I bought a digital single lens reflex for the first time 4 years ago (a refurbished Nikon D60) and have been trying to figure out how to produce a good photograph ever since.

What I have learned is that I had go through a long learning curve in re-learning how to expose a digital image (not like negative or slide film) so that I could make the most of the software in post-production. I never thought I would spend so much time in front of computer, but it's become some sort of holy grail even though I'm nowhere near feeling that I've got it figured out. But here's what I think I've learned:

1) Get the most out of your camera's sensor by shooting RAW files.
2) Expose to the right (or ETTR), which means make sure you look at the histogram of each photo and that it stops just before the right side edge of the histogram box.
3) Learn to use well one of the better software programs for photo post-production. If you use a Nikon then Capture NX2 has many advantages, but I also use DxO and I'm sure that Lightroom as well as the high end Photoshop suites can do more than any single person can ever learn.
4) Some of my best photographs were taken with low resolution cameras (like the 10MP Nikon D60) and with modestly priced lenses, like the 18-105mm and the 18-200m.

My first conclusion: even with low resolution cameras and kit type lenses you can take good photos if you've got good technique (steady camera holds, correct exposure, correct white balance).

I already knew how to take correctly exposed images for film, but it took me a while to understand the relationship between a digital sensor and how to use the software to exploit it.

My second conclusion: if you don't know how to use the software then you are not getting the most out your camera and lens.



I was at the Pointe du Hoc in Normandy a few weeks ago. Some of you may know of this battleground, taken on D-Day by Rangers under 1st Infantry Division command. The site is full of old bunkers and gun emplacements; shell craters pock-mark the site.

What works for me is to expose for the highlights in the sky (the white clouds) so nothing gets blown out. In post-production I lighten up the foreground which is underexposed in the original RAW (NEF) file. This photo was taken with a Nikon D7000 and a Nikkor 10-24mm lens. The NEF file is treated first with DxO (which is best used as a RAW converter), in an attempt to clean up any noise, wipe out any dust spots on the sensor which show up, adjust color balance and exposure, etc and then saved as a TIF file. I then open the TIF file under Capture NX2, crop to my taste and sharpen, then save as a small JPG file for web posting.

I think having a correctly exposed sky makes landscape photos much more dramatic. Your camera, no matter how good it is or how much it cost, is not going to do this for you unless you make it do so. This is just a travel snapshot, which I've chosen just to make the point that good exposure and good post-production can give a photo more impact, even when there's not much in the photo to get excited about.

Just after pontificating in the above post about "exposure to the right", I read a post in a photography forum which would seem to indicate that in fact what I am doing is "exposure to the left". I may never figure out which vocabulary explains what works for me. Whatever. I like it when the clouds look good to me. In a "busy" foreground the noise isn't a problem for me.

Fantastic picture! Been there, this photograph takes me back.