D300 lightning

"Scott W" <biphoto.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f3c4c91a-f3ec-4679-ad41-9a6d946ee7df@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...


And if I want to work in a larger color space then what. Does any one
really shoot jpegs in Adobe 1998 RGB?

If I shoot jpeg in sRGB and go out of gamut there in very little I can
do.


But there is really very few cases where shooting jpeg only makes
sense.

Scott

The notion of using sRGB is valid if you intend to print on the spot (our
Santa shoots for example) otherwise Adobe RGB with JPEG allows you to avoid
losing that 1 stop of DR, another poster claimed happens with JPEGs whilst
producing an image I believe is as "editable" as most RAW images.

I suppose you know, Scott that you can use Adobe Camera Raw, DxO optix pro
and Adobe Lightroom to open and edit JPEG images as if they were RAW images?
The only difference is that compressing a JPEG wrongly as way to many camera
makers do, can be the fly in the ointment.

If you intend to anchor a camera to a PC, you do that only so you can
embellish the image or send it to a printer so using Adobe RGB may be OK in
that situation because in sending it to the printer, you can convert it to
sRGB.

If you anchor your camera to a printer (Sony Dye Sub in my case) then sRGB
is the language of the printer so you have to use it in the camera. That's
fine indoors because I can control the lighting and that controls the
dynamic range.

It's all about getting it right in the camera. For 30 years I've seen Video
operators use a disc to get white balance before starting to shoot. What's
wrong with doing that with your DSLR? They are both video cameras. If you
know your camera's limitations you can avoid them.

I don't mind shooting RAW but I'll do anything to avoid a week in front of a
computer screen just because someone thought the camera knew best!

Douglas
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

"Rita Ä Berkowitz" <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote in message
>
> No wonder you waste so much time in PS, you would rather tie the old 40D
> on
> the end of a rope and spin it around hoping you can catch a pic. Like I
> said, shoot both RAW and JPG and the JPGs will quickly tell you how poor
> your photographic skills are.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rita
>

He knows that already Rita... I've been telling him for years!
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

>
> Your kind, the kind that buys a fully automated DSLR so you can brag about being
> a good snap-shooter with an expensive P&S camera, rarely do figure it out.
>
> I suggest you sign up for some community-education classes in basic photography
> skills. Or switch to a better P&S camera with more capable automatic features
> than that DSLR of yours. Since you don't know the first thing about photography
> you clearly need help of some kind. You most certainly didn't get what you paid
> for, that's clear.


There is a difference between being a technical geek and a
photographer. You can capture great images without knowing much more
than how to press the shutter button, if you have a good eye for a
picture. You can know everything ever written about the theory and
practice of photography, but you will never take a good picture unless
you have that eye for the picture. So up yours too!
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

In article
<517a62cf-5740-4c32-bab8-a0528d0dfa27 RemoveThis @d27g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
tomtom <trevortoms RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> >
> > Your kind, the kind that buys a fully automated DSLR so you can brag about
> > being
> > a good snap-shooter with an expensive P&S camera, rarely do figure it out.
> >
> > I suggest you sign up for some community-education classes in basic
> > photography
> > skills. Or switch to a better P&S camera with more capable automatic
> > features
> > than that DSLR of yours. Since you don't know the first thing about
> > photography
> > you clearly need help of some kind. You most certainly didn't get what you
> > paid
> > for, that's clear.
>
>
> There is a difference between being a technical geek and a
> photographer. You can capture great images without knowing much more
> than how to press the shutter button, if you have a good eye for a
> picture. You can know everything ever written about the theory and
> practice of photography, but you will never take a good picture unless
> you have that eye for the picture. So up yours too!

There's another 'type' that grates on me. I often encounter people who
want to engage in conversation after spotting me with a Nikon. This goes
back to Nikon F days, and continues today. I usually don't want to chat
when I'm thinking about shooting, but I'm not antisocial and try to be
polite.

It's a huge turnoff to me when gadget freaks want to lecture me on why
they think their 50/1.4 is really a better choice than my 50/1.8 after
having "known" me for ninety seconds, and without any inquiry about what
KIND of photography I like to do.

Even worse are the geeks who only seem interested in the dollar value of
equipment. "Oooh, a Nikon! Those are expensive, huh!" That happened a
few times when my wife and I were doing street photography, nobody
paying attention to her classic M3 which was worth a lot more, just
discreetly so.

But the worst, THE worst, are people who get on a soapbox about the
evils of Photoshop.

Kidding.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

On Dec 14, 5:06 am, Chris Malcolm <c....TakeThisOut@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> > How do you set up your JPG-shootin camera to combat purple fringing
> > (aka "chromatic aberration")? I know how to fix it using the RAW file
> > in Photoshop. I'm just wondering what settings to use to prevent it
> > when shooting JPG?
>
> If your editor really doesn't let you do that you might need to switch
> to one that does, or at least use another one as a front end that
> allows you to convert your jpgs to an input format that your fussy old
> editor will accept. There's no technical reasons why the correction
> can't be applied to a jpg image.

You misunderstood the question. The question was how I can set up my
camera for shooting JPGs to that I can "get it right in the camera"
without having to do any post-processing. The answer is that I
cannot. CA is just one of the problems JPG shooters have to live with
and it is very apparent in many of their pics, especially those taken
with point-and-shoots.
It makes even less sense to shoot in JPG mode if your are going to do
any post-processing. The JPG itself has already undergone processing
and data loss. No sense in making it worse.
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

On Dec 14, 5:08 am, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
> Annika1980 wrote:
> > Oh really? OK, here's a simple question for ya.
> > How do you set up your JPG-shootin camera to combat purple fringing
> > (aka "chromatic aberration")? I know how to fix it using the RAW file
> > in Photoshop. I'm just wondering what settings to use to prevent it
> > when shooting JPG?
>
> > I'll wait for your informed response. I am always eager to learn.
>
> Easy, you use good glass, dumbass! You don't have that problem with
> Nikkors.
>
> Rita

Bullshit.
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

Annika1980 wrote:
> On Dec 12, 11:07 pm, Rita Ä Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
>> If it's taking you all day fiddling with the controls it's time or you to
>> RTFM and learn how to use your camera. If you can batch process RAW than
>> there's no reason you can't set your camera up to take decent JPGs.
>
> Oh really? OK, here's a simple question for ya.
> How do you set up your JPG-shootin camera to combat purple fringing
> (aka "chromatic aberration")? I know how to fix it using the RAW file
> in Photoshop. I'm just wondering what settings to use to prevent it
> when shooting JPG?
>
> I'll wait for your informed response. I am always eager to learn.

Actually the new Nikons do correct CA in-camera (or post for raw with
their software).
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
> Tully wrote:
>
>> But the worst, THE worst, are people who get on a soapbox about the
>> evils of Photoshop.
>
> Only if they try to pass their garbage and excrement off as photographs.

The worst are the four-flushers, who spew daily both the above, and put
forward crackpot theories with nothing but book learning to rely on.

--
john mcwilliams
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning 

In rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Annika1980 <annika1980.DeleteThis@aol.com> wrote:
> On Dec 12, 11:07 pm, Rita ? Berkowitz <ritaberk2O04 @aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> If it's taking you all day fiddling with the controls it's time or you to
>> RTFM and learn how to use your camera. If you can batch process RAW than
>> there's no reason you can't set your camera up to take decent JPGs.

> Oh really? OK, here's a simple question for ya.
> How do you set up your JPG-shootin camera to combat purple fringing
> (aka "chromatic aberration")? I know how to fix it using the RAW file
> in Photoshop. I'm just wondering what settings to use to prevent it
> when shooting JPG?

If your editor really doesn't let you do that you might need to switch
to one that does, or at least use another one as a front end that
allows you to convert your jpgs to an input format that your fussy old
editor will accept. There's no technical reasons why the correction
can't be applied to a jpg image.

--
Chris Malcolm cam.DeleteThis@infirmatics.ed.ac.uk DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]
 >> Stay informed about: D300 lightning