Hello, new forum member with some ?'s on 1D action photos

[prov431]

Hello all, new to the forum with some questions..hope to learn a lot here.
My wife and I own a track side photography business, which is in it's first year of operation. We do on site prints & Cd's from an enlosed trailer / mobile digital photo lab. We've learned a lot, but still have a long way to go before we go calling ourselves professionals.
We have a Canon 1D, with a Canon 70-200 2.8L and a Canon 100-400 IS 3.5-5.4?, Canon 1.4 extender, Sigma 35-70 small lens, and monopod. My wife is the shooter, and I am the Photoshop (ver. 7) end of the deal, hense my questions.
1 - Is the best camera mode for shooting motorcycles and fast cars Tv, setting your shutter speed manually to >800? (or should we be in AI servo?) The reason I ask this is because most bikes and cars have small sponsor stickers, which sometimes do not come out very clear, regardless of which lens set up we use....I believe it's merely a camera setting not right. We have our focal setting to center point only, on the 45 point grid.
My wife likes to shoot two distinct styles of images....freeze frame, and then background blurred, subject in focus. Typical images are single subject only, and then traffic shots w/ multiple bikes/cars in the frame. She's able to get I'd say within 50-100 feet of the action depending on which area of the track she's at.

2- We've set up the camera through the computer program to produce Jpg. images in large fine mode approx. 2 megs in size each. Is this the best option for what we do? (we download all the images to file folders for customer viewing and printing)

3- When I select the properties / advanced tab of any photo, the resolution always shows 72 dpi. Is this correct? I understand that once I open the photo in Photoshop it defaults to whatever res. I have Photoshop set for (350)...but wonder if we're missing some setting in the camera itself that would yield better resolution.

4-We use Epson model 1280 printers, I've been through tons of settings and have found a few that work really fantastic giving what I see on screen what I get on print...but sometimes my reds look pink. Any suggestions besides saturation settings on this?

5- We have the camera set to SRGB, should we be using a different color profile..Adobe1988? Is there a better one that might provide better images?

Ok, tired of typing and I'm sure you're tired of my questions. We really want to learn more so I hope some of you will answer!

PS- If you want to see some low res. samples you can view our website at www.shoottothrillphoto.photoreflect.com to get an idea of what type of work we're doing.
Thanks a bunch,
Dan

[DC]

I don't own a 1D, but I dont necessarily think that your questions are directly related to that specific camera.

So:
1. You've confused two things here, shutter speed and focus mode.
I'd suggest setting Tv mode when you want to freeze frame, and Av when you want to blur the BG. In both cases you want AI-servo for the focusing so that it tracks the cars.

2. Shoot RAW. This will give you maximum post processing ability to correct for under/over exposure as well as other things.

3. Don't sweat the dpi. The picture is x number of pixel by y number of pixels. DPI has no meaning to a computer screen, only printers

4. You will need to get hold of a profile for your printer, probably available from Epson's web site. When you print from PS, do a "Convert to profile" under the Image > Mode menu. Then select the profile for your printer. now all your colours on screen should match what the printer will see. You can tweak the saturation etc at this point.

5. Shoot Adobe 1998. It has a wider colour gamut than sRGB, and is better for printing. You really only need sRGB for use on the web.

In summary, Shoot RAW, Adobe98, Tv or Av with AI-Servo. And get a profile for your printer.

HTH

[CyberDyneSystems]

The RAW files on the 1D are "relatively" small .. I concur. you may want to try shooting RAW .. especially with a 1D this gives you quite a lot of alttitude both in post processing in general.. but more importantly.. in upsizing or "interpolation" to make larger prints.

To use RAW files in PS .. you will weither need to convert the files in the Canon or other third party app,. or you will need to upgrade to PSCS whcih includes a RAW file converter.

Check out the "top tips" sticky.... read it and follow the links.. :wink:

//let me know if you need a second 1D ... :roll:

[prov431]

I have some worries with shooting RAW, simply because we sell a lot of CD's, and most people have no idea what a RAW file is. They are familiar with Jpg. and know they can view / print it.
In truth, we have never even tried to shoot a RAW file before, so perhaps some experimentation is in order at the least. It would seem to me that it would really slow things down if I had to convert everything countless times to either burn a CD or make a print while a customer waited??

Regarding the print driver, I have loaded the drivers for the Epson 1280 printer, and have Photoshop work flow set up to utilize said drivers. I'm quite sure I've done it correctly.

Color space setting for Adobe1988 is that #4 on the 1D? I know my wife has not tried any other setting except the SRGB.

Confused....easilly done on my end. I really have only picked up the 1D a few times and shot some frames. I don't understand the settings, nor which is the appropriate setting for any particular condition. These are the things that I want to learn. Are there any tutorials online that might help me with this?
I appreciate your replies, thanks very much.
Dan

[*MOMOFAIRFORCEBRATS*]

you would not put a raw file ont he disk you use software to convert it to ither jpeg. of tiff.

just as a raw image you can work with color saturation and contrast and brightness without loss of print quality.

not my 2 cents may be worded badly lol

i dont even have my digital rbeel in the mail yet thats just what i have gatehred from the forum

[ssim]

Your shooting is done in RAW anf you would then post process into a JPG file that you are putting on the CD that you sell. You would never supply the CRW file on the CD. This would be akin to a pro photographer giving away his negatives.

[DC]

OK now I see where we're going with this.

Shootng RAW is no different to shooting JPG, except that any in-camera settings (sharpness, saturation, etc) are ignored. You will need to use either Canon's or a third party RAW conversion program. This will allow you to adjust the settings, exposure, contrast, sharpening etc to your liking then it will convert to a TIFF file. You only need to do this once. Now take that TIFF file and open it in PS. You can apply levels, curves etc etc til the cows come home. When you are happy with the pic, do a "save as" and save it as a PSD. You know have a manipulated image that you then save as a jpg
It's this file you then give out. Sounds like a lot of work but it isn't really. You only do the work once. The advantage of this is you can, from the PSD file, create different sized jpgs, for printing, web, whatever, without having to go back and do all the editing again.

As for the printer, I said profile not driver. By which I meant a colour profile that will map colours to match the way the printer understands them. That way, red on your screen will be mapped to whatever colour number is red on your printer, thus preventing it from turning pink

I'm not sure what oiption it is on a 1D to select Adobe98, I'm sure someone here will know.

[KennyG]

1 - Is the best camera mode for shooting motorcycles and fast cars Tv, setting your shutter speed manually to >800? (or should we be in AI servo?)

Two issues here. You should be using AI Servo and centre point focus only. If you pan do not go above 1/350 or they looked parked, preferably 1/250. You can even pan an F1 car at 1/250 (I do it) so a m/c should not present a problem. Only shoot in Tv mode and if you need more DOF, up the ISO to 400. The 1D produces razor sharp images and they are quite clean at ISO400.

At 50-100 feet you really need to fill the frame to get the detail of small sponsor logos. Bikes are quite small and you need as much reach as possible from the lens to get the frame filled. That is why most pro bike and car photogs use a big fast prime with a TC. The 100-400L should be fine but I wonder what you are doing for IS? Mode 2 for panning and mode 1 for head-on. If the shots are not sharp I would suspect hand shake and addressing it by upping the shutter speed is the wrong way to go about it.


2- We've set up the camera through the computer program to produce Jpg. images in large fine mode approx. 2 megs in size each. Is this the best option for what we do? (we download all the images to file folders for customer viewing and printing)

Honest answer - No. You need to get the most accurate uncompressed data if you want the sharpest pictures. For that you should shoot RAW. The 1D is very fast for RAW and all you are saving with JPG is CF space but at the cost of getting the best data. I'll complicate things somewhat by suggesting you either upgrade PS V7 to PS CS or buy Capture One to process the RAW images into TIF. C One is by far the best tool but it isn't cheap.

3- When I select the properties / advanced tab of any photo, the resolution always shows 72 dpi. Is this correct? I understand that once I open the photo in Photoshop it defaults to whatever res. I have Photoshop set for (350)...but wonder if we're missing some setting in the camera itself that would yield better resolution.

The 72dpi flag is of no use at all and could be set to 1M dpi for all that it matters. The only time it is of value is when images are submitted to publications where they expect to see this flag set to 300dpi, even though it is pointless.

4-We use Epson model 1280 printers, I've been through tons of settings and have found a few that work really fantastic giving what I see on screen what I get on print...but sometimes my reds look pink. Any suggestions besides saturation settings on this?

Get yourself Q Image to do your printing. It has color management and will output some of the best looking prints you have ever seen. PS should only be used to convert or make adjustments. You may have get yourself profiles to suit the printer and paper you are using.

5- We have the camera set to SRGB, should we be using a different color profile..Adobe1988? Is there a better one that might provide better images?

As above, use RAW then these settings do not matter. With the 1D there is no need to use anything other than RAW.

Here is an example of a 1D shooting RAW, conversion done in C1 Pro.

Long view
http://www.stiuk.dial.pipex.com/demo-1.jpg

And a 100% crop
http://www.stiuk.dial.pipex.com/demo-2.jpg

[prov431]

WOW...I really appreciate these informative replies. You guys are great!

Sorry about my misunderstanding profile vrs. drivers..like I said, I'm still learning a lot as I go.
Regarding IS mode on the long lens, yes we use #2 for paning, usually shooting 2-3 frames per vehicle as it passes by. Perhaps you could view our website (posted above) to get a better idea of what we do, and where you think improvement is possible with setting adjustments.

I am still mostly lost in the RAW format vrs. Jpg file area.
If we shoot only RAW images, and download them to our computer through a card reader....can I still look at each photo and sort them according to car/bike competition number?
If I can sort them and get them into folders in RAW format, how do I then burn those files to CD so the average customer can use them? Is RAW simply enhancing my flexablity to manipulate the image and then print it?
Am I correct in thinking that our CF cards will only hold 1/2 the ammount of images in RAW format vrs. Jpg.?
Do I already have (canon?) software that will convert all the RAW files to Jpg?
If I am converting the RAW images to Jpg., what's the point of taking them in RAW format in the first place??
Sorry for the endless questions, but I really appreciate the answers and I am willing to learn this stuff if you care to reply.
Thanks so much,
Dan

[CyberDyneSystems]

You can sort the RAW files using a compatible browser app.. Breeze browser,. Capture One etc...

Before you burn anything to CD you would convert them.. to either jpeg or tiff..

In all honesty.. if you have no intention of post processing your images.. maybe you should ignore all our recomendations for RAW..

I don't want to say this because particularly with a 1D you will get the best use of the Camera by going RAW,.. but it sounds like your workflow does not involve much if any PP work...

So yes Maybe best quality jpegs...

Lets set RAW aside for now,.. as your only course of action for using RAW files at this point needs to be experimentation.. try it out.

Perhaps shoot an event with the camera set to take RAW AND jpeg files... use the jpegs as you normally would,. and save the RAW files for your own experimentation...

Then you can decide whether you are ready to take on a RAW based workflow...

[KennyG]

Can I ask you a simple question. You say 1D, is it the MK-I or MK-II? The answers to your questions are very different for each.

New 1D users sometimes assume that when they say 1D there is only one model.

[prov431]

Sorry, we own the Mk-1, older style 1D, not the new release.

As for Photoshop work, I normally just use it for contrast / brightness adjustments, cropping, and the occational touch up of a car or bike body work. Do a lot of adding text and logos to the prints as well, but that's really about it.

I guess that is what I was trying to get across with the raw vrs. jpg. shooting. We do a lot of previewing photos with our customers in the photo trailer. We cater to track day events, and sell on site prints & cd's. If I had to convert all files to Jpg. from raw, I think I wouldn't get much work done. Sorting files into folders takes a serious portion of my time...and showing / printing pics takes the rest....that is why I believe sticking with the jpg. format may be best. I do however wish to experiment with the raw to see what I am missing.

So, in a nut shell, really what I am after now is simply the best one or two camera settings for the lenses we use. Primarilly we stick with the 100-400 IS , sometimes with the 1.4 converter, but not always as I heard it was best to not shoot with a converter because you loose 2 f-stops....like I really know what that means anyway :)
We need to keep our images crisp and clear, as prints are our primary output...and acurate color representation is a top priority as well. I think my wife and I have done so much 'bad' experimenting that we've lost track of what actually worked well....does that make sense?
Thanks again!!!!!
-Dan

[KennyG]

I am still mostly lost in the RAW format vrs. Jpg file area.
If we shoot only RAW images, and download them to our computer through a card reader....can I still look at each photo and sort them according to car/bike competition number?

Yes, just use ZoomBrowser or any of the third party viewers.

If I can sort them and get them into folders in RAW format, how do I then burn those files to CD so the average customer can use them?

Wrong approach. You convert them to the folder you want as JPG or TIF.

Is RAW simply enhancing my flexablity to manipulate the image and then print it?

You said that you wanted the best definition to make sure you could see the small sponsors logos. You do lose definition with JPG and RAW will give you the maximum your camera produces. The conversion software can be set to your desired levels of sharpening, white balance etc.

Am I correct in thinking that our CF cards will only hold 1/2 the ammount of images in RAW format vrs. Jpg.?

As they are so cheap it shouldn't really be a worry. But for a 1D MK-I large fine JPG is around 2.4MB and RAW 4.8MB, so the answer for this camera is yes. Converted files, depending on what you convert them to can go as big as you want.

Do I already have (canon?) software that will convert all the RAW files to Jpg?

Yes

If I am converting the RAW images to Jpg., what's the point of taking them in RAW format in the first place??

Maximum resolution. Simple as that in your case. Plus, you can output much better resolution for printing.

Sorry, I forgot to add. The images on your site are too small and have large logo over-prints making it impossible to pass any comment.

[Sinar]

Just because you have the money to purchase a digital camera doesn't make you a photographer. You say that you still have a long way to go before you are professionals, I bet you are charging professional money for your photographs? What do your clients think, shouldn't they expcect professional results? I think that any one that pay's money for a photograph should expect great results. When I read your questions I am appalled that you think that you should even be doing this. You know nothing about what your new supposed profession is. Shutter priority and ai servo, all that stuff is the same on a film camera, so obviously you don't even know how to shoot film either. I got news for you, buying a digital camera doesn't make it easier to photograph, it's TEN times more difficult to get first rate results. So maybe you should sell your little business and let a real photographer that has a real life college degree and skill in the business do what he does best. It's hacks like you that erode fees and give professional photographers a bad name.

It's unbelievable that you don't know any of the stuff you are asking questions about, it is all so basic. Oh by the way, you probably don't know that after opening a closing a jpeg about 125 times there won't be a file left. Never ever shoot jpegs.

[prov431]

The title should sum up my feelings on your reply. Was that really called for? As I said previously, my wife shoots, I don't. Read the post and save your derogatory comments for yourself.

My wife has been shooting for a few years, and lucky me, she is leaving on a business trip and I am left to fill in for an event due to her absense. It is a crime for me to try and answer some questions to better my understanding of my wife's camera?
This is not either of our professions, it's a hobby that we both enjoy, and we are both doing the very best job we can. Hackers....hardly. Honest business people running a reputable business, you bet. Making money at it, you bet. I race motorcycles too, not professionally of course, am I a hacker ruining it for the rest of the racers out there because I'm not 100% error free?
I imagine you were just born knowing everything...well congratulations to you... (maybe you're one of the guys we compete against and beat all the time huh?)
Thanks so much for your informative and pleasant reply. Hope to meet you at the track sometime!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Just because you have the money to purchase a digital camera doesn't make you a photographer. You say that you still have a long way to go before you are professionals, I bet you are charging professional money for your photographs? What do your clients think, shouldn't they expcect professional results? I think that any one that pay's money for a photograph should expect great results. When I read your questions I am appalled that you think that you should even be doing this. You know nothing about what your new supposed profession is. Shutter priority and ai servo, all that stuff is the same on a film camera, so obviously you don't even know how to shoot film either. I got news for you, buying a digital camera doesn't make it easier to photograph, it's TEN times more difficult to get first rate results. So maybe you should sell your little business and let a real photographer that has a real life college degree and skill in the business do what he does best. It's hacks like you that erode fees and give professional photographers a bad name.

It's unbelievable that you don't know any of the stuff you are asking questions about, it is all so basic. Oh by the way, you probably don't know that after opening a closing a jpeg about 125 times there won't be a file left. Never ever shoot jpegs.

That's a hell of a first post here Sinar. :?

Normally my action would be either to ask you to edit it yourself,. or more likely as a 1st time poster/troller I would just delete it and go on my way.

But as Prov431 has allready seen it,. instead it stays.

Prov431,

Please look at Sinar's post count and be assured that he in NO WAY represents this forum. :x

Yes.. people have varying levels of proficentcy..

But this is why we come to ask questions.. and with KennyG offering answers you are in VERY GOOD hands.



Sinar..

..if you have any intentions of remaining as part of this community .. think again about where to post,. when to post, and what to post before starting a ruckus.

Any further "off topic" discussion can be, and should be handled via personal message.

Post here only if you have something helpfull to add to the discussion.

Thank you
MODERATOR

[neil_r]

Sinar,

This is your first post? You joined the forum today ?

Now If you a a regular lurker / contributor and signed up today with a new pseudonym then why?

If you are new, then I don’t think you quite have the hang of this forum. Read the above chain, all very sensible and helpful comments from people with a proven track record.

You my friend are bang out of order and I suggest that you either go away or radically change your style.

To dignify one of your comments with an answer though… I am sure that they do not hold a gun to anyone’s head and force them to buy their work, the customer has a choice.

And so have you, lighten up or bugger off.

Just my 2c

N

[Johnnynf]

Well said Neil R. I have gotten into a few "shouting matches" with some of the regulars of the forum a couple of times on various issues, but in the end, we all remained professional and can continue to have intelligent conversations about photography. However, Sinar's comments are totally inexcusable. I don't care if you are on an internet forum, in the back room of a strip club, or visiting the White House, you don't treat people like that. That is just plain ignorant. Your words speak volumes about the type of person you are. You don't have to agree with what everyone says, just please, if you don't have something constructive to say, just please remain silent.



I guess that is what I was trying to get across with the raw vrs. jpg. shooting. We do a lot of previewing photos with our customers in the photo trailer. We cater to track day events, and sell on site prints & cd's. If I had to convert all files to Jpg. from raw, I think I wouldn't get much work done. Sorting files into folders takes a serious portion of my time...and showing / printing pics takes the rest....that is why I believe sticking with the jpg. format may be best. I do however wish to experiment with the raw to see what I am missing.


Prov431

If I may, let me present the alternative view of this whole RAW vs. JPEG issue. It seems to me that you are still a little hesitant to start shooting RAW. I am still simply an amateur, but I think that for you specifically, RAW may not be the best way to go. Many knowledgeable people on this forum swear by RAW...and rightly so I guess. It works best for them. I will admit that it does give you more control in post processing than does JPEG. However, for me at least, JPEG is perfectly fine for 90% of my shooting. I am not one who likes to spend hours fine tuning every photo (and obviously, with the schedule you are on, you aren't either). I have directly compared prints made from RAW files (only corrected for color and saturation) to JPEG prints straight out of the camera, and I can see very little if any difference at all.

So basically, what I am trying to say, is that I think that in your situation, shooting in RAW would add needless time to your workflow...something that you obviously can't afford. RAW takes a LONG time to convert, not to mention all of the post processing you would need to do. Stick with JPEG. Your customers will never know the difference.

[Jay Todd]

From the sound of things from Sinar, I think he's taking a pro approach (Sinar being large format) and is looking at this as an encroachment of amatuer vs. professional...taking away or undercutting his livelyhood. Granted, the post might have been a bit harsh, but as a shooter myself I see where he might be coming from.

[prov431]

Thanks for the suggestions on Raw vrs. Jpg.
I did some more reading on the best links thread and found a nice write up the explained the differences in more detail.
I believe that for what we do, Jpg. is the best method, but Raw definitely has a place for certain shots and occations. We will try it out and see how it goes when the time permits.

I would hate for anyone to think that just because my wife and I operate a track side photo business that we know nothing about what we are doing. That's just plain silly.
Like I mentioned earlier, my wife is good with the camera, I'm not. I sit in the trailer all day and sort thousands of pictures into folders. I don't learn much about what settings are used to create which effects, pr how any particular shot was composed. I only see the end results. Out of thousands of pictures that she takes on a weekend, only a handful ever make the trip to the recycle bin!
As was stated before, the customer quite often has a choice of photographers at events we attend, and we always do very well business wise. Maybe it's because we actually do good work!
Me wanting to learn more is just that, and this forum presents an opportunity for me to do that (without having a sit down with my wife that turns into an argument because I have no clue :) )
Hopefully that clears things up.
Thanks again for your support, and if you want to look, our website is available to anyone for viewing..just note the resolution is very low!)
-Dan

[CyberDyneSystems]

From the sound of things from Sinar, I think he's taking a pro approach (Sinar being large format) and is looking at this as an encroachment of amatuer vs. professional...taking away or undercutting his livelyhood. Granted, the post might have been a bit harsh, but as a shooter myself I see where he might be coming from.

We have pros who are regular posters here. And we are VERY glad for there informative help.

But Large format pros who sneer at "newbie" digital users is not what THIS forum is all about. :)

Were here to learn and share our knowledge of digital phtography.

But most importantly .. we are here to have fun!!!! :mrgreen:

The "encroachment" on to the pro territory by digital carrying novices may indeed be an issue.. particularly to those who can't, or refuse to keep up with the ever changing times..

But THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE TO BRING INTO SOMEONE ELSES THREAD!

Feel free to start a new thread in "Talk about photography" or General chat... in fact,. I would really encourage the discussion.

It simply DOES NOT belong here. :)

Thanks.

[IndyJeff]

Let me just say this about the deragatory posts directed toward the thread originator, ask yourselves if the guy is selling pictures? Obviously he is which in turn would leave me to believe that he has something....happy customers. Nuff said!
Last year at Chicago or maybe it was Kentucky I ran into a "I have a degree" photographer. Dude was trying to tell everyone how to shoot, what seetings were best for their cameras. Plainly he made a lot of people want to do nothing but avoid him.
Well after the race I heard about halfway thur the race the "smart guy" ran his battery down and didn't have a backup. So much for his know it all approach and from what I heard his shots weren't anything to write home about. If I had a question I would ask one of the guys who has been shooting for 20 years before I would have asked this guy.
Looking down your nose at someone because you have a degree will get you two things in motorsports photography, no friends and no help when you need it.
I don't have a degree but I do have 10 years experience. A couple of smart guys I know who do have degrees were asking me questions about turn shooting at Indy this year. In turn I answered their questions and they had some answers for me about some things I was having trouble with in the conversion from film to digital.

As for the original questions, I think Kenny pretty much knows what he is talking about. If I had a question I would have no problem sending him or anyone of several on here a PM asking their advice. I damn sure don't know it all, never did and probably never will. (If I do I am writing a book LOL)
Prov431 the best way to figure out how to do it is to practice. With digital it is so easy now to shoot and take notes of the settings and then look at them on the pc and make your adjustments or figure out what works the best for your style.

[defordphoto]

When I shoot sports it's all JPEG. I shoot the highest JPEG I can, however with the MKII I use JPEG 8. JPEG 10 adds no visible advantage and the files are about as large as RAW.

With proper exposure by an experienced photographer that knows their camera well, and equal experience in the digital darkroom, you can produce stunning photos that would be near impossible to tell if they were originally shot JPEG or RAW.

Like one Pro told me some time ago while shooting the ChampCars: If you have to shoot RAW, you don't belong out here.

But, if you're going for extremely large blowups, then I'd only shoot RAW for the most availabel information I could have.

With what Prov and his wife are doing, JPEG is the best format to use as it requires much less time to process than RAW.

Prov: As you'll see on these forums -- and not just here -- some people are very one-sided about some of these issues. However, these cameras give us these choices and let us decide what works best for us at any given time.

When I have a particular assignment at a race, then I shoot it RAW. When out at the track generally shooting, I shoot JPEG. I'll process JPEGs once and only once. I have also printed JPEGs at 30x40 with stunning results.

I'll also offer my aplogies for the thoughtlessness of that previous poster. That is not the normal greeting newcomers receive here.

So....What races you shoot?

[CyberDyneSystems]

KennyG,
IndyJeff,
RFMSports,


This is why this site ROCKS.

A first post from someone with a question about motorsports photography and what does he get?

We have three experienced pros taking the time to tell it like it is.

I especially love it that two of the equally intelligent well thought answers are in essence contradictory where file type is concerned... :)

Thanks guys.

[nosquare2003]

The 1D has a quality setting -- RAW + JPEG (large fine). Most people don't find this setting useful but it may suit you. You can have the JPEG file that you have already get used to. At the same time, you can try to learn to process the RAW file. The downside is that the file size is larger (about 7M per photo) and the frame rate is lower. Do you have an external backup like Xdrive?

DC, it seems that the colour space for most printers are smaller than sRGB, doesn't it? By the way, your wild animals are great.

[Sinar]

I am not a lurker or a troller, today was the first time I ever saw or heard of this web site. I did register today and the above was my first post. I registered expressely so I could reply to this thread. I do shoot large format, digital and traditional but I am also as adept with medium format and small format(film or digital)as well. Maybe it is a bit harsh and maybe I mispoke when speaking of degreed photographers. You are correct not all of them do know what they are doing. With the switch to digital, it is everyones responsiblity that is earning money from photography, to keep the standards as high as possible. Even people who aren't earning money from it, but are advanced amateurs shoulder the burden as well. Friends and family look to them as opinion leaders in what they think about photography and what equipment purchases they should make. The art, craft and skill of photography have been eroded by digital photographers that aren't photographers at all. There is much more involved in shooting digitally than most people think. All of a sudden the photographer has become art director, retoucher, pre press and printer. All of these post production jobs are trades in and of themselves. Even photographers that have been shooting digitally for years(i have, since the beginging of it all in "97) aren't as good as a real pre press house is at sharpening and preparing to go to press. So for someone to just pick up a digital camera and go to town shooting is fooling themselves and their clients. These are the reasons I felt compelled to make the post that I did.

[defordphoto]

Maybe so, but you didn't have to be so freaking rude and snotty about it. As you've learned, that attitude does not fly here. Respect the people you speak to here or you'll simply be chased off.

[defordphoto]

Prov: Here is an excellent example of how RAW can save your butt: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/102687

Download the JPEG and try to fix it.

You can't.

With RAW you can literally turn back time and change camera settings after the fact. Very cool!!

[MarkH]

It's unbelievable that you don't know any of the stuff you are asking questions about, it is all so basic. Oh by the way, you probably don't know that after opening a closing a jpeg about 125 times there won't be a file left. Never ever shoot jpegs.

It amazes me that someone can be so critical and yet so ignorant. Opening and closing a JPEG file does no harm to it whatsoever! It seems that your knowledge in this area is abysmal, yet you feel free to tell others what to do.

Many of the worlds top sports photographers shoot JPEG, mainly for the speed, and because the quality is absolutely fine. You DO want good exposure and white balance though, shooting JPEG and cropping is fine, and little colour balance and sharpening is fine too, but you don't really want to do major adjustments with the JPEG.

You should also store the original JPEG and save the modified files seperately. If you open, modify and save the JPEG and then repeat that process several more times, you will end up with a gradual drop in quality due to the compression on saving the modified file. (Kinda like a VHS tape which is a copy of a copy of a copy of . . .) A couple of generations of modifying and saving a JPEG wont be a problem, but after a dozen the image quality will be noticable suffering. Best practise for someone wishing to keep modifying and resaving the file would be to open the original JPEG, modify it, save as an uncompressed file (TIFF or Adobe PSD or similar), after the final modifications are complete you can then save in the most convenient format.

[defordphoto]

Mark: http://forums.speedguide.net/images/smilies/thumb.gif

You rock!

[Sinar]

My mistake in typing, you are correct. It should read opening and saving not opening and closing.

[MarkH]

My mistake in typing, you are correct. It should read opening and saving not opening and closing.

Opening and saving a JPEG 125 times? Why?

I often shoot JPEG and for the pictures I want to put on my website I open the image, adjust levels, resize and save as (diff name). That's once, why would ANYONE open, modify and save any JPEG more than one or two times?

I would agree that if someone wants to work on a pic a bit at a time and therefore opens, modifies and saves the pic many times, they should save in a different (non-lossy) format until they have finished. That does not necessarily mean that they can't use JPEG when they first take the pic.

JPEG degradation depends on many things:
Compresion level used (Large, fine JPEG is better than Large, normal JPEG)
Amount of times the compression is applied (the less times the better, 2 or 3 times is no problem usually, but dozens of times is bad. 125 times is crazy!)

Obviously there is also a problem if you shoot RAW and convert to JPG, then open, modify and save that JPG 125 times. The obvious solution is to convert the RAW to TIF and modify it 125 times and if you need it smaller, save it to JPG AFTER you finish all the modifications.

Shooting RAW and ending with a JPG requires at least one JPG compression. Shooting JPG and ending with a JPG with any adjustments requires at least 2 JPG compressions. No good workflow will ever necessitate 125 JPG compressions.

[Belmondo]

There probably isn't one person in a thousand in this forum who will ever make money with their digital photography; it's just not a requirement for membership here. Nor is it our function to determine who should be able to call themselves professional nor what criteria should be used to measure a person's worthiness to wear that title.

Our new friend really needs to re-think his concerns a little bit. I sense he's misdirecting his anger towards individuals when he's actually upset about technology that levels the playing field between new users and old-guard practicioners of the art.

Maybe too he's just a little jealous that someone with a good idea (more so than technical knowledge) has found a way to make money with digital photography.

Let's concern ourselves with the 'how' of photography and not the 'why'.

[KennyG]

Time to cool down me thinks. Everything was getting a bit overheated at places. This is a long post and I apologise for it in advance.

My personal reasons for shooting 100% RAW are quite simple. In the UK we have circuits in the open, usually built on ex WW-II airfields. They have lots of bends in them and you can't always shoot from where you would like to for safety reasons. On sunny days this means you are chasing, or more accurately avoiding the sun and glare. A day has to be planned to take into account where the sun is, in the same way any outdoor photographer would.

Add to this the habit drivers have of switching on their very high intensity headlights to annoy those in front and you have a recipe for exposure disaster. Now, if I were shooting landscapes I would have lots of time to check the histogram and tweak away until everything was just so. Unfortunately motor racing does not give you such luxuries and quite often you have to run with what the sun and headlights give you. RAW allows you more lattitude to put this right.

Image size is also important to me and up-sizing a Jpeg is nowhere near as good as starting from RAW to do it. My submission rules are 300dpi (just an arbitary number, but it keeps them happy) and 20mb or bigger files. Getting there from a 4mb Jpeg vs a 4mb RAW really shows where the formats differ.

For shooting and printing in the field using Jpeg will give the simplest and easiest workflow, no doubt about that. I even have magazines who prefer Jpeg because they can download smaller files from my media only website. I must say they never look as good in print as the 20mb Tiffs. The 1D seems to show this difference up more than most and that may be due to how it handles the CCD output vs CMOS - just a guess.

To work on-site you have to really get things in order and set a workflow. But, before that you must make sure you are getting the best images possible out of the camera (in any format) and that in the main is down to the photographer. The 1D is as bullet-proof as they come and there is nothing wrong with the 100-400L. However, there is also nothing wrong with testing the setup, particularly as it is a tool that you expect to earn money from. Set up a card that has some detail on it, on a post the same distance away you will be shooting the riders/drivers and see just how sharp you can get the image. Make sure one of your tests is using a tripod (IS off by the way) as a reference. This will guide you as to whether you can get the image as sharp as you want without the complication of a moving subject.

Assuming you have a 100% working setup and you can get nice sharp images back to the computer, the next step is to sort out the post-processing workflow. Oh, before I forget, use custom WB to make sure you get accurate colors rather than tinker around in PS. For in-your-face images use Matrix 3 otherwise Matrix 1. I must say I prefer Matrix 3 for bikes. You should not be changing the colors in PS, they should come to you pretty much spot on.

Sharpening should be done with care. The 1D's CCD produces very sharp images anyway and you should do no more than a slight dose of USM - 50,0.6,0 if required. If you are having to do more than this then I would refer you back to the equipment test above.

Lastly, get yourself Q Image ( http://www.ddisoftware.com/qimage/ ) . It is the best $45 you can spend on improving your prints. Use best quality paper and make sure what you use has a profile available to suit your printer. Q Image will accurately use color profiles and you will not have any issues with color casts. Also, Q Image will use the maximum resolution of your printer giving you the sharpest possible prints. You will be amazed how well it scales a 1D image all the way to 11x16.

Most of what I do goes to magazines and they look after the post-processing to suit their style. A magazine happened to arrive today with a shot of mine they have published and it is very accurate for color and detail. I put it down to getting it as right as possible out of the camera and not having to do too much with it afterwards. Which of course makes for less work and I'm all for that.

I'll head off to Parc Ferme, switch off the engine and grab a beer.

[prov431]

Wow, a lot of replies here to read, and again some very great information. Very much appreciated, thank you!

I did a lot of reading through the 'best links' thread again last night and found a lot of answers and explainations to some of the things that confused me. The key, as mentioned earlier, will be for me to get out there in some off time and experiment with things..while taking notes on what I did. I realize it's not as simple as 'set it like this and you're good to go'!....but I also realize that for the type of shots that we take, there will be some standardization in the basic camera settings....such as Ai servo for the focus, single point focus selected, Tv...and so on. These are the things I must play with and see the differences each make.

My wife and I live just 20 minutes from Virginia International Raceway, www.virclub.com
We shoot club level motorcycle racing (WERA/CCS), club level car racing (SCCA) all different kinds of car clubs, and motorcross racing as well.
We occationally shoot a car show, but rarely now. Our customer base goes from the seasoned pro who's been there, done that, and saw everything, to the new-comer on his/her first track day. We are glad to say that the people we do serve are more than satisfied, which is evident by repeat business, invitations to come back, and invites to attend other events. We had planned on traveling the entire Mid Atlantic circuit, but instead we now have more than enough business at just VIR and the motorcross track which are both close to home. With my regular full time job (gas turbine operator maintenance technician) Why travel if you don't have too...in trutth it's been a blessing it's gone as it did in such a short amount of time.
We work out of a 8.5x16 foot enclosed trailer which has 3 networked computers, 5 monitors, (2 wall mounted flat screens slaved off 2 notebook computers below them plus a regular desktop comp.) heat / AC, sound system, 2 printers, 50 amp electrics, overhead lighting, and a lot of cabinet space to store everything.
Between the trailer set up and the camera gear, we have a lot of time and big money invested, which is one of the reasons why I am always trying to learn more about it.
I hope to buy myself a 1D like the one my wife has, so I can do what I please with it and learn the thing inside out...without fear of messing up my wifes camera.
Also would like to add another printer, and another flat screen to the trailer....and someone to help me run it all:)
Again, thanks for your replies, I sincerely appreciate them all.
-Dan

[IndyJeff]

Most of what I do goes to magazines and they look after the post-processing to suit their style. A magazine happened to arrive today with a shot of mine they have published and it is very accurate for color and detail. I put it down to getting it as right as possible out of the camera and not having to do too much with it afterwards. Which of course makes for less work and I'm all for that.



I can't begin to tell you how many of my 300-some posts on here have said somewhere in the post, rely on your camera and your knowledge of the equipment to get the right shot, not post processing. Using PS and similar programs can be a helpful tool but you shouldn't rely upon it to "make the shot".
As Kenny stated most mags and other publications will want the file in original form, no post processing done what so ever. I recently submitted an image to ESPN magazine. In their query thay asked for the file in original form, jpeg format, with no post processing at all. No sharpening, no color balance, no dpi or pixel witchery. What they do with it after they get it will conform to their press requirements. What I do in PS copuld make changes that would be irreversable and render the shot useless to them.

[prov431]

Oh, before I forget, use custom WB to make sure you get accurate colors rather than tinker around in PS. For in-your-face images use Matrix 3 otherwise Matrix 1. I must say I prefer Matrix 3 for bikes. You should not be changing the colors in PS, they should come to you pretty much spot on.

As far as I know, the camera is set on auto WB...I have not read much on this subject, and from what I think you're saying, it seems that I need to.
I can say that in PS I mainly make levels changes, and don't adjust for color...and this is only when required, say when making a print.
The largest prints that we do on-site are 12x18 tabloid size, and we do use Epson premium papers for all prints. The large prints come out fantastic, and are one of our best sellers next to CD's.
The statement you make about getting the image correct from the camera is very true indeed, because when we sell a customer a CD of their images, we do not correct any of the jpg's before we burn the disk, so it is imperitive that the image be crisp, clear, and colorful in it's original form.
-Dan

[nosquare2003]

prov431, do you have the Canon 1D manual? Try to read through first.

When I get my camera, I will do some simple check first. The second thing is to read through the manual.

[CoolToolGuy]

I hope we are over this latest firestorm. They are unpleasant. But I think they are inevitable as technology marches on.

Internet photo forums didn't exist in the 1960's when 35mm took hold, but I'll bet the same type of discussions happened among the Speed-Graphic and other medium format and large format photographers. All of a sudden these young punks with 35mm Single Lens Reflex cameras were taking away some of their business. That's life - get over it. If you are good at what you do you will adapt and survive. And everyone has to start somewhere and learn their craft - be it doing their friends' weddings, taking instant pictures at a tourist trap, providing same-day images at a racing venue, or whatever. There is no one 'right' way to get into the photography profession. Same thing happened with computers - all of a sudden (in the 1980's) these Personal Computers were taking over some of the sacred turf formerly handled by the big iron mainframes, and now a couple in a trailer can make a little money and (presumably) have a little fun using computer power that would have filled a room only a few years ago. Fine - more power to them. It looks like PROV431 has found a niche that was not being served, and they are off and running. Good Luck, and I hope that, bumps aside, this forum has been helpful.

Have Fun,

[prov431]

prov431, do you have the Canon 1D manual? Try to read through first.

When I get my camera, I will do some simple check first. The second thing is to read through the manual.

You betcha, and I plan on doing some reading this weekend while at the track. It will be a lot more productive when I get another camera I'm sure.
-Dan

[Sendide]

Sinar wrote:
Just because you have the money to purchase a digital camera doesn't make you a photographer. You say that you still have a long way to go before you are professionals, I bet you are charging professional money for your photographs?

simply : nobody was born photographer, among the many ways to learn : books, courses, discussions, CDs DVDs.... I most of the time found this forum very imformative. thanks to all of you guys from the moderators and top contributers to the first (nice) posts. I've been in photography worls since 1984, and have to admit that switching to digital photography is not that easy, especially when you are a serious film photographer. SO instead of throwing those expressions out like you Sinar did, think twice.
I read your "first"post more than once trying to understand what trigered your anger : yes he's not a professional photographer but tries honestly (with his wife) to make something out of it. if his clients are happy, what is then your problem? Professional that you think you are : then make the difference and show your clients AND PHOTOGRAPHY AMATEURS your distinction. but alose try to respect others freedom and honesty.
Reagrds
Khalid