Re: Do you set your camera at high resolution?

DHB offered these thoughts for the group's consideration of the
matter at hand:

=(8) offered these thoughts for the group's consideration of
Only a moron would shot at a resolution lower than the
camera's maximum. You never know what you will want to do
with the images in the future.

<SNIP>
HEMI-Powered,

Forgive me for placing you last sentence 1st but I did so
in support of your position & the maturity of your response.

No problem. Sometimes top- or near top-posting is the best way
for people to see your main point without having wade through
screens full of irrelevant quotes.

I think it may be better for you to allow for the possibility
that other people may have different views of fitness of
purpose, and that hardly makes them morons just because they
don't do what you do.

Then, I guess I am a moron. That seems to be a rather strong,
judgemental assertion. But, being the moron that I am,
shooting well over 15,000 images in the last 5-6 years gives
me a pretty good idea what I want to do with the images, and
there simply is NO justification for me to greatly increase my
editing time and HD storage for the 1% when I want to print.

<CUT>

Well FWIW, considering your replies it seems that your
very
much *not* a moron. It is interesting that in some areas we
have *very* different views on what we consider worth saving &
why.

Thank you, obviously I don't think I am. But, I will also say
that I have the strong philosphy that learning is a life long
endeavor, which is why I've been asking people to explain what
looks at first glance as something that doesn't make sense or I
just don't understand. Not this time, I think the position taken
was just a tad too extreme and rigid.

For me, I save every picture I take no matter how bad
they are
but maybe do so for what most people would consider wastefully
stupid reasons. The main reason is so that I can always go
back & see my learning curves with different digital cameras,
both P&S & DSLR.

I upload all my camera images to a large set of folders that save
literally every one of them in their unedited state. Then, I move
the ones I just shot to the "in progress" sub-folder under
whatever folder the finished pictures will go. Unlike many who
file by date taken, I file by place taken, and have broad
categoriess to make it easy to find similar pictures, e.g.
Digital Car Pictures, Auto Show Pictures, Car Show Pictures,
Museum Pictures, Non-Car Digital Pictures, etc.

Everybody has to create their own data management scheme that
works for them. The only advice I ever give people when they ask
me how I do it, beyond a synopsis like above, is for them to
think about what they want for awhile, develop and test drive
what they think is best for them, and stay ruthlessly consistant.
I tell people the same thing when creating naming conventions for
their finished pictures. Naturally, that differs widely depending
on the broad class of subjects, but for my cars, it is 100% rigid
as year, make, model, body style, special features, color, and
view. And, if the car shots were taken at some organized event or
place, I'll put that in parens, e.g. (Henry Ford Museum). This
makes it trivial to do a standard XP Search to find anything in
my collection very quickly. But, if I stray from my own
conventions, I'll miss things so I try to be as absolutely
consistent as I can.

Also they all have other potentially useful information
encoded in the META/EXIF DATA, such as:

1> Date & time.
2> Shutter & aperture information.
3> ISO setting.
4> WB setting.
5> Picture mode, such as P, Tv, Av, M or etc.
6> Focal length & etc.

You know, the one thing that I've never seen a camera put into
EXIF, which REALLY annoys the hell outta me, is the distance
focused. If I had it, it would be ultra useful in debugging DOF
or flash uneven lighting or underexposure blunders. I don't put
much in EXIF myself, just a copyright statement even though I
know that Exifer can remove it without even altering the file's
date stamp.

You & I are largely in the same boat with shooting mostly
jpeg
though since I added a Canon 30D to my 300D (Digital Rebel), I
often shoot *both* "RAW+jpeg" so if I really need it @ some
future point & have the time I can learn more about RAW & get
the benefit of it on an as needed basis.

I did shoot a bunch of RAW last summer and spent a reasonable
amount of time and effort trying to figure out how to make use of
its capability using Raw Shooter Premium, but I just can't climb
the learning curve enough to even begin. You might've seen my
comments about that. I can't find any books on the general
techniques for making the most of RAW, can't find anything
specific to Raw Shooter, which of course, got gobbled up by
Adobe, and all the digital photography how-to books use PS CS or
Elements as their example app, and I'm still in love with PSP 9.

So, if you have a hint or two on how a rank novice and RAW-
impaired person can learn the basics, I'd be obliged.

Off topic but it might be of comic interest to you, I
have
owned 2 HEMI engine powered vehicles but they both only had 2
wheels, a Suzuki 250cc twin & a Kawasaki 600cc water cooled,
shaft driven quad. Unlike most people I like *smooth* power
on 2 wheels rather than being *pulsed* down the road on 2 big
cylinders or head 1st on a cafe` style racer but I respect
opposing views/preferences!

That is humorous, considering my handle. Mine is a little bigger.
I've always been an admirer of Chrysler's many hemispherical head
engines dating all the way back to the 1951 FirePower, the 426
NASCAR, drag race and Street Hemi, and my previous and current
cars, a 2006 Dodge Charger R/T 5.7L 340 hp HEMI and my month-old
2007 Charger R/T with the Road & Track Performance Group which
adds some really nice trim, upgraded brakes and suspension, and
is rated 350 hp. I was all set this time to pop the $11-12K
premimum for an SRT8 Charger with the 6.1L 425 hp HEMI, but two
different car sales droids warned me that they are NOT cars for
Michigan. I already know that my RWD Charger is slippery in the
wet and a real bundle to control in snow even with All Speed
Traction Control and Electronic Stability Program, but when guys
who presumeably will sell anything to somebody with money tell me
that SRT8's just don't move well in rain and are virtually
undrivable, das ist das ende! I'm not paying all that dought to
garage the damn thing all winter!

Best of luck in your auto show photographic efforts, I
know
that on many vehicles/colors/polish, it can also be a
challenge to avoid your own reflection as well as those of
other people & other nearby vehicles too.

Once in a while, the exact way that I reflect in the paint or on
the glass is truly comical! It's like looking at a distorted
caricature from the curvature of the reflection.

I've got some health issues that really rob me of my energy, and
all those big Mopar events are coming up starting in a couple of
weeks, as you probably saw me talk about, and then the biggest
"car show" east of the Mississippi, the Woodward Dream Cruise, is
in August. The main problem for me at these events, besides just
lack of energy, is that there are 200, 300, 400 or more cars,
some I care about, some I don't. The events that are nearly all
day are OK, but lots of informal car shows have owners driving
in, staying for awhile, then leaving. So, I feel like I'm a
marathon runner, literally running from car to car, snapping
pictures about as fast as I can line of a decent composure and
getting an AF lock, then on to the next. Whew! Makes me tired
just thinking about it!

I am blessed in having so many really great places to indulge my
hobby of car picture collecting here in SE Michigan, that it's
like a kid in a candy store trying to stuff as much in their face
as possible.

But, to serious stuff. I rarely have much trouble with
reflections outdoores, but sun glare is a BIG problem. Some can
be minimized by moving a foot or two one way or another, some can
be helped a little with a circular polarizer, and the rest I just
have to live with. Then, there's the problem of shooting an
engine, interior, or instrument panel. The central part of the
subject is in focus and properly exposed, but other parts go inky
black while stray light, like that coming through the glass, just
blow out to almost white. I'm still experimenting with the best
way(s) of using fill flash to help with that, maybe this year,
I'll finally get it right.

Then, there's the museum biz where you either set up a tripod and
setting for a small number of pictures, or use flash which has
the usual problems, primarily uneven lighting, glare, exposure
problems even with AE lock, and effects of windows and overhead
spot lights. But, hey, if it were always easy, it wouldn't be
fun, right?

Bottom line, we each do what works best for *our needs*
but
with flash memory & external USB/FireWire/Network hard drive
prices dropping & capacities rising, it's relatively painless
(for many of us) to save everything & just sort the cream of
the crop.

You have summarized my philsophy exactly. If what you want can be
achieved with a P & S or EVF, fine, if it takes a DSLR, fine. If
you want to go max mega pixels, fine, and if you want to take a
middle-of-the-road view of things, I think that is also fine.
You've undoubtedly read me saying many times that I am a realist
and pragmatist, so I'm far less interested in what lab tests show
or what the norms are for PPI or whatever than I am in producing
REASONABLE images to suit my own tastes and preferences. I take
exactly the same view on cars, PCs, about anything one buys.
There just ain't one right answer, there isn't even 10 right
answers.

Respectfully, DHB

PS www.bhphotovideo.com has a Sandisk 2GB Extreme III
CompactFlash Card on sale for $29.95 US after a $15 mail-in
rebate, so you may want to check around, prices have dropped
considerably @ least in the US & I would expect this is also
true world wide though maybe not as low.

I guess I really embarrased myself with being so out-of-step on
the rapid drop in CF card prices. I should check first before
"open mouth, insert both feet"! <grin> I'm OK with 2.5 gig unless
I were to travel, which is almost out-of-the-question due to my
health limitations. But, I do appreciate the polite heads-up.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally
treasonable to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May
7, 1918

TR was an interesting guy. To be just a little bit political
here, but in a metaphorical way to extreme views occasionally on
this NG, the United States has twice enacted a sedition act which
made it a federal crime to critizie the president or Congress.
That's how I feel sometimes reading the arguments that break out
here. It's too bad when a couple or three guys get into "if you
do that, you're a moron" or "you don't know squat about what
you're trying to do". Ease up, everybody will be happier.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments.


--
HP, aka Jerry
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Digital storage
    ... images is growing very rapidly indeed. ... Whilst I print some of the pictures ... I archive all of my 'raw' photos - whether they are actually RAW or jpeg. ... If/when 'storage formats' change, I will move them to the ...
    (alt.photography)
  • Exposure discrepancy between raw & jpeg
    ... Recently I took some landscape pictures in raw+jpeg. ... properly exposed but the raw pictures appear to be underexposed. ... and exposure correction was needed to the same extent to bring the images ... degree of underexposure was similar for the images with or without the ...
    (rec.photo.digital.slr-systems)
  • Re: Camera Iyonix Compatible
    ... >> It takes pictures in JPEG or RAW, ... > Many PC prog's cannot handle RAW images either, ... > sets up a folder within the current picture folder as an automatic ...
    (comp.sys.acorn.hardware)
  • Incredible... Bush Administration condemns *broadcast* of Abu Ghraib images but not the abuse itself
    ... New images could fan tensions across the Middle East ... abusing prisoners in Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad, saying that the pictures ... pictures taken by US soldiers at the jail in late 2003, were broadcast less ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: Off Topic, but of interest to this group - I hope
    ... >> discussion on propaganda and photography. ... > I go to the Art & Letters Daily website every morning. ... > by so many images was interesting. ... > technolgies allowing mass distribution of pictures have had a major, ...
    (rec.photo.darkroom)