Wow! I like the way you showed the before & after. Since I'm a Mac user I use their iPhoto program most of the time. You can play with the sliders and see what changes you're making as you play.

I think software should be used to fix photos
and perhaps to produce effects that correspond with the
context of where the photos are being used, like in an
advertisement. An example of a "fix", sort of, is I had my
portrait used for professional purposes photoshopped to
whiten my teeth.

Other than that, keep them untouched.

But I'm a newbie to photography also.

It would be interesting to know what the more experienced
photogs commonly do with software beyond cropping and
rotating (to fix an unwanted tilt).

BTW, I've been using this image editor for about 12 years.
Cheap and powerful. Paint Shop Pro


[Edited on 12-29-2009 by k-rico]

Here is a the post ...

A review of three methods from an older thread... for the new Nomads or the PC challenged Nomads... Note: there are many methods, and I suggest you go to the older thread where 'everyone' provided their favorite... the following are MY prefered methods, and I want to keep it as easy as possible to help folks who are photo posting challenged.

A) ADDING A PHOTO THAT IS IN YOUR PC PICTURES FOLDER:

A photo that is in your computer file can be displayed on Nomad pages in certain forums where it is allowed...

The photo's file size must be BELOW 50 kbs to post here. Open your photo file ('My Pictures' or ?) find the photo you want to share and move your mouse arrow onto the photo thumbnail... a pop up will tell you how big it is in kbs or mbs (1000 kb=1 mb).

TO POST A PHOTO:

Simply click the button labled 'Browse' just below where you type a message, and your pc will pop up a window of your photo files... simply click on the photo you wish to post (if it is under 50 kbs). The post must have a subject or some text with the photo to post.

IF your photo is over 50 kbs, then here is one method to reduce the size, and make it a duplicate (so the original full size photo is preserved). I thank Neal Johns for showing me.

(If the photo you want to post is already on another web site, then you may 'hot link' it to Nomad, and the size doesn't matter... unless it isn't too big and distorts the screen. Hot linking will be described below.)

PHOTOS IN YOUR PC OVER 50 KB, click on each step:

If 'paint' isn't on your deck top, do this (click on):

a) Start

b) All Programs

c) Accesories
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Paint (start here if 'paint' is on your desk top)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) File

3) Open...

3a) then click on the photo to get reduced (double click).

4) Image

5) Stretch/Skew... then change the % down from 100 in both boxes in sketch to a lesser number.... (if over 700 kb try 25%, if 400 kb try 35%, if 120 kb try 70%, if 60 kb try 90%)

Continue to Click on:

6) OK

7) File

8) Save As

8a) now type in a new name for the reduced photo or add -r to it to indicate it is the 'reduced' one... this is a copy so you don't mess with the original.

9) Save

THAT'S IT!

Now, click on file and open again, move your mouse arrow over the reduced photo and see if it is between 25 and 50 kb.

When you move the mouse over the reduced photo in the files, the kb size will show and let you know if you didn't get it low enough, or too low! In either case, repeat the steps above... working with the original, large photo.

After you do a couple it gets pretty easy.

=====================================================

B) HOT LINKING FROM ANOTHER WEBSITE:

If the photo you want to show on Nomad is already on another web site, and it is your photo or you have permission to use it, then get the url of the photo... and click on
which is right above where you type a message. A pop up will give you a place to paste the url of the photo.

To get the url (begins with http:// ), move your mouse over that photo and right click on it, then left click 'properties' in the new pop up. Copy the address/ url with your mouse to paste on Nomad in


Here is a hot link from my web site:




If you have your photos on a photo album web site, there may be a direct link option that will have the html tags ([img]) already included... see Photobucket.com instructions below...

======================================================

C) PHOTOBUCKET.COM

Photos can be copied onto your (free) photobucket.com album from your PC files... just pre select the size reduction setting as 15" screen or smaller... not 17" and not 1 mg. so the Nomad board doesn't get streched wide requiring awkward right scrolling to read messages.

To show any photos on Nomad, put your mouse on your photobucket photo, and a drop down menu will appear with these four choices and a url or 'code' next to each... for that photo:

Email & IM
Direct Link
HTML Code
IMG Code

Copy the last one (IMG Code), and paste that right on the Nomad page where you type a message... where ever you want the photo to appear in your thread.

===================================================

MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU!

Pompano, since you asked....I'm with Ken....original pics you've shown here have more warmth & color to them, the "enhanced", IMO, are washed out & colder when you compare them side to side. Don't mess with success!

like this?

Roger,
It really is a matter of taste---with your lovely photos, some I like the original better and some I like the "lucky" fix better.

Since I shoot most of my pix in the RAW format, they all require at least some processing and most photography books I have read say that some color adjustment is necessary for almost all digital photos. However, only once in a while does the auto work for me.

But photoshop is convenient because sometimes one may take a photo underexposed for a reason, or want to change to B & W or sometimes there is pole that you could not avoid with shot, so it gets cloned out. Or there may be noise that needs to be worked on, and a little sharpening is convenient.

But in learning to use photoshop, and I am just beginning as it overwhelming, it is easy to over-do the correction---real easy.

And sometimes it is just fun to turn this



Into this



I have not met a photographer who does not tweak his photos in some way or another. One professional landscape photographer I met recently has returned to using film. He uses those huge monster cameras, takes at least 4 images of the same thing with different settings---each image costs about $20.00 to process---then he puts them all together on the computer and adjusts everything.

So, it really is a matter of what pleases you----and no matter what you decide, everyone is enjoying your pix.

Have fun

BTW---that flower is a Baja flower.

[Edited on 12-29-2009 by DianaT]

Just for kicks, and because I have no life, I took Roger's first (unmanipulated) image, brought it into Photoshop (CS3), and used the "Autolevels" function. Here's what I got. I think it is very similar to the enhanced image produced by Picasa:

http://www.gimp.org

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIMP



[Edited on 12-29-2009 by BajaNomad]

I also use Photoshop "CS2" , and it helps to clean up background noise with most images...
It works best to see both images side by side, and adjust manually as needed.
I am currently scaning about a couple of thousand slides through a Nikon CoolscanV I pickup earlier this year.
The Photoshop program sure is bring these old "chromes" back to life

BACKGROUND/FOREGROUND - HORIZONS - CENTERING

Many thanks for all the helpful suggestions and comments. I have a few more Baja pictures to post, you know! And my photo-knowledge quiver could use some more arrows.

I'm making some progress, and mostly having great fun, in learning newer and better photo techniques.

Your responses on enhancing an image were very helpful.

Now I am interested in:

1. BACKGROUND/FOREGROUND

Say you want to take a picture of an object, or of a person, and you have some choice of what will be in the background. How much subject matter is suitable in the photo frame? What are you opinions on these next three (3) photos and the amount subject matter they contain?


Do you think they are...Okay...Too much...Not enough??

Which one/s do you prefer?

Does anything give the photo character or make it more interesting?

How much subject matter should be in the background..or foreground?

You don't have to give an expert's opinion on this, I am interested in what YOU think makes a good photo. Your candid comments are sought...and thanks!


PHOTO 1 - background/foreground


PHOTO 2 - background/foreground


PHOTO 3 - background/foreground

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. HORIZONS

I am trying this...putting the horizon either one-third of the way up the picture, or two-thirds of the way up, not halfway.
Here are 2 examples:


PHOTO 1 - one-third horizon



PHOTO 2 - two-thirds horizon


Again, your comments please?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. CENTERING

I am experimenting with not getting my subject dead in the center of the picture. So as to show off the background and add a nice 3D depth effect to the shot, I am moving the subject off to the side and taking in the background.

I was reminded of an often-mentioned very basic “rule” of composition: The rule of threes, aka the rule of thirds. I had just bought this nice Nikon D40 and noticed that I could have the display show a grid of three-by-three squares (like a tic-tac-toe) over the picture I was taking. I looked this up and found out about this rule of the thirds.

The rule basically says, divide your frame into three rows and three columns, roughly equal in width and height, like drawing a tic-tac-toe (i.e divide your picture into thirds, vertically and horizontally). See middle photo below. Now, try to align most (or the strongest) horizontal lines and vertical lines in your shot with the edges of the rows and columns (i.e. with the tic-tac-toe).

Like I said earlier, have the horizon be either one-third of the way up the picture, or two-thirds of the way up...not in the middle or half-way.

Also, try to put your subject (or whatever details of the picture are important or draw the eye) on one of the four places where the tic-tac-toe lines intersect. This will make your pictures appear expertly composed (and incidentally will make for better computer wallpapers, leaving room for your icons).

Here are some examples for you:

PHOTO 1 - centered subject


PHOTO 2 - grid (tic-tac-toe) photo form


PHOTO 3 - grid result

.

Well, what do YOU think of the Rule of Thirds? Thanks for your input.

Would agree with the Photoshop use.. it is still a very solid application.. albeit a bit slow, due to the learning curve, as noted by DianaT.. would also add, that if you don't use the application, and you tend to forget things.. it will be a real pain, as I'm always having to go back and re-read how to do things..

I don't use the application nor the rest of the "suite" of applications on a daily basis any more.. and there is really a lot you learn to use...

But, in many cases the work is worth the reward.. and if you don't mind doing things just like Ken did, you end up with even more flexibility in your photography ... a very useful and a lot of fun tool "Photoshop"

As usual, great shots, great information... thanks

Interesting thread to which I hope to add more with time. The foreground/background image I usually consider as a 'framed' subject. And I particularly like this one. The long side-to-side archway emphasizes the broadness of the horizon and greatly emhances the image to my viewpoint. I have taken the liberty to edit this image to bring this idea even stronger. I also tilted the horizon 1 degree counterclockwise to get the arch parallel with frame.

After resisting all forms of photomanipulation in the begining I have come over to embrace and use it judicially to improve digitally images. My experience with 'autolevels' has been so negative that I no longer even consider it with any image.

Roger,

I can recommend the Nikon School seminars that are held each year. They are 2 all day seminars. I have attended both of them and think you would find them wothwhile. (They are not specifically for Nikon users for anyone else interested.)

Here is the link:

http://www.nikonusa.com/Learn-And-Explore/Nikon-School/Sched...

You asked just what steps in editing photos does one use in Photoshop.

Here are my steps I use on most shots, with the CS2 version:

Crop
Levels adjustment and or curves
Saturation (usually less not more)
Sharpen...in photoshop "unsharp mask"


Most digital cameras now have built in contrast adjustment, hue, white balance, color, saturation, sharpness. Depending on the camera or how you modify these adjustments effect greatly how your image comes out. I'm speaking JPEG images not RAW (which are basically neutral coming out of the camera, to be manipulated in the editing process).

My editing goal is to create an image as I remember it when I shot it. The camera seldom produces that "remembered" image. So, with editing, you attempt to bring that image back to the one you saw.

For images used online I work mainly in JPEG and have over the years made the in camera adjustments more neutral. With the editing variables mentioned above I usually get the shot where i want it, assuming it was well exposed to begin with.

Here is an example of an interior shot without flash. It was very flat because of the low light condition.




The finished image with curves, increased exposure, lower saturation, and sharpen adjustments.


















[Edited on 1-5-2010 by tripledigitken]

Shadow/highlights adjustment

Roger,

One of the recent (to me) additions to photoshop has been the shadow/highlights option in the adjustments menu. I found this to be a very useful feature. It allows you to lighten/darken shadows or highlights independent of one another. Many pictures are shot so that either one or the other looks right (shadows or highlights) and the other is off. Another words the shadows look right but the sky is palid or the sky is right and the shadows are jet black. But to the naked eye it doesn't look that way.

Anyway, here is a picture of an oak I took at Coe State Park. I wanted the grass to appear golden so I metered to get that result. When I got home I saw that the shadows were way too strong.





None of my endeavors with Photoshop 7.0 could resurrect this image. Then along came CS3 with the shadow/highlights feature and the image came back to life as I remembered it. I lightened the shadows to bring out the bark in the tree but this caused the grass to pale. So I darkened the highlights which caused a color change as well. It's not where I would like it to be but it's better than what I started with.




Try this feature after you get your CS3, Roger. It's real easy to pick up also.

test 3

This photo is a direct attachment non hosted but with low resolution it is only 40kb.

I finally figured out how to do this large enough to be useful. Just set the size big with resolution small.

Now if I had done this last month when I took the picture with my cellphone you could have saved money on a Pacifico at Wahoo Fish Tacos.

[Edited on 1-5-2010 by Stickers]