# My kids- I need honest feedback.



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

I'm the newest of newbies and I would appreciate any feedback or suggestions. I may have over edited a few of these.


----------



## jaomul (Aug 18, 2012)

I like the first one in particular, but some could be improved with better or more eye contact


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Thank you! Is that an easy fix? How would I do that?


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:
			
		

> Thank you! Is that an easy fix? How would I do that?



Oops sorry... I misread that. Thank you


----------



## rokvi (Aug 18, 2012)

Cute kids, Try not to cut too many heads off with your shots. I wouldn't let the camera pick the focus point for you either. Try changing the focus point to the center only. That way you pick the focus point so you can get those beautiful eyes in focus. 
Good luck!


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

rokvi said:
			
		

> Cute kids, Try not to cut too many heads off with your shots. I wouldn't let the camera pick the focus point for you either. Try changing the focus point to the center only. That way you pick the focus point so you can get those beautiful eyes in focus.
> Good luck!



Thank you! I hadn't even noticed how many heads I chopped...yikes! Thank you so much! I'm going to give that a try


----------



## Granddad (Aug 18, 2012)

My 2 cents worth is that you've got some very good potential in most of these shots. More eye contact with the baby would help next time, and a couple could use a warmer wb. On a personal note I really don't go for those head band flower things (I know lots of ladies think they're the bees knees), I find them very distracting.

I agree with Rokvi - more concentration on pin sharp focus should be your next aim.

I like the shots of the boy with the hat and boots. Some nice processing there.

On a broader note, if you want good, detailed C&C post no more than 5 images and number them. 

I look forward to seeing more of your work.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> I'm the newest of newbies and I would appreciate any feedback or suggestions. I may have over edited a few of these.



if you would have hit focus on the last one of the boy and the truck... 


better watch this one, boys. she needs some minor adjustments and shell be a hell of a photographer. 

id say back it off with the tone mapping a bit also. A lot of the time less is more.


----------



## Primoz (Aug 18, 2012)

You do have some very pretty shots, but I suggest much less extreme post processing on most of the images.

For example Photo Nr.4 - you have gone too far with what I believe is Clarity and it makes the skin of your child look unnratural... My personal rule is: don't tuch clarity when it comes to portraits because soft mid tones (negative clarity) make images look like really bad cheesy wedding shots, increased clarity makes the face go old, wrinkly and weird... Sometimes I will use a little bit of soft clarity with a local adjustment brush just to smooth forehead and cheeks a bit if necessary - but otherwise clarity is a big time no-no for me when it comes to people photography... 

You also need to work on your subjects being sharper and your backgrounds being blurrier... Next time try to sit your child further away from the background, use a large aperture, the telephoto part of your lens and you'll get a nicer bokeh and a less distracting backgorund (images 1,4 and 8 have a too busy background)

Hope this helps a bit and gives you some tips to improve  Keep it up, because you have an eye for photography!


----------



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2012)

My feedback is that pictures of your kids should be about their kids, not about the giant prop flower stuck on their heads.

This is admittedly a little harsh, but everyone trying to replicate Anne Geddes or whatever or whoever came up with this thing drives me buggy.  When I look at a picture of my kids, I want to be sucked in by their beautiful eyes... I want to get all woozy over how cute her curls where back then... I want to marvel at how pretty her lips were and wonder where she got those.

I don't want to be hit in the face with a giant pink fake flower stuck onto her head with some weird giant band that covers up 30% of her features.

My advice to you is try doing it simply.  There is great beauty in the simplicity, innocence and wonder of our children.  Don't try to fabricate it.  It's already there.  All you have to do is capture it.  Props not required.


----------



## Angela Spangler (Aug 18, 2012)

I like the boots ones. The first one looks a bit out of focus to me. You have some really nice shots.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 18, 2012)

You will get much better feedback if you post between 3 and 5 images. You have given us a LOT to look at here and if we gave you feedback on them all it would take us over an hour. We also ask that you separate them on a new line and number them just so you know 100% you and I are talking about the same image. 

You are killing your kids with editing. I see you are finding some fun things to do in editing and playing is fine, but the images should be about the kids and not the neon of everything around them. I don't know if you are using the clarity slider in raw processing or what to get your faux HDR look in the first ones of the little girl it's really muddied up her skin tone in a couple of them. The first one is just out of focus. A word about out of focus or just barely blurry-you can't save it. You  can fix a LOT of things in editing, but focus isn't one of them. If the  shot isn't in focus-don't bother.
That little one has some awesome eyes. 

 The processing/editing in the truck series has made the images REALLY busy with a lot going on between the texture and the color. I THINK you are going for a dark, color rich contrasty pop look and you seem to be getting it somewhat, but then you are pushing over the top. I'd also guess that your monitor isn't well calibrated and you are probably working on a laptop from the color and extreme brightness to this set. 

Calibration is beyond important if you are working with photos. What you see on your computer is not what you would get when you print and it's not what we are seeing. You will need a calibrator and software, but to help in the meantime you can start by reducing the brightness and contrast on your monitor to about 75% and that will help. Monitors are set up for internet and gaming out of the box. Photography and printing is very precise in it's brightness, contrast and color-if those aren't right and calibrated according to some standards you will get something different than what you THINK you are getting.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Granddad said:
			
		

> My 2 cents worth is that you've got some very good potential in most of these shots. More eye contact with the baby would help next time, and a couple could use a warmer wb. On a personal note I really don't go for those head band flower things (I know lots of ladies think they're the bees knees), I find them very distracting.
> 
> I agree with Rokvi - more concentration on pin sharp focus should be your next aim.
> 
> ...



Thank you! I feel bad about posting so many. It was my first day on here and I got a little too excited.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

AaronLLockhart said:
			
		

> if you would have hit focus on the last one of the boy and the truck...
> 
> better watch this one, boys. she needs some minor adjustments and shell be a hell of a photographer.
> 
> id say back it off with the tone mapping a bit also. A lot of the time less is more.



Thank you! I really have so much to learn so please forgive me if my questions come across as clueless, but in most ways I am. When you say "tone mapping" does that mean the editing I did to it? I need to find someone on here to give me just basic lessons.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Primoz said:
			
		

> You do have some very pretty shots, but I suggest much less extreme post processing on most of the images.
> 
> For example Photo Nr.4 - you have gone too far with what I believe is Clarity and it makes the skin of your child look unnratural... My personal rule is: don't tuch clarity when it comes to portraits because soft mid tones (negative clarity) make images look like really bad cheesy wedding shots, increased clarity makes the face go old, wrinkly and weird... Sometimes I will use a little bit of soft clarity with a local adjustment brush just to smooth forehead and cheeks a bit if necessary - but otherwise clarity is a big time no-no for me when it comes to people photography...
> 
> ...



I agree with you completely! I will mess with editing so much until I find something I like at the moment and I look at it later and wonder what was I thinking!?! These tips are awesome! I appreciate your help! Thanks


----------



## Granddad (Aug 18, 2012)

Tone mapping: Tone mapping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you're doing it and don't know what it is I assume you're using an editing program and playing around to see what looks good?

I think the general advice from those who know more than me (most everyone) will be to leave that alone for now (except for fun) and concentrate on the basics. You've got the eye for a good photo and if that's you in the photo you're young enough to go far if you decide to take photography seriously.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> My feedback is that pictures of your kids should be about their kids, not about the giant prop flower stuck on their heads.
> 
> This is admittedly a little harsh, but everyone trying to replicate Anne Geddes or whatever or whoever came up with this thing drives me buggy.  When I look at a picture of my kids, I want to be sucked in by their beautiful eyes... I want to get all woozy over how cute her curls where back then... I want to marvel at how pretty her lips were and wonder where she got those.
> 
> ...



Ok, thank you.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Angela Spangler said:
			
		

> I like the boots ones. The first one looks a bit out of focus to me. You have some really nice shots.



Thanks! Yes, the first one is really bugging me now. I may have over edited it?


----------



## SCraig (Aug 18, 2012)

20 years from now when you look back through these are you going to say, "She had the prettiest skin back then" or are you going to say, "God I wish I had gotten the skin tones right"?  No two of them have the same skin tones, and only the last one is close to being right.

As others have said, photos of your kids should be about the kids.  Backgrounds, props, everything else should be used to accentuate them and not take attention away from them.  Forget the editing gimmicks and focus on making them look true to life and not posterized / selectively colored / smoothed / whatever.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> You will get much better feedback if you post between 3 and 5 images. You have given us a LOT to look at here and if we gave you feedback on them all it would take us over an hour. We also ask that you separate them on a new line and number them just so you know 100% you and I are talking about the same image.
> 
> You are killing your kids with editing. I see you are finding some fun things to do in editing and playing is fine, but the images should be about the kids and not the neon of everything around them. I don't know if you are using the clarity slider in raw processing or what to get your faux HDR look in the first ones of the little girl it's really muddied up her skin tone in a couple of them. The first one is just out of focus. A word about out of focus or just barely blurry-you can't save it. You  can fix a LOT of things in editing, but focus isn't one of them. If the  shot isn't in focus-don't bother.
> That little one has some awesome eyes.
> ...



Thank you! I got caught up in my excitement being that it was my first day on here. I promise no more than a couple pics next time. I really have a problem with over editing. I should probably get find my untouched pics and give it another try. I do like a little bit of the pop look. I am working from a lap top and IPad. I'm going to change that right now. Thank you for all of the advice!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't sweat your over-editing so much. EVERYONE does it at first! As you learn and grow you will get some great editing techniques that you enjoy on the computer as well as look great. 

What are you working with for your camera and for your editing program?


----------



## OLaA (Aug 18, 2012)

Nice pictures.  I really like the boy and the truck.  I found a great resource for editing at Photography Tutorials, Photography Tips, Photography Lessons, Photography Equipment Reviews, Photography Wordpress Themes.  It's only for lightroom and photoshop, but they have a huge amount of tutorials that you can watch at your own pace.  Not sure what you're using for editing, but either way I'm sure you can take some principles shown, and apply it to what you're using.


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 18, 2012)

One last thing (although I agree with all that has been said about the framin and the editing), no one here really cares about your baby.
We care about the pictures.
So post only the very few, the best ones and then you will learn from the comments.
Posting a bunch means that nothing gets looked at closely and you don't get the detailed help that will help you progress.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Don't sweat your over-editing so much. EVERYONE does it at first! As you learn and grow you will get some great editing techniques that you enjoy on the computer as well as look great.
> 
> What are you working with for your camera and for your editing program?



I have so much respect for you guys that understand all of this stuff! There really is a lot to be learned and I appreciate people like you who take the time to explain this stuff to beginners like myself! I have 2 entry level cameras I alternate between, a Canon Rebel and a Nikon D90. I find myself reaching for the Nikon most days. I am also very much guilty of just using the automatic settings because I have never been properly trained. The only other one I feel comfortable with is the Program setting. My laptop is so outdated it belongs in a museum. As you mentioned, I'm probably seeing a different image than the rest of the world. I purchased the IPad2 last year and it is generally what I use for editing. Since money is tight I just use programs like Snapseed and Photogene. Sometimes I edit with one, save it and edit more on another. That's not a good thing is it?


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

Granddad said:
			
		

> Tone mapping: Tone mapping - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> If you're doing it and don't know what it is I assume you're using an editing program and playing around to see what looks good?
> 
> I think the general advice from those who know more than me (most everyone) will be to leave that alone for now (except for fun) and concentrate on the basics. You've got the eye for a good photo and if that's you in the photo you're young enough to go far if you decide to take photography seriously.



Haha...that is exactly what I'm doing! Do you have any recommendations for minor editing? I would at least like some soft skin tones.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

SCraig said:
			
		

> 20 years from now when you look back through these are you going to say, "She had the prettiest skin back then" or are you going to say, "God I wish I had gotten the skin tones right"?  No two of them have the same skin tones, and only the last one is close to being right.
> 
> As others have said, photos of your kids should be about the kids.  Backgrounds, props, everything else should be used to accentuate them and not take attention away from them.  Forget the editing gimmicks and focus on making them look true to life and not posterized / selectively colored / smoothed / whatever.



Good point! Thank you


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

OLaA said:
			
		

> Nice pictures.  I really like the boy and the truck.  I found a great resource for editing at Photography Tutorials, Photography Tips, Photography Lessons, Photography Equipment Reviews, Photography Wordpress Themes.  It's only for lightroom and photoshop, but they have a huge amount of tutorials that you can watch at your own pace.  Not sure what you're using for editing, but either way I'm sure you can take some principles shown, and apply it to what you're using.



I will check that out immediately! I'm using Snapseed and Photogene. I have never even seen Lightroom. Thanks


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> One last thing (although I agree with all that has been said about the framin and the editing), no one here really cares about your baby.
> We care about the pictures.
> So post only the very few, the best ones and then you will learn from the comments.
> Posting a bunch means that nothing gets looked at closely and you don't get the detailed help that will help you progress.



Yes, sorry about that. I promise I won't do that again. Thank you


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> Don't sweat your over-editing so much. EVERYONE does it at first! As you learn and grow you will get some great editing techniques that you enjoy on the computer as well as look great.
> 
> What are you working with for your camera and for your editing program?



Here is the original:
Is it salvageable???


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 18, 2012)

Make him bigger in the frame - and not in the center.
Remove or de-accentuate bright stuff that pulls the eye.  All that truck and the sky in the corner isn't needed.
make his face a bit warmer.

burn the corners to keep the viewers' eyes in the important spots.
his face looks a bit blurry but I enlarged the original.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> Make him bigger in the frame - and not in the center.
> Remove or de-accentuate bright stuff that pulls the eye.  All that truck and the sky in the corner isn't needed.
> make his face a bit warmer.
> 
> ...



I love it! Thank you so much! I think his face is a bit blurry in the original. I think I caught focus of the truck instead of him?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 18, 2012)

3 simple rules should guide picture taking and finishing
   1: put important stuff in important places
   2: minimize the impact of stuff that isn't necessary
   3: maximize the impact of important stuff


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> Make him bigger in the frame - and not in the center.
> Remove or de-accentuate bright stuff that pulls the eye.  All that truck and the sky in the corner isn't needed.
> make his face a bit warmer.
> 
> ...



Also, could this picture been improved by using a different setting on my camera?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 18, 2012)

There's no embedded info but the only thing that looks wrong is the slightly blurred face - and that is probably motion blur.
So a slightly faster shutter speed might have been nice.
In situations like this I take several exposures so I can be more certain I'll get one with no-blink or no blur.

Look at the original on your computer and get the EXIF if you know how.

There are rules of thumb for shutter speed.

Never shoot slower than the inverse of the twice focal length. 
Using a crop frame camera like the entry level dslrs never shoot slower than the inverse of  three times  focal length.
That sounds complex but it means if you are shooting a 50 mm lens with a crop frame camera (that has a longer effective focal length) then never shoot slower than 1/150th UNTIL you learn to hold steady.  
That will eliminate blur from camera shake.
That's also a good to decent speed for shooting (I mean photographing) children who aren't running or flailing around.

Faster subjects faster shutter speed required to stop them. (unless you pan)


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> There's no embedded info but the only thing that looks wrong is the slightly blurred face - and that is probably motion blur.
> So a slightly faster shutter speed might have been nice.
> In situations like this I take several exposures so I can be more certain I'll get one with no-blink or no blur.
> 
> ...



Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! This answers many questions I had. Is there some sort of site on here that explains what is best to use under different scenarios with just an entry level camera? I would really like to improve without constantly bugging everyone with my elementary questions?


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 18, 2012)

PM KMH for his list of resources.
(I think its posted in a sticky here somewhere)
It really isn't rocket science and you will get up to speed quickly.

Once you learn how to use your camera you will be fine.
I typically shoot aperture preferred to control the DOF, let the camera manage the shutter speed and use exposure compensation for particular lighting situations.
All that may sound like gobbledy-gook now but a hour of reading and it will all become clear.

Lew


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 18, 2012)

The_Traveler said:
			
		

> PM KMH for his list of resources.
> (I think its posted in a sticky here somewhere)
> It really isn't rocket science and you will get up to speed quickly.
> 
> ...



You are the best, Lew! If I could only keep you in my pocket...


----------



## manaheim (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't feel guilty about using the more automated settings... at least program.  I wouldn't advise full auto as it alters ISO (and chooses your focus point I think).  Program lets you focus on some other things and learn a little more slowly.  There's a lot to learn in photography.  Taking it easy can help keep you from getting frustrated.  Use the other modes as you learn how and why they are valuable... and trust me, you will in time.  Eventually you may choose to not use program again, but most of even the most seasoned pros still use aperture and shutter priority for most of their work, which is just 1/2 of the program setting and the other left to the photographer.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> MLeeK said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The nikon is probably the better camera of the two by far! 
For cheap  software that is very good I know Sparky uses Gimp which is free. It's  very much like Photoshop in how it works. It's not intuitive and there  is no easy button, but if you really learn it, it's an incredibly  powerful program. 
For inexpensive editing program take a look at  Adobe Photoshop Elements 10 or Corel's PaintShop Pro X4. I'd try to  stick to the photoshop only because if and when you upgrade later to a  full version of photoshop you are still working with the same interface,  your actions, brushes, etc will all transfer. I believe you can pick up  elements for under $75 now. You can download the trial and use it for  30 days as well. 

It looks like a lot and very complicated when  you are at the starting gate and looking at having to learn exposure,  composition, post processing, editing, color management.......... It's  not that bad and as you start to move forward it will begin to fall in  place much easier than it looks. 

For the photography end of it  you can start with the tutorials here:  Digital Photography Tips and Tutorials
As you are working your way through them and you get questions just ask. There's always someone around to help!


----------



## SCraig (Aug 18, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! This answers many questions I had. Is there some sort of site on here that explains what is best to use under different scenarios with *just an entry level camera*? I would really like to improve without constantly bugging everyone with my elementary questions?


Today's "Entry Level" cameras have more features and capabilities than any professional camera made before the late 60's.  They may not be built as ruggedly or have the professional optics or alignment, but we would have given anything for some of the "Entry Level" features that are taken for granted today.  We didn't even have built-in light meters much less something that would set the proper exposure for you.

An "Entry Level" camera in the hands of an experienced photographer is capable of outstanding photographs so don't sell them short.  Learn to use what you have and keep in mind that any camera is just a box.  The real work is done by the mind about 6" behind it.


----------



## AaronLLockhart (Aug 18, 2012)

SCraig said:
			
		

> Today's "Entry Level" cameras have more features and capabilities than any professional camera made before the late 60's.  They may not be built as ruggedly or have the professional optics or alignment, but we would have given anything for some of the "Entry Level" features that are taken for granted today.  We didn't even have built-in light meters much less something that would set the proper exposure for you.
> 
> An "Entry Level" camera in the hands of an experienced photographer is capable of outstanding photographs so don't sell them short.  Learn to use what you have and keep in mind that any camera is just a box.  The real work is done by the mind about 6" behind it.



Agreed.


----------



## jaxx419 (Aug 18, 2012)

Your white balance looks off in most of them.
Might be your processing... But it still makes the baby look an odd color.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

jaxx419 said:
			
		

> Your white balance looks off in most of them.
> Might be your processing... But it still makes the baby look an odd color.



I agree! It's funny, those were my favorite at first and now I'm thinking "what the He'll was I thinking!?!"


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

manaheim said:
			
		

> Don't feel guilty about using the more automated settings... at least program.  I wouldn't advise full auto as it alters ISO (and chooses your focus point I think).  Program lets you focus on some other things and learn a little more slowly.  There's a lot to learn in photography.  Taking it easy can help keep you from getting frustrated.  Use the other modes as you learn how and why they are valuable... and trust me, you will in time.  Eventually you may choose to not use program again, but most of even the most seasoned pros still use aperture and shutter priority for most of their work, which is just 1/2 of the program setting and the other left to the photographer.



You guys lit a fire under me! I stayed up until midnight playing with different appeture,ISO, and shutter speeds. I still am a little overwhelmed, but very determined. Thanks guys!


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> The nikon is probably the better camera of the two by far!
> For cheap  software that is very good I know Sparky uses Gimp which is free. It's  very much like Photoshop in how it works. It's not intuitive and there  is no easy button, but if you really learn it, it's an incredibly  powerful program.
> For inexpensive editing program take a look at  Adobe Photoshop Elements 10 or Corel's PaintShop Pro X4. I'd try to  stick to the photoshop only because if and when you upgrade later to a  full version of photoshop you are still working with the same interface,  your actions, brushes, etc will all transfer. I believe you can pick up  elements for under $75 now. You can download the trial and use it for  30 days as well.
> 
> ...



I'll have to check those out. I've been doing all my editing on my IPad now because my laptop is 12 years old...no joke! I'll be looking for advice on the best of those next. Last night I realized that if pics on my Nikon were taken in both RAW and JPEGs, I can make some pretty nice adjustments of a picture I had already taken. It looked like skin tones were improved and there is also an auto correct option. What are your thoughts on using this camera feature? Worth it or waste of time???


----------



## Derrel (Aug 19, 2012)

Shooting in raw capture mode is almost always worth it. Raw capture mode creates files that can be adjusted to a much greater degree than in-camera JPEG capture only gives. So,yes, raw capture is definitely worth it!


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

SCraig said:
			
		

> Today's "Entry Level" cameras have more features and capabilities than any professional camera made before the late 60's.  They may not be built as ruggedly or have the professional optics or alignment, but we would have given anything for some of the "Entry Level" features that are taken for granted today.  We didn't even have built-in light meters much less something that would set the proper exposure for you.
> 
> An "Entry Level" camera in the hands of an experienced photographer is capable of outstanding photographs so don't sell them short.  Learn to use what you have and keep in mind that any camera is just a box.  The real work is done by the mind about 6" behind it.



Oh no, I completely agree with you! The camera is amazing! It's definitely user error! I was asking if there was somewhere to go to learn the basics of this entry level camera. Many sites I've seen reference more advanced cameras.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Shooting in raw capture mode is almost always worth it. Raw capture mode creates files that can be adjusted to a much greater degree than in-camera JPEG capture only gives. So,yes, raw capture is definitely worth it!



Yay! So maybe when I master a decent picture I can nix an editing program altogether and just do a miner adjustment on camera?


----------



## Derrel (Aug 19, 2012)

No, that's not what I meant...


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> No, that's not what I meant...



Ok, but do you recommend editing a picture with the camera?


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

My attempt at better eye focus (still in the P setting.) I know they aren't very good pictures, but I'm hoping my clarity is at least better?


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



NO! Raw images can't be edited in camera. They are like a digital negative. they have to be developed with a raw processor. There would have been one with your cameras. For the Canon it would have been DPP and for the Nikon it would be View NX I believe. 
Jpegs are edited by the camera to the picture styles that you see in the menus somewhere. Raw images are every bit of the information that hits your sensor. YOU get to decide what is discarded and what is kept. Raw images are actually not an image file that is viewable by just anything like jpegs are. You have to process them first. 
Now that makes it sound complicated, but in reality it will make life easier on you and your editing steps-you can create a "look" by only using that raw software. 
There is also free Raw processing software in RawTherapee and I believe there are others I know nothing about. Sparky could probably help you more along that lines as he uses free software. 

Don't just switch to raw-make sure you have the software to process it. You may want to try out shooting in raw+JPEG at first. 

I can't help you much in Nikon's View, but I can help with DPP a bit or Raw THerapee. There are tons of people here who shoot Nikon and can help with it. 
When you do get a raw image-don't panic when it looks like crap!!! It's like anything else that has too much. It's flat and soft looking. When you process it and eliminate some of the information it will be MORE than your jpegs.


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 19, 2012)

I looked at the two images. Are you using one or multiple focus points? The first one looks like the hand is in best focus. The second one looks great. 
I think part of your blur problem is coming from shutter speed being too slow. 
Shutter stops motion or shows motion. If your shutter is open for a long time you can move, the subject can move... That movement is recorded in the photograph as blur. If the shutter is only open for a very short time there isn't time enough for you to shake or the child to move. 
A few rules to START with... 
Your shutter speed should be equal to or greater than the reciprocal length of your lens. In many instances it should be twice as much. So if you have a 200mm lens your shutter speed should be more than 1/200 or if you are not the steadiest hand (most of us) more than 1/400. That is just to prevent blur from you shaking or moving the camera a slight bit.

Hand held photographing a still life your shutter speed should be equal to the above or more than about 1/80.

Hand held photographing a live subject your shutter should be above 1/125

Photographing a moving subject like a toddler above 1/250

For most sports I am at or above 1/400.

I think we touched on shutter priority mode earlier in the post. For now, try that out with those minimum shutter speeds. That will let the camera choose the aperture. If your camera has auto ISO you CAN let it choose, however I don't care for AUTO ISO. SO... if you aren't using auto ISO and your settings are blinking at you when you look at the viewfinder to take a shot it is telling you that it needs more light-you have to raise the ISO until it can get good exposure and stops blinking. 


I'd guess that would be your first lesson in exposure! Shutter speed! Next comes learning about Aperture and Aperture Priority mode. A LOT of photographers prefer Aperture priority. I am not sure why they always default to that instead of Shutter Priority in shoots that shutter speed is your largest priority-but then I am not really very good in either priority mode and I shoot full manual (NOT what most do) all of the time. The ladies and gentlemen here can explain to you why that choice is. 
When you are comfortable understanding Shutter Priority and to watch your settings start asking and someone will help you move on to controlling things with aperture and aperture priority.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> I looked at the two images. Are you using one or multiple focus points? The first one looks like the hand is in best focus. The second one looks great.
> I think part of your blur problem is coming from shutter speed being too slow.
> Shutter stops motion or shows motion. If your shutter is open for a long time you can move, the subject can move... That movement is recorded in the photograph as blur. If the shutter is only open for a very short time there isn't time enough for you to shake or the child to move.
> A few rules to START with...
> ...



I'm looking into all this stuff. I know the Auto ISO was set which I'm now attempting to disable. I'm so sorry, I have no idea about the focus point. To adjust shutter speed, does that mean the picture must be taken in the " S Program?"


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:
			
		

> I'm looking into all this stuff. I know the Auto ISO was set which I'm now attempting to disable. I'm so sorry, I have no idea about the focus point. To adjust shutter speed, does that mean the picture must be taken in the " S Program?"



These are the best tips! Thank you so much!!,


----------



## MTVision (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:
			
		

> I'm looking into all this stuff. I know the Auto ISO was set which I'm now attempting to disable. I'm so sorry, I have no idea about the focus point. To adjust shutter speed, does that mean the picture must be taken in the " S Program?"



http://kenrockwell.com/nikon/d90.htm

^^ there will be a couple links in the beginning that say user guide for d90. You can get one for the iPhone/iPad or a PDF file that you can view online. I normally don't recommend this guys site but his d90 guide might be helpful to you to familiarize yourself with all the buttons and functions. Especially if you don't have the camera manual.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Some of the newer Nikons can do this. My experience with doing it is limited, but it CAN be better than no editing, for sure. I have a Nikon that does in-camera editing, and it does make some nice sepia-toned B&W images, and the in-camera fill lighting stuff can do "okay". I'm pretty sure that some of the newer Canon bodies are now also offering in-camera editing.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:
			
		

> I'm looking into all this stuff. I know the Auto ISO was set which I'm now attempting to disable. I'm so sorry, I have no idea about the focus point. To adjust shutter speed, does that mean the picture must be taken in the " S Program?"



Sorry for driving you nuts with questions! Trying to dial this stuff in. Is this any closer? The first pic is just the Auto setting for comparison. Second was the shutter setting and I used settings close to those you gave me.


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Rachel141 said:
			
		

> Sorry for driving you nuts with questions! Trying to dial this stuff in. Is this any closer? The first pic is just the Auto setting for comparison. Second was the shutter setting and I used settings close to those you gave me.



And I promise no more photos! This was my last attempt of the day


----------



## Rachel141 (Aug 19, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Some of the newer Nikons can do this. My experience with doing it is limited, but it CAN be better than no editing, for sure. I have a Nikon that does in-camera editing, and it does make some nice sepia-toned B&W images, and the in-camera fill lighting stuff can do "okay". I'm pretty sure that some of the newer Canon bodies are now also offering in-camera editing.



Yes, that's exactly what this one does. I adjusted the color a bit and it seemed to add a nicer glow to skin, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## HughTFall (Aug 23, 2012)

@Rachel141, Do you have a hard time shooting your babies? Based on experience, it is really tough to shoot them formally since decent posing  never sink in their mind yet. Nevertheless,  I find them cute here . However, I agree to some members suggestion of putting numbers and limit your photos so that we could determine where the stage you needed to develop.


----------



## rachelrach11 (Aug 23, 2012)

As a super newbie myself, i am by far the last person that should give any advice or recommendations but I will tell you that I have learned more from this forum in the past few months than I could have ever hoped for. 

I typically browse certain treads of interest and find a lot of helpful links and information. Ive received super helpful responses after asking many "dumb newbie questions". Many people here  recommended  "The Digital Photography Book" by Scott Kelby and it's AMAZING! 

Don't feel bad, I myself are soooo guilty with "big flower headbands"! Hard habit to break!


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 23, 2012)

rachelrach11 said:


> As a super newbie myself, i am by far the last person that should give any advice or recommendations but I will tell you that I have learned more from this forum in the past few months than I could have ever hoped for.
> 
> I typically browse certain treads of interest and find a lot of helpful links and information. Ive received super helpful responses after asking many "dumb newbie questions". Many people here  recommended  "The Digital Photography Book" by Scott Kelby and it's AMAZING!
> *
> Don't feel bad, I myself are soooo guilty with "big flower headbands"! Hard habit to break!*


Just think back to 80's hair and Hammer Pants and how mortified you are to see those images now... It'll break your trendy habits quick like! LOL!


----------



## AMOMENT (Aug 23, 2012)

I think you have a REAL creative eye and I LOVE THE FEEL of your photos...now, I am CERTAINLY NOT ONE TO TALK LOL, but some have missed focus.  Hoqwever, they are so creative and fun that I really think you are a natural  =))))


----------

