Help me make better pictures!

[jenseib]

I have a Rebel XTi and I like it. But I also know that alot of pictures get tweaked with photoshop. I don't have photoshop, but I do have Paint shop Pro 9. From what I have read, you can do about the same stuff with it.
So what I want to know is how do you guys make the colors "pop". And what exactly is being done to make the pictures looks so awesome. Where do I learn how to do this. I am really new to all this. I have been taking lots of picutres for years, but only recently got the Rebel, and learned form others that photoshopping really helps too.
I have asked on another board how to make the colors pop, and have yet to recieve an answer. It seems to be a big secret that no one wants to let me in on. LOL!

Can anyone help me get started? Should I get photoshop and ditch Paint shop Pro9?

 

[MICKEY88]

I use paint shop pro photo XI.

I highly recommend it, there are some awesome features in it that were not in psp9


there is a tooth whitener tool, a blemish remover , a suntan brush, a color changer tool....all very easy to use and very helpful.


one way to make colors pop is to increase the saturation.


with psp pro photo XI the steps would be

adjust--hue&saturation- then one of the saturation options in the drop down list.

increase saturation in small steps, too much can really make a pic look bad..


with psp pro photo XI you can pick adjust--color--fade correction

 

[Master Mason]

you should be able to do almost anything with PSP as you would with PS.

As for making the colors pop, that is simply learning how to adjust your photos. You can make adjustments in exposure, contrast, color saturation etc. I think a lot of it is trial and error in the learning process.

I know there are books out there that will help you, but all the ones I have are PS specific so I don't have a good suggestion as to what you should get.

Also, you might take a look at understanding exposure, because if you are getting the best image you can to work with, it makes it much easier in the post process stage.

 

[jenseib]

Thanks guys!~ Is understanding Exposure a book? I think I have heard of it. I'll look into that too. I know I have lots of room for improvement with my photography skills and knowledge!! But so many people I know keep telling me that no matter how good your picture you always tweak it in photoshop/paintshop. They said it is like developing in a dark room, but only on the computer.
So I guess I'll keep reading up, and trying.
I am jsut getting inot the chapter on layers in my book, and it really isn't telling me much. I may have to try and find another book for help there.

 

[ukcatfan]

You might also want to consider shooting in RAW and using the processing program to do those basic adjustments. You would also likely get better results with RAW b/c there is much more data for the program to work with when the adjustments are made.

Kevin

 

[AndrewWG]

Thanks guys!~ Is understanding Exposure a book?

Yep! It is a book and a great one at that. We refer to it so much on here that I figured I'd scan the cover to show in the future.

Everyone, feel free to copy this pic to your drive to post it in future threads as well.

Andy

 

[Master Mason]

I agree with what Kevin just said about RAW as well. and Yes Understanding Exposure is a Book.

 

[jann1033]

some lenses have better color and contrast as well so it could start before photoshop gets involved

 

[MICKEY88]

But so many people I know keep telling me that no matter how good your picture you always tweak it in photoshop/paintshop. They said it is like developing in a dark room, but only on the computer.
QUOTE]

I wouldn't say always.... I have a lot of pics that I have not edited at all

as others have said the key is starting with proper exposure, underexposure will dull the colors.

another option that some people use is to set your camera for more saturation if it allows you to do so, I prefer to do that via pc,

 

[Groucho]

Like Mickey88 said, check the settings on your camera first. Some of the DSLRs let you choose the image tone, like "natural" or "vivid" or similar names. Switching to "vivid" (or equivalent) will give you colors with more "pop", probably more than they have in real life. You can probably also adjust the contrast, saturation, etc - those options may be blocked out in the "auto" mode, so try shooting in "P" Program mode instead. This is basically the same as Auto mode, but it won't pop your flash automatically, and gives you access to more tweaks, like those I just mentioned.

As others have said, bumping up saturation will "pop" the colors, though you don't want too much. Adobe Lightroom (and Photoshop if you use RAW) has a really nice feature called "Vibrance", which is like bringing up the saturation, but will generally give more pleasing results than just cranking up the saturation. Shooting raw is definitely worthwhile, as you have the ability to change the saturation, contrast, white balance, etc after the fact, so you don't have to worry about it when shooting. You can also turn up the saturation more safely because if a particular shot is oversaturated, you can turn it back down when processing the raw with no loss in quality.

 

[jann1033]

op i think the xti has picture styles which i think include a more vivid setting, you might want to check in your manual for which setting that would be..if not you can set it for higher saturation in parameters( that's how the xt sets it but i think the picture styles does it as a preset as well on the xti)

i looked it up on canon usa, the default or standard is high saturation but the landscape is :Sharp expression with particularly vivid results for blue skies and green hues. maybe you'd like the landscape better

 

[handicap18]

But so many people I know keep telling me that no matter how good your picture you always tweak it in photoshop/paintshop. They said it is like developing in a dark room, but only on the computer.
So I guess I'll keep reading up, and trying.
I am jsut getting inot the chapter on layers in my book, and it really isn't telling me much. I may have to try and find another book for help there.

I don't necessarily agree with this. I HATE POST PROCESSING. I try to get the best shot I can right out of the camera. I've had my dSLR (a Nikon D50) for a little over 18 months and its taken a lot of time and practicing. Took me a good 6+ months to get some of the settings adjusted to my liking and then longer to get a better grasp of proper exposure (still learning all that).

I also highly recomment Bryan Peterson's book "Understand Exposure". I refer to it often. I've been experimenting with RAW recently and have come to realize that I can still make all the adjustments I like in the camera, but have more flexibility to adjust it afterwards. A few times I've left the white balance on the wrong setting and have been able to correct it on the computer where as with shooting JPEG I wasn't able to do that.

Though I think the software I'm using is making some automatic changes I don't like. Still trying to figure it out. Heck, it was free so I'll stick with it till I can afford Lightroom or Nikon Capture.

Keep up with it. Do a bunch of reading and get yourself out of the AUTO modes and into at least Program and then aperture priority, shutter priority and maybe even sometimes full manual. You'll have a lot more control of the camera instead of the camera having control over you.

 

[Groucho]

I don't necessarily agree with this. I HATE POST PROCESSING. I try to get the best shot I can right out of the camera. I've had my dSLR (a Nikon D50) for a little over 18 months and its taken a lot of time and practicing. Took me a good 6+ months to get some of the settings adjusted to my liking and then longer to get a better grasp of proper exposure (still learning all that).

I also highly recomment Bryan Peterson's book "Understand Exposure". I refer to it often. I've been experimenting with RAW recently and have come to realize that I can still make all the adjustments I like in the camera, but have more flexibility to adjust it afterwards. A few times I've left the white balance on the wrong setting and have been able to correct it on the computer where as with shooting JPEG I wasn't able to do that.

Correcting things later is one of the big reasons that I like shooting raw. I'd like to think that a year down the road, I'll be better at doing my raw conversions. Maybe there'll be better software, too. Or maybe I'll decide that I want a slightly different look to some old photos - brighter, more or less constrasty, etc. Shooting raw makes it easy to go back later (as I'm doing with my January WDW trip photos now) and tweak things that you didn't think of, didn't know how to do, or just plain couldn't (lack of proper software) at the time.

It also means that you can simply ignore the white balance and color settings on your camera. So your camera flubbed the WB when shooting under tungsten - so what? Concentrate on getting the shot. Worry about the other stuff later. Yes, you can adjust it to a degree with a JPG, but you won't have as much flexibility. You can definitely put me down as a big fan of shooting raw.

(That last sentence might not sound right out of context...... )

 

[0bli0]

i seldom use photoshop. i do 90% (or more) of any edits/processing in Apple Aperture. the one thing i do use photoshop for is healing - especially on negatives (dust and scratches). i wish the dodge and burn tools behaved a bit better (more like darkroom tools. fwiw i used to be a big psp user, but my workflow is all on the Mac now...

 

[jenseib]

Thanks everyone for the replies.
I NEVER shoot in auto, so that isn't a problem for me. I almost only shoot in manual. I also don't use photoshop, but paint shop pro. I have heard it is just as good as photoshop, but I don't know enough to know if that is true.
I do not shoot in RAW yet. I only have one card, and RAW takes alot more room up, and since iam still learning, I figure I'll wait a bit before I tackle that. I knwo an excellent photographer that shots in JPEG, and her pictures are jsut awesome. She says she doesn't have time or room for RAW. So I am taking that slowly.
I must admit that I have not read my whole manual yet either. But I am sure there is a vivid mode. My P&S has that, and I shoot in that all the time with that one.
I will get to reading the rest of my manual, and get the book you guys suggested too, and hopefully that will help a bit as well.

I will take any other suggestions as well!

 

[Groucho]

She says she doesn't have time or room for RAW. So I am taking that slowly.

Time isn't too bad. You don't have to do any special post-processing, just run them through whatever raw converter came with your camera (or any other one) and deal with the resulting JPGs. The advantage is that in the future, if/when you DO have time, you'll have the RAWs to revisit. I used to put all my pictures through on default, and would occasionally go back to tweak a few that really needed it, but Lightroom makes it easy and fast enough that I'm doing more specific tweaking on most photos. And again, I can go back to any of my earlier RAWs and tweak those now.

It's kind of like keeping your film negatives around. A few years ago, my uncle tossed a huge box of negatives that he had, figuring that he'd never use them again and they were just taking up space. Now, he had a negative/slide scanner and is forced to just scan prints of the photos that he threw away.

Now, space is definitely an issue... you're probably looking at 3x as many JPGs as RAWs. Fortunately, memory cards are really cheap.