Poor Image Quality

Echoing what others said, they look fine to me. Composition could use some work I suppose, and the second shot was probably taken in the midday sun probably, so the sky is washed out, but nothing looks terribly amiss. I'd also like to see the ones that you say look like its shot through glass.

Just to get it out of the way...
You don't have a cheap filter on your lens do you?

To me, both look over-exposed and midday lighting makes for very difficult landscape photography.

Maybe Nikon has more in-camera processing defaults (sharpening, saturation, etc).

#1 looks like the shadows were pushed up. The grass on #2 looks over-sharpened.

I don't see anything horrible on my screen either. I originally thought the OP was shooting at a high ISO and the noise reduction was smoothing things over and gave it a toy/painted look, but that doesn't look like the case. Everyone's monitors seem to show no issues so got to wonder what monitor the OP is using??
Hope it isn't a tv being used as a monitor and not an actual monitor. TVs won't always reproduce colors correctly from a computer.

Ok...please do not take this as discouraging because it isn't meant to be; but, stop. It seems like you need to take a step back and really take stock of the situation.

I've just gone back through the history of your threads here and what I see is that while you're spending a TON of time worrying about editing software and other gadgetry, etc without taking the time to learn to take a photo that is well exposed, framed well and contains clear subject. Forget about RAW, and processing and which software to use, etc.

The images that have been posted in other threads, previously, have no clear subject or "story", are framed in such a way that the subject is just uninteresting (soft focus, poor backgrounds), or light is unflattering/harsh/dir​ect/etc.

Go back to shooting jpeg for now and focus on:
1. Composition; how to include points within the image for the eye to 'land' on, how to lead the eye through the frame and/or to your subject, how changing the angle that you shoot from can impact the image...
2. Proper exposure: What the meter in your camera is telling you (not just where the needle on the meter is falling, but what that actually means in relation to the overall image), how your [or the camera's] choice of settings impacts the final outcome
3. Light; how the angle that light falls on the scene affects the final image (direct vs side vs back light, etc), shadows (why they're important)

Look up the "zone" system, learn to read the histogram and understand what it is actually showing you. Read (or re-read) Understanding Exposure (version III is the latest, geared more to digital than previous versions). Take a ton of shots, then look at them next to images of similar subjects in the photo sharing sections and take notes on how they compare/differ. Post more in the C&C forum once you feel that you're getting those things down and act on some of the feedback you get; really examine the results that you're getting and identify what you do/don't like about what your outputs are.

Once those things are working for you with your current kit, then start working with processing software, shooting RAW and tweaking things further, etc.

Most importantly, don't give up; learning these things can be frustrating and take time; but it certainly can be done.

Snydremark wrote in post #16612195
Ok...please do not take this as discouraging because it isn't meant to be; but, stop. It seems like you need to take a step back and really take stock of the situation.

I've just gone back through the history of your threads here and what I see is that while you're spending a TON of time worrying about editing software and other gadgetry, etc without taking the time to learn to take a photo that is well exposed, framed well and contains clear subject. Forget about RAW, and processing and which software to use, etc.

The images that have been posted in other threads, previously, have no clear subject or "story", are framed in such a way that the subject is just uninteresting (soft focus, poor backgrounds), or light is unflattering/harsh/dir​ect/etc.

Go back to shooting jpeg for now and focus on:
1. Composition; how to include points within the image for the eye to 'land' on, how to lead the eye through the frame and/or to your subject, how changing the angle that you shoot from can impact the image...
2. Proper exposure: What the meter in your camera is telling you (not just where the needle on the meter is falling, but what that actually means in relation to the overall image), how your [or the camera's] choice of settings impacts the final outcome
3. Light; how the angle that light falls on the scene affects the final image (direct vs side vs back light, etc), shadows (why they're important)

Look up the "zone" system, learn to read the histogram and understand what it is actually showing you. Read (or re-read) Understanding Exposure (version III is the latest, geared more to digital than previous versions). Take a ton of shots, then look at them next to images of similar subjects in the photo sharing sections and take notes on how they compare/differ. Post more in the C&C forum once you feel that you're getting those things down and act on some of the feedback you get; really examine the results that you're getting and identify what you do/don't like about what your outputs are.

Once those things are working for you with your current kit, then start working with processing software, shooting RAW and tweaking things further, etc.

Most importantly, don't give up; learning these things can be frustrating and take time; but it certainly can be done.

+1

Oh, and buy $8,000 more in glass, a 2nd body, another $1000 for a huge color balanced monitor, every gismo and color balancing card out there .... That didn't work for me but ...

Seriously though, if you want to learn about framing and what makes a good photo good (besides the technical stuff), read this book. With all those rolling hills and picturesque homes, you'd think that something more interesting than a straight-on shot of a hedge could be found.

RE: Your 2 photos - besides composition, I think over-exposure and harsh lighting are the main technical problems as regards your concern of having the "camera not perform right". Bring a tripod there at 3:30 PM (maybe an hour before sundown) and find a better vantage point.

As for shooting in RAW vs. JPG - maybe try both. RAW does allow for more technical correction, but JPG is simpler.

Snydremark wrote in post #16612195
Ok...please do not take this as discouraging because it isn't meant to be; but, stop. It seems like you need to take a step back and really take stock of the situation.

I've just gone back through the history of your threads here and what I see is that while you're spending a TON of time worrying about editing software and other gadgetry, etc without taking the time to learn to take a photo that is well exposed, framed well and contains clear subject. Forget about RAW, and processing and which software to use, etc.

The images that have been posted in other threads, previously, have no clear subject or "story", are framed in such a way that the subject is just uninteresting (soft focus, poor backgrounds), or light is unflattering/harsh/dir​ect/etc.

Go back to shooting jpeg for now and focus on:
1. Composition; how to include points within the image for the eye to 'land' on, how to lead the eye through the frame and/or to your subject, how changing the angle that you shoot from can impact the image...
2. Proper exposure: What the meter in your camera is telling you (not just where the needle on the meter is falling, but what that actually means in relation to the overall image), how your [or the camera's] choice of settings impacts the final outcome
3. Light; how the angle that light falls on the scene affects the final image (direct vs side vs back light, etc), shadows (why they're important)

Look up the "zone" system, learn to read the histogram and understand what it is actually showing you. Read (or re-read) Understanding Exposure (version III is the latest, geared more to digital than previous versions). Take a ton of shots, then look at them next to images of similar subjects in the photo sharing sections and take notes on how they compare/differ. Post more in the C&C forum once you feel that you're getting those things down and act on some of the feedback you get; really examine the results that you're getting and identify what you do/don't like about what your outputs are.

Once those things are working for you with your current kit, then start working with processing software, shooting RAW and tweaking things further, etc.

Most importantly, don't give up; learning these things can be frustrating and take time; but it certainly can be done.

THIS ^^

People usually blame their gear first before themselves. Just practice a whole lot and step outside your comfort zone

In my defence - the above pics were just an example and not ment to show perspective just IQ, 99.9% of my photography is point and shoot instant picture taking, i dont go out tripod in hand(i dont own one) and set up base survaying the scene, i just set my camera up so i dont get blured pics through too low s speed, and try not to use too higher Iso due to the extreme noise my camera can create despite ettr, this in its own rite can cause inconvenience as with me adding 2/3 ec in less then bright light i then need more Iso to cope with f5.6 max and a 300mm lens and min 320/sec s speed, i have often seen my camera needing an Iso of 400+ at f5.6 and 320/sec, for some reason with my old 30d and nifty 250 even with ettr of the same amount i was seeing a need for lower Iso despite f5.6 being the largest on the nifty aswel, do nikon and canon meter differently even at the same settings apreture,shutter speed, etc?

P.

My simple suggestion: set the camera back to factory defaults, shoot some jpegs in auto mode from a few different places (sunny, shady, inside, outside, flash, no flash, etc.) and then look at which photos you like and then analyze the settings used.

People often underestimate the camera's ability to get a good shot. What you shoot and how you frame it is on you, but proper exposure is what the camera's engineers programmed it to do.

Another idea: find a good photo online that includes the camera settings and try to duplicate the shot to see if that teaches you.

I'm wondering what metering setting you have got in camera......spot/centr​e weighted/average. The 55-300VR is not the best selection of lens for the images you have posted up, apologises if I am wrong but I get the impression you are shooting at f5.6. If this is so then the first image will struggle with depth of field.
I would agree what others have mentioned shoot out with Jpegs at the moment, make sure you are not set up for spot metering and do a bit of homework on your point of focus.
The composition problem will just go away with experience, if you can post up some more images with all your camera settings we might get you up and running IQ wise.

Subject
Lighting
Composition

Images need to have a subject, whether it's a person, a group, a building or shape or landscape view, etc... Essentially what is it that made me (you) want to take a picture in the first place?

What's the light like? Do I need to move to get the best out of the light available? Do I need flash? Do I need a faster lens? Do I need extra support? Are the shadows nice? Should I come back later in the day when the light will be better (always take a shot anyway just in case you can't come back)..

How does the subject look in the frame? Are there any distractions? Is a power line in the background, growing out of the subject's ear? Do I need a longer or wider lens? Do the people in my shot have feet? Are all the things I want in focus, in focus, and vice versa?

Don't bother with RAW or NEF files until you are truly restricted by JPEG. For what it's worth I mostly shoot JPEG and have still been able (luckily perhaps) to produce some photographs that have been published. I also don't use a tripod much, though I do use a monopod for head-on Motorsport shots and occasionally for wildlife.

Lots of good advice from the other folks. Just keep plugging away, you'll get there..

Pagman wrote in post #16613341
In my defence - the above pics were just an example and not ment to show perspective just IQ, 99.9% of my photography is point and shoot instant picture taking, i dont go out tripod in hand(i dont own one) and set up base survaying the scene, i just set my camera up so i dont get blured pics through too low s speed, and try not to use too higher Iso due to the extreme noise my camera can create despite ettr, this in its own rite can cause inconvenience as with me adding 2/3 ec in less then bright light i then need more Iso to cope with f5.6 max and a 300mm lens and min 320/sec s speed, i have often seen my camera needing an Iso of 400+ at f5.6 and 320/sec, for some reason with my old 30d and nifty 250 even with ettr of the same amount i was seeing a need for lower Iso despite f5.6 being the largest on the nifty aswel, do nikon and canon meter differently even at the same settings apreture,shutter speed, etc?

P.

Do you have any examples of the "unrealistic/painterly​" look you mentioned?

Here is another one just shot while out for a walk, again another quick pas shot.

P.

Andrushka wrote in post #16613648
Do you have any examples of the "unrealistic/painterly​" look you mentioned?

Pic above ^^^

P.