[Rikstwinkle]

First attempt at night photography. Kinda pleased with the result let me know what you think?

Shutter speed 20secs
F11
ISO 200

Thanks Rik

[PhotoPlay]

This is one great mage Rikstwinkle Few adjustments on some blown up highlights and this would be great, also in sharpness.

[EdMak]

Excellent, agree with above. Shorter exposure would have helped. Was there few years ago , will look out some results and post. Ed.

[Rikstwinkle]

Thanks guys, I think I shot one in auto which used a shorter exposure, came out quite dark. I've already played around with some minor adjustments on this one but I'll have another go to see if I can improve with both of them if I did.

My camera fell of its perch around this time so I might have only taken the one shot out of caution. Was perched on a bollard. Luckily I managed to catch it mid fall but my remote ended up in the Tyne as it flew from my hand as I dived to save my camera. Better my remote in the Tyne than my camera though hey

[Rikstwinkle]

Can you be more specific about what and how I should adjust the pictures in an editor?

[EdMak]

What software are you using. Ed.

[EdMak]

Photoshop, 2 minutes. Ed.

http://www.4shared.com/photo/UV3Sf3O3/imagea.html

[Rikstwinkle]

Just got picassa can't afford anything that isn't free yet

[Rikstwinkle]

Ed did you adjust that? What did you do?

[EdMak]

Power of Photoshop, Auto set in Camera Raw, then used their settings to tweak, as I saw it, opened in P/shop, only sharpened, and adjusted Shadow/Highlights. Ed.

[Rikstwinkle]

Cool thanks ed, shame photoshop isn't free are you using elements or the better one?

[EdMak]

Use CS4E. This is one of the side effects of photography. 1950''s, everything done by you. Raw chemicals to make own Developer, Fixer, Toner. Intensifier, etc. Picture was sharp, or, dizzy, no means of post sharpening. Made own prints, better printer, better picture, better chance of selling, always, attention to detail. Now, if we had been standing together when your pic was taken, same camera, same settings, then, since I have P/S, mine would probably have been better, using someone else's capabilities, not mine. Money also comes into the equation. So it's really not an even skills playing field. Yours would have been even better, working from the original file, M/bts, rather than K/bts. Lecture over. Cheers. Ed.

[Rikstwinkle]

Went a tad over my head. What is k/b m/b?

Think I got most of it Ed. are you saying I need to get ps and kick picassa to the curb?

[EdMak]

Apologies Megabyte, Kilobyte, the file size of your pictures, right click on pic, choose properties and size will be shown. Have not really tried Picassa, so no comment. Gimp, http://getgimp.com/lp/index.php?pk=4769 is free and good, steep learning curve, as is P/S. Learned friend maintains that P/S CS3, is all you need. Adobe Lightroom 5 looks good, under £100 Ed.

[Rikstwinkle]

Thanks Ed, ill have a look at that. So are you advising I shoot in mb rather than kb? I thought I was shooting in the highest quality :/

Sorry I must sound like a right gimp, pardon my pun

[EdMak]

You probably shooting at Best quality, but check to be sure. the Forum uses small files, and will resize as needed, if too big, popup should advise. What Camera are you using, what is the file size of uploaded one. Ed.

[Rikstwinkle]

Agh I'm beginning to understand. I'm using a pentax k30, I did some minor editing in raw then converted to jpeg. Ill have to check the file size when I'm at my pc and let you know

[EdMak]

Assume it's Pentax version RAW, try all the sliders, see what they do. A lot can be done there. Ed.

[Dean]

Well, if that was your first attempt at night shot then you have done very well. I would have been v pleased to have taken it. Just needed a little less exposure. You can always increase exposure post production but rarely reduce.
Dean

[Rikstwinkle]

Brilliant thanks some great advice here. If I'm increasing exposure post production... What am I looking for in the program am using picassa ATM but will download gimp soon?

[PhotoPlay]

I'm not sure how to say to say this but base on my experience go for adobe photoshop or lightroom. There are tons of software programs out there that can achieve same effect and its a matter of time in learning from its use. Only difference with adobe is you can extend more of your learning from its production but expensive either way still there are pros and cons. sounds confusing ei. cheers..

[Dean]

I use PS Elements 9 which is not so expensive. I don’t often go in for the most “creative” stuff so find it adequate. If you shoot in RAW and underexpose, slightly, then you can certainly increase the exposure in selected areas later.

[Vik]

You certainly have an eye for a great composition...I can't comment on the technical details in the depth the others have, but if I'd produced this, I'd have been happy! (though before you say it, Ed, I'm only at the level of a wedding photographer)

[helmsmer]

First attempt at night photography. Kinda pleased with the result let me know what you think?

Shutter speed 20secs
F11
ISO 200

Thanks Rik

Wow! What a shot! ... and what a mural this would make, blown up and in the lobby of a large building.

[hotglassguy]

Love the picture. You have an excellent eye.

Regarding post-processing programs. There are several very capable programs out there that would serve you well without the high cost of Photoshop. My choice is PrintShop Pro X6 from Corel.com The "Ultimate" version, which includes some nice freebies is priced at $99 US but often is on sale for $50 to $60. X6 has just been released and so is at full price at the moment. But keep watching for a sale if you can wait. Otherwise, it is a great value at the full price.

Also, when you purchase PaintShop Pro you "own" the package. It is not a subscription service like Photoshop has become.