DSLR Owners Unite! (56k? Are you kidding me?)
Originally Posted by DonNguyen
the 50 1.4 is definietly a good lens, however, most people simply do not have the patience to walk around with a prime lens
walking around with prime lens is fine, you dont even have to move back or forward, you can still compose nice shots with the 50mm regardless of how distant the subject is. As long as you compose the photo right its perfectly fine.
I walk around with the 50mm and keep that ish at f8 for city roaming.
only time I DONT use a prime lens is when im in stationary seating and photographing a stage, than 300 photos from the same area at the same focal length, same subject distance, same platform would be crappy.
Originally Posted by kiss_kiss_kill


I wish my pics were brighter & more crisp. I suppose I'll learn in class next semester.

grass doesnt have enough black level information, which would require masking to fix and I didnt want to invest that kind of time for the photo.

oops too much red in this one.
anyhow for anyone that wants to know how to fix exposure
you adjust levels, then tweak with curves, than adjust color.
results may vary depending on how much time you want to invest in correcting the photo. the above examples were quickies.
I did it a bit differently than roja, I didnt use the warming filter. I adjusted the colors by decreasing blue and increasing red yellow and green levels.
to avoid blown out highlights use levels and curves. Burn tool can help darken areas that need darkening also.
other improvements may include, dodge and burn, surface blur, smart sharpen, hue/saturation correction, selective color, and masking.
however working with raw files is much easier! anyhow, the best way to speed up post processing is just to shoot the photo correctly from the camera, then little to no time is spent optimizing a photograph.
When I first got my camera, the first round of serious shots for an event needed some heavy correction(300 photos). I learned the camera's limitations. The second event I photographed needed less attention(1200 photos) and I learned a lot more, after that all the events I photograph require no editing, but I still tweak here and there just to optimize the photos. which is why I still shoot in jpg/raw
jpg to quickly view the photos, raw to edit.
[quote="Elijahtc"]
yeah i did it in like 2 minutes before work with a resized photo if i had the hi rez version i woulda spent some more time on it.. hard to work with an image that size without losing mass amount of quality and it was way underexposed
props to rnb tho made it look much better
Originally Posted by Nastos
hey kisskiss girl.. i liked ur shots of the chimp hope u dont mind me trying to adjust the exposure... looks a little noisy but if i had the original non resized one i could make it look good..
Originally Posted by Elijahtc
u can tell this version was edited. the whites are blown out and have a blue tint to them.
props to rnb tho made it look much better
ok wow i just found some OLD shots. These are ALL film and weren't adjusted in any way at all. These were shots taken from when i switched from a Canon Rebel (back when it was ALL film and there weren't any DSLRs) to a Canon Elan 7e!















































lemme know what u guys/gal think. Again those were like YEARS ago and are completely unedited. They were actually scanned from a crappy HP scanner that scanned the negatives. ha ha















































lemme know what u guys/gal think. Again those were like YEARS ago and are completely unedited. They were actually scanned from a crappy HP scanner that scanned the negatives. ha ha
now go comment on my photos. Don't have to be too brutal. THose are my first shots, they are OLD negatives, scanned on a VERY crappy negative scanner, not edited, and they are compressed by photobucket. ha ha











