Added thoughts on Adobe software plans

The following is a guest commentary from Teton Photography Group Steering Committee member Nick Wheeler:

I feel compelled to enlarge on my comments the other night about the new Adobe subscription model. Here is a link to one place you can still get the physical version of Photoshop if you want it.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=850333&Q=&is=REG&A=details

It’s also available from Amazon and many traditional software vendors. It is being sold now for less than what I paid in 1992, never mind inflation.

There are some users who have been resisting the latest “upgrade” to subscription pricing. These are typically long time users who have been updating since v2.0, so admittedly we have long since amortized the upfront cost. Our monthly cost was more along the lines of 5.00, so even the current discount of 10.00 per month looks like a ripoff. It’s a double whammy as we did pay the upfront cost and now we are forced into the subscription model.

There have been no worthwhile upgrades to Photoshop since version 5, everything since has been window dressing. For me personally the CS6 upgrade has been a terrible rehash of the interface, burying features (such as command-shift-option-E) in an undocumented no man’s land and rejiggering key shortcuts in some of the traditional dialogs (such as curves) as to make them much slower and more inconvenient to use.

Another poorly understood and undocumented feature of recent versions of Photoshop is the growing disparity in functionality between ACR in Photoshop and Lightroom. This will only be exacerbated as time goes on, and not necessarily in a positive way. Is Lightroom to become a dumbed down version of Photoshop + ACR? Will the slightly better version of ACR in Photoshop be eliminated because it’s a bit harder to use?

It may prove that the average user is far better off with the last physical version of Photoshop, combined with more advanced Beyer interpolators such as Raw Developer and more robust media management, my favorite tool of the past decade or so is now owned by Phase One and is sold as Media Pro. The end user would be far better off right now with CS6, Raw Developer and Media Pro than subscribing to the Adobe program alone.

I think it is in every photographers best interest to maintain a two horse race in software development for photographers. Blindly subscribing to the Adobe solutions may be a long term lose lose unless more competition enters the space. It would be great if enough end users agreed with this notion, did not subscribe and forced Adobe to hit the pause button on this strategy.

Admittedly it has been a great strategy for Adobe insiders with giant stock options on the line, providing them with a gratifying short term bump in the value of their options. For the rest of us – maybe not so great.

Nick Wheeler

Post-processing of digital images

To say that post-production or photo editing equipment and software are controversial is an understatement. In one of the very first postings on this blog I discussed the difference between JPEG and RAW photo image files and the need to always have RAW files available for post-capture digital editing. Now I would like to address the details of post-processing equipment and software. This is clearly controversial and rapidly changing but I will give you my opinions about the advantages and reasoning for what I use (today.)

The first impossible controversy regards the computer platforms available for digital imaging. I will say upfront that I use a PC and software designed for a PC.  My choice was made for three reasons.  First, I came from the world of academia and to a lesser degree, business. The PC is dominant in these areas so I knew the machines and software. Second, there is generally more software available for the PC. Third, the PC is less expensive than a Mac or Apple system. Now before the Mac users start screaming, I am the first to admit that the Mac is probably a better system for any graphics application. Good photo editing software is available for both systems and the software costs are similar. Generally, though, you need to make a choice early in your photo editing career, because the software is usually platform-specific and cannot be used on both systems.  I would lean towards the PC platform if you are in a large business or academic institution. I would lean toward a Mac if you do not need to share all of your non-photographic work with many colleagues and would definitely choose a Mac if you are going to edit video.  

That said, I use a high-end PC with a fast processor (3.6 Mbs), separate high-speed video card with 2 GB memory, 16GB of RAM, and a 2TB internal hard drive, multiple USB3 connections and 2-27" Viewsonic high-resolution monitors. I have multiple external 1, 2, and 4TB hard drives for back-up. You need a lot of RAM for photo editing and lots of hard drive space and a good back-up system to store your work.

There are multiple paths to appropriate post-production software. There is the camera software approach using what comes with your camera. These software packages are usually satisfactory for RAW file editing, conversion to JPEG, and printing. They are proprietary and, therefore, subject to change so if you have any aspirations to develop and expand your photographic work, I would avoid the proprietary camera company programs. A second approach is the low-end, freeware approach. Several programs are available to convert and edit photo files at little or no charge. Sometimes these programs link to on-line photo storage and sharing sites such as Flickr and Picasa. These work great for point-and-shoot and cell phone photographers but those shooting seriously with a dSLR usually want more than these programs can provide. Next are the rich, mid-range, purpose-specific photo editing tools such as Adobe (Photoshop) Elements (for either the PC or Mac) and Aperture for the Mac. These are full-featured programs that have far more capabilities than most photographers want or need and will do almost any editing job asked of them.  Finally, there are the top-end editing tools used by advanced and professional photographers - Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop. These are two totally different packages that serve different but compatible roles in your photo editing work flow.

What is Adobe Lightroom (LR)? LR is a photographic database that was designed to store, catalog, and locate large numbers of digital images. LR also combines the photo editing power of Adobe Mini-bridge, Bridge, and CameRAW to view, convert, and edit images in a non-destructive manner and with a very easy to learn user interface. LR manipulates digital images at the image file-level rather than the pixel-level. Adobe Photoshop (PS), on the other hand, is part of a huge creative suite of programs used to manipulate digital images at the pixel-level in a destructive manner.  Wow - that is a lot of very specific terminology - what are these two programs used for and what do they do?

LR is the starting point in the digital imaging workflow of most serious photographers. LR allows the photographer to import RAW (or JPEG) image files from a camera or memory card into a computer. During the import, the files can be renamed, assigned to specific folders, converted to digital negatives (DNGs), have key words assigned, and undergo basic image processing available in Adobe CameRAW (ACR). Once the images are imported LR can be used to correct white balance and tint, adjust exposure, straighten and crop, create local color, contrast, and exposure adjustments, sharpen and reduce digital noise, and apply special effects to the images. LR also creates a viewable image and has multiple tools to compare, sort, locate, grade, tag, flag and copy images. It acts as a file manager for the RAW images allowing movement on hard drives and allows the creation of smart (automatically updated) or stable collections of photos.  LR can geo-tag photo locations.  The latest version of LR also creates various output formats for the web, slide shows, books, and prints.

Photoshop is the top end of photo editing software. Most photographers who do not do graphic design probably only use a small fraction of what PS can do. PS has two import features called Bridge and Mini-bridge that bring photos into ACR for editing and conversion to output files for printing or sharing.  ACR works much like LR to make image-level edits and corrections before PS is used.  PS allows editing at the pixel level so the user has complete control over all elements of the photo.  The photo edits, for the most part, are destructive edits meaning that the image will be irreversibly altered if saved. PS does not have the sophisticated database functions of LR and does not do the cataloging and searching as well as LR.

Both LR and PS can use pre-sets and third-party plug-ins to automate much of the work of photo editing. The automation of PS is far more sophisticated using scripts and batch processing to speed your workflow.  Examples of these include high dynamic range (HDR) imaging, focus stacking, and panoramic stitching of multiple images. The two programs work together seamlessly to enhance your editing workflow and image storage and retrieval.  So, how are the two programs used by a nature photographer?

The more I talk with professional photographers, the more I realize that about 90% of post-production editing is done in LR and only about 5-10% in PS. LR is a powerful image editor that gives busy photographers a comprehensive database with which to catalog tens of thousands of images and find them again in seconds. As an editor, LR performs all of the functions of ACR in a very intuitive user interface.  Color balance, tint, leveling, cropping, exposure and contrast adjustment, noise reduction, and sharpening are handled effortlessly in LR.  Local adjustments of nearly all of these functions can be done with both brush and gradient tools.  I will review these editing functions in more detail at another time, but, for now, recognize that these tools are available.

PS adds three hugely important functions that are not in LR and a few hundred other functions used by graphics designers.  The three biggies in PS are layers, masks, and content-aware fill. These destructive, pixel-level tools add creative touches not possible in LR and give the nature photographer the ability to "fix" issues in a photo that could be distracting to the central theme of the photo.  There are literally hundreds of other manipulations that can be done in PS that are not available in LR. Most of these are interesting but not necessary for the average photographer.

That is the editing overview and I will have much more about editing in future posts. Next time we will explore high dynamic range (HDR) imaging and its role for the nature photographer. 

 

Post-processing of digital images

To say that post-production or photo editing equipment and software are controversial is an understatement. In one of the very first postings on this blog I discussed the difference between JPEG and RAW photo image files and the need to always have RAW files available for post-capture digital editing. Now I would like to address the details of post-processing equipment and software. This is clearly controversial and rapidly changing but I will give you my opinions about the advantages and reasoning for what I use (today.)

The first impossible controversy regards the computer platforms available for digital imaging. I will say upfront that I use a PC and software designed for a PC.  My choice was made for three reasons.  First, I came from the world of academia and to a lesser degree, business. The PC is dominant in these areas so I knew the machines and software. Second, there is generally more software available for the PC. Third, the PC is less expensive than a Mac or Apple system. Now before the Mac users start screaming, I am the first to admit that the Mac is probably a better system for any graphics application. Good photo editing software is available for both systems and the software costs are similar. Generally, though, you need to make a choice early in your photo editing career, because the software is usually platform-specific and cannot be used on both systems.  I would lean towards the PC platform if you are in a large business or academic institution. I would lean toward a Mac if you do not need to share all of your non-photographic work with many colleagues and would definitely choose a Mac if you are going to edit video.  

That said, I use a high-end PC with a fast processor (3.6 Mbs), separate high-speed video card with 2 GB memory, 16GB of RAM, and a 2TB internal hard drive, multiple USB3 connections and 2-27" Viewsonic high-resolution monitors. I have multiple external 1, 2, and 4TB hard drives for back-up. You need a lot of RAM for photo editing and lots of hard drive space and a good back-up system to store your work.

There are multiple paths to appropriate post-production software. There is the camera software approach using what comes with your camera. These software packages are usually satisfactory for RAW file editing, conversion to JPEG, and printing. They are proprietary and, therefore, subject to change so if you have any aspirations to develop and expand your photographic work, I would avoid the proprietary camera company programs. A second approach is the low-end, freeware approach. Several programs are available to convert and edit photo files at little or no charge. Sometimes these programs link to on-line photo storage and sharing sites such as Flickr and Picasa. These work great for point-and-shoot and cell phone photographers but those shooting seriously with a dSLR usually want more than these programs can provide. Next are the rich, mid-range, purpose-specific photo editing tools such as Adobe (Photoshop) Elements (for either the PC or Mac) and Aperture for the Mac. These are full-featured programs that have far more capabilities than most photographers want or need and will do almost any editing job asked of them.  Finally, there are the top-end editing tools used by advanced and professional photographers - Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop. These are two totally different packages that serve different but compatible roles in your photo editing work flow.

What is Adobe Lightroom (LR)? LR is a photographic database that was designed to store, catalog, and locate large numbers of digital images. LR also combines the photo editing power of Adobe Mini-bridge, Bridge, and CameRAW to view, convert, and edit images in a non-destructive manner and with a very easy to learn user interface. LR manipulates digital images at the image file-level rather than the pixel-level. Adobe Photoshop (PS), on the other hand, is part of a huge creative suite of programs used to manipulate digital images at the pixel-level in a destructive manner.  Wow - that is a lot of very specific terminology - what are these two programs used for and what do they do?

LR is the starting point in the digital imaging workflow of most serious photographers. LR allows the photographer to import RAW (or JPEG) image files from a camera or memory card into a computer. During the import, the files can be renamed, assigned to specific folders, converted to digital negatives (DNGs), have key words assigned, and undergo basic image processing available in Adobe CameRAW (ACR). Once the images are imported LR can be used to correct white balance and tint, adjust exposure, straighten and crop, create local color, contrast, and exposure adjustments, sharpen and reduce digital noise, and apply special effects to the images. LR also creates a viewable image and has multiple tools to compare, sort, locate, grade, tag, flag and copy images. It acts as a file manager for the RAW images allowing movement on hard drives and allows the creation of smart (automatically updated) or stable collections of photos.  LR can geo-tag photo locations.  The latest version of LR also creates various output formats for the web, slide shows, books, and prints.

Photoshop is the top end of photo editing software. Most photographers who do not do graphic design probably only use a small fraction of what PS can do. PS has two import features called Bridge and Mini-bridge that bring photos into ACR for editing and conversion to output files for printing or sharing.  ACR works much like LR to make image-level edits and corrections before PS is used.  PS allows editing at the pixel level so the user has complete control over all elements of the photo.  The photo edits, for the most part, are destructive edits meaning that the image will be irreversibly altered if saved. PS does not have the sophisticated database functions of LR and does not do the cataloging and searching as well as LR.

Both LR and PS can use pre-sets and third-party plug-ins to automate much of the work of photo editing. The automation of PS is far more sophisticated using scripts and batch processing to speed your workflow.  Examples of these include high dynamic range (HDR) imaging, focus stacking, and panoramic stitching of multiple images. The two programs work together seamlessly to enhance your editing workflow and image storage and retrieval.  So, how are the two programs used by a nature photographer?

The more I talk with professional photographers, the more I realize that about 90% of post-production editing is done in LR and only about 5-10% in PS. LR is a powerful image editor that gives busy photographers a comprehensive database with which to catalog tens of thousands of images and find them again in seconds. As an editor, LR performs all of the functions of ACR in a very intuitive user interface.  Color balance, tint, leveling, cropping, exposure and contrast adjustment, noise reduction, and sharpening are handled effortlessly in LR.  Local adjustments of nearly all of these functions can be done with both brush and gradient tools.  I will review these editing functions in more detail at another time, but, for now, recognize that these tools are available.

PS adds three hugely important functions that are not in LR and a few hundred other functions used by graphics designers.  The three biggies in PS are layers, masks, and content-aware fill. These destructive, pixel-level tools add creative touches not possible in LR and give the nature photographer the ability to "fix" issues in a photo that could be distracting to the central theme of the photo.  There are literally hundreds of other manipulations that can be done in PS that are not available in LR. Most of these are interesting but not necessary for the average photographer.

That is the editing overview and I will have much more about editing in future posts. Next time we will explore high dynamic range (HDR) imaging and its role for the nature photographer. 

 

How to ruin a picture quickly

Failure is the key to success - or - mistakes are the best way to learn! In the last posting I revealed my failure rate was about 44% of all shots I take and only about 7% of my shots do I really like. So what goes wrong when capturing an image and why do I really care?

Photography is a learned technical skill.  Learned by reading, classroom work, watching videos, research on the web but, photography is really learned by trial and error. Taking pictures and critically reviewing them in a timely fashion is the best way to improve your photographic skills - taking lots and lots of photos! In the tremendous book "Outliers," Malcom Gladwell claims that to really master a complex task it takes the average person about 10,000 repetitions. Photography is a complex task, certainly made easier with automated digital cameras, but none the less complicated. Automatic digital cameras (and, even iPhones) reliably take good snapshots and, occasionally, even good photographs. However, at some point in time, aspiring photographers will make the move from a point-and-shoot to a dSLR (digital single lens reflex) camera. The move allows for greater creativity but also many more ways to foul up a good picture.

So how are images destroyed at the time they are captured?

1) Bad focus always ruins a photo. Most digital cameras have an auto-focus system that is capable of many modes of focus. Auto-focus is attained when the shutter button is displaced halfway. Focus points show in the viewfinder and the operator has a choice of which point or points to select. When focus is attained there is usually a beep or a visual indicator of the selected focus point. Given multiple possible focus points in a scene, the camera will select the closest one - maybe not the one of greatest interest. Because of this problem, most nature photographers choose the "spot focus" mode so only one point is chosen by the camera. The subject of greatest interest is centered on this point and the shutter button depressed halfway down. Then the shot can be properly composed and the shutter fully depressed to expose the image. Obviously there are a lot of ways this can go bad and an out of focus subject ruins the image. No degree of post-processing (editing) can fix the image.  When precise focus is critical many choose to use manual focus either through the viewfinder or in the "live view" mode on the LCD. The advantage of this mode is that the image can be magnified greatly during the focus process for precise control. This,of course, requires a tripod and a very stationary subject.

2) Similar to bad focus, motion blur also can  ruin an image. Blur is different from out of focus. When a subject is out of focus there is usually some portion of the image that is in sharp focus. With motion blur, usually nothing is in focus if the camera moved during the exposure. If the subject moved, obviously it can be the only thing in the image that is blurred. The most common cause of blur in my experience is "camera shake." Camera shake is induce by poor technique in holding the camera or pressing the shutter release button. It is magnified by long exposure times and telephoto lenses trying to capture a distant or small subject. The result is a "soft" image or one that lacks crisp detail.  In addition to poor technique, camera shake can be induced by the vibration created when the mirror retracts as the shutter opens. Good camera hold technique and careful release of the shutter help but on long telephoto shots vibrations need to be minimized. Four things minimize shutter release and mirror vibration: 1) a sturdy tripod to hold the lens still, 2) a cable or remote shutter release, 3) locking up the mirror prior to exposure, and 4) fast shutter speed. 

3) Bad composition is a sure way to ruin an image. Taking time to consider all compositional elements before capturing the image is key but also shooting the scene from several perspectives improves the chance you will have a good composition. Professional photographers always tell you to "work the shot."  This means moving to several different camera locations, changing perspective from normal to high or low, using different focal lengths or zooming the lens, changing the depth of field, and shooting in vertical (portrait) and horizontal (landscape) formats. All of these things can help to create the best composition. Composition may be the hardest thing to learn in all of photography.  Poor composition is not necessarily the end of a digital image. Post-processing by cropping can sometimes save a poorly composed image but cropping deletes pixels from the image and will lower the resolution of the final print.

4) Serious exposure errors can reduce a great, well-composed, sharply focused image to a throw away. Exposure is fairly complicated and requires appropriate balance of the three elements of the "exposure triangle" - shutter speed, aperture, and ISO. In the automatic or program modes of the camera, these three factors are balanced for you. However, auto and program modes severely limit your creative ability and may reduce good shots to snapshots. I will spend time in a later posting discussing why and how you might want to have control over the exposure triangle but for now let's agree that good exposure is necessary for a good photograph. Fortunately for all of us, post-processing can often repair minor exposure errors. Underexposed (dark) images are more easily repaired than overexposed(light) images.

5) The last element that destroys the impact of your photographs on the viewer is what I call lack of emotion.  Flat, dull, washed-out colors in a bright scene have no emotional impact on the viewer.  Photographers often refer to this as "punch." I almost always like punchy photographs - bright vibrant, saturated color that depicts nature at her best. I strive to produce these in my wildlife shots, macros, and wildflowers. Sometimes emotion is better conveyed in low contrast, moody shots. I love an early morning shot in the rising fog. Good exposure is the first step in creating mood and emotion in a photograph but post-processing also is a big part of bringing drama to a good shot.  

So that is it - 5 ways to ruin a photograph or, 5 things to remember when shooting to make your shots better. I will come back to each of these issues in future posts.

As always, please post your comments and contribute to this blog. There are several outstanding professionals on the contacts list who can add insight and perspective to these thoughts.