Is it my camera or photoshop skills I should improve?

[Phober]

I've got a bridge camera (Sony H7) and have it figured out pretty well. My photos turn out not too bad, but they just don't have the vibrance I want. Photoshop helps a bit, but I lack photoshop skills very much. I basically adjust the levels, do some darkening or lightening of areas using masks and stuff like that.

Here's one of my favorites I took not too long ago of my fiancee. I didn't spend too much time on it and I know some things I should change on it, but it turned out to be one of the best ones I've taken with this camera.
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a54/03_silver_sv/n514431101_772645_8646.jpg
But my shots like this make me realise that it has so much potential to be a great shot, its just not quite there.
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a54/03_silver_sv/DSC05042-1.jpg

Is it my cheap camera or my photoshop skills that I should upgrade? Do your photos need much photoshopping to get them to look that good?

Would anyone mind sharing with me what basic things you do to your photos to improve their quality?

[geospatial_junkie]

I'm not sure what your menu's are like on your camera, but have you tried increasing saturation, sharpness, and contrast?

[pathfinder]

Phober,

Great images come from great lighting and composition, which can be achieved with many simple cameras. If you need very low light performance, or rapid focus aquisition, then more sophisticated cameras can help.

The most important skills are an understanding of what the camera can achieve, and an ability to refine the image in Photoshop. Think of Photoshop as the seasoning, not the rack of lamb.

Much of the discussion of Photoshop usage seems to center around how to make modest images ok or 'better'. The really great images you see online or in print, start out as very good images, that are then improved by Photoshop.

I suggest you take a look at a gallery of mine here (http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/gallery/5021422_wgex6#311594164_wdbfa) and try to decide which images were shot with a DSLR and which images were shot with a Canon G9 point and shoot. Then check the exif data link you get when you hover your mouse over the image and see if you are right. There are numerous images in this gallery shot with a G9, a 40D, or a 5D. Try to guess which is which.

All were shot in RAW, and yes, I edited them in Photoshop, but usually no more than a B&W point and myabe a curve or two.

I think to get great images today, as expectations are much higher than 25 years ago, one needs both good photographic technique, and at least a modest level of skills using Photoshop.

[geospatial_junkie]

Agreed.

[Phober]

I suggest you take a look at a gallery of mine here (http://pathfinder.smugmug.com/gallery/5021422_wgex6#311594164_wdbfa) and try to decide which images were shot with a DSLR and which images were shot with a Canon G9 point and shoot. Then check the exif data link you get when you hover your mouse over the image and see if you are right. There are numerous images in this gallery shot with a G9, a 40D, or a 5D. Try to guess which is which.

I lose. You have some really great shots with your G9 as well!

After my wedding next month, I'll have more time to play around with my camera and learn photoshop better. Photography is a really fun hobby!

[pathfinder]

Thanks.

I can't tell which is which either, frequently, without checking my exif data at any image size usually seen on the web or a computer monitor.

[Blaker]

Best light to shoot in is early morning/late afternoon. Shooting in the middle of the day will make your photos look flat.
Also, to emphasize your subject, it helps to soften the background. For example, in your motorcylcle photo, if you had used a wider aperture, it would have thrown the background a little out of focus, thus making the motorcycle stand out a little more.
You can also play around with contrast and saturation in whatever photo editing program you are using.
I'd suggest a book on basic composition and also read your camera manual and learn how to use aperture priority effectively.
Good luck!


I've got a bridge camera (Sony H7) and have it figured out pretty well. My photos turn out not too bad, but they just don't have the vibrance I want. Photoshop helps a bit, but I lack photoshop skills very much. I basically adjust the levels, do some darkening or lightening of areas using masks and stuff like that.


But my shots like this make me realise that it has so much potential to be a great shot, its just not quite there.
http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a54/03_silver_sv/DSC05042-1.jpg

Is it my cheap camera or my photoshop skills that I should upgrade? Do your photos need much photoshopping to get them to look that good?

Would anyone mind sharing with me what basic things you do to your photos to improve their quality?

[pyrtek]

You know, Phober, what's interesting is that if you had posted these pics in
one of the "regular" sub-forums, you'd have gotten a slew of "great pics", or
"awesome photos" responses. Around here it's all in how you "sell" your
images or how well known you are. That's why I find DGrin to be a good source
of some sorts of information
, but I would certainly not consider this place
important in establishing what is or isn't a good image. For example, if you are
a "friend" around here, then you can post even the most horrendous crap and
it will be treated with reverence. I'm not trying to say that this is a bad place to
hang out at, but I just want you to realize, that much MUCH worse photos than
the ones you posted here have been deemed "awesome" or, at the very least,
"great" on these forums, just because the folks here are too nice to be honest
sometimes.


For example, anything edgework or BinaryFX have to say about postprocessing is golden.