agoreira

I've seen a few of these, but I'm not a "people photographer" so never really tried them. You'd need to be doing a fair bit of this type of photography to justify the expense. I think these sort of things should be used in moderation, where less is often more, otherwise they look like little china dolls, totally unnatural with flawless skin. A bit like badly done HDR! For me the only good HDR shots are shots you don't even realise it's been used, but alas the result is all too often garish, totally unnatural colours. I've used it a little but more for shadow recovery in interior shots, cathedrals, churches etc.

anonimouse

Thanks for that Mitzyboy

Mitzyboy

Hardly anyone splashes out £600 - £800 for Photoshop CS5
There is no confusion.
I just explained what serious amateur photographers do, and they use CS5 in conjunction with Faststone and other progs.

I am not aiming this at serious amateur photographers, as I already said, I was merely a helpful suggestion

Fred James

I've just got round to trying it Mitzy - it's very good.

What impressed me most was how easy it is to use for the first time. I particularly like the way it is always full screen with pop up (or is that pop in) menus available just by moving the mouse to the edges.

It also seems very fast indeed.

Thanks for telling us about it - I certainly hadn't come across it before.

agoreira

Photoscape is a similar free programme, does a similar job. Good for people that like playing with frames, effects etc as well as all the usual stuff.
http://www.photoscape.org/ps/main/index.php

Domino

it was never so contentious or mind boggling when we used to use film .

you generally had one chance and took it, some people used to dabble with the chemicals but most had to wait for it to come off the automatic machines, in Boots or in the mail. No tweeking this, tweeking that, just plain old taking that chance and hoping.

.

Fred James

But if you were a "chemical dabbler" as I was, then most of the things you now do digitally to improve/correct an image were available in the darkroom.

Exposure correction was done in the enlarger, contrast ratios were controlled by the choice of paper type, cropping was easy and you could even localise some of the effects by "dodging" and "burning".

It was fun doing it but it's even more fun digitally and you don't smell of foul chemicals all the time!

Mitzyboy

And you dont have to go and sit in a dark room

Fred James

Sometimes, after reading some of the threads on this forum, that sounds like an attractive place to be

Domino

<tongue in cheek here>
Fred, if we are not allowed to knock the mods how come the mods can knock us

Domino

perhaps I have this wrong Fred (OK not the first time)
but the end result was a product of your skills, something you could be proud of.

I never got the chance to try my own lab work, always wanted to, but floating around on grey painted war canoes precluded it. Also electronics always seemed to get in the way of getting into heavy involvement in "peripheral" interests.

I have to admit that in many things the old ways were the best.
Probably like you and a number of others here, I have a modern car, but can't hear the damned engine, have stalled it more times since I had it than I ever did the older ones, where I learnt to drive by the tone of the engine, the sound of the tyres on the road. OK call it "seat of the pants" but when something went wrong you had that microsecond of warning before the big bang
.

rachelk

Digital cameras are one of the best inventions ever. Being able to take loads of shots in the hope that one will be worth it. Just delete the rubbish at no cost.

I'd never have got so much fun out of an old style camera and roll of film - just too expensive to experiment with.

jimenato

Agree entirely. I have drawers full of poor quality, expensively produced photographs that I (and certainly nobody else) will ever want to look at. I gave up taking a camera on holidays because it started to spoil the holidays.

Now I carry my little pocket Coolpix everywhere - magic - I must have thousands of photos on my computer some of which are quite good.

jimenato

Incidentally, I am becoming interested in HDR photography for which I will need a camera capable of Auto Exposure Bracketing. Does anyone know of a camera which does this without breaking the bank? Or does anyone know how I can find out if a particular camera has this feature - sometimes specifications aren't very specific (if you see what I mean...)?

Mitzyboy

I'm Canon, so thats all I can suggest tbh. Depends what your budget is, but iirc the EOS 10D does the job and on ebay you can pick them up fairly cheap.

I have one that the wife uses now and I always found it to be an excellent camera

Heres a list http://www.hdr-photography.com/aeb.html