These are, as always, just my own personal opinions...please use them as such.
Right off the bat here, my first suggestion is to not worry so much about the gear and learn some basics about composition, lighting, etc.. As I've said sooooo often over the years, the simple fact of the matter is that a GOOD photographer can use humble gear and still take GREAT images, however a poor photographer will ALWAYS take bad pictures even with the most expensive gear out there! Very simply, a good understanding of what actually makes a great image will take you further than any single piece of camera equipment ever can.
With that said, I have to
completely disagree with wyogirl. Shooting all manual offers no advantage at all to someone just learning and if anything, it's usually counter-productive. There was a time when people would move from a point & shoot to an SLR and HAD to learn those dials and knobs to create decent photos. Today however cameras have gotten to the point that even "Full Auto Mode" or "Scene Modes" do a really great job in many situations allowing the photographer to concentrate on the subject instead of the camera. As a person who grew up shooting ALL manual with a 35mm SLR, the simple fact of the matter is that 80% of the time I use AP mode myself. I will still use manual in particularly tricky lighting situations (such as a commission I recently did where I was shooting still images of video animation on 7 screens with mixed colors, levels, etc), however for most average situations I'd rather "focus" on my subject (no pun intended) rather than twiddle knobs. Here's a little tip I've learned over the years; you can shoot all manual and have an image that is perfectly exposed and that's absolutely razor sharp, however if it's simply a boring image to look at, the rest simply doesn't matter
AT ALL!!! Who really cares how well you can twiddle those knobs and dials if your pictures lack a degree of interest. On the other hand, if you have a truly interesting composition, then it simply doesn't matter whether you shot all manual or full Auto....when people look at your pictures (be it prints, jpgs or otherwise), they're not really going to care HOW the image was shot.
Very simply, learning how to use the controls of your camera...aperture, shutter, ISO, etc., all this stuff will come in time. If you're just learning however, all that stuff won't help you to actually take good pictures if you don't understand what actually makes a "good" picture to begin with. In other words, the horse should go IN FRONT of the wagon. Understanding what makes a good image always comes FIRST...and it's NOT the knobs and dials on your camera.
Likewise, I also have VERY mixed feelings about "taking classes". This is perhaps fine for some people as it may motivate them to learn, however the unfortunate truth of the matter is that not all classes or instructors are created equal. The fact of the matter is that I've looked at a great deal of "student work", where it's clear the instructor just wasn't teaching the right information. Again proper exposure means very little if the picture is just stupid to begin with. The fact of the matter is that we live in the age of information...some folks forget this or don't like to hear it, but for a self-motivated person, there isn't a damn thing you can learn in a "class" that you can't find in books or on the internet these days. It's simply a matter of knowing WHAT to look for.
So on that note, again I would suggest you start with the concepts of composition and light. Learn how to use basic principles such as "the rule of thirds" and how dramatic lighting can create a more intense image. While a book or two on "introduction to photography" will help, I would also urge you to look at some traditional art books as well. When I first started taking photography seriously, I learned more about composition from the likes of people such as da Vinci, Caravaggio, etc., than I did from
any book on photography. And a book (or two) on drawing or even a text book on graphics design can teach you about concepts such as light and shade, value, color, contrast, shape, line, form, pattern, etc., etc., etc....subjects that are often glazed over or ignored by many photography books or so-call "instructors". You can look around at local used book stores or even Amazon for some used books, but your local library may be the best place to start! Unfortunately a lot of folks today use libraries as little more than low cost video rental stores, but wow...they still have some really great books as well! LOL!
So on that issue, again...learn what makes a good picture to begin with and just lock your camera down on full auto if need be...the rest will come with time.
Now on the issue of image editing software...wow...this is really a can of worms unto itself! LOL! The very basic premise of photo editing software (regardless of brand) is that it gives YOU control over how your images will look. These days, anyone can walk into Walmart, pop their SD memory card into a machine and have their prints in "half an hour or less" (LOL). To be honest, it's not much different from the days when people would drop a roll of film off at "Fotomat" (geezz I'm getting old, LOL)...a bit faster perhaps, but the principle is the same - someone else develops YOUR images. And for a lot of people taking snapshots of the family vacation or little Johnny's 5th birthday party, that's just fine! I got a big old box of family snap shots myself that I enjoy going thru every ten years or so. That said however,
some people,
sooner or later, decide they want their pics to look "better". In the grand old days of film, this meant setting up your own dark room and such, so YOU could decide how your images looked instead of the zit faced kid running the gear for Fotomat. Today, we have the true blessing of image editing software.
I will say here that -IF- you can afford it and -IF- you take your images seriously, it's hard to go wrong with Adobe Photoshop. I've been a PS user since version 4 came out (and that's 4.0 that came out around '96, NOT "Creative Suite"). Photoshop is without doubt, the ipso-facto standard in image editing and as such, has one advantage over ANY other software out there; learning resources. There's a TON AND A HALF of info out there on Photoshop from basic image editing techniques to some of the most complex image manipulations you can imagine. That said however, like the camera itself, I also must point out that Photoshop, like any image software, is nothing more than "a tool"...an unbelievable powerful creative tool, but a tool none the less.
On the other hand, if you can NOT afford Photoshop, there ARE some very good alternatives available. Photoshop "Elements" for example is affordable (under $100 if I'm not mistaken) and offers many of the most common features found in it's higher price counterpart. Then of course there's "Gimp". As a long time Photoshop user, I personally find Gimp a tad annoying...I'm used to PS and that's what I like to use, however Gimp has the very distinct advantage that wow...it's FREE! And for someone just learning, it has plenty of features to drastically improve your images right from the git go. If nothing else, based on price alone, it's a really great place to get your feet wet!
Since it was mentioned, I would also like to say a quick word here about "Lightroom". Ok...ok...I'm a HUGE fan of Adobe, however for how -I- work, I don't really care much for Lightroom. This is just my own opinion, however LR has always been more geared for people who do "production photography". Certainly you can edit individual images, but over-all it's more for the more commercial minded individuals...say a wedding photographer who may be processing 80 posed shots or the proverbial school photographer who may be riffling thru hundreds of otherwise identical photos. For myself, for lack of a better explanation, I treat each image as a singular piece of art work...even if I've shot 400 images or more on a given day. Because I have so much experience with Photoshop, I can setup batches or even "actions" that allow me to do my work just as efficiently as I could with LR, with considerably more control and a lot more options. I'm -not- saying Lightroom is a bad program by any means, but for myself at least, it's about using "the right tool for the job"...and for me personally, that's Photoshop.
While I don't know if this will help or confuse the matter, to give you some understanding of this, here's how I work with images; after I copy the images from my camera to the computer, I'll first examine the pictures in Adobe Bridge...think of Bridge like a basic browser of sorts, where you can preview your images, see image info such as EXIT data, etc.. I'll use Bridge to basically weed thru the bad shots and decide exactly which shots I'm going to process. Once I decide on an image (or multiple images as the case may be), I'll then open the image in Adobe Camera RAW...this is a very powerful tool in and of itself. Using RAW, I can make my primary adjustments including color balance, exposure, noise reduction and address any other issues I may have missed at the camera. Once I've made these adjustments, I'll open said images in Photoshop for the final tweaks and polish...usually a slight levels tweak, a bump to the saturation, some sharpening...you get the idea. It may sound tedious, however with practice and allowing for basic images, I can usually knock out most pictures in about a minute or two per pic (give or take what else I may decide to do with the image...crops, level the horizon, composites, etc).
Last but not least, regardless of which software you choose, do remember; there IS a learning curve! Be patient, don't be intimidated and take the time to learn your software properly. Most photo editing software does in fact share many of the same features...the ability to adjust levels, curves, contrast, color/saturation, yadda, yadda, and it's in understanding such adjustments that allows you to get the most out of your images. A simple levels adjustment for example can make a dramatic difference with your images with the simple use of the slider.
Obviously, there is A LOT to learn, both from a photography and a post-processing point of view. It can seem daunting, if not incredibly intimidating, but with time and patience, I suspect you'll find you can create some truly amazing images!
Again, just my own $.02 worth...keep the change
Lower than 1\60, even if you think you can be still, you'll be moving, just enough to create a motion blur, 
![[No title]](/data/xfmg/thumbnail/40/40309-c759bfd4ae7c079632e7402d21d332f1.jpg?1734174717)
