Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Wildlife Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 23, 2006, 1:43 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
JakeTPegg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,767
Default

This shot is straight out of the camera, TOTALLY over exposed. {in fact I had discarded it until tonight when I was looking for a really badly exposed shot to see just how much could be recovered, and the resulting pic looks OK}
Attached Images
 
JakeTPegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 23, 2006, 1:45 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
JakeTPegg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,767
Default

The result : {I think I'm going to keep this one after all}
Attached Images
 
JakeTPegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 1:59 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6
Default

You bring colour into the world - zolbol.
bboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 4:25 PM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 20
Default

ok if you do not mind I have a couple of questions. I am really new to the digi cam and have just started taking bird shots

1- how close were you and what set up. I have a 5200 and tried to take a shot at around 30 ft and found that the 10x is NOWHERE near enough lens. I am sure now I need to get a longer lens AND get alot closer.

2 what program did you use to recover this / looks alot better than the first.

thanks
strickland36 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 23, 2006, 10:21 PM   #5
KEM
Senior Member
 
KEM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 1,458
Default

Oh my! I would have definitely tossed that first one out Jake. I noticed that some of our local CC's offer courses in PS and I think I'm going to take one. Thanks for taking the time to show the differences in raw as they do show a notable advantage over JPEG processing.
-Kent

JakeTPegg wrote:
Quote:
This shot is straight out of the camera, TOTALLY over exposed. {in fact I had discarded it until tonight when I was looking for a really badly exposed shot to see just how much could be recovered, and the resulting pic looks OK}
KEM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2006, 3:12 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

Good recovery Jake. Yes, RAW has its advantages. Cute bird too.......thekman.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2006, 9:49 AM   #7
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

strickland36 wrote:
Quote:
ok if you do not mind I have a couple of questions. I am really new to the digi cam and have just started taking bird shots

1- how close were you and what set up. I have a 5200 and tried to take a shot at around 30 ft and found that the 10x is NOWHERE near enough lens. I am sure now I need to get a longer lens AND get alot closer.

2 what program did you use to recover this / looks alot better than the first.

thanks
A couple of points.

First, 10x zoom is not giving any information. 10 times of what? In other words, what is the maximum magnification?

To discover this, as a rule of thumb, 50mm should be considered base - It's what the eye see's. So if you start at 25mm, times ten - you have a 250mm lens - 5 times magnification.

The other point, and the one that Jake is explaining, is that he shot in RAW mode. RAW is the vague equivalent of a digital negative. It allows "pushing" the image, in much the same way that a real negative can be pushed by a photography lab.

You can push a RAW file one full stop without signifigant damage, and two full stops with some degradation of the image.

(It's better to over expose then under expose - less noise)

So in this image the highlights were almost blown, and Jake was able to lower the exposure of the file to bring the image back into view.

There are a number of programs that do these conversions of RAW into one of the normal formats. Photoshop has such a converter built in, and thus you can convert from RAW, and then simply work on the image in Photoshop. The converters allow changing the exposure, the White Balance, and many other aspects of the image.

Personally, when I got into digital photography, I thought they were kidding...:G

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2006, 4:25 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5
Default

DBB wrote:
Quote:
A couple of points.

First, 10x zoom is not giving any information. 10 times of what? In other words, what is the maximum magnification?

To discover this, as a rule of thumb, 50mm should be considered base - It's what the eye see's. So if you start at 25mm, times ten - you have a 250mm lens - 5 times magnification.

The other point, and the one that Jake is explaining, is that he shot in RAW mode. RAW is the vague equivalent of a digital negative. It allows "pushing" the image, in much the same way that a real negative can be pushed by a photography lab.

You can push a RAW file one full stop without signifigant damage, and two full stops with some degradation of the image.

(It's better to over expose then under expose - less noise)

So in this image the highlights were almost blown, and Jake was able to lower the exposure of the file to bring the image back into view.

There are a number of programs that do these conversions of RAW into one of the normal formats. Photoshop has such a converter built in, and thus you can convert from RAW, and then simply work on the image in Photoshop. The converters allow changing the exposure, the White Balance, and many other aspects of the image.

Personally, when I got into digital photography, I thought they were kidding...:G

Dave
Quote:
RAW, "pushing". white balance, BOY I have a lot to learn about my camera! No more just pointing and shooting for this girl! :-)I guess some of my over exposed pics could have been "saved". :-(
jrpolarbear is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 24, 2006, 4:25 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 20
Default

sorry I am new and a little to quick sometimes. I just got myfirst digital camera, a s5200 fuji. I am not expecting miracles, and I know if I wanted a truly customizable camera I should have bought a DSLR. I am getting into wildlife / Macro, and just thought the 10x zoom ( lens is 38 - 380 mm ) would get me a little closer than it did. I am new as I stated so I am sure I am expecting a little to much. I am hoping to get a macro lens and do some close ups as well

I would like to thank you for the response, and explaining the RAW shooint mode he was talking about. I understand better now. thanks again











style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000000"

strickland36 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:26 PM.