Ashanali

Why is "EVENTS" is capitals? I shoot dog EVENTS too. (although I don't advertise it) I shoot them in RAW (not yelling ) Yep - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's fine, however I was more discussing the point that some people appear to feel 'superior' to those who choose to shoot RAW (eg - ) to me that possibly says, "I'm better than you because I can take one jpg image and you all have to edit RAW because you can't get it right."My example was simply to show that even someone who IS better than most photographers has changed over - not because his photos weren't perfectly captured - because anyone who has seen his SOOC images can vouch for the fact that they are friggen amazing as they are... but because of ease of workflow. I know it might come as a shock to many, but there are plenty of photographers out there who can nail their exposures and they still choose to shoot in RAW. (and I am one of these people, and so is my husband and I bet there are other people on DOL also who could do this.) I am all for Rubiton not changing what works for her. That's fine and I have seen samples of her work and agree that they are great. My issue is with the superiority complex that seems to accompany the whole, "I shoot in jpg" issue. ftr - Shooting in RAW is something that I resisted for ages also - I can see both sides of the argument. :p

There is nothing wrong with setting yourself a challenge but why resist an extremely awesome tool that you have at your disposal? You sound like Jerry Ghionis. After years of preaching to people that he only shoots in jpg because he get's the shot first go, he is now shooting in RAW. He is still shooting the same way but has realised that RAW has some unbeatable qualities that he wanted to make use of. Our shooting style hasn't changed since we went from jpg to RAW; we still try to get the image in one shot - but out workflow has changed dramatically. We are 100% happier with the results we are getting now.

Sounds like a wedding. Also sounds like a dog show. Everything here is run through lightroom. Once you have it worked out, it really is easy and fast. Lightroom will also work on jpg files.

okay. We are on the same page.

I think people who jump straight into digital often forget/don't realise that. With film (and i mean self processing and printing, not done at the shops), there wasn't a 'no edit' option, from the way you process your film to all the work done at the enlarger. Every single step is manually done, with considerations made. I came from film. I have printed black and white in a dark room and been responsible for my own processing and I have printed colour in a lab. I know exactly what you're talking about. Hope you weren't assuming that I jumped straight into digital.

Where you left it in the hands of the printer operators to make any necessary corrections... that's editing. :confused:

I love the purists... because a true 'purist' will take the photos, process them at home and print them in their own darkroom. And they dodge and burn, they can push or pull the developing of the film, they can over or underexpose an image to get the outcome they want. They are editing!! Then when photos go to a lab, they are edited there also. They are put through the machine and the printer who is running through the film will correct exposure and colour as they go. They can increase or decrease the exposure by two stops and they can increase or decrease colour by two steps also. eg, if photos came through the lab from underwater cameras, I would boost the yellow and red channels to take out haze over coral. This is editing! So now that everything is digital and back in the hands of photographers - 'purists' say, "everything should be perfect in the camera and not need fixing." There has never been a time when everything has been perfect and not needed fixing, it was just that in the past they had other ways of doing it. personally, for weddings, we do as little as possible during the proofing process. It will be a colour, exposure and cropping only (if needed, sometimes it isn't). Portraits and final layout for albums is different. This is where there might be elements removed, wrinkles faded (NEVER removed), effects or textures added, and so on...

I'll ask again in a month then

Stunning!!! So now I've nagged Rocco and achieved a result, I'll start nagging you. When are you going to join the AIPP??

registration opens August 31st

any camera can be used

http://www1.canon.com.au/worldofeos/photo5/ Due to start again soon. I reckon there could be some great photos coming from DOLers. Registration opens on August 31.

I don't have dogs as photogenic as Rocco and Ralph. But I agree, there needs to be a Rocco and Ralph book

Like grass

jr inoz - you can use fill flash or a reflector if you wish to. However your shots still work - and I had a play with one in PS She came out great in High Key - look at her eyes! They are like polished glass.

My favourite lighting when shooting weddings... LOVE overcast and dark. Gives me more control. I take a test shot and if it looks a bit flat, I'll bump it up so it's a stop overexposed. (AnnieK - so the needle that you see through your viewfinder is more to the right than the left). You can buy gray cards at good camera stores.

Okay, the short and quick answer is to have your camera set to evaluative metering. In this mode it will meter based on the entire scene and work out your setttings (this is how we shoot weddings). If you have it set on spot metering, then it's only going to meter for that one point... so it could under or overexpose depending on which spot it's going by. The long and complex answer... you need a gray card. Position the card in front of the dogs and take a meter reading from the card. Switch your camera to manual and put in the settings... remove the gray card and shoot. If you can't get your hands on a gray card, simply meter your camera from a patch of grass as the camera will see it as being close to the magical "18% Gray" that it registers.

yep... and I can give you an answer except I'm about to go out and do a photo shoot. I'm sure someone else will give you an answer, if not, I'll post when I get back.

Everyone is doing so well

version b - with texture (I'm procrastinating from cleaning the house... )

lea - I had a quick much around with yours too version a

Lea - I think backlighting is your thing

In photoshop. I did a curves layer increasing the contrast burnt in his head I created a mask to lighten his head but keep the contrast then I added a texture layer and faded it. I know it sounds complex but it took me about 2 minutes... that's how you know I've been doing this waaaaay too long.

Apart from the quality of the drawings, does it help?

a quick and crappy diagram. This shows the lighting set up. The sun can be anywhere along that back line... it can be high, it can be close to the horizon (lower means more colour in the background). You don't have to have your subject actually blocking the sun. The sun doesn't even have to be in the image, it can be totally out of the frame. You just want the sun to be generally behind your subject... as opposed to a 'traditional' lighting situation. Hope this helps.