I need a photoshop program thing but hate the idea, can you help?

W

westie1

Messages
17
Name
rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi everyone,
so iv been using my dslr and keep reading and reading about the "digital light room" that im supposed to be embrasing.

my dilemma is I hate the idea lol.
I understand that when I change settings on my camera im digitally manipulating the image and its just an extension of that post picture taking.

but.......

my tablet is great for surfing but I will have to borrow the other halfs laptop.
I dont like the thought of making something radically different from the initial shot.
I dont have much money for a 100+ pound program.

im rambling but basically can anyone tell me it will honestly improve my pics (obviously lots of variables but you know what I mean) as iv no experience with this sort of thing.
What is a good cheap basic program for just changing colour temp, sharpening up images and cropping I guess thats the basics?


sorry for the essay on my first post but im finding it hard to pinpoint my issue.

thanks
rob
 
Couple of thoughts, Rob.

1. No one here can tell you (or even suggest) what might improve your pics if they cannot see them, so post one or two and see what folks say.

2. There are loads of photoeditors which cost from nothing to a lot.

The two free ones I use more than any other are -

Photoscape - it has, IMO, a useless RAW converter but if you are working with jpegs it is simple (as in basic but VERY easy to use). Often I find it does all I need.

GIMP - this can do almost everything that many sophisticated(paid for) editors can do.

However, there are other free ones and also many paid for ones.

Dave
 
Contrary view: some basic processing in lightroom will drastically improve the quality if your pictures. You absolutely I should be tweaking the blacks, shadows and whites of all your images, and lens correction is very nice to have. Then you can look at noise reduction etc. You don't have to go overboard but going off "woah, that's nice" comments from mates, my hitrate is through the roof since I started doing pp...

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Talk Photography Forums mobile app
 
Download a free 30-day trial of Lightroom and see for yourself, preferably working from Raw files (y)
 
Thanks guys theres some great suggestions there!
il get an image up if thats ok, and download one of the free editors then if possible follow some of your suggestions to improve it and see the benefits for myself.
im very new to all of this so be warned but its all experience and im always willing to learn.

I will upload onto this thread over the weekend a few pics iv already taken, ah there in jpeg though should I take some new ones in raw?

just been eating mince pies and watching christmas special royal families so im out for today :)
cheers
rob
 
Whilst trying to get it right "in camera" is obviously something to strive for, it would be foolish, not to admit the necessity of post-processing. Not every image, needs a lot of post-processing, but it is a tool that is essential to the digital photographer.
 
buy this months Practical Photography as there is the full version of something a bit like Lightroom for free.

The CD's that came with your camera will have basic software on as well.
 
Last edited:
johnnypanic said:
Whilst trying to get it right "in camera" is obviously something to strive for, it would be foolish, not to admit the necessity of post-processing. Not every image, needs a lot of post-processing, but it is a tool that is essential to the digital photographer.
Click to expand...
This for me is what's wrong; too many people mix up processing with putting right something that was wrong in camera.

We should always strive to get it right in camera, and PP is what we do to make sure our images are fit for presentation.
 
westie1 said:
What is a good cheap basic program for just changing colour temp, sharpening up images and cropping I guess thats the basics?
Click to expand...

Sounds like Picasa, (from google) will suit you.... (and it's free).

play with this for a bit, and if you want more, come back and ask again.... (y)
 
overbez said:
Sounds like Picasa, (from google) will suit you.... (and it's free).

play with this for a bit, and if you want more, come back and ask again.... (y)
Click to expand...
:agree: Its free and it may be all you need. My wife uses it quite a bit just to add some contrast.
 
HoppyUK said:
Download a free 30-day trial of Lightroom and see for yourself, preferably working from Raw files (y)
Click to expand...
I'll 2nd that....have been using the free trial and it's a great program to "refine" your images, the way I'd put it is it's a great program that will not correct the things you got wrong but will enhance the things you got right in the camera.
The ability of noise reduction is also superb.
 
Hi Rob - as Andrew points out, as you have a Canon you should have thier DPP software on a disc? If not you can download it from the net for free.

This is a RAW editor and allows you to do all the basic PP that Lightoom will, including spot, (dust) removal and tweaking all the levels etc. When your camera creates a JPEG it is fundamentaly just applying internal presets to a RAW image, DPP gives you some control over that to adjust for exactly what you want, at the same time allowing some recovery if the initial shot was not spot on - and as a beginner I rarely get everything spot on! I found it a little intimidating at first, but there are some good tutorials our there, including Canons own:

http://www.canon.co.uk/youconnect_newsletter/tutorials/Processing_Raw_Images/index.aspx

In the end, after downloading the free trial, I opted for Lightroom as I found the user interface more intuative and the functionailty a little better, but I expect many would disagree!

Best of luck,

Rob
 
Why do you hate the idea? Do you think Ansel Adams took his roll of film to Boots and just used their express service default settings? Without Lightroom (or Lightzone or Darktable etc.), how do you prepare an image for display? You need to at least match the colours.
 
Not everyone likes to or wants to spend time PP'ing photgraphs... All my dad does is press the button, and then stick the memory card straight in the digital photo frame they have. They pretty much never even get onto the computer.

For the basics Rob has asked for, IMO Picasa is adequate to start with. At least it will enable Rob to see the images, make the basic changes he's requested, and experiment with a few styles if he's feeling adventurous.

It may well then prompt the step to LR or similar, but for the moment I can't help but feel that even DPP would be over the top.

Rob, are you shooting RAW or JPG??
 
Good grief im amazed at the response on this forum I wish others were so helpful.

That's just it, coming from point and shoot now and then, and a lack of interest in sitting a computer for hours I wanted/needed to hear some first hand feedback from people who have been/are in my shoes.
Upon reading many reviews I keep finding myself reading about 100+ programs so the above suggestions are great.

Iv been shooting jpeg but il get some raw fired off too and post them up, iv never shot raw so dont know what expect but il have ago.

Im about to do a 6yo birthday party with my mini menagerie so youl have to excuse me .

Thanks again everyone hope Saturdays treating you well
Rob
 
Picasa very basic, has some limited editing capabilities, but its free, it's a good galley if nothing else. Phil's right though, pp should take seconds to do, 30 seconds per image at the most. Photo Elements does everything you'll need and is a 10th of the price of photoshop, Lightroom seem to be an affordable alternative, and there's a host of other software like paintshop etc, but as mentioned, you should have had some editing software with the camera
 
A vote for the free one from Practical Photography mag ... it's Cyberlink's Photodirector 4 Ultra which for free beats all the free ones hands down, even gimp since it has a raw converter if I recall correctly. Not without flaws but does a lot of what lightroom can do.
 
artyman said:
You could have a shot at this one http://www.serif.com/free-photo-editing-software/?MC=FSSPHOTOPLUS I use their MoviePlus software for my videos.
Click to expand...

I have used Serif PhotoPlus editing programs since getting PhotoPlus 5 on the front of a magazine about 8 or 9 years ago and they do all I want them to do without costing the earth.

In fact since I was registered with them I get special offers of older programs at exceptionally low prices; I am still using PhotoPlus X2 which I bought for about £15 several years ago and have never found any need to change it since it does all I want in an editing program.

In addition I also use Neat Image for noise reduction, Easy HDR Pro, Easy Thumbnails (free), Canon's own DPP, and Fast Picture Viewer for rapid viewing and sorting of my images.
 
Myrdhinn said:
A vote for the free one from Practical Photography mag ... it's Cyberlink's Photodirector 4 Ultra which for free beats all the free ones hands down, even gimp since it has a raw converter if I recall correctly. Not without flaws but does a lot of what lightroom can do.
Click to expand...

I have downloaded this today from Practical Photography Magazine. The files and photos are taking ages to load, so I have un-installed and will try again. First impressions, a poor working program on my computer.
 
westie1 said:
Good grief im amazed at the response on this forum I wish others were so helpful.

That's just it, coming from point and shoot now and then, and a lack of interest in sitting a computer for hours I wanted/needed to hear some first hand feedback from people who have been/are in my shoes.
Click to expand...

It may not take hours, it may take seconds.

I shoot raw and process my images in CS5 and many don't need anything more than batch processing with my chosen defaults. If that's the case it's just a matter of selecting the images, selecting "all," calling up my presets and applying them and then saving "all." It takes literally seconds.

Other than that if need be I straighten images, clone out the odd discarded water bottle or out of focus bird that flew into shot as I pressed the shutter button and that's often it but my pictures are better for it.

I suggest shooting raw and processing with something free (Canon's DPP?) and then finishing with a free JPEG processor.

So, I suggest that you give it a try and see how you get on :D
 
Last edited:
Right then so after pulling my hair out last night trying to do ANYTHING useful on my tablet iv hijacked a proper laptop.
Iv bought outdoor photography before and an excellent "essential guide to outdoor photography" magazine book thing and il check out practical photography magazine.

Iv got these pics to upload and they were all taken handheld with my 1100d using the kit 18-55 non-IS lens.
The beetle and lizard shot used a 58mm achromatic macro lens too (new toy for my impending 55-250 lens)
Remember im very much a beginner and not saying i dont need a program lolView attachment 1613View attachment 1614View attachment 1613View attachment 1614View attachment 1615


sorry i dont know why its posted two images twice
 
None of those need PP to improve them, they all need improved technique though, the owl and the dog are both almost completely lost in the background, the beetle is badly lit with on camera flash.

Lighting and better control of depth of field are what's required, however some people would PP these to create something but that really is 'cheating'.

Sorry, I should add that you need to get your head round the fact that photography doesn't start when you lift your camera and end when you've polished it in pp. A lot of people think that's a 'workflow', it actually starts when you plan the concept, which you then shoot and process to your original plan.

The people who are grabbing shots then trying out loads of processing till something looks ok are kidding themselves.
 
Last edited:
The beetle was done with my phones led light pointed at it from an angle but the light seems quite harsh on it.
I have since bought a reflector for some close up shots, would you suggest the use of natural light with a reflector rather than artificial?
With the dog i went al servo i think it was with center spot focus and had the other half shake some treats for him :)
Thanks for the input much appreciated.
 
The lizard isn't at allnoisy, and I would think some PP would improve it, depending on what you wanted. I would probably increase contrast and adjust both brightness and gamma to prevent loss of detail in highlight and shadow, plus increase colour saturation a little and sharpen just a tiny bit to make the eye and scale details stand out just a bit more. That would make the image punchier, although there is also the danger of just having a spectacular eyeball against a dark background.

Ideally the shot would have been taken from a slightly different angle to allow the mouth to fall along the plane of focus, and with a little more space in front of the head to allow room for movement.
 
Thats great feedback thankyou. il have a go at changing what you recommend and repost in a few days for your consideration.
Im still in the take a shot from many angles change one setting at a time then repeat mode.
When you say "plain of focus" does that mean so the whole mouth is in focus?
I was so interested in the eye I didnt think about overall composition I guess.
Thanks
rob
 
Re: plane of focus, yes, that's the idea.

The thing about image editing is that provided you keep a copy of the original safe, you can do anything you fancy to see what works, although it's often good to make small incremental changes, assess the effect, then make more. Some programs are good, in that they make the changes quickly, and it's easy to juggle before & after. Others are poor in this respect, and changes, especially to large file, are very slow so it is much harder to judge.
 
abdoujaparov said:
Or they're just enjoying themselves and don't need your approval.
Click to expand...
I never said anyone did need my approval :thinking:(I rarely get it). Some people are happy to shoot total crap pictures, some people strive to improve. I'm not judging anyone, but if people wish to improve their photography, what I described is not the way to do it.
 
Phil V said:
I never said anyone did need my approval :thinking:(I rarely get it). Some people are happy to shoot total crap pictures, some people strive to improve. I'm not judging anyone, but if people wish to improve their photography, what I described is not the way to do it.
Click to expand...

It's obviously not your way, but it is a way. Nine months ago, I was taking 100 shots, whittling them down to maybe 20, processing those in a bunch of different ways, getting maybe 2 I was happy with. I enjoyed taking the photos, I enjoyed processing them, I loved getting something I was proud of, even if just in a "that ain't half bad" kind of way. At each stage, I was learning - the whittling stage taught me what didn't work, I learned a lot about the capabilities and limitations of PP, and the image at the end gave me the shot of gratification I needed. At no point did I "plan a concept". I still don't have a concept. Maybe one day I'll learn enough to feel comfortable having a concept, but until then I'm going to point my camera at things, process the photo until it makes me happy, and try to learn something new each time.
 
But what Phil is saying is, learn about you camera and get the setting right on the camera. No amount of PP will improve an image that's been poorly setup. Understanding about you camera will significantly improve your photography, not the other way around.
 
abdoujaparov said:
It's obviously not your way, but it is a way. Nine months ago, I was taking 100 shots, whittling them down to maybe 20, processing those in a bunch of different ways, getting maybe 2 I was happy with. I enjoyed taking the photos, I enjoyed processing them, I loved getting something I was proud of, even if just in a "that ain't half bad" kind of way. At each stage, I was learning - the whittling stage taught me what didn't work, I learned a lot about the capabilities and limitations of PP, and the image at the end gave me the shot of gratification I needed. At no point did I "plan a concept". I still don't have a concept. Maybe one day I'll learn enough to feel comfortable having a concept, but until then I'm going to point my camera at things, process the photo until it makes me happy, and try to learn something new each time.
Click to expand...

Which bears no resemblance to what I said. :shrug:
Which was "
Phil V said:
The people who are grabbing shots then trying out loads of processing till something looks ok are kidding themselves.
Click to expand...
 
In a way, you guys actually agree, but come at things from different angles. Phil - your approach seems to be to pre-meditate your shot, while Keith's approach has been to learn about what works and what doesn't by practice - you're both about improving technique through practice.

Sometimes you can go to places, observe what's there and then start panning how to shoot. Sometimes you need to be familiar with gear and just react to capture a moment, relying on instincts to get everything 'right'. Keith's approach is more noob-friendly a fits the latter more readily, because it's much more fun to shoot and then deconstruct to see where it went wrong. Forcing yourself to craft a single image through the camera in an afternoon (that you're probably still not satisfied with) may result in a better image, but you need to be of a particular frame of mind to enjoy that.

And we're all different.
 
Phil V said:
Which bears no resemblance to what I said. :shrug:
Which was "
Click to expand...

I actually quoted you with "plan a concept", so yes, it did bear a resemblance. And "grabbing" is exactly what I was doing. I learned by grabbing. There was no plan, just the fun of pointing the camera, clicking, and seeing what worked. Sure, at some point there will have to be a plan if I want to continue to get better, but that's in the future, and I don't think I'm "kidding myself" in any way about it.
 
You've made a start Westie so your photographic journey is off and running, if you take onboard the advice i'd say in 12 months time you'll look back and smile at the photos you've posted, not that they are rubbish but that they are the start and in that 12 months you've learnt and improved.
Before you worry to much about processing look at what you want from an image......take, for example, the dog, do you want the viewers eye to look at the dog or the man or the red sign or the tree trunk as they all catch the eye and for me, the red sign catches the eye the most. People will take about light, which is an important aspect but great light with poor composition will never work. Take a bit of time taking a shot, look around you at what you what to be the main feature and try different angles and even try getting down low and clicking the shutter button, try using a large aperture (low "f" number) so the background tends to be more blurry when you focus on a precise object.
if you want to go out and take a 100 shots then do it, load them up on the computer and look at them and see what you wish you had done, then go back again and take some more shots, i'd guess that eventually you'll be taking maybe 5 whereas now you'll be taking 105, nothing wrong with that as its what myself and many other did/do, photography is an enjoyable but lengthy learning curve.
 
abdoujaparov said:
I actually quoted you with "plan a concept", so yes, it did bear a resemblance. And "grabbing" is exactly what I was doing. I learned by grabbing. There was no plan, just the fun of pointing the camera, clicking, and seeing what worked. Sure, at some point there will have to be a plan if I want to continue to get better, but that's in the future, and I don't think I'm "kidding myself" in any way about it.
Click to expand...
Then I'll quote you:
abdoujaparov said:
. At each stage, I was learning - the whittling stage taught me what didn't work, I learned a lot about the capabilities and limitations of PP, and the image at the end gave me the shot of gratification I needed.
Click to expand...
You're over reading my 'plan a concept' as if I believe that we should all sit with a sketch pad with a lighting plan.

By planning the shot we decide what we're shooting, we examine the light and pre visualise to a degree. The opposite is what you see people do who have never held a DSLR before, when they put the camera to their eye they turn the zoom ring back and forth end to end. These people shoot 'what's in front of them', with no forethought, they don't learn from previous shoots, because if they did, there'd be forethought.

You're no longer 'grabbing shots' if you've learned from your previous shots. Maybe you hadn't realised?
 
Phil V said:
You're no longer 'grabbing shots' if you've learned from your previous shots. Maybe you hadn't realised?
Click to expand...

Sure. I learned, gradually. I improved, over several months. By "grabbing shots". Without "kidding myself". Nowadays I sometimes even take the camera away from my eye without taking a shot. Some day, I hope to be able to see the shot without even needing the viewfinder. :D

I just think it's unhelpful to belittle the processes of people who shoot what's in front of them, and to tell them it's not the way to learn. You can learn that way, and everybody has to start somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top