).Public : Luke's : Gallery closed!
|
|
 Oct 16 2007, 12:06 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
 
Elite
7,826 posts Joined: Jan 2003   
|
Wow its tough being constrained to just a single light. Perhaps instead of it coming from the left side, any chance if could be positioned higher so that more light fills her face? Usually lighting straight from the side portrays a very serious and fierce effect (good for guys
). |
Quote|
|
Dec 6 2007, 10:57 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Elite
7,826 posts Joined: Jan 2003
|
QUOTE(R a D ! c 4 L @ Dec 3 2007, 07:28 PM) 1st of all, a RAW file is a "digital negative". Everything is "0", except for the exposure(shutter speed and aperture setting) is what you set during u take the shot. Like film. But for film its a different story, there's already a setting inside it, that's why you see certain film produce different quality and style of pictures. Hey mate,And Adobe Lightroom is a raw editing software. Where you edit the raw files, in Lightroom, you can edit the brightness and contrast of the image without much loss of quality. You can also edit the curves, saturation... almost everything. Because my rule is to get the most out of your shots - I always shoot in RAW. And the best thing here is the setting you made wont affect the original raw file, so once you're done with editing, you convert the image into JPEG while keeping the original raw file. Get it?  There's much debate on RAW vs JPEG going around. But I stand my ground on shooting raw. For using lightroom for editing your raws, its like having your own digital darkroom. Like the old days where people used the darkroom to give special effects on films. Here's a simple RAW vs JPEG link http://digital-photography-school.com/blog/raw-vs-jpeg/ Read on   Just to help you with your statement because the way you describe it, just covers a very small portion of what Adobe Lightroom actually does. In the case of RAW, don't confuse him with digital negative especially if you do work with *.DNG type files (http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/). Canon RAW and Nikon RAW will have different formats in file types. In the case of the RAW file, not everything is "0" but basically the whole area of tweaking white balance, exposure and different areas of the photo for a RAW file is because the data picked up by the sensor is in its complete uncompressed and editable state (hence the size of RAW files are much larger than JPEG). Basically the full range of data for each pixel is editable to suit the entire outlook of the image. Adobe Lightroom is somewhat like a more complexed version of what Picassa can do. Lightroom has of course loads more tweaks and features in terms of developing the photo but of course that comes with a price tag. To say that lightroom is just a RAW editor is seriously limiting its full ability and usage. To fcbarcelona-my In the area of shooting RAW versus JPEG, it all depends on what you are shooting. From what you can see through Luke's gallery, most of his shots are post processed to quite a certain extent. If you are the type of person who shoots loads of photos, have limited amount of space in your memory card then JPEG might be the way to go. There has always been a lot of "heated" discussion between photographers who try to get the picture right on camera (they use JPEG) versus those who use Post processing tools (RAW users). Again it depends on your subject and what is it that you are trying to shoot. Some wedding photographers shoot in RAW, some in JPEG. It all depends on personal preference and how you want to work. Basically all these decisions, determines your own style in shooting. |
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: |  0.0320sec
 0.37
 6 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 10th December 2025 - 12:21 AM |
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.