Can someone tell me if I'm doing this right?

[r3dline]

I've only had my digital rebel for about a month now, and I've just been snapping away (over 1200 shots so far) in fine jpeg mode. But none of my pictures have had that "wow" factor so far. So I figured...maybe there's something to this whole "post processing" thing. So yesterday, I finally hooked up an external monitor and mouse to my iBook and opened up some pictures in Photoshop and began messing around with the Levels, Saturation, Contrast, and Colors on some of the pictures. Well I was able to make a drastic change in some of the photos, but I'm just wanting someone to tell me if I'm actually improving the pictures or making them look worse. All I know is it looks...brighter...and at first it seems more appealing to my eyes. But maybe I'm just thinking the "difference" is better rather than the actually quality is improving. So here's a couple pictures of my girlfriend that I took at a lake. The first is straight out of my drebel with no adjustments, and the second is after some photoshop adjustments. Which one looks better to you?

Oh yeah, and please look over the lower quality smaller versions of these pictures. After I put them on my girlfriend's old desktop (the only one in the apartment that has internet access right now, and that's a long story) I just resized them using Microsoft Paint. The originals are a lot sharper than these (and of course bigger).

[FREELANCE2004]

what your saying is that you alwys shoot pictures and then print them w/out ps.i always atleast do a auto levels at the least.the more you play around with the programs the better yuoll be at adjusting colors,contrast,focus,light,ect.but there is also doing to muchadjustment also.
the best thing to do is take a couple of shots,color corect them,and then post them to see what people think.dont take what they say to heart though,ive posted pictures that i thought would win awards,and a pro poined out atleast 5 things that were wrong with the picture.but thats why i did it,to learn.your picture looks alil underexposed,or low on light.did you use a fill flash?
good luck editing your shots,post something soon.
freelance2004@cox-internet.com
shane robichaux

[wburychka]

To answer your question fully would require someone more experienced than I--and around 800-900 pages! However, here are a couple of ideas:

Moderation. I don't think you've over done the adjustments here, although the subject is a little dark (see below). Over sharpening, over saturation, and excessive contrast are temptations to avoid. Of course, you'll find that the ultimate use of the image makes a difference, too. For example, you might want to add just a touch of additional sharpening before you print a picture but not for screen display.

You didn't mention your camera Parameter setting. If it is Parameter 1, it already has increased contrast, sharpness, and saturation, so you will be building sharpening on sharpening, etc. in PS or PSE. With the Digital Rebel, Parameter 2 is the baseline, no-adjustment setting and probably your best bet since you post process.

If you have space on your CF card, shoot RAW. If you don't, get a bigger CF card and then shoot RAW. You'll have more latitude for adjustment, and you'll have a higher image quality. Even at the highest quality setting, JPEG compression is "lossy". That is, it discards actual image information and replaces it with guesses and estimates. You didn't think that 75% reduction in file size was free, did you? And working in PS, PSE, Paint Shop Pro, or whatever, do not use JPEGS as your working files. Every time you save a JPEG, you lose a little more quality. Only work in PSD or TIF file formats. Go to JPEG only if you have to for the web or for online photofinishers. My favorite RAW vs JPEG analogy is that working with RAW is like having the original film negative, while working with JPEGs is like starting with a 4x6 print.

The picture of your very attractive girlfriend illustrates one of the limitations and advantages of digital. Digital has less latitude than film. In your picture, your subject and her immediate surroundings are a little dark. Yet, as you probably found, if you lighten enough to fix that, the sky washes out to white. The digital advantage, though, is that you can use a layer mask in PS to combine two images. Usually you would use two images from a bracketed shot, but if you have complete detail in your highlights and shadows, you can create two images from the one--one adjusted for the shadow detail and one optimized for the highlights. Two images from one is also slightly more effective if created from a RAW image, as you are less likely to have lost detail.

[StillMrFitz]

Good photography starts 4" behind the viewfinder.
The WOW factor - as you call it - takes two forms.
A: Artistic Interpretation
B: Technical Expertise

Technical expertise means knowing your equipment, it's capabilities and how to make the best use of what you have.
Technical expertise indicates that you are aware of what constitutes a good photograph and know how to go about achieving such things as; good basic exposure, correct focus, use of colour, etc.

Artistic Interpertation comes from inside the photographer. It is here that the photographer shows imagination and feelings about the subject being photographed.
Being a better photographer means being "a different photographer". How do I make a photograph - off a familiar subject - which has not been done before???

Two photographs can be technically excellent but miles apart as far as artistic Interpertation is concerned.

Photoshop is a digital darkroom, it is not a magical formula for creating art from poorly conceived photographic concepts.

Your photograph of this lovely young lady has many distracting elements, not the least of which is the bridge running through the middle of her head. This is a poorly chosen background, so as a beginning, in seeking the WOW factor, you should first have a look at the compositional elements in your photograph.

The study off the basics of phoptography and the study of Photoshop are two entirely different undertakings. Photoshop is not necessary for good photography but a thorough understanding of the elements of photography is necessary for the production of photographic art.

PFitz

To answer your question fully would require someone more experienced than I--and around 800-900 pages! However, here are a couple of ideas:

Moderation. I don't think you've over done the adjustments here, although the subject is a little dark (see below). Over sharpening, over saturation, and excessive contrast are temptations to avoid. Of course, you'll find that the ultimate use of the image makes a difference, too. For example, you might want to add just a touch of additional sharpening before you print a picture but not for screen display.

You didn't mention your camera Parameter setting. If it is Parameter 1, it already has increased contrast, sharpness, and saturation, so you will be building sharpening on sharpening, etc. in PS or PSE. With the Digital Rebel, Parameter 2 is the baseline, no-adjustment setting and probably your best bet since you post process.

If you have space on your CF card, shoot RAW. If you don't, get a bigger CF card and then shoot RAW. You'll have more latitude for adjustment, and you'll have a higher image quality. Even at the highest quality setting, JPEG compression is "lossy". That is, it discards actual image information and replaces it with guesses and estimates. You didn't think that 75% reduction in file size was free, did you? And working in PS, PSE, Paint Shop Pro, or whatever, do not use JPEGS as your working files. Every time you save a JPEG, you lose a little more quality. Only work in PSD or TIF file formats. Go to JPEG only if you have to for the web or for online photofinishers. My favorite RAW vs JPEG analogy is that working with RAW is like having the original film negative, while working with JPEGs is like starting with a 4x6 print.

The picture of your very attractive girlfriend illustrates one of the limitations and advantages of digital. Digital has less latitude than film. In your picture, your subject and her immediate surroundings are a little dark. Yet, as you probably found, if you lighten enough to fix that, the sky washes out to white. The digital advantage, though, is that you can use a layer mask in PS to combine two images. Usually you would use two images from a bracketed shot, but if you have complete detail in your highlights and shadows, you can create two images from the one--one adjusted for the shadow detail and one optimized for the highlights. Two images from one is also slightly more effective if created from a RAW image, as you are less likely to have lost detail.

[r3dline]

I wanted to thank you all for the advice. Until recently, I've been shooting in JPEG Fine at Parameter 1, importing into the computer and leaving them at that (resizing some of course to reduce file size for those rather unartistic "snapshots"). I've since began experimenting with the different parameter settings as well as shooting some in RAW (which is limited by my only cf card of 256mb) and trying my mouse and some post-processing. I think I've been able to improve upon my pictures somewhat but last night I picked up a copy of Tom Ang's "Digital Photographer's Handbook." So maybe by the time I finish reading that book I will have improved upon at least SOMETHING.

As for the artistic composition, I'll take that advice into mind as well. So far, most of my compositions have been snapshots or look like them at least. But I guess practice makes...better.

Thanks again, and I'll post some newer pictures and hopefully better attempts in the future.

[StillMrFitz]

There is nothing wrong with shooting in Large Fine JPG.
Better to practice and try the parameters with Fine JPG then to try and learn RAW and RAW processing at this time.
You won't notice much technical difference in your photographs with either one.
It's more important that you learn such things as exposure techniques, composition, use of DOF, colour sense etc. Those are the things which will improve your photography the most.
If you haven't learned to make a good photograph, straight out of the camera, then all the Photoshopping and RAW, in the world, won't help.
Learn to use the camera, then learn post processing.

PFitz

Lighting wasn't great but this is straight from the camera - Nikon D70 - I have some decent composition and some colour to work with and I can fix the lighting in PS if I wish.

I wanted to thank you all for the advice. Until recently, I've been shooting in JPEG Fine at Parameter 1, importing into the computer and leaving them at that (resizing some of course to reduce file size for those rather unartistic "snapshots"). I've since began experimenting with the different parameter settings as well as shooting some in RAW (which is limited by my only cf card of 256mb) and trying my mouse and some post-processing. I think I've been able to improve upon my pictures somewhat but last night I picked up a copy of Tom Ang's "Digital Photographer's Handbook." So maybe by the time I finish reading that book I will have improved upon at least SOMETHING.

As for the artistic composition, I'll take that advice into mind as well. So far, most of my compositions have been snapshots or look like them at least. But I guess practice makes...better.

Thanks again, and I'll post some newer pictures and hopefully better attempts in the future.

[opus]

Remember, photography is all about the light. Just keep that in mind while you're shooting.

[Elysian]

Remember, photography is all about the light. Just keep that in mind while you're shooting.

My guess is that you actually mean to say that light plays an important role.