started using RAW format for first time today and took 2 test pics, I think theyre rubbish still as when I tweaked on photoshop I think ive ruined them





if anyone who is good at RAW would be cool if they explained how many things are wrong in the test pics

Welcome to the real world Bratty Now, tell me what you did in Photoshop and I might be able to help (at least with the second one)...

Al

mustve went a bit too crazy with the saturation and hue or something it almost looks cel shaded

Yes, it's really over saturated. I think you've tried blue-ing up the sky too much.
I poked it with an electric stick and I'm happier with this version -

This is kinda what I dislike about digital photography - it's too easy to become a Photoshop technician!

hm at least I know where im wrong I think, is the hedgehog pic ruined too?

I think the hedgehog pic is a little too yellow, but nothing you couldn't save with the RAW files.

ye I thought that too someone needs a lot more practise it seems

One thing Aperture does, and indeed I suspect Lightroom, is you can make adjustments on the RAW file directly, but not actually affects the original data. Any adjustments are stored as metadata, which tell Aperture what to do when outputting the image. You can have more than one version using the same master, so you can tweak one version to be black and white, and another to colour correct as you wish. Any changes you make are reversible, and do not impact on your original image. In Aperture you can also touch out spots and oddities in the image. These edits, and others, are recorded as metadata too.

I think iPhoto works in a similar fashion, but it’s been a long time since I used it.

So by the time you get to Photoshop, your “dark room” tweaks have already been done. I find this a really good way of handling images.

Yes, LR does do this too for all edits and modifications, as I presume Adobe Camera RAW does. If using proprietary RAW files, such as CR2 or NEF, then my understanding is the changes are stored in xml "sidecar" files which sit alongside the actual RAW file. If using Adobe's DNG file format then the modifications can be embedded directly into the file.

Edd

hi sorry for posting these pics (again) as they are on random photo thread but these 2 pics were shot in RAW and I sorted them out I think, can anyone tell me if theres anything wrong in the pics etc? has it come out good quality etc? analysis from someone would be much appreciated

Can't see anything wrong with them!
Do you like them?

I just think that all my pics look worse than everyone elses

I do like the pics, theyre funny sortof but comparing to anyone elses SLR pics, the quality is better on their pics?

Okay.

The test pics are both oversaturated, the Tornado noticably so.

If you upped the saturation in post-, you might want to back it off as saturated pictures can give banding if the colour contrast is turned up too much. If, however, it came out of the camera like that you might want to investigate whether your camera has a saturation setting - lots do - and turn it down.

As for the big, ominous-looking teuchter, the photo is merely over-exposed, a problem not easily eradicated in post-. The problem you see is that too much of the white pixel data (i.e. the shirt) is crammed up at the top end of the contrast range and has bled into the surround. The only way to totally get rid of it but be to take the photo again.

What you may want to do is fiddle with the contrast curve to increase the contrast on the shirt whilst at the same time decreasing the contrast on the background (and hopefully the bleed).

As for the quality, they're really not that bad and certainly not so bad that practice wouldn't help. Keep going with it - you'll get it.

HTH

ye it was heavily overexposed as I forgot to change exposure setting when taking the picture thank goodness for RAW. even then RAW hasnt really saved the pics compeletly, dont think im cut out for photography tbh

Fiddled with a bit.



With the RAW file, you might be able to play with the contrast a little more and boost the areas that are dropping off around the shirt. Some judicious and crafty selection work would help.