Editing question from a beginner

fabphoto

fabphoto

Suspended / Banned
Messages
224
Name
Fabien
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi

I am quite new at this (and photography) and I feel a bit lost as to what needs to be done and how much editing needs to be done.

All tutorials I have found on editing are on how to use lightroom or photoshop, not on the basics of editing.

Sorry if it sounds wrong but I almost feel that I need to go back to shooting in jpeg.
 
fabphoto said:
Sorry if it sounds wrong but I almost feel that I need to go back to shooting in jpeg.
Click to expand...

Why on earth have you decided you need to shoot in RAW then ? You can do a lot of editing in JPG .. RAW is for advanced editing.. If your comfortable with JPG editing then you would know whats next in RAW and why you needed to go there.. If your not comfortable ediitng in JPG either then I suggest you get to know the basics before going to advanced.. walk then run :)

Tel us what editing you already do then we know what level your at.. also what software you use.. also tell us why you think you need RAW .. All that info will help us help you..
 
To your last comment first: there's nothing wrong with jpegs.

Basically, you want to do as little editing as possible.
In a perfect world you would be taking perfect shots every time you press the shutter button.
In the real world most shots have a few problems, whether it be exposure, white balance or composition.

Try to get things correct in camera. This comes with practise.
 
I am using Digital Photo Professional which came with my camera.

Why do I shoot in raw? Because most tutorials I have read suggest that any photographer who want to get serious with their photography need to do it.

I didn't say I don't want to do any editing but you are right and I don't feel I know the basics but where should I start?

You may be right and i might not be ready for raw.
 
fabphoto said:
Why do I shoot in raw? Because most tutorials I have read suggest that any photographer who want to get serious with their photography need to do it.
Click to expand...

oh my god! haha.. sorry thats not directed at you..

Two reasons for using RAW

#1 as a failsafe.. if you think your going to take a bad picture.. then use RAW to help you fix it..

#2 as an artistic tool if you want to make major changes, usualy artistic

Shooting in RAW is a bit like shooting in MANUAL mode.. people seem to think its more professional.. makes you look like your a serious photogrpaher... most of the time neither or needed and when people look at a picture on a wall and go wow thats great... it really doesnt matter what it was shot in :)

Where to start?
Well you dont edit for the sake of editing.. you edit to make the picture look better if you havent nailed it in camera (almost impossible 99% of tyime ) for me all pictures need an auto contrast.. a slight sharpening and usualy straightening... but at the end of the day its what your shooting and whats required of your picture.. Nobody can tell you what to edit...its impossible.. show us a picture and we can tell you what ediitng we think you need to do to makie it better.. but theres no actual rules to editing.. do this do that...
 
Last edited:
Sorry, but I completely disagree with Kipax about RAW editing.

In camera jpeg processing gives you the result that your camera thinks is correct - or rather the bods who wrote the software.

RAW files give the photographer the opportunity to interpret the image to their own preference.

To suggest that RAW processing is for those who "take bad pictures" is just plain wrong!

It is said that the RAW file is the negative and the finished image the print. That seems a good way of looking at it to me. Think of working on the RAW file as "processing" and you will have a better grasp of what you can do with an image. "Editing" as I understand it involves adding and subtracting elements within the image and is something that many photographers would avoid.

I don't use DPP but I do use Lightroom and it is excellent software. Start with the simple tools like Blacks, Whites, shadows and highlights. Just pick an image and start playing around with it. That way you will learn.
 
" if you think your going to take a bad picture.. then use RAW to help you fix it."

Maybe I interpreted your quote incorrectly?

Whatever. Your suggestion is also that people use RAW to make themselves APPEAR more serious and/or professional. You can do whatever you want but to give a beginner such cynical advice is mistaken.

To the OP.....ignore!
 
jerry12953 said:
"To the OP.....ignore!
Click to expand...


Seriously?


FACT .. People do use RAW in the way I described... FACT I also gave an option #2 whcih you ahve totally ignored in order to jump up and down on option #1

FACT.. Don't ever tell anyone to ignore advice I have given in good faith
 
jerry12953 said:
If jpegs suit you then fine.
Click to expand...

But according to you I ahve not to reccomend it to anyone else.. I ahve not to suggest RAW is for saving files and I ahve not to reccomend getting to grips before moving onto RAW as I did above..i have not to suggest its good for artistic editing either.. according to you all that advice should be ignored..

The OP should decide what advice to take... or maybe a moderator can advise who should post what... NOT YOU!

I believe my advice to be correct and helpfull.. it was poosted in good faith.. for you to disagree is no problem.. thats what makes the world go around.. but for you to tell the OP to ignore my advice simply because you dont agree is just wrong :(
 
jerry12953 said:
"
To the OP.....ignore!
Click to expand...
There are two sides to any argument, both may be correct, or indeed have their merits.
by all means put your's, its up to the OP to decide,
which path to follow.

KIPAX said:
I believe my advice to be correct and helpfull.. it was poosted in good faith.. for you to disagree is no problem..
Click to expand...
And that's the important part.
 
fabphoto said:
Sorry if it sounds wrong but I almost feel that I need to go back to shooting in jpeg.
Click to expand...
The first thing to master is exposure - to control the camera, at least to overide its decisions when judged necessary. If you can do that you're at least halfway there, and might consider using jpg output.

The motivation for using RAW rather than jpg camera output should be a desire to extend this control forward. The in-camera processing that results in a jpg is pre-programmed and incapable of knowing fully what your intentions are, beyond your basic selection of mode.

Basic adjustments are colour temperature and tonal range.
 
droj said:
The first thing to master is exposure - to control the camera, at least to overide its decisions when judged necessary. If you can do that you're at least halfway there, and might consider using jpg output.

The motivation for using RAW rather than jpg camera output should be a desire to extend this control forward. The in-camera processing that results in a jpg is pre-programmed and incapable of knowing fully what your intentions are, beyond your basic selection of mode.

Basic adjustments are colour temperature and tonal range.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It might help Fabien to know what tonal range means, though. I don't know what controls there are in DPP but I think it's quite sophisticated?

Can anyone advise?
 
Learning to edit RAW is no more difficult than editing jpeg. Both take time and practice: there are no short cuts in photography if you want to get it right. RAW files contain more information, and are using the sensor to its maximum capability, hence shots can result in a better final image, but this isn't a given; some of the very best shoot in jpeg. Why not start in RAW? Lightroom and PS RAW are more or less the same in terms of how adjustments are made (you can edit a jpeg in PS RAW, though of course this doesn't turn it into a RAW file). Have a look at the Scott Kelby books. They give a clear and concise introduction to PS and LR. Also, many local collages run courses and will be booking now for autumn. Have a look at some of them.
 
My advice, for what it's worth, is this..............

continue using your current software, but I could almost guarantee that after a while, you'll notice it's limitations and want something more comprehensive. Lightroom and photoshop are essentially the industry standard these days (I know, there's lots of other software solutions in use as well :rolleyes:)

Lightroom is a fantastic programme, which not only allows you to edit but also helps maintain a catalogue of your images, etc. Photoshop is the ultimate manipulation tool, very complex, but incredible useful in certain circumstances. (btw, lightroom editing engine is basically PS camera raw). Will you need both, certainly not to begin with, but that need may come eventually. I use the creative cloud deal, so get both plus extras for £8.78 per month. Some people think this is a great deal, me included, others think it is not and prefer perpetual licences............ each to their own.

Regarding, jpeg or raw, I'd always opt for raw unless I need to shoot fast moving sports, etc. which I'd use jpeg for, so I can ensure that my camera buffer does not fill up as quickly. Raw does not contain any edits by the camera (even the preview you see on the camera screen, when shooting raw, is a jpeg image with default settings applied) and when you import it, you may be underwhelmed by the lack of contrast, sharpening, etc., but the big plus is that you have much more latitude when it comes to editing. With LR you can, if wanted, automatically have an import preset applied to the raw images so that they look more like the camera jpeg and then do further work on the image or multiple images at one time.

Basically, my rational is that, I want to get in right in camera, but for those times when I can't, I want as much control over the editing of the images as possible and the raw format does that for me.

As with a lot of things in life, there is no right or wrong answer, only a solution that works best for you.
 
I shoot in raw because I believe you should have a decent back up just incase you ever want to go back and do something amazing with it.

I'm not well versed in post processing. I use Aperture, and mostly what I do is white balance, exposure compensation and cropping. To be fair, the majority of my pictures are just sports shots and action shots. I'm sure that if I knew a little bit more, I'd post process in photoshop. I don't though, and it makes things difficult especially with my current work load and my ability to actually make sense of the friggin program.

Sometimes things just need a simple edit too.
 
It's difficult to rescue blown highlights. In a JPEG it may not be possible as the available detail to rescue is set by the software from the camera. In a raw file there is far more information available so a potentially blown highlight on a JPEG May be lost where as in a raw file there may be enough detail to recover and save the image.

That's why I shoot in raw.
 
Last edited:
fabphoto said:
Hi

I am quite new at this (and photography) and I feel a bit lost as to what needs to be done and how much editing needs to be done.

All tutorials I have found on editing are on how to use lightroom or photoshop, not on the basics of editing.

Sorry if it sounds wrong but I almost feel that I need to go back to shooting in jpeg.
Click to expand...

Raw or JPEG is a long running and tired debate. The answer however, is that raw offers more options to correct things, and is less destructive when you do. A JPEG has 256 levels of red, green and blue per pixel (8 bit), and making excessive adjustments can mean that it's impossible to recover some information in the same way. Deep shadow detail and very bright highlight detail being the most common. Raw files are not locked into this 256 levels per channel constraint (within reason), and nothing is decided until it is exported as a bit-mapped file format, and even then it can still be a 16bit format such as TIFF.

That's the advantage of shooting raw. However, if you plan on doing little to the image, shooting JPEG is not really a massive disadvantage.

Just because you shoot raw doesn't mean you HAVE to do anything more to the image than you do when shooting JPEG if you don't want though. You can download, and simply convert to whatever file format you want without doing a single thing to the image. It adds an extra step, but at least you have the raw file to treat as a "negative" should you decide to revisit that shot later for some reason.

How much processing? How long is a piece of string? That's something you decide upon. Having never seen your work I'm reluctant to advise.

Just becaues you're shooting raw, don't think you have to do more processing. Don't do any if you don't want to.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Raw or JPEG is a long running and tired debate. The answer however, is that raw offers more options to correct things, and is less destructive when you do. A JPEG has 256 levels of red, green and blue per pixel (8 bit), and making excessive adjustments can mean that it's impossible to recover some information in the same way. Deep shadow detail and very bright highlight detail being the most common. Raw files are not locked into this 256 levels per channel constraint (within reason), and nothing is decided until it is exported as a bit-mapped file format, and even then it can still be a 16bit format such as TIFF.

That's the advantage of shooting raw. However, if you plan on doing little to the image, shooting JPEG is not really a massive disadvantage.

Just because you shoot raw doesn't mean you HAVE to do anything more to the image than you do when shooting JPEG if you don't want though. You can download, and simply convert to whatever file format you want without doing a single thing to the image. It adds an extra step, but at least you have the raw file to treat as a "negative" should you decide to revisit that shot later for some reason.

How much processing? How long is a piece of string? That's something you decide upon. Having never seen your work I'm reluctant to advise.

Just becaues you're shooting raw, don't think you have to do more processing. Don't do any if you don't want to.
Click to expand...

Great advice.
 
You should ignore ALL that advice and shoot in the raw.
(except at weddings. )
 
Last edited:
No No No :ROFLMAO: theres a third option, shoot film then no need for raw or Jpg. :exit:
 
Last edited:
ianp5a said:
You should ignore ALL that advice and shoot in the raw.
(except at weddings. )
Click to expand...


That statement shows great ignorance. If you need to ask why it does, then that shows even more ignorance.

I agree that raw is preferable in the vast majority of cases, but if you do little, or no processing, shooting JPEG isn't a massive disadvantage.
 
Pookeyhead said:
That statement shows great ignorance. If you need to ask why it does, then that shows even more ignorance.

I agree that raw is preferable in the vast majority of cases, but if you do little, or no processing, shooting JPEG isn't a massive disadvantage.
Click to expand...

I assumed it was a tongue-in-cheek suggestion that he gets naked when using his camera. Which would be interesting advice ;)
 
Pookeyhead said:
That statement shows great ignorance. If you need to ask why it does, then that shows even more ignorance.

I agree that raw is preferable in the vast majority of cases, but if you do little, or no processing, shooting JPEG isn't a massive disadvantage.
Click to expand...

pjm1 said:
I assumed it was a tongue-in-cheek suggestion that he gets naked when using his camera. Which would be interesting advice ;)
Click to expand...



LOL... sorry... speed reading.... bad habit of mine. I miss subtlety in the mornings. Apologies to all concerned. :)
 
I can write the apology in blood if it helps ;)
 
There are 2 ways of solving your such worry. One will be to learn editing by your own self and if you are not good enough in this then just make your work done by other experts. The later will cost some money I must say!
 
Talking of indecent exposure, I personally only use the raw file if the jpeg has exposure extremes in it. Why? Because I'm not happy with that jpeg. If you are happy with the jpeg, leave the raw. My camera is set to save both.
I'm not sure what reasons, apart from exposure problems, I'd not be happy with the jpeg.
 
Last edited:
LC2 said:
Have a look at some of the free videos on here:
http://phlearn.com/fundamentals-of-editing
Click to expand...

I think this is what the OP was looking for.

Some of this raw vs jpg 'debate' has gotten a little sharp (no pun intended). For my 2 cents learning to process in raw is no more difficult than making changes to your jpgs. Both take time. learning raw processing techniques from the start is a worthwhile investment.
 
My advice is, stop feeling the pressure to process everything if you don't want to. Many, many great photographers over the years have made fantastic images straight to Kodachrome.

This obsession with processing is a new, and distinctly digital, and dare I say it.... amateur obsession.

People only want to process their images to make them look pretty anyway. It doesn't fool anyone... well maybe the flickr "like" crowd, but seriously... if your images are crap without processing then they're probably crap. That's not to say great images can't be made better with careful, relevant and TASTEFUL processing, but this attitude of NEEDING to process everything just flies in the face of what makes a great photograph.

Garbage in, garbage out.

/thread.
 
Stuart M said:
Yes please! And can you record the sound as well cos we want to hear the screams.
Click to expand...


Takes more than opening a vein to make me scream :) Locking me in a gallery full of HDR sunset images would probably do it though.
 
OP

Why not shoot in JPG and RAW (your camera should be able to support this)

Aim to get it right as a JPG but in the future, if you feel you want to revisit a photo and edit it, then the RAW will give you more options as has been described above.

For my first year or so,of shooting with a DSLR I shot exclusively JPG which meant I didn't have to worry about PP except fora quick crop here and there but now I do wish I also had the RAW to edit!!

Go,at your own pace - trying to learn too much too quickly just means you'll learn little...quickly!
 
Yes. Or, to streamline the learning, shoot jpeg ONLY. Until you get annoyed with them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top