What's new

My Best Friend Crystal

Lightroom is where I do 99% of my editing.. I don't know anything about Elements ;\
 
Lightroom is where I do 99% of my editing.. I don't know anything about Elements ;\

So you really like Lightroom? Is it user friendly? (As user friendly photo editing could be?) ;)
 
I think at first it was SO different from photoshop that I was used to that it was scary and overwhelming but I caught on quickly. Still learning all the time but after some youtube tutorials and watching a bunch on creativelive and of course just playing around with things I have really figured a lot out with it. I think for the cost and now ease of editing since I've learned the program better I don't think I could go back to Photoshop for the bulk of my editing.
 
I started using Photoshop 2.0 a looooong time ago. I shot a wedding in 1991 where in addition to $550, the guy gave me a brand new boxed version of PS 2.0. Computers back then were soooooooo pathetically slow, that PS would barely run. It took foreeeeeever to do anything on those ancient Macs. I tried the trial version of Elements 10...wow....very challenging for me, and an oddball interface. I can honestly say that Lightroom 3.6 changed my entire world.

I am a sloooooow software upgrader...if a Mac I own is stable, I will run outdated software until I can no longer keep up. I can guarantee you--with Lightroom, inside of 30 days, we could have your shots looking sooooo much better and more consistent.

As to the direct sun...Crystal's eyes cast downward, her walking the horse on a short lead...pure MONEY!!!!!!!!! THe thing about the "new" Lightroom 5 that I have seen is the incredible way it can now "lift" highlights, and also separate highlights from under-exposed areas without the need for "quick masking".

You really,really,really want to move to Lightroom, shoot raw, and watch as your backlighted frames improve dramatically. Software processing within the past four years has really improved to a HUGE degree, and most of the effort has been in Lightroom and ACR, but Elements has been kept down, so to speak, by Adobe. I am more of a shooter than a software guy, but Lightroom has helped me more than anything I have bought in the last 25 years. Not kidding. I am not a really skilled "Photoshop guy"....I still try and do most things in the field or in-studio with actual "light" and "lenses". But Lightroom...my Gawd..it's like the invention of electricity was to cooking...
 
I started using Photoshop 2.0 a looooong time ago. I shot a wedding in 1991 where in addition to $550, the guy gave me a brand new boxed version of PS 2.0. Computers back then were soooooooo pathetically slow, that PS would barely run. It took foreeeeeever to do anything on those ancient Macs. I tried the trial version of Elements 10...wow....very challenging for me, and an oddball interface. I can honestly say that Lightroom 3.6 changed my entire world.

I am a sloooooow software upgrader...if a Mac I own is stable, I will run outdated software until I can no longer keep up. I can guarantee you--with Lightroom, inside of 30 days, we could have your shots looking sooooo much better and more consistent.

As to the direct sun...Crystal's eyes cast downward, her walking the horse on a short lead...pure MONEY!!!!!!!!! THe thing about the "new" Lightroom 5 that I have seen is the incredible way it can now "lift" highlights, and also separate highlights from under-exposed areas without the need for "quick masking".

You really,really,really want to move to Lightroom, shoot raw, and watch as your backlighted frames improve dramatically. Software processing within the past four years has really improved to a HUGE degree, and most of the effort has been in Lightroom and ACR, but Elements has been kept down, so to speak, by Adobe. I am more of a shooter than a software guy, but Lightroom has helped me more than anything I have bought in the last 25 years. Not kidding. I am not a really skilled "Photoshop guy"....I still try and do most things in the field or in-studio with actual "light" and "lenses". But Lightroom...my Gawd..it's like the invention of electricity was to cooking...

I think at first it was SO different from photoshop that I was used to that it was scary and overwhelming but I caught on quickly. Still learning all the time but after some youtube tutorials and watching a bunch on creativelive and of course just playing around with things I have really figured a lot out with it. I think for the cost and now ease of editing since I've learned the program better I don't think I could go back to Photoshop for the bulk of my editing.


Thanks guys! It even looks pretty affordable compared to Photoshop CS(whatever it is now). They even have a plan where you can pay $10/a month to use it. I'm definitely doing my research.


Hey they even have a free demo!
 
Lightroom is fantastic! However, be prepared for some frustration learning to use it. I've recommended it to 3 people I know that shoot casually to part-time-business, and none of them kept it after the trial. One preferred Photoshop CC, one stayed with Elements 10, and one even prefers Picasa for LOL!!!

Get the trial, watch lots of videos here Learn Lightroom 5 | Adobe TV , and give it an hour or two every day. Experiment, trial and error, read, watch, learn.
 
Lightroom is actually a photo processing/cataloging software, photoshop/elements is not.
 
https://adobeid-na1.services.adobe.com/renga-idprovider/pages/login?callback=https%3A%2F%2Fims-na1.adobelogin.com%2Fims%2Fadobeid%2Ftrials1%2FAdobeID%2Ftoken%3Fredirect_uri%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.adobe.com%252Fcfusion%252Ftdrc%252Findex.cfm%253Fproduct%253Dphotoshop_lightroom%26scope%3Dopenid%252CAdobeID%26state%3D%257B%2522av%2522%253Anull%252C%2522pl%2522%253Anull%252C%2522di%2522%253Anull%252C%2522mc%2522%253Anull%252C%2522ac%2522%253A%2522Adobe.com_TDRC_PhotoshopLightroom%2522%257D&client_id=trials1&display=web_v2&denied_callback=https%3A%2F%2Fims-na1.adobelogin.com%2Fims%2Fdenied%2Ftrials1%3Fredirect_uri%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.adobe.com%252Fcfusion%252Ftdrc%252Findex.cfm%253Fproduct%253Dphotoshop_lightroom%26scope%3Dopenid%252CAdobeID%26response_type%3Dtoken%26state%3D%257B%2522av%2522%253Anull%252C%2522pl%2522%253Anull%252C%2522di%2522%253Anull%252C%2522mc%2522%253Anull%252C%2522ac%2522%253A%2522Adobe.com_TDRC_PhotoshopLightroom%2522%257D&state=%7B%22av%22%3Anull%2C%22pl%22%3Anull%2C%22di%22%3Anull%2C%22mc%22%3Anull%2C%22ac%22%3A%22Adobe.com_TDRC_PhotoshopLightroom%22%7D&relay=aeeb5c65-e2a9-4ea0-a99c-0af2c0e43258&locale=en&flow_type=token&dc=false&client_redirect=https%3A%2F%2Fims-na1.adobelogin.com%2Fims%2Fredirect%2Ftrials1%3Fclient_redirect%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.adobe.com%252Fcfusion%252Ftdrc%252Findex.cfm%253Fproduct%253Dphotoshop_lightroom%26state%3D%257B%2522av%2522%253Anull%252C%2522pl%2522%253Anull%252C%2522di%2522%253Anull%252C%2522mc%2522%253Anull%252C%2522ac%2522%253A%2522Adobe.com_TDRC_PhotoshopLightroom%2522%257D

This link will take you to the free trial of Lightroom 5.
I like your ideas and I might steal some of them lol. I like to use an on camera flash dialed back to like 1/16th to fill some of the shadows on the face and to add a little twinkle. I see that you like shallow DoF and it is effective. You can improve this look if you go to a fixed focal length lens like a 50mm f/1.8. You can shoot with them at 2.8 and have much better sharpness and contrast than you will get with a standard kit zoom, and they are cheap.


Good luck and keep on shooting.
 
Yes - the "nifty fifties" of the lens world are great starter primes. Canon's 50mm f/1.8 II runs about $95 last time I checked. I've had it for several years and I do still use it along with my 85mm f/1.8.

LR is WORTH IT. It took me a while to hop on the Lightroom bandwagon but I can't imaging working without it now. And I still work in PSE - I'm using the latest PSE 12. I do so much editing in Lightroom these days I've never felt the need to drop several hundred dollars on the full Photoshop. Anything creative I've wanted to do in Photoshop I've been able to do it in PSE 12 (so far).
 
Agree with the points raised above and will add that almost every one of these would have benefitted greatly from the addition of some fill light.


Please excuse the question, as it may seem "dumb", but what is fill light?

Thanks your advice!

Please let me answer that.

Usually there is a main light called the "key light". Key light can be anything; the sun, a window, a flash, or an ordinary lightbulb, depending on the levels of light you want.

The "fill light" works with the key light but is not in the same location. The fill light "fills" in the shadows generated by the key light. It serves to compliment the overall composition by evening out the light by cutting deep shadows, etc. The fill light also can be practically anything; a reflector, a flash, or whatever works with the key light as long as it's just "fill" and doesn't become so powerful that it overpowers the key light.

So now in your daytime shots that were lit by the sun, you could have a reflector or a flash on low power so that the shadows would not spoil your shot.

Hope that helps.
 
the horse ones do it for me
 
Crystal is a very attractive young woman, and her great attitude comes through in most of these. I think the inconsistency part is largely because there are from several different shoots, spanning a fair amount of time, so yeah, they are "different". My favorites are the two where she's lying in the grass and looking upward, and also the one where she's walking the light-colored horse as the sun sets, since that's a really romantic setting.

I saw your earlier thread about getting more business, and spent a few minutes clicking through the entire 2014 and 2013 Photos galleries on FB. You've made a big improvement since 2013. I noticed Tirediron mentioned "fill light", and I saw the same issue in 2013's FB galleries. I think one area that your work needs to address is how you place your people and your camera in relation to the natural light. You're shooting a lot of back-lighted and side-lighted stuff, and when I look at the images FULL-sized I see soft images that have a slight overall veiling glare, which I am thinking comes from a kit-grade lens shot wide-open, and I also see digital noise in the backlighting or low-light shots. I think you need to start thinking about a different approach to how you position your subjects in relation to the sunlight, and if you want to keep shooting this backlighted stuff with no fill, you need 1) a modern camera with VERY good dynamic range AND great High-ISO capability and 2) a better lens that can produce contrasty, and SHARP images when shot in flat light. I notice an improvement from the 2013 to the 2014 FDB galleries in terms of better use of light's direction.

You need to get some contrast and tone-differentiation in the shadow areas. There are solutions you can buy that will do that, good, quality lenses that will do that, shot after shot. You can also work on shooting with more side-lighting too, and even front-lighting, like the shot of the horse being walked into the sunset...the horse has a nice ass-end, yes, and Crystal looks cute walking away, yeah, but I bet she looked simply radiant with that late-day sunlight hitting her in the face...that shot from the front would be very different, with that golden light hitting her and the horse in their faces. A really GOOD, fast 50mm or fast 85mm prime would really help in situations like this. WHat I am saying is something KmH mentions a lot: the direction and quality of the lighting is what determines how good the pictures look.

MOST of these are great ideas, but the way the lighting is used is less than optimal...like the horse's ears against a strong, late-afternoon sky, called a "bald sky"... shots 4 and 9 have a gorgeous horse and an even more beautiful woman, but that doggone white, empty sky hurts. The strong side-lighting is lovely lighting, but it needs to be shown with rich, crisp shadow detail: this is where a good lens hood, and a very contrasty lens like a Nikon 105 DC or a Canon 135/2 L is every photographer's BEST friend; a lens that can shoot right INTO the light, not flare, not ghost, and can deliver contrast and separate out the low-tone values even when shot toward the light. (If you want to, you could also add a 1/16 power squirt of flash and BOOM...you're golden.)

I see a photographer who could use about four specific pieces of gear that would up her results quality within a short time frame.

you're awesome Derrel!
 
Agree with the points raised above and will add that almost every one of these would have benefitted greatly from the addition of some fill light.


Please excuse the question, as it may seem "dumb", but what is fill light?

Thanks your advice!

Please let me answer that.

Usually there is a main light called the "key light". Key light can be anything; the sun, a window, a flash, or an ordinary lightbulb, depending on the levels of light you want.

The "fill light" works with the key light but is not in the same location. The fill light "fills" in the shadows generated by the key light. It serves to compliment the overall composition by evening out the light by cutting deep shadows, etc. The fill light also can be practically anything; a reflector, a flash, or whatever works with the key light as long as it's just "fill" and doesn't become so powerful that it overpowers the key light.

So now in your daytime shots that were lit by the sun, you could have a reflector or a flash on low power so that the shadows would not spoil your shot.

Hope that helps.


Thank you so much! I've been thinking a lot about reflectors recently.
 
Start to learn Lightroom and you will go a long way.
Nothing beats learning to see light, however.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom