Camera Advice Would Be Appreciated....

[Richn83]

@ TC - So are you saying that in Aperture what you do is add your photos to the library, edit them very much like you would in iphoto (but obviously with all the extra features) and then you can just drag the photos out of the Aperture screen to a finder window to save them as separate image files?  And can you select multiple images at once?  Also I guess this approach will copy the image and therefore double the HDD space used?

They do get everywhere, and this one was particularly tame and loved bread...

[RedRobin]

Also I guess this approach will copy the image and therefore double the HDD space used?

....I think that the original image file will remain in the folder depths out of sight. After editing any image file we always use additional HD space. However, some apps such as Adobe InDesign apply your work by proxy like an alias. Adobe Photoshop too, giving you the options to Save or Save As or Save Copy.

[andrewparker]

I have aperture 3, and if i can operate it, then it must be simple. 

You can import straight from your camera to aperture, or just import from iphoto into a projects folder. Then its just one click to start editing the pic. Once you have finished your edit, you just have to drag it into the folder of your choosing.

I have copied all my folders into aperture, which gives me a nice option of a list of folders, were i can simply one click to edit from, or drag and drop to organise.

Don't get me wrong, the way it organises libraries within the programme is very straightforward. However to use an image you must first import it into Aperture. If you're working with the yield of a two day shoot, say 20Gb of RAW data, then you're duplicating that data. It's very easy to organise folders within the programme but accessing these folders from outside Aperture, by multiple users is very difficult (even impossible).

[andrewparker]

However, some apps such as Adobe InDesign apply your work by proxy like an alias.

This is the problem for me, use of the image outside of Aperture. Sure it's possible, but it adds to the management time. The workflow isn't efficient - Aperture without the media management would be great.

I should note that I'm talking purely from the perspective of use of the program in a professional environment with a team of designers all having to access the image files. For the average consumer it's a very good application.

[RedRobin]

I should note that I'm talking purely from the perspective of use of the program in a professional environment with a team of designers all having to access the image files. For the average consumer it's a very good application.

....Exactly. Aperture and iPhoto (especially) are aimed very much at the 'average', or shall we say 'non-professional', user.

I have been working for Adobe (unpaid but very willing) as a pre-release tester on their Creative Suite since version one but took time out this last year. IIRC (hoping I don't have to shoot you after telling you this) Adobe were developing a universal access/networking/editing system, very much aimed at professionals. Adobe Acrobat Professional already follows that principle. I intend to rejoin the development (I get free software!) when I eventually get my new Mac.

I suggest what's missing from the market, and the camera hardware designers have at last recognised it, is software suitable for 'semi-professionals' or those 'amateurs' with a serious addiction and talent (like some of us here). Having said that, I haven't experienced either Aperture or Adobe Lightroom.....YET!

[andrewparker]

IIRC (hoping I don't have to shoot you after telling you this) Adobe were developing a universal access/networking/editing system, very much aimed at professionals. Adobe Acrobat Professional already follows that principle.

Yeah, I think that was quite widely known, but the industry reception to the idea wasn't great as far as I remember. It would certainly be interesting but I haven't heard anything about it for a long time.

[Top Cat]

Ok i think i understand now, how to expose the pics properly in manual mode, and the six available exposures available, using F/stops, in each pic depending on the style of photo you want. Even though i do this very slowly at the minute, it is becoming a more natural step.

Trying to get my head around focus and depth of field at the moment so i trotted off to the park with Marley, and a bloody big camera round my neck. 

The basic lens that came with my kit is very limiting, when trying to get a large depth range of focus, though with somebody who knows what they are doing i am sure they could do a lot better than me.

I wanted to get one pic with just marly in focus, and one pic with a full depth of field focus.





I couldn't really get either of my choices nailed, as Marley woke up after only a few attempts. 

I have since read that i need to use a really small aperture for full depth of field, somewhere around F16,F22 Thanks to Hedge for recommending a great book. :noteworthy: I will be trying again to see if i can improve this.

Here is a pic a Marley as he woke up, it came out really sharp. 

[MAT ED30]

last pics ace mate he looks like he just made a mess in his pants  

cute kid mate  

[andrewparker]

It's normally impossible to get decent drop focus with kits lenses.

The easiest way to think of it is with a smaller f-number more of the image in front of and behind what you are focusing on will be sharp and in focus. That depth of focus gets smaller and smaller the higher the f-number.

Oh, and a high f-number is something like F2.8, and a low f-number is something like F22. When you're experimenting with aperture I'd leave the camera in aperture priority mode so you're allowing it to determine the shutter speed. One less thing to worry about and you're less likely to end up with washed out images.

[andrewparker]

For example, and a great excuse to post a photo of my little boy, this shot was taken with an aperture of f2.8.

[JPC]

Ok i think i understand now, how to expose the pics properly in manual mode, and the six available exposures available, using F/stops, in each pic depending on the style of photo you want. Even though i do this very slowly at the minute, it is becoming a more natural step.

Trying to get my head around focus and depth of field at the moment so i trotted off to the park with Marley, and a bloody big camera round my neck. 

The basic lens that came with my kit is very limiting, when trying to get a large depth range of focus, though with somebody who knows what they are doing i am sure they could do a lot better than me.

I wanted to get one pic with just marly in focus, and one pic with a full depth of field focus.





I couldn't really get either of my choices nailed, as Marley woke up after only a few attempts. 

I have since read that i need to use a really small aperture for full depth of field, somewhere around F16,F22 Thanks to Hedge for recommending a great book. :noteworthy: I will be trying again to see if i can improve this.

Here is a pic a Marley as he woke up, it came out really sharp. 

TC, i think the pics would be a lot better without the sodding great black background around them! haha!

glad to see youve taken the plunge and got the 550d. its a great camera, and you have a good eye for composition too, much better than mine!

[cmdrfire]

I ain't afraid of no DoF!

[andrewparker]

^^ Nice vignette

[Top Cat]

It's normally impossible to get decent drop focus with kits lenses.

The easiest way to think of it is with a smaller f-number more of the image in front of and behind what you are focusing on will be sharp and in focus. That depth of focus gets smaller and smaller the higher the f-number.

Oh, and a high f-number is something like F2.8, and a low f-number is something like F22. When you're experimenting with aperture I'd leave the camera in aperture priority mode so you're allowing it to determine the shutter speed. One less thing to worry about and you're less likely to end up with washed out images.

I know when in AV mode the camera finds the correct shutter speed for the pic, but its just as easy in full manual as the light meter aligns up when correct, this is helping me remember which one is correct for the corresponding aperture. I have read that i need a decent size zoom lens or macro to get creative focus like your great shot. 
I am happy for the moment just trying to learn how to get the full depth of field. 

TC, i think the pics would be a lot better without the sodding great black background around them! haha!

 

Jay do you mean the border that i put on with photobucket.

[andrewparker]

I know when in AV mode the camera finds the correct shutter speed for the pic, but its just as easy in full manual as the light meter aligns up when correct, this is helping me remember which one is correct for the corresponding aperture. I have read that i need a decent size zoom lens or macro to get creative focus like your great shot. 
I am happy for the moment just trying to learn how to get the full depth of field. 

Tthe best way to improve your photography is to learn the limitations of your own kit, so you're doing it right as far as I'm concerned. Rather than buying a decent zoom lenses (because you'll pay a fortune for one that'll go down to a decent aperture) I'd suggest buying a 50mm F1.4 lens. Canon do a good one for £250 - £300.