough software already to do what you need without
spending any money and Canon keeps upgrading these tools so they keep
getting better without more outlay.

I have been working with it today, doing a few tutorials and working on my
pictures.
wow this program is amazing compared to elements 4.0.
For how many pictures I take and what I need done this program is amazing.
This little venture is costing me more than I ever thought. Well worth
every penny.
The $400 flash seems less important now but I am still getting a new tripod.
the next thing I am going to look into is a program that displays high
quality photos
but keeps the down load size very small. I still don't know of any by name
but have read they
are out there.

Tom

Just Shoot Me wrote:

the next thing I am going to look into is a program that displays high
quality photos but keeps the down load size very small. I still don't
know of any by name but have read they are out there.

Save for web has some options for that.

Here's instructions how batch process for web in photoshop with actions:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/raw-batch
Scroll down for the web-batch-action and modify in the action toolbar if
you don't want thumbnails or to change the final size bigger than 640
pixels. That action does an incremental resize & sharpening, I copied &
modified it from elsewhere because I liked the results.

The droplet example below has some annoyances, so I don't recommend
that. The raw batch description works for the web resize action.


--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com

"Paul Furman" wrote in message
t...
Just Shoot Me wrote:

the next thing I am going to look into is a program that displays high
quality photos but keeps the down load size very small. I still don't
know of any by name but have read they are out there.

Save for web has some options for that.

Here's instructions how batch process for web in photoshop with actions:
http://edgehill.net/Misc/photography/raw-batch
Scroll down for the web-batch-action and modify in the action toolbar if
you don't want thumbnails or to change the final size bigger than 640
pixels. That action does an incremental resize & sharpening, I copied &
modified it from elsewhere because I liked the results.

The droplet example below has some annoyances, so I don't recommend that.
The raw batch description works for the web resize action.


--
Paul Furman Photography
http://edgehill.net
Bay Natives Nursery
http://www.baynatives.com


Maybe Photoshop is the program I read about, there was no name mentioned.
I have been using save for web and have started to save as progressive.
I think its because I am shooting in raw but now I see very little
difference in the thumb nails that are displayed when saving for web between
medium and high but the time
is 6 seconds on medium and 13 seconds on high at 28.8kbps.
after I do a few things I am going to see if larger pics also show no
difference.
the exposed brick wall does look better on high but that might be able to be
changed if I do a few more adjustments to the wall before I save. a plain
painted wall probably wont show a difference. I think hardwood floors also
look better saved on high.

with my cool pix camera and not shooting in raw and of course my skill
level. I used to notice a difference between medium and High. later today
I will post some pics in high and some in medium
if anyone sees a difference between the 2.
I have started to save as 600 to keep the size down but if I can take it
back up to 640 or even larger and save on medium
that would be good.

I will be trying the batch save tip later today. that will no doubt save me
some time. I will be looking into if I can
put a layer into it at the same time. I guess after the save I can rename
them in my usual way.

I guess I could also post a thumb nail or save as low and make that pic a
link to a higher quality pic.
I am really happy with the lay out now tho and would rather not change it.
I have seen people connect to the web wirelessly and down load my 400 x 267
pics very fast.

thanks for the help Paul.

Tom