Photo shop and the likes??

TYOsborn · 07-27-2008, 01:26 PM

Do most people use editing software for their pics? A good pic is a good pic and a bad pic is a bad one? You have a good lens or you don't? Just curious how many people actually use software to enhance their photos. Not saying that I won't... but why would you?

davemdsn · 07-27-2008, 02:09 PM

I use photo editing software for the same reason I used to have a darkroom. In the film days there were lots for different films, each with it's own characteristics. Then you had different chemical options to develop them in, each with it's own characteristics. You could even change the strength of the chemical, the length of development time and so on. When it came time to print there were different papers, different paper developers, and so on. I could dodge and burn, combine negs in one print, and so on. Pressing the shutter release button was only the beginning.

These days I can't change the film, but I can change the development process much like I did when I had the darkroom. I can push and pull process, dodge and burn, change contrast, use multiple images to make one new image, and much more. Photo editing hasn't changed all that much, it has just moved to a new medium to get there. Even Unsharp Mask is based on an old darkroom technique.

A bad photo is a bad photo. A good photo is a great photo with the right tools and experience.

*Wombat* · 07-28-2008, 02:37 AM

Like Davemdsn said. (By the way, Dave, I was over on the mainland last week, in Adelaide and I'm sure I saw your pants busking in Rundle Mall. Unfortunately, I didn't have a camera with me, so I can't show you the evidence. Nice material...).

I use editing software a lot because I like making abstracts and experimentations from some of my images. The ideal for "straight" photography is, of course, to get it right at the moment you press the shutter, so that you rarely need to do much editing. After some 40-odd years of shooting, however, it's an ideal I'm still pursuing. It really depends what you want to do with the photos. If you're happy simply sharing your pics with friends over the net or setting up slideshows and screensavers on your 'puter, then you probably won't be in much need of sophisticated software. No-one will notice or care about a few blemishes. But if you find yourself starting to treat photography as a serious hobby and want to start exhibiting or selling, for example, then that raises the quality bar and yes, you will need software - and good software at that. Horses for courses.
The other factor is if you shoot in RAW you'll definitely need software. A RAW image straight from the camera usually isn't much cop to look at.

TYOsborn · 07-28-2008, 07:53 PM

Thanks. I appreciate the input. I see some of these pics and wonder why mine aren't quite as sharp.

Since my post, I've been playing with GIMP. I had heard it was as good as Photo Shop and free. Can you recommend something good for a beginner that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Afterall, I'm busy spending money on my camera and lenses.

*Wombat* · 07-28-2008, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by TYOsborn

Thanks. I appreciate the input. I see some of these pics and wonder why mine aren't quite as sharp. Since my post, I've been playing with GIMP. I had heard it was as good as Photo Shop and free. Can you recommend something good for a beginner that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Afterall, I'm busy spending money on my camera and lenses.

This is a common question and you'll find lots of posts if you do a search. For the record, I use Gimp/Ufraw and Rawtherapee. All are free. There's also Irfanview, FastStone and Magix Xtreme Photo, also free. ArcSoft is a very good one for beginning/intermediate. It came free with my Canon printer, but I think it's under $100. There's also the free bundle that came with your camera, of course. It's not the greatest but again it's free and you'll learn a bit from it.

SpecialK · 07-28-2008, 09:43 PM

I use the state of the art software provided by Pentax for RAW conversion. I do not do much except bump the contrast or exposure, occasionally crop, and frequently level the damn horizon as my viewfinder and sensor are not aligned...

Dust-spotting and viewing is with now-defunct (?) Firehand Ember.

procyon · 07-29-2008, 03:40 AM

Originally Posted by TYOsborn

Can you recommend something good for a beginner that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? Afterall, I'm busy spending money on my camera and lenses.

Try PhotoLine, it sure convinced me to stop thinking about buying photoshop.

MrApollinax · 07-29-2008, 04:52 AM

You can also check out Paint.net: Paint.NET - Features

It is similar to photoshop and has a lot of similar features. It also has a very active online community that is very helpful and is a wealth of info. It does not support PEF files natively rather it relies on the OS to support PEF files. So if you are running Vista with the right PEF codecs Paint.net will open and support your RAW files. There are couple plugins as well to import RAW files but I haven't used those at all.

procyon · 07-29-2008, 06:17 AM

Originally Posted by MrApollinax

So if you are running Vista with the right PEF codecs Paint.net will open and support your RAW files.

Does the PEF codec really work as a RAW converter ? Or does it just use the embedded JPEG image ? I don't have Vista so can't test myself. But the embedded JPEG image is not even as good as a normal JPEG out of the camera (embedded JPEG has a smaller filesize than the JPEG generated by shooting RAW+JPEG, so it is more compressed).
It is really something that everyone using image viewing programs for RAW processing should be aware of. Some programs use the embedded JPEG (fast), some really convert the RAW file(slow), some let the user configure it (for example IrfanView). For on-screen viewing the faster approach is better, so many image viewing programs default to that.

*reeftool* · 07-29-2008, 10:17 AM

Picasa is a very good photo editor for quick simple editing and organizing your photos and is free also.

MrApollinax · 07-29-2008, 11:07 AM

I'm not sure how Windows decides to handle the PEF files. I can view the files but I cannot tell if the image is really a 16bit image or a downsampled 8bit image. I know the plugins for Paint.Net use DCRAW so in that case it would be the full 16bit image. However from what I can see the writter of the plugin did not include PEF extensions. Someone has re-written the source to include PEF and it seems to work.