From: bugbear on
Alex Monro wrote:
> bugbear wrote:
>
>> BD wrote:
>>> Software - check out GIMP. It won't open the RAW files from the camera
>>> by default, but you should be able to dig up some mechanism for
>>> converting to TIF and then opening in GIMP.
>> Gimp will open raw "native" if you add the (free) UFram plugin.
>>
> That's UFraw.

Not if I typo, it isn't ...

BugBear
From: J. Clarke on
David J Taylor wrote:
>> Also, there's the issue of software. Everybody talks about
>> Photoshop, but I wonder if there might be freeware that would let me
>> process raw images well enough and do the occasional HDR or pano
>> pic.
>
> Take a look at these for editing:
>
> http://www.getpaint.net/
>
> http://photofiltre.en.softonic.com/
>
> For raw conversion:
>
> http://www.rawtherapee.com/
>
> and for panos:
>
> http://people.cs.ubc.ca/~mbrown/autostitch/autostitch.html
>
> Cheers,
> David

I'm not seeing the original post--found it on Google Groups though. The OP
hasn't answered a very basic question. What does he want to do that his
current setup won't do.

It's easy to make a bunch of recommendations for general purpose kit, but
the right setup for press photography is different from the right setup for
product photography which is different from the right setup for portraits
which is different from the right setup for landscapes and so on.

From: ray on
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 23:05:28 -0600, Peabody wrote:

> As a hobby, I mean.
>
> I've been doing stuff with a Canon A590IS for a year now, but have been
> thinking about getting into photography more seriously - getting a nice
> camera, etc. My total investment in the A590 setup is around $150,
> including the camera, batteries, charger, SD cards, and card reader, and
> that's using a cheap, wobly tripod I bought years ago that really isn't
> much good.
>
> But serious photography seems to be a really expensive hobby, and I
> would be operating under a limited budget. So I was trying to make a
> list of the things I would need, and would appreciate help putting
> specific numbers on some of these things. Here's my list so far:
>
> Canon XSi with 18-55mm IS kit lens - $560 50mm 1.8 lens - $100
> other lenses
> filters
> lens hood
> extra battery
> SD cards
> camera bag
> tripod
> off-camera flash, lights, other lighting equipment software - raw
> processing and general editing software - HDR, pano
> books?
>
> I guess one way to keep the cost down would be to just fart off the
> entire flash/lighting category, and stick with available light.
>
> Also, there's the issue of software. Everybody talks about Photoshop,
> but I wonder if there might be freeware that would let me process raw
> images well enough and do the occasional HDR or pano pic.

Of course, There are Open Source programs such as ufraw, GIMP and pano-
tools that will allow you to do that - they are all available for free.


>
> If it matters, I probably wouldn't be doing weddings, wildlife, or
> sports, but pretty much anything else.
>
> Well, I'd appreciate help on filling in what things are likely to cost,
> and what things I need to add. Kinda hoping to stay under $1000, but
> that may be unrealistic if I have to buy software.

From: nospam on
In article <00cb207a$0$23374$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com>, Peabody
<waybackNO746SPAM44(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> There was one comment about Nikon being better that Canon for old,
> inexpensive lenses. I don't understand that. Did Canon change the
> mount or something so that old film lenses won't work anymore, even
> manually?

'film lenses' is meaningless. canon changed their mount and old manual
focus canon lenses will not fit nor work, however, any canon autofocus
lens will work, including ones from the film era.

there are adapters for the manual lenses, but they either use an optic
making it a 1.3x teleconverter and are hard to find and only work with
some lenses, or there's no optic and you lose infinity focus. in other
words, not worth it.
From: Keith Nuttle on
On 1/14/2010 12:33 AM, BD wrote:
>> Well, I'd appreciate help on filling in what things are likely to
>> cost, and what things I need to add. Kinda hoping to stay under
>> $1000, but that may be unrealistic if I have to buy software.
>
> Don't buy anything you don't actually have a reason to get. If you
> have a specific reason to get the 1.8 lens, great - but if not, wait
> until you actually do. It would suck if you spent hundreds of dollars
> on stuff that ended up just being shelved.
>
> Ditto with the lighting. Get what you need when you find you need it.
> Much of what you would want to accomplish with multiple light sources
> you may be able to accomplish with one remote flash and a bounce
> reflector. Not sure if the XSI has built-in remote flash control - I
> doubt it, offhand. I used a 550EX as the master flash and a couple of
> remote 480EXs. Worked fine, but that's quite a few bucks in flashes.
>
> Filters - get a decent UV filter for each lens diameter you have - for
> physical protection.
>
> Software - check out GIMP. It won't open the RAW files from the camera
> by default, but you should be able to dig up some mechanism for
> converting to TIF and then opening in GIMP.

Another free software program that appears to handle RAW files is
Irfanview. It is the only image program that I use. I use it for image
viewing from my digital camera, cropping, color adjustment etc. and as
an input program for my flatbed scanner.

As for other photographic equipment, first go buy a good basic portrait
and landscape book on photography. Learn the principals of lighting,
reflections, composition, etc. A knowledgeable photographer with a less
than perfect camera can take better than someone who knows nothing about
the photographic principals with the best camera in the world.

After learning the principals, get the best camera you can afford, and
add other equipment as you need it.

I don't know about others but the most important thing for me is a good
zoom lens. On the photos I take, very few are taken without some degree
of zoom. When you look at a landscape scene your eye only see about
what is seen with a 135 mm lens on a 35 mm camera.