In the raw!

23 comments - Leave a comment

Last Saturday I finally picked up a flash for my camera — a Nikon SB-600 Speedlight unit. On Wednesday and Thursday afternoon, I did a lot of reading on manual settings, recommendations for white balances, shutter speed in relation to the lens, and so on and so forth (Magic Lantern Guides: Nikon D40x was a great read).

Tonight, I grabbed my camera, fine tuned everything in manual mode (flash, white balance, shutter speed, aperture, etc.), and took a few dozen shots. I also set the saving mode to RAW (.NEF), hence the title of this post. ;)

The only “bug” I ran into was bringing the photos up in Adobe Photoshop CS3. It spit out a program error. As it turns out, I simply had to upgrade the Camera Raw plugin to the latest version to get Photoshop and .NEF files to play nicely together.

I got my hands on a really swanky set of Photoshop actions (torrents, heh), but I’d rather play with self-portraits than photos of the kidlets.

Anyway, enough geeky babbling aside… here are some of the best shots!

DSC_9742 (by Jenn ?)

DSC_9785 (by Jenn ?)

DSC_9799 (by Jenn ?)

DSC_9834 (by Jenn ?)

DSC_9854 (by Jenn ?)

(For those who took note, yes, Ryan’s hair is crazy long! He is going for a hair cut either this Friday or Saturday.)

(0)
 

23 responses to “In the raw!” - Jump to comment form

  1. Sheena wrote on #

    Pretty! Ryan’s hair isn’t that bad! You used the word SWANKY, I hate that word, it’s right up there with NEATO!!! lol

  2. Sheena wrote on #

    Um…those photos suck. They look like they were taken on a disposable camera. Congratulations, you just spent a shitload of money on something that made absolutely no difference at all.

  3. Sheena, since you’re so quick with the opinion, care to share why you think they came out so poorly? Feel free to share any tips you have for better shots next time around, so that the carefully set up photos don’t look like they rolled off of a disposable (according to you, anyway). ;)

  4. kali wrote on #

    what exactly is your new toy supposed to do? because those photos to me don’t look any different that normal point-and-shoot photos taken by any other random person?

  5. Er, I don’t know much about photography, I’m a sculptor myself, but what exactly is the difference we should be seeing? Or are those the “before” photos?

  6. kali, the new toy is a flash – an external one. The Nikon D40x comes with a built-in flash, but the external flashes are superior in terms of fine tuning how it goes off — speed, duration, intensity, even angle.

    All of the above photo were taken at home, at night, with lights from indoor lamps – incandescent lighting. Without the external flash, these photos would have been very warm looking, with a lot of yellow/orange casting. The use of the external flash provides much more natural lighting, which was accomplished here. :)

  7. larissa wrote on #

    i feel kinda bad i mean here you have this expensive camera with all these buttons and doodads and a big flash and your photos have the same quality as a disposable 35mm…and then i see other people with a simple canon powershot bringing down the house…i suppose everyone has different talents, i guess yours is…cooking? (that’s not a “fat” insult, it seems you blog about cooking frequently)

  8. Danielle P., as I explained in the last comment, the external flash provides a great light source that can be angled up and away from the subject, so that the light falls all around it as the photo is taken, rather than directly at it. So instead of the subject being vividly shown in the photos, or even slightly washed out, the lighting is natural. Before I had the external flash, I was only able to achieve an effect like this by taking a shot without any flash, which meant holding the camera very still, risking blur and grain, and then having a yellowish/orangey photos to try and manipulate in Adobe Photoshop.

    For comparison, here are similar photos, done under the same lighting conditions (at night, two lamps throwing off incandescent lighting), but with no flash and then edited in Adobe Photoshop to try and give the illusion of natural lighting:

    DSC_9516 (by Jenn ?)

    DSC_9282 (by Jenn ?)

  9. larissa, I really don’t think I blog frequently about cooking… except mentioning in passing about cooking meals? I do make meals three times a day you know, what with kids and all… it kind of comes with the territory.

    That said, these particular photos aren’t stunning in terms of quality, but for showing the capabilities of an external flash, I think they do quite well.

  10. L wrote on #

    hrm, i have no idea why everyone has suddenly decided to become a photography critic here. perhaps the above commenters would like to share their work, which i’m sure would put helmut newton to shame… or not.

    anyway! i think these are very nice! like you i take a lot of pictures inside at night, and they often have a very ‘warm’ yellowish cast. which i don’t really mind. but for taking portraits it does seem like the speedlite creates a much more flattering colour tone. i hope you enjoy playing with your new toy! :cute:

  11. ^Because Becky has a stick up her ass over Jenn again and has all of her little follower friends coming over to “play”. heh

    Jenn, I can tell the difference immediately. Getting a flash for the XTi was one of the best investments I’ve made in a long time. I’m able to get indoor and night shots I’d never have been able to get before.

    To the rest of the photography experts: Since when can a diposable camera add bokeh to an image? Please point me to this wonder I’ve never discovered because clearly I’ve wasted tons and tons of money when all I had to do was shop at the dollar store like the rest of you!

  12. Ashley wrote on #

    ^ I can totally see the difference too. The kiddies look too cute :cute:

  13. Hah…the disposable camera part cracked me up. Clearly you haven’t had your hands on a DSLR camera or else you’d see the difference by a long shot. Stupid people with their stupid comments. :hmm:

    @ Jenn, these photographs are gorgeous and you can definitely see the difference between flash and no flash unit. They look so natural and the skin colours are terrific.

    My personal opinion is that they need a little more contrast, not too much. But then again, I prefer my photographs to be vivid. But as your photos are now, they are stunning nevertheless. Great work! :cute:

  14. Tasha wrote on #

    I have been wanting to get a flash for my D40 and some new lenses. Heh. There is a BIG difference when using the flash and the photos look great! The first one of Alyssa is so pretty! :)

  15. Ally wrote on #

    Swanky PS Actions, you say? My curiosity is piqued!

    I am digging the shots with the new flash. It’s an investment I want to make, but can’t justify right now. haha

  16. Kay wrote on #

    The photos are great. I think those comments are all by one person or people that know each other. seriously what are the odds that a bunch of people, all with no websites/contact info linked commented the same thing one right after the other. one thing i did notice though was that all the comments from everyone, including your reply have the same exact time so i couldnt tell if these ‘different’ people really did comment together or not. lol its the damn internet i dont get the point of fake comments to TRY to make you feel bad. ignore them theyre losers.

  17. Emily wrote on #

    aww how cute! i think the pics are gorgeous and the flash really does make a difference (in a good way) :biggrin:

  18. Ranee wrote on #

    Who the hell is Becky?

    Anyway I commented on the photos on flickr instead of on this entry. I am saving up to buy the camera I want instead of just purchasing a cheap one so if ALL OF THESE EXPERTS know where I can get that disposable that takes pics that are good please direct me right to it and I’ll save myself hundreds of dollars.

    I used the Cannon that they were talking about in one of those comments, just to see what it did. Hahahahaha. I’m not trashing anyone with that camera, but if it’s comparable to the quality of Jenn’s then I don’t even know how to point and shoot.

  19. Becky wrote on #

    ^Because Becky has a stick up her ass over Jenn again and has all of her little follower friends coming over to “play”. heh

    Sorry not me. Even if it were my “followers” would use their real names. It’s a shame they didn’t use their real names to add strength to their opinions :\

    perhaps the above commenters would like to share their work, which i’m sure would put helmut newton to shame… or not.

    You don’t need to be an amazing, talented photographer to be able to criticize someone else’s work competently. Just throwing that out there.

    Hopefully this will go through.

  20. Leslie wrote on #

    Who gives a shit in the first place lmfao. THEY ARE PICTURES. Jenn isnt a professional photographer and her PICTURES ARE FINE. Jesus christ, Shut the FUCK up.

  21. Nellie wrote on #

    comments–comments if you are satisfied with your pics, please do not let the “know it all comments” bother you. They look fine to me and they are memory worthy.=

  22. Ajemi wrote on #

    Beautiful photos and beautiful children! :)

  23. Arwen wrote on #

    Don’t worry Jenn, you’re not the only one being attacked by stupid people and their stupid comments. Me and my “mexican sharpie eyebrows” (LOL!!!) are the topic of discussion because apparently I did something ungodly to Becky to cause her to zomg haet me. *shrug*

    Your photos are beautiful. Nikon cameras are awesome. I used to have a manual 35MM F2, and I used to take rolls of black and white pictures with it. I loved it.

 

Leave a Reply

*


What is 8 + 3 ?
Please leave these two fields as-is:


CommentLuv badge