AAAGH. Been asked to take pictures for a publication. Help.

[ChrisN]

Hello.

I may be undertaking a photo assignment. This is will be my first time taking pictures of something "professionally".

The pictures will be going in a brochure to advertise the company's services.

I will be using my S50 to take the pictures, they want posed candid's and posed "life shots" so no studio setups (perfect for me).

I think I can handle the photography end of it, I am feeling confident in that regard, but I want to ask how high of resolution do I need so that the pictures look OK in print?

I mean I normally shoot in the L(2592x1944), Fine, settings of the camera. (I have not progressed to RAW yet, but will go to RAW if need be).
Is this going to be enough?

Comments on camera setup would be highly appreciated.

Come on, I am counting on you guys. LOL. The money from this is going to be a down payment on a Digital Rebel or EOS-10D (I have not decided yet, poll to come later)

[Vegas Poboy]

Always shoot high & if they have a good crew to edit the shots they will know what to do with it. Right now it only seems like they will use the photos on a small scale you should be fine all the way up to an 8x10 print anything lager you might have problems.

[ChrisN]

Thanks for the reply Vegas Poboy
I talked a bit further with them and what they want is colour glossy brochures to advertise or promote specific product offerings (and to see them in action).

The picture sizes are most likely going to be no larger than 5x7 (at the absolute most).
I was told as long as the pictures can be printed at 300dpi, there will be no worries. How would I compute the dpi? Should I even bother figuring it out? I have blown up a few pics to 8x10 and they look gorgeous.

Am I worrying too much about the small stuff?

Again, I am a complete newbie in this industry and am grasping for any advice. Thanks again

[stopbath]

I would shoot at the maximum resolution and let the layout artist worry about the final size, crop and other details. Whoever they contract to do the actual brochure, will have photoshop or some other software that can handle any thing they need to do to the image to get it in the pamplet.

[PhotosGuy]

How would I compute the dpi?
You can set the dpi in prefs when you convert from RAW to TIFF which is the way I'd do it.
If you don't have the upgraded EOS Utility for the FVU, then I'd recommend that you download it at:
http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/customer/psswup.html.

[IndyJeff]

Chris shoot in the largest jpg format you have on your camera. Don't worry about dpi or anything else. Just send the original file off to the layout guy. Prepress will do any sharpening, color change or contrast and anything else they need to do. If you make any changes it will only be harder for the guys in prepress to do what they need to do in order to make the shot conform to their standards You add sharpening, color balance, contrast etc and you may very well get a note back that the shots were unusable due to changes done to the original file.

When you do take the shots, take several of each. Up one stop or two and down one or two. Give as many different exposures as possible to choose from.


Good luck

[Andy_T]

Chris shoot in the largest jpg format you have on your camera.

DEFINITELY NOT!!!

Use RAW instead.

You are not a seasoned pro who wants to save some time in post processing. It's your first assignment, and you need any bit of leverage you can get.

As far as your equipment is concerned ... as far as I know, you can't use an external flash on the S50.

The internal flash might not be the best way to start professional portrait shooting.
Do you have some kind of diffusor and experience with it?

Best regards,
Andy

[IndyJeff]

Chris shoot in the largest jpg format you have on your camera.

DEFINITELY NOT!!!

Use RAW instead.

You are not a seasoned pro who wants to save some time in post processing. It's your first assignment, and you need any bit of leverage you can get.

Best regards,
Andy

Before you shoot in Raw I would ask them. If you shoot it in RAW the prepress may take one look at it and say "Get a reshoot."
He may not be a seasoned pro who wants to save time but, I'll bet the prepress people have better things to do than to convert from RAW.

[blinking8s]

whoa whoa whoa...if you have RAW as an option...why are you even thinking about shooting in jpeg? And its not some insane amount of time to process your RAW files, no more than you would spending cleaning up some shoot mistakes with the jpeg that you cannot change quite so easily...

jpeg vs raw...no comparison, you shouldnt ever have to think about it unless CF card memory size is an issue, which if you can drop a lot on the camera i would hope you saved up for some memory too

in the end it preserves image quality, time, and effort...there is no question about it

[damnengine]

Prepress will do any sharpening, color change or contrast and anything else they need to do. If you make any changes it will only be harder for the guys in prepress to do what they need to do in order to make the shot conform to their standards You add sharpening, color balance, contrast etc and you may very well get a note back that the shots were unusable due to changes done to the original file

I don't know what prepress guys you worked with, but when I send artwork to some place, I decide about the colors, contrast etc., I'm the artist just like the photographer is the artist in this case, the photographer decides the look of the pictures not the prepress dude.

Before you shoot in Raw I would ask them. If you shoot it in RAW the prepress may take one look at it and say "Get a reshoot."
He may not be a seasoned pro who wants to save time but, I'll bet the prepress people have better things to do than to convert from RAW.

ofcourse you don't send them raw files, you should convert them to tiffs yourself, NEVER use jpegs for print.

[Andy_T]

ofcourse you don't send them raw files, you should convert them to tiffs yourself, NEVER use jpegs for print.

Sorry, I assumed that was rather obvious.

But then, what do I know about Prepress people :wink:
What is obvious to us might not be obvious to them.

Best regards,
Andy

[damnengine]

I didn't quote you Andy =], I quoted IndyJeff, your post made total sense to me.

[Andy_T]

Damnengine,

I know.

I assumed it would make sense to others, as well :lol:

Best regards,
Andy

[IndyJeff]

What I know is based upon submissions to AP, ESPN Magazine, WireImage, and a couple of other media outlets. They don't want RAW, they damn sure don't want you to manipulate color, sharpness, contrast etc. They will do that with the programs they use that fit their needs. Is your monitor calibrated to the exact same settings as the final press programs? If not you have created more work and maybe an unsalvagable image for use by the printer. Every change in PS takes information away from the original file, take to much away and that image becomes unusable. RAW does no processing, you have to do with the computer what the camera would do using jpeg.
RAW has it's place and benifits, just not in every situation. If you have your settings correct, there should be very little that needs to be done to an image before it goes to press.

I guess if you have doubts about how to set up your camera and get the proper exposures or you are in a changing light situation, RAW would be the format to use.

I still say, ask the person who will be processing the image for final use if they want jepg, tiff, or RAW.

[IndyJeff]

Ok here are some submission standards for a couple of media outlets I had handy

Here are the submission guidelines:

Digital photos must be submitted as UNCROPPED, original files in JPEG format – no TIFFs, please. Also, do not lower or increase the resolution of the original file.

That is from espn magazine, sorry no link, it is from a paper I have printed from an email about their submission standards.

And from Sports Illustrated

When saving your files, the best file format is JPEG (Windows format, high quality, non-progressive) -- it works with our database well, and because of JPEG's compression, it provides the shortest transmission time.

siphoto.com (http://www.siphoto.com/?transmit.inc)


LOL And so the RAW vs jepg battle continues

[ChrisN]

Wow. I don't know if I am that confident any longer :lol:

Thank you all so very much for your input.
Space is definately not a problem for me, I have a 1 gig MicroDrive and 2 512 meg CF cards.

There is definately a lot of food for thought here and I will definately go back to them and ask the format, I never have dreamed that I had so much to think about.

I still think the S50 should be able to handle the task camera wise, unless there is something that your guys aren't telling me. :)


I am saving up for a big gun (Digital Rebel, EOS-10D, PRO 1, ugh so many choices) in the new year, so this will just have to do to help pay to play HAH.

Thanks again everyone. You have no idea, how helpful you all are.

[skiphoto]

Just my 5 cents...I have submitted to numerous magazines and done many brochures and have never been asked for a RAW file. Always JPEG, TIFF or PSD in some cases.

J

[Andy_T]

Just my 5 cents...I have submitted to numerous magazines and done many brochures and have never been asked for a RAW file. Always JPEG, TIFF or PSD in some cases.

J

That's certainly right.

However, you must get your JPEG, TIFF or PSD somewhere, and RAW is - especially for someone who doesn't do this every day - a great way to get these that offers some possibilities to correct mistakes later that you do not have with JPEG.

We certainly are in awe of all the assembled experience of the sports shooters here in the forum ... but the goal is to get good candids and portraits with little experience so far ... so the requirements might be different.

Best regards,
Andy

[IndyJeff]

but the goal is to get good candids and portraits with little experience so far ... so the requirements might be different.



Andy I understand what your saying about RAW but, it won't make a photographer out of someone who doesn't know how to take a picture. As I have said many times before, rely on your camera to take the picture you set it up to take and don't rely on the computer to save your bacon, ahhh so to speak.
Photoshop can make a good photo better but it can't make a bad photo good. If you don't have a clue in setting up the shot no amount of post processing is going to make a bad shot an acceptable one, unless your not setting the desired goal very high.
I was once told "when you shot film did you manipulate every shot in PS to get the desired effect or did you do it within the camera?"

[dn7elson]

I was once told "when you shot film did you manipulate every shot in PS to get the desired effect or did you do it within the camera?"

Still, with film, there was a lot of adjustment activity that went on in the dark room. But you are right in that the better conceived and implemented the initial camera image is, the better the possible output.

[Andy_T]

I was once told "when you shot film did you manipulate every shot in PS to get the desired effect or did you do it within the camera?"

Actually, when I shot film, most likely the guys in the photolab had to do a lot of manipulations (although not in PS) to make my pictures something to look at :lol:

I wholeheartedly agree with you ... good PS work will not make a crappy photo good.

OTOH, the wrong settings in the camera can easily ruin an otherwise (composition, motive) good photo.
RAW *might* offer SOME help to salvage SOME shots that are technically not good enough.
(Notice that this sentence is not exactly a 'guarantee' :wink: )

*I* personally would try to get any help I can for such an assignment. (e.g., a flash diffusor :lol:)
Just my 2c...

Best regards,
Andy

[PJ]

Here is a link about how the SI guys shoot the super bowl.
I think they said that they want Raw + imbeded JPEG

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6453-6821

I myself always prefer shooting raw whenever possible.

[IndyJeff]

Here is a link about how the SI guys shoot the super bowl.
I think they said that they want Raw + imbeded JPEG

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/multi_page.asp?cid=7-6453-6821

I myself always prefer shooting raw whenever possible.

Yes I am sure they do shoot in RAW/Jpeg formats at the Super Bowl, and probably the NBA finals as well as the NCAA Finals too. Do you know why? In this case RAW/Jpeg makes sense.

One other thing that article failed to mention too is that all of those cameras are all setup exactly the same to SI camera specs.

[PJ]

I must apologize. I didn't mean to come off like I was trying to prove you wrong. I'm not trying to say there is a right or wrong way, I just wanted him to have the information.

[IndyJeff]

No offense taken PJ. The SI shooters won't touch any of these RAW files either. The editors will do all the PS work because they will be more familiar with the setting needed for prepress dept. There are appilcations where RAW is not only a good idea, it is a must. Low light, fast action is just one of those applications.
The editors will look at the jpeg versions, find the shots they want and then if they need to work on them pull up the RAW file and go do that voodoo they do so well. This only a theory and not written in stone fact and is just from what I am familiar with but, is probably how it would have been done.

[Andy_T]

So ... to get back to the original thread ...

what was your decision, ChrisN?

Will you do it?

Do you need any further help?

We sure wish you all the best with your venture!

Best regards,
Andy

[ChrisN]

Hey. Sorry. I have not been back to this section.

Well, I have talked to him and for this particular shot, he is open to RAW but would prefer a jpg or tiff image. He does not want me to manipulate the photo in any way, but would like to have a lot of photo's of the same thing, shot with different camera settings, for exposure, lighting, etc.

I am going to do it. It will be outdoors, with a few models (which are employees for the company) for each location. I will be doing the location rounds 3 times throughout the day (early morning, early afternoon and before shift end) to try to capture the available light in different parts of the sky.

The owner is actually going to pay me only for the shots that he will use and an hourly sum, since he would like me there all day (it is all cash that will go towards my new camera :twisted: )

The shoot is a couple of weeks away as there are a few other factors that he needs to work out. I have the job and it is mine to turn down and will not entertain other photographers (as he is a family friend).

I am going to poke around with my camera on the weekend to see if I can get some pictures and check to see what settings may need tweaking for picture day. the S50 is a little limited on what I can do with flash, so I was considering my tripod and some spot lamps and umbrella (which I have for other stuff) to fill in where the sun just isn't cutting it.

Thanks again for this much interest and encouragement. I am less scared than I was a few weeks ago, I think I will do OK.

I will try to keep everyone posted.