[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

How do you know what shutter speed or aperture to chose in M mode? you carry a separate light meter, or use the camera light meter to tell you what settings to choose?
If your camera tells you different exposure in M mode, and sets a different exposure in Av/Tv mode, then your camera is faulty. I suggest you get it repaired.

How did everyone knew shutter/aperture to choose when there was no inbuilt metering ?

Of course camera will set different exposure in Av/Tv mode because I control both aperture and shutter in M mode. And I neved said camera underexposed, I said my camera tells me, I am underexposing, there's a difference.

Originally Posted by lucifer1881

How am I supposed to put it without sounding offensive and attracting infractions from the mods?

Some believe that M mode is the way to go. They lug their tripods in broad daylight believing that using them instantly produces better pictures. In fact, if you are in the mood for a good laugh go to a tourist spot, set up your tripod and try to look all busy. Within 10 minutes you will have a huge group of people clicking away with their cameras. They believe that since someone has set up a tripod the place must be photo worthy.

Better gear or dedicated light meters will not make better pictures. The camera meter works the same irrespective of the mode the camera is in. It does not matter if you select M mode to deliberately get 2 stops of under exposure or dial in the same value with the exposure compensation dial.

Fiddling with M mode makes you lose time - time which could have been spent taking more pictures. If it takes 'x' sec to set aperture and shutter speed in M mode, it will take 'x/2' sec to do the same in Av or Tv mode. And the settings would be identical.

The above tirade is not directed at any particular individual or group of people. I am simply fried with all the half-truths and myths surrounding photography that are all over the internet. This is a general rant.

Sorry, I thought we were discussing about M mode vs Av/Tv/P modes usability and not time it takes someone to adjust settings or tripods. Also fiddling is different to adjusting

On one side we all rave about not letting camera do everything for us and on the same side we rely on built-in-meter to do metering for us which makes or breaks an image. Baseline for photography is to learn the rules and then break them all.

I did not want to go into long posts, but here it goes.

Shooting weddings is easist and hardest compared to other branches of photography. Easiest because there are 20% shots that need to be nailed, 60% is just documenting and rest 20% is just candid shots. Where it becomes hard is familiarity with camera. Sure one can shoot Av/Tv/P/M mode but one needs to be in control of Aperture all the time, so that only leaves us with Av/M mode. Now 99% of wedding photography (including location shots) happen at 24-200mm @ f2.8/f4

Using 200mm in Av and at a reception, camera will usually ask to go 1/15, 1/30 or even longer shutter speed and that is at ISO 3200-5000, steady shots is just impossible, ofcourse one can use flash in bounce but then again, its just a hit and miss since camera doesn't take flash into account while metering, so even if camera exposes correctly flash will literally wash everything away. So one has to have flash in manual and one has to check every single shot for exposure and adjust flash for everysingle shot. A tiny bit of underexposing increases chances of getting noise too. So we are shooting Av but still spending time of checking settings and images we captured but during this time we are missing critical shots.

On the other hand at the same place, I can go M mode with 1/200 @ f4 and ISO 3200. My camera will still tell me I am way underexposed but since flash will sync till 1/250* and M mode will let me meter the flash through TTL+A+FL, I can just let flash correct the exposure. Way less fiddling/adjusting for me.

Its to the point, a starter can shoot a wedding at 1/125-1/200 @ f2.8-f4 and ISO800-2000 with flash in TTL+A, and without changing any setting, he can come out with 80%+ keepers (ofcourse composition depending).

If you have better way to shoot weddings and manage 95% keepers, please let me know and I will follow without hesitation.

Originally Posted by shajufx

I should happily agree to that fact because the %age of my keepers increased from the day I moved to M learning. I will surely try the Sunny16 rule with more attention. Flash is mostly used in the bounce mode, so thats not a worry for me. About your MFD suggestion, its not very clear to me. Did you mean minimum focus distance ? Could you clarify what you meant by that doubling ?

Exactly. I only use bounce flash except one situation (that is not my image, just a random google shot to display). But to hazard a guess that is around F22, 1/250, ISO 200 with Flash in TTL.

Especially while bouncing if we are too close to subject (less than Minimum focusing distance), there is a big chance to get clipping, majority of it comes on forehead and cheeks which is most imp part of the image (emotions). While getting clipping, it can also give harsh shadows on eyes. In such circumstances, double the MFD or bounce to your back, bouncing to back doesn't always work so bounce to right or left and give it a creative side light

[rajb3125]

Originally Posted by VW2010

I thought the discussion to use the M mode was to achieve better results compared to AV to Tv mode using a flash and not about the speed it takes.. Controlling light using M mode is far easier than Tv or Av mode when using a flash.

There, I highlighted the most imp part

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

Using 200mm in Av and at a reception, camera will usually ask to go 1/15, 1/30 or even longer shutter speed and that is at ISO 3200-5000, steady shots is just impossible, ofcourse one can use flash in bounce but then again, its just a hit and miss since camera doesn't take flash into account while metering, so even if camera exposes correctly flash will literally wash everything away. So one has to have flash in manual and one has to check every single shot for exposure and adjust flash for everysingle shot. A tiny bit of underexposing increases chances of getting noise too. So we are shooting Av but still spending time of checking settings and images we captured but during this time we are missing critical shots.

On the other hand at the same place, I can go M mode with 1/200 @ f4 and ISO 3200. My camera will still tell me I am way underexposed but since flash will sync till 1/250* and M mode will let me meter the flash through TTL+A+FL, I can just let flash correct the exposure. Way less fiddling/adjusting for me.

Its to the point, a starter can shoot a wedding at 1/125-1/200 @ f2.8-f4 and ISO800-2000 with flash in TTL+A, and without changing any setting, he can come out with 80%+ keepers (ofcourse composition depending).

I understand your logic. Since you are dealing mostly with artificial lighting, you can pick your exposure setting after initial trail and error and stick with it throughout without a risk. May not work if it is a beach wedding at dawn or dusk where the daylight keeps changing.

This discussion reminded me of a 5 year old discussion, reposted it here: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/shift...ml#post2367646

[typeOnegative]

I thought that one best learns when one is out in the field clicking and then critically analyzing images at home. In my opinion fights are mostly about peoples opinions. In any case, more power to learning ...

If a new topic is required: GIMP/Open Source versus Photoshop. I have not used Photoshop and on GIMP (with UFRAW) just adjust white balance and contrast on my .NEF files. Sometimes I use colour curves for extra effect. Is this all I should be doing? Also I somehow feel that the images I process on Windows look different from those processed in Linux. Does the software and the operating system make any difference?

[rkbharat]

Hot Pixels, not one but almost 70-80

Took few evening shots from D7000 and 35mm at 20sec, f22 at 100ISO and I observed small dots on little zoom on LCD, viewing on PC confirmed so many of them.

On some research on net, this is confirmed to be a painful defect in D7000 and not proper solution from Nikon as of now, despite they have accepted the problem.

Even new firmware upgrade did not improved the situation, though setting NR yes for Long exposures reduced the problem a bit. But that again is a problem.

This is one very very bad experience.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by amitk26

I use canon DPP for processing and converting my RAW , Can someone tell how to add a new lens data to this tool ? also if there is any Lens correction data available for Sigma 10-20 F4.5 ~ 5.6 for DPP ?

I tried using Adobe lightroom ( 20 day free trial version) but it also lacks the lens data for Sigma 10-20 F4.5 - 5.6.

I think lens correction is required most in UWA lens.

Bumping this question again which was dumped in M mode discussion.
Meanwhile I found there is no way to add lens data in Canon DPP and UFRaw has a lensfun lib which can suit my purpose but haven't checked the lensfun till now , though I use UFRaw occasionally.

Originally Posted by typeOnegative

If a new topic is required: GIMP/Open Source versus Photoshop.

+ 1 to that.

IMHO it is not the software and OS that make difference but the description of techniques makes a difference most of the workflows described on net are very much photoshop and lightroom specific.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by typeOnegative

If a new topic is required: GIMP/Open Source versus Photoshop. I have not used Photoshop and on GIMP (with UFRAW) just adjust white balance and contrast on my .NEF files. Sometimes I use colour curves for extra effect. Is this all I should be doing? Also I somehow feel that the images I process on Windows look different from those processed in Linux. Does the software and the operating system make any difference?

Originally Posted by amitk26

+ 1 to that.
IMHO it is not the software and OS that make difference but the description of techniques makes a difference most of the workflows described on net are very much photoshop and lightroom specific.

Please add Aperture (LR equivalent in MAC) to the same. The idea is to have good database management, plus good to very good editing capabilities. My research tells me that one should start with LR or Aperture depending if he/she is on windows or MAC. (If one is on MAC my findings have been that Aperture is better). Beyond that if one feels the need he should look at Photoshop.

However I have not been able to place GIMP in the whole proposition.
As Amit mentioned, a seamless work flow/recipe capability is very important. That easies life to a great extent in S/W. How do these compare on that front?

Having commented on the above, I have another basic problem. How good is Canon DPP itself? Today that is the only thing I use and hence cannot pass a judgement. Since I am totally new to the this, I cant even vouch for a reason to shift from DPP to LR/Aperture. Any thoughts on that?


EDIT: @rajb3125 As you mentioned, that is the exact reason I also was mostly on M mode as against Av. 1/125, Flash, ISO 200, F4/5 for occasions.

[neoonwheels]

Finally bought Canon 1100D with 18-55 IS II kit lens, 4 GB class 4 memory card + carry case and 2 years warranty on body and 1 year on lens.

[amitk26]

Originally Posted by ampere

The idea is to have good database management, plus good to very good editing capabilities. My research tells me that one should start with LR or Aperture depending if he/she is on windows or MAC. (If one is on MAC my findings have been that Aperture is better). Beyond that if one feels the need he should look at Photoshop.

However I have not been able to place GIMP in the whole proposition.
As Amit mentioned, a seamless work flow/recipe capability is very important. That easies life to a great extent in S/W. How do these compare on that front.

No I did not mean that at all I was just searching for a solution to find lens aberration correction data for Sigma 10-20 F4 ~ 5.6 lens . And apperently UFRaw provides that using lensfun lib.

GIMP is what Photoshop does and UFraw functionality equivalent of LR .
IMHO Light room sucks ( with my limited use of 1 week )

Originally Posted by ampere

How good is Canon DPP itself? Today that is the only thing I use and hence cannot pass a judgement. Since I am totally new to the this, I cant even vouch for a reason to shift from DPP to LR/Aperture. Any thoughts on that?

Quite good actually for all Canon lenses the only thing is that I was unable to add lens correction data for Sigma lenses in this.

[Rudra Sen]

Originally Posted by ampere

Having commented on the above, I have another basic problem. How good is Canon DPP itself? Today that is the only thing I use and hence cannot pass a judgement. Since I am totally new to the this, I cant even vouch for a reason to shift from DPP to LR/Aperture. Any thoughts on that?

No need to pass any judgement here but how's your experience with DPP? I'm keen to know.

[ampere]

Originally Posted by amitk26

No I did not mean that at all I was just searching for a solution to find lens aberration correction data for Sigma 10-20 F4 ~ 5.6 lens . And apperently UFRaw provides that using lensfun lib.

GIMP is what Photoshop does and UFraw functionality equivalent of LR .
IMHO Light room sucks ( with my limited use of 1 week )

Thanks. Thats provides some prospective

Quite good actually for all Canon lenses the only thing is that I was unable to add lens correction data for Sigma lenses in this.

See this is was also mentioning. I also found DPP to be very good (as per what I think).
But if one does not know what he/she is missing, one wont realize. That is why I was asking, what is a compelling reason to shift to better solutions.

EDIT: Rudra da, I just answered your question.

[VW2010]

@Rudra

I extensively use DPP. I found it more than sufficient. Unless i specifically need to use photoshop, i almost always use DPP.

DPP Raw is very decent and the tool has quite some good features.
I strictly use PS only when i have to alter a picture by enhancing the shadow or clipping an highlight or rotate a picture to eliminate the skew.

Also i use PS only when i want an altered effect and i end up using it for some portraits and landscape only.

Moving towards the point where if i dont capture it right, i dont want to waste my time in editing. Shooting RAW was once fun. Now i tend to shoot only landscapes in raw for a little better editing options to enhance image.

[shajufx]

Originally Posted by rajb3125

....while bouncing if we are too close to subject (less than Minimum focusing distance), there is a big chance to get clipping, majority of it comes on forehead and cheeks which is most imp part of the image (emotions)....

I understand it now, gone through that while testing few times. Need to experiment more to get the point completely.

Originally Posted by Samurai

.....May not work if it is a beach wedding at dawn or dusk where the daylight keeps changing.....

Sunny16 rule all the way I got something new to experiment....Muaaahhh Any team-bhpians getting married on a beach ?

Originally Posted by VW2010

.....Shooting RAW was once fun. Now i tend to shoot only landscapes in raw for a little better editing options to enhance image.

Same feeling here. I used to keep the RAW mode throughout, but realised its not worth the pain (memory fill up, conversion, editing, time consumption etc.). Unless I forget changing to JPEG, I prefer to shoot family, friends, personal events etc all in JPEG.

[tsk1979]

When I was a "Canon Guy" I was heavily dependent on DPP. I rarely felt the need to Use GIMP, except for some night shots where stock noise reduction was spoiling images too much. So I used GIMP for wavelet denoise algorithm.
Another case is where the shot is slightly blurred. Stock sharpening of DPP does not work here. So I used GIMP to do a USM + Blur combo to get a sharp image without getting too much noise or artifacts in the image.

[pawan_pullarwar]

I also use DPP for most of the editing. I bought Photoshop Element 9, use only if I have to do light adjustment for selected areas of the image. Also DPP does not provide the free hand cropping, you need to select the available cropping dimension from the drop down.