OK so maybe I've got more money than sense. I've got he D700 and a bag full of fancy glass. Yet I just came back from a trip to Hawaii and am deeply disappointed in my shots. I don't have enough to show my husband. This is not the first time but it seems to be the worst collection I've ever done.
Is it I've bitten off more than I can chew? Is it because I shot only Raw and this format is less inspring until you unlock the magic? If that's the case I am overwhelmed to unlock the magic on 1500 photos!
My compositions are not in question. Focus could be better , but there is a distinct Blah across the board. Colors- meh, Exposure correct but meh, Subjects - it's Hawaii for goodness sake!
Where do I go now. I used to take good pictures in the film days. Even got more inspiring results from my D300.
So folks. Am I doing something wrong, is this part of the learning curve, is it RAW I'm not used to or have I just lost mojo?

This is a familiar story. Do not despair!

A couple of things - 1500 photos - whew. Time for you to start culling. Be ruthless - out of focus? Heads cut off? Photo of half-consumed tropical fizzy drink that seemed "artistic" at the time? Gone! Aggressively use the DEL button for what it was intended. Get to the 50% mark, take a break. Come back to it again. I can't speak for anyone else, but my rate for keepers is about 10% of the total take on any given session (paying or otherwise). Seriously. You can tell a story in about 10 photos so you should be able to tell the whole visit in a 150!

Check your Picture Control settings. It could be you're set to Neutral or Standard Picture Controls. That's actually good, because it means you've got a lot of nice room to optimize Image Quality.

Not sure what you use for Post-Process, but take 5-10 of the photos you know would rock with a bit of work and apply a different Picture Control against them. I use Capture NX2, so it's easy for me to grab that sample, apply a pre-defined set of changes against them and batch-process. You can do the same in different programs, but the ease and mileage may vary.

Remember too that at their heart, ALL photos benefit from a minimum of AutoLevels, perhaps some WB optimization and sharpening.

If you want to send a copy of a RAW file to me, I can work it briefly in Capture and show you what you might need to do. Just message me with your e-mail.

"Toodle-loo from Covey22!"

-Armando
Nikonians Team
Nikonians News - Fresh Everyday!

The Covey Blog!

My Plan:

Get out of the car.
Get closer to the subject.
Pick the right mid-tone this time.

See My Nikonians Gallery

Your profile is blank, so I would ask what development software are you using?

Only Nikon software can take advantage of the in camera settings.

You can obtain good results with other software, but it may take more effort on your part.

So tell us more about what software you are using, and maybe a few sample shots for us to analyze.

Pete

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Pete's right Sonja, and so is Armando.

Based on what you said, you've got some photos to discard right away. If it's no good, get rid of it. If you have duplicates, maybe keep the best 2 or 3, but certainly no more, then later, make it a couple, and no more, once you really examine the dupes.

As Pete said, you've left your entire profile blank. That profile helps us help you. It lets us know what level of expertise you have, what equipment you have, and what software you use to process your photos.

Moreover, a sample photo or two of what you're speaking of would be helpful. RAW photos can look pretty mediocre at first in most software, such as Photoshop, because its just as the camera saved it, with zero processing. When you shoot in RAW you have to do the work. It's my personal preference, as I believe I'm smarter than the Nikon camera's software which processes the photo in the camera when you choose JPG.

JPG often looks a lot better at first, when you pull that formatted photo directly out of the camera, because the camera has applied processing as per your decisions or the default. It will have sharpening and vibrancy, for example, which will make the photo look a lot better much of the time.

Don't compare the RAW photos vs. the JPG photos until you've processed the RAW photos. Then you can compare.

May I ask why you decided to store your photos in RAW?

I look forward to your response.

Ned
A Nikonians Team Member

-----------------------------
Visit my Travel Photography Blog and my Galleries.

I just recently went through this dilemma lol I was adjusting my RAW photos, but I didn't take into account the major differences. After I did a bunch of enhancements to my RAW photos, I got most better than what my camera did with my fine jpegs. The ones that didn't, I just simply went off and post edited my jpeg. This is why I now shoot RAW+Fine images...gives me both options.

I will say my RAW images after being post edited and converted to jpeg looked better when printed over my fine/jpeg. Also the fine/jpeg images were much smaller in size (6-8mb in comparison to 13mb). And I think I wore the paint off of the delete button LOL,

Jesse, I'll bet once you get more experience with processing RAW, you'll drop the JPG saves.

Frankly, the RAW files have more information in them, which gives you more latitude, and more to work with. Therefore, you will eventually get to the point that your processed RAW files will be at worst equal to the JPG files, and almost all the time, or even all the time, better than the JPG files, but it does take experience through the learning curve of your software before you achieve that.

The only time I use RAW + JPG is to have quick and dirty files to give a client immediately after shooting, should they desire some basic proofs faster than I could otherwise provide them.

Ned
A Nikonians Team Member

-----------------------------
Visit my Travel Photography Blog and my Galleries.

Thats what I am hoping to do. Thing is I am finding myself reducing the clarity of the image to try and get rid of what looks like distortion. I think if I can get a baseline as to what I should do with my RAW files right off the bat, the rest can sink in. I am also trying to figure out how to load my camera settings in Lightroom. I noticed it shows camera model when I scroll down on the right, but D3100 is not an option. I might need to google a tutorial on how to add it. This is so when I import my RAW image, I can apply the cameras basic settings and go from there and try and use that as a baseline, basically to remove the noise and such then work on tone and so on. Or what do you suggest? Do you basically just go down the list in Lightroom until you achieve what you wanted with the image?

I have been using photoshop to remove the blemishes first, then I basically use LR3 as the final to get some nice tones and so on.

My post processing seems easier with the cameras settings when converted to JPEG in the camera...but that's my goal is to shoot only in RAW eventually.

"Thats what I am hoping to do."

You'll get there. It took us all time to learn how to edit.

"Thing is I am finding myself reducing the clarity of the image to try and get rid of what looks like distortion. I think if I can get a baseline as to what I should do with my RAW files right off the bat, the rest can sink in."

I strongly suggest you go to the "Digital postprocessing & workflow for Adobe postprocessing software" forum and discuss Lightroom there. Show them a before and after shot so they see what you're talking about. I think you'll get some good assistance.

I don't use Lightroom much myself. My editor is Photoshop. I have a base routine I follow for every image, then modify that according to the individual needs of each photo. Having that routine makes editing much easier, but it took me a while to work that out for myself, based on my needs and my style.

"I am also trying to figure out how to load my camera settings in Lightroom. I noticed it shows camera model when I scroll down on the right, but D3100 is not an option. I might need to google a tutorial on how to add it. This is so when I import my RAW image, I can apply the cameras basic settings and go from there and try and use that as a baseline, basically to remove the noise and such then work on tone and so on. Or what do you suggest? Do you basically just go down the list in Lightroom until you achieve what you wanted with the image?"

First I suggest again to go to the "Digital postprocessing & workflow for Adobe postprocessing software" forum.

To answer your question of what do I do.

For every photo, I'll first look to see if there is a distortion I want to mitigate. If there is, that's first. I don't necessarily want to get rid of all distortion. Some is pleasing, some makes for a better photo, some may even be part of the effect I'd like to keep for a variety of reasons, and artistic concept.

Then I'll crop if necessary, what I definitely don't want in the photo. Then its time to get rid of imperfections, such as a dust spot.

After that I evaluate the photo for what it needs, but for every photo I will use levels or curves, vibrance and saturation, and brightness and contrast, as needed, but each of those layers will be used. I may use other manipulations if necessary, and I may uses masks, etc. to apply those layers as different parts of the image may need different corrections.

Once I'm satisfied with the photo, I save it as a photoshop psd file. That's done to preserve all my layers in case further work is needed, so I don't have to reinvent what's already been accomplished.

At this point I consider my output. If it's to be printed, for example, I will make what other changes are needed, and the last thing I will do is sharpen based on the paper and size of the print. If it's to be on the Internet, I will resize, reduce the resolution, and sharpen specifically for viewing on a screen.

"I have been using photoshop to remove the blemishes first, then I basically use LR3 as the final to get some nice tones and so on.

My post processing seems easier with the cameras settings when converted to JPEG in the camera...but that's my goal is to shoot only in RAW eventually."

While JPG files may seem to be easier to work with, in my opinion, because they have already been processed, in this case by the camera, they are actually more difficult to get the best results. For example, if you use curves or layers on a RAW file vs. a JPG file you can see a big difference, as the JPG will clearly show on the curve when manipulated that data has been lost already, and that makes for a degraded photo. It may be hard to see in many cases, but it's there and it more difficult exposures it will show up big.

Just keep learning any you'll be fine.

Ned
A Nikonians Team Member

-----------------------------
Visit my Travel Photography Blog and my Galleries.

If the images looked good on the camera LCD, then you've got the RAW data for at least as good final images.

I'll be on Maui at the end of the month. I'll probably capture 1,500 images — and almost immediately edit that down to 500, pretty soon down to 200, and flag the best 50. Or maybe it will be only 10. We'll see!

We do need to know what software you have, and it would be useful to see a few of the "blah" images.

Jon Kandel
A New York City Nikonian and Team Member
Please visit my website and critique the images!

As others have mentioned, it will come down to what processing software you use and how developed your skills are in that area. That's the power of RAW and why you would use it. At this stage, would you consider still shooting jpeg fine? You may be more happy seeing the initial results with your camera's settings and not have to spend as much time with your software. RAW is your digital "negative" waiting for you to add that extra magic. Some enjoy that part, others aren't as interested. Basically, it's want process works best for your picture-taking preferences and needs.

For you, it may simply be a case of becoming more familiar with the entire digital process. I'm sure experience will help get your mojo back.

Dan L.
http://www.danlarussophotography.com/

I would suggest shooting 14-bit RAW--as it allows for better colors, but I think you hit the nail on the head when you said you needed to unlock the magic in processing. As far as the 1500 shot number, cull it down, and only process the shots you think are the best ones. Actually, I use my delete button heavily while shooting, and I tend to be choosy when shooting, having shot film for many years.

James

I strongly caution against deleting photos individually from your memory card in your camera. It can lead to memory card corruption, and may make it impossible to recover photo still on the card which weren't deleted.

Lexar has this to say about deleting photos from cards in the camera.

"Deleting images in the camera is a convenience but at the same time can result in data corruption, especially with large file formats like RAW and TIFF files."

It has been my experience, and that of many others, that this is true.

I never delete individual files from my memory cards. Once I've transferred the files to my computer, I format the cards in the camera. (Never format your camera's memory cards via your computer.) Only format the memory cards in your camera. This accomplishes two purposes. First it strengthens the card's formatting, and second it deletes the files from the memory card.

Ned
A Nikonians Team Member

-----------------------------
Visit my Travel Photography Blog and my Galleries.