John H. wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 11:08:58 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" [email protected] wrote in
message ...
John H. wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 09:24:44 -0500, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
[email protected] wrote:

John H. wrote:
This picture was taken from about six feet away. In looking
at the EXIF data, I noticed that the 'sharpness' was set at 'soft'.
I've
got to check into that. Maybe that's part of my problem.
All I have to say is "Duuuuhhhhhh".
I appreciate your suggestions.
Give me a break! I spent 30 years with a Canon FTQL. I didn't have to be
a
damn IT professional to take a picture.
LOL, JohnH, I am teasing you. If you look at my photos, I have a tendency
to over sharpen them.
Then stop over sharpening them. It's a nasty effect. Nobody likes the
results. Nobody.



Most photoshopped photos look photoshopped. I can see touching up a sky
a bit or getting rid of redeye or other simple stuff in an image, but
most of the rest of it seems to produce clichés, especially in the hands
of amateurs. The less you mess with a decent photo, the more pleasing it
will be.

Were the owls touched up?

I do very little touch up with Photoshop. I haven't learned how to do much
yet, and I try to get a semi-decent picture to begin with. I wish RG would
take me along to the Grand Tetons next time he goes. I'd love to hold his
camera bag or something and maybe get in a few shots myself.

JohnH,
Since you shot in jpg, the camera is functioning as your "photoshop".
The different auto settings will make minor changes in the way it will
process the photo. They will change the color to vibrant, soft focus,
emphasize certain colors etc.

If you shot in RAW, you need to process it out of the camera.