My G9 Does NYC

There was a GREAT fog around the tops of all the buildings.

All shots hand held & shot in RAW
Night ISO 400 (braced)
Daytime ISO 80/100

Post Processed in Lightroom and Photo Shop

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Very nice. DSLR quality.

thanks

Eight is the limit on embedded images S2000.

wonderfully done!

Kevin wrote in post #4507190
Eight is the limit on embedded images S2000.

Does this count? or does in fall into the "discussion" clause....

http://texasholdemblog​ger.files.wordpress.co​m/2006/12/grinch.jpg

I'm a newbie to digital post processsing. When used with Photoshop, is the principal purpose of 'Lightroom' batch processing, or is it used to make additional adjustments to the image, beyond what was done with Photoshop?

thanks.

Roger955 wrote in post #4509592
I'm a newbie to digital post processsing. When used with Photoshop, is the principal purpose of 'Lightroom' batch processing, or is it used to make additional adjustments to the image, beyond what was done with Photoshop?

thanks.

Roger,

I use Light Room to process the RAW file. I then convert it to jpeg and sharpen/remove noise in Photoshop. I also add boarders, layers and my signature.

There are many different ways and programs to do this. This is just what I'm comfortable doing.

Thank you, Shawn. I take it that you process each photograph individually, in Light Room. I had inferred from posts of others that Light Room can be/is used to process a group of images, perhaps by specifying settings for the batch.

I ask because I'm wondering how time-consuming it is to use RAW and whether I'm likely to go there, or simply continue to use jpegs.

Your PP work seems to nicely eliminate/reduce noise, a not infrequent concern with the G9.

Roger955 wrote in post #4510127
Thank you, Shawn. I take it that you process each photograph individually, in Light Room. I had inferred from posts of others that Light Room can be/is used to process a group of images, perhaps by specifying settings for the batch.

I ask because I'm wondering how time-consuming it is to use RAW and whether I'm likely to go there, or simply continue to use jpegs.

Your PP work seems to nicely eliminate/reduce noise, a not infrequent concern with the G9.

You can batch in both LR and Photoshop. I have batch process set up, but I like to "tweek" the photos. It takes me 10 minutes max to edit the average photo. RAW gives you so much more control over WB, exposure, tone, color, detail, lens...and so on.

Since I do not shoot professionally or sell large batches of photos, I don't have a time issues.

I shoot and edit as a hobby and post on my website which I usually update with photos and interesting photo related info once a month. I try to get 15 keepers a month.

I try to carry a camera everywhere I travel (I travel a lot for work). The G9 is the best travel camera I have used to date. When I have the time and weight/luggage space I usually carry my 40D and 2 lens.

S2000 wrote in post #4508734
Does this count? or does in fall into the "discussion" clause....

http://texasholdemblog​ger.files.wordpress.co​m/2006/12/grinch.jpg

If that had been your image, yes, it would count since all your images were posted for sharing. I did not see where you asked for specific comments or critique for each particular image. AAMOF, this thead really belongs in Urban Life forum where it's being moved to as soon as I finish this post.

Thanks again Shawn.

I have a brand new G9 sitting in it's box on my desk, which I bought to use in much the same manner as you have. Then, having read the concerns regarding noise, I've wondered if I should wait for the G10 and continue to use my F30 in the meantime, as my travel camera. You photos suggest that, when images are properly processed, noise isn't such an issue.

Roger