I couldn't agree more. Every picture is a time capsule, I want as much in there as I can get!

Guitarsoup said:

---

Deats said:

---

Mr. Dubi said:

---

A body is just a box. As long as it still works, money is usually better spent on better lenses.

---

Chips don't help?

---

Depends on the upgrade but most body upgrades are incremental and for things other than the sensor.

Going from crop to full frame can be a big upgrade but going from a 2013 camera to a 2018 camera will be very incremental as far as the sensor goes

---

That's where I am

Great info on here.

One thing I would add that doesn't get mentioned a lot of times, is learn how to post process. One thing I hate seeing a lot is a photo that would be really great, but it was obviously posted SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). Post processing is of course all a matter of personal taste, but has become increasingly important in the digital age.

Most digital photos, in my opinion at least, need at minimum a boost in contrast and saturation. The composition and subject matter may be top notch, but the main subject just doesn't pop out at you with washed out bland colors.

Sometimes playing with the exposure and white balance will go a long way to improvement.

Judicious cropping can go a long way to drastic improvements as well. If that dead tree branch sticking out above your subject doesn't add to the story, crop it out. You don't have to spring for Photoshop, there are many cheaper alternatives that will still do the basics. Just my .02 cents.

Here is an example that has no adjustments made to it. Basically SOOC.




Here is the same photo with just some basic enhancements and cropping.

Deats said:

---

Playing with my camera but it's time for a new body I fear..

---

Do you mean yours or the camera??

labmansid said:

---

Great info on here.

One thing I would add that doesn't get mentioned a lot of times, is learn how to post process. One thing I hate seeing a lot is a photo that would be really great, but it was obviously posted SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). Post processing is of course all a matter of personal taste, but has become increasingly important in the digital age.

Most digital photos, in my opinion at least, need at minimum a boost in contrast and saturation. The composition and subject matter may be top notch, but the main subject just doesn't pop out at you with washed out bland colors.

Sometimes playing with the exposure and white balance will go a long way to improvement.

Judicious cropping can go a long way to drastic improvements as well. If that dead tree branch sticking out above your subject doesn't add to the story, crop it out. You don't have to spring for Photoshop, there are many cheaper alternatives that will still do the basics. Just my .02 cents.

Here is an example that has no adjustments made to it. Basically SOOC.




Here is the same photo with just some basic enhancements and cropping.

---

X2. But, a lot of noobs will get sucked into post processing too much. I look back at files I exported from Lightroom a few years ago and shake my head at how heavily I processed.

Agree on too much processing.
I sometimes see a lot of over-saturated and overly sharp photos. I really don't like HDR effects. The photo should look realistic.

New to photography cannon Ti7 just a few.

Layla our 14 y/o Border still laying it down on a 5 mile hike!



Parmalee the Sheltie

Labmansid what do you use to post edit ? Software ? Filter?

Quote:

---

One thing I would add that doesn't get mentioned a lot of times, is learn how to post process. One thing I hate seeing a lot is a photo that would be really great, but it was obviously posted SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). Post processing is of course all a matter of personal taste, but has become increasingly important in the digital age.

---

Growing up in the age of film, including doing a lot of black&white developing and printing, that is not something I've adapted to in the digital age. I still take photos in both JPEG and RAW, and have done post-processing on a handful of photos.

Where the RAW format has saved my bacon, was when I forgot to set the white balance of indoors, or forgot to set it back after changing it. Was able to print the photos as if the white balance was correct all along.

I will say that over-processed photos annoy me. But, as I said, I'm from the B&W age, and still have some favorite shots in that format.

FirefightAg said:

---

Labmansid what do you use to post edit ? Software ? Filter?

---

I use Adobe's Lightroom. To me it is worth the $10 or so per month. I use it pretty much exclusively. I have presets saved that I use for different circumstances, such as Milky Way shots, indoors, moon, sun (with solar filter of course), outdoors, etc. Those give me a good starting point which I fine tune to taste. The package includes Photoshop as well, but I rarely find the need for it so far.

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

One thing I would add that doesn't get mentioned a lot of times, is learn how to post process. One thing I hate seeing a lot is a photo that would be really great, but it was obviously posted SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera). Post processing is of course all a matter of personal taste, but has become increasingly important in the digital age.

---

Growing up in the age of film, including doing a lot of black&white developing and printing, that is not something I've adapted to in the digital age. I still take photos in both JPEG and RAW, and have done post-processing on a handful of photos.

Where the RAW format has saved my bacon, was when I forgot to set the white balance of indoors, or forgot to set it back after changing it. Was able to print the photos as if the white balance was correct all along.

I will say that over-processed photos annoy me. But, as I said, I'm from the B&W age, and still have some favorite shots in that format.

---

I totally understand. I started out many years ago in film, even had my own modest darkroom back then. It was a bit of a pain, and I often just left it to commercial developers.

I really embraced digital when it first came out, although not with the first DSLRs which were quite expensive, modified film cameras. Personally, I never was into B&W. I'm more into being a technical shooter, meaning I strive to accurately portray what my eyes see, and I don't see in B&W. I may take some liberties with the color, contrast, and saturation among others, but try not to overdo it. I see some fantastic work others do with different styles and appreciate it, it's just not really my personal style.

I shoot exclusively in RAW format, and have for a long time. There is just so much more flexibility versus JPEG. Adjusting white balance is a big part of that, way easier.