Advice would be appreciated

I am new to photography and it is a bit of a mystery to me(part of the appeal). I can take a photo of something interesting (debatable) and then if it is not quite right alter it at home on my laptop (a good thing).

Being out and about with my camera is what I love but I want the best images I can muster.

I read a lot about photography - books, online and magazines- magazines in particular are all heavily weighted toward Photoshop and post processing generally (some would be a bit thin without tutorials wouldn't they?)

So should I spend a long time mastering Photoshop? Will my photos really be better if I can use all the bells and whistles on Photoshop?

I shoot in RAW and currently use the silkypix disc that came with my K5 and have started using ACR to do the basic adjustments and I think some of the results are good (debatable again) and a lot are not.

I guess it depends a lot on what you want to achieve. For some people the interest comes from the work they do in refining, changing or enhancing their pictures on the computer. For others the satisfaction comes from capturing the image the way they want, and post-processing is used just to make small corrections and only if necessary.

Personally I'd say that getting experience in how to 'see' images around you, even with a simple camera, is a greater priority than learning how to exploit the features of Photoshop. In my opinion many of the bells and whistles are never used unless the picture needs some help.

Seeing, composition, then exposure and other techniques, then post-processing. But that's just me.

No
As the saying goes - you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear

Composition and correct exposure are your first priority. You should be able to get very close to what you envision within the camera... and then you can take it further with Photoshop (even Elements will do 95% of most people's photographic needs).

Check out some of the excellent tutorials and videos on the sister site - ePhotozine

Another tip - visit your local library and borrow books on photography, composition, lighting and exposure. Google Books does have some snippets of decent books too

Matt

take yourself off to your local college sign up for a beginners course and follow on from that.
i did this ,am now on the 4th. we have now become our own little camera club . started as beginners then intermediate then continuance which does exactly that, we all just sign up for the next term when each one ends.
have gone from learning the basic controls on the camera to researching famous photographers,techniques, going to local places of interest to photograph, take on a project plus using post processing through elements 9. i really look forward to these 2hrs every week plus as i say we get together outside of this and off we go with camera in hand. also you can give and receive constructive criticism which can be good brings you down to earth.
sorry if i,ve gone on a bit but for me signing up,after a lot of "shall i shan,t i " was the best thing i have done since buying my camera

Right-o good advice all round. Would love to sign up for a course but my job is a problem- often still here at 8 o clock so a night school course looks unlikely- SLAVEDRIVERS!!
I think I will carry on getting out and about and getting my basics right- I supppose I can do the photoshop stuff anytime as I can always go back to the images when i have that knowledge and apply new skills learnt.

You are a friendly and encouraging bunch. Thanks

couldn't agree more...
Photoshop is the seasoning to a chef.... yes it compliments a dish, can even transform the dish, but won't really save the dish if the food is burnt or poorly cooked.

Matt[/quote]couldn't agree more...
Photoshop is the seasoning to a chef.... yes it compliments a dish, can even transform the dish, but won't really save the dish if the food is burnt or poorly cooked.[/quote]Well said and agreed

I learnt my photography with a manual SLR, no light meter unless with (rich) professional friends (my tutors)and a couple of rolls of B/W film. I never really though got the hang of darkrooms.

Today we have the luxury of clever metering (no more guessing F8 at 1/125th)and histograms, never mind the actual images. I use Serifs excellent PhotoPlus (Version X4 now) which I get at a discount as a regular customer. Last upgrade under £30. I rarely do more than correct for contrast but it is a very clever bit of software and much less impenetrable than Photoshop with good help functions when lost. Elements I think is similar to be fair.

I think there are two old film days habits. One to think about it and get it right (or close) and two (the bad one) to take too few shots (always regret not bracketing more) due to a long habit of conserving the 72 shots I had with me!!!

I would recommend using Adobe Lightroom rather than worrying about photoshop. The cataloguing aspects of lightroom are amazing and the Develop module is more than enough for 99.9999% of any Post pro you'll ever need, unless you get into some specialist aspect of photography

No, they'll get better if you stop reading books and magazines and just get out there and take lots of photos in all kinds of situations, all kinds of lighting, all kinds of weather, at all kinds of perspectives/angles.

And do NOT follow any rules. If you've already unfortunately been indoctrinated into any rules ( by so called tutorials ) then break them!!

Often the 'correct' composition is not artistically the best composition.
Often the 'correct' exposure is not artistically the best exposure.
Often the 'correct' lighting is not artistically the best lighting.

IMO

Sings to me like a choir Smeggy

The idea of follow no rules though is not IMHO the right approach. It's only when you understand what the "rules" are that you can break them intentionally to your advantage. Otherwise you are relying on your own vision skills without any guidance.

Smeggypant's images in general, and I hope he will forgive me for using him as an example, do not break the rules, but in fact make highly intelligent use of the rules. They are bold and visually rich, but show me the ones that don't adhere to good principles of composition.

The rules were created after srtists spent many years examining the most favoured paintings of the masters. Why did they work? What made some appeal far more than others? They were found to often fit into certain patterns and these became the rules of composition. It wasn't random.

However, there are other rules that can freely be broken, such as perhaps someone saying, "This isn't a suitable subject for monochrome." To which I would suggest that if done properly and with good reason, that statement is almost always wrong. Yet sometimes we take these things on board without questioning them.

Always question, but don't discard the basic rules of photography unless there's a good reason.

John is exactly right - you need to understand the rules before you can break them effectively!

Smeggy makes a good point about avoiding the photography mags though. Too much preponderance on a formulaic 'painting by numbers' approach to photography, and too much emphasis on PP quick fixes. I get the National Geographic and study the photographs for inspiration and insight. For photography basics you could get one of the classic John Hedgecoe guides from Oxfam for a fraction of the cost of a single magazine.

If you can get a set of the 17 volume Time Life series on photography that is a wonderful resource of inspiration that covers from the 1800s to the 1970s. Although much of the technical stuff may be dated to that period, there is a lot of basic material that is timeless. It would be worth it for the images alone.

Modern photographic magazines rely too much on snazzy design and don't have enough real content IMHO. They tend to be superficial in approach and are full of errors, presumably because of time pressures as well as sometimes writers with a lack of detail knowledge.

When Jack Schofield edited Photo Technique there was far more detail and real information. Rather than an Another Publication "Lenses" supplement that briefly mentions a few lenses we would have an entire issue dealing with every wide angle lens in existence. Then an entire issue on telephoto lenses. Then an entire issue on the Magnum agency. There were even issues with a huge page increase where the extra section was a magazine-within-a-magazine dedicated to a manufacturer. I recall the Rollei one, full of interesting stuff old and new.

However, Another Publication continues and PT is long gone.

You just need to find the right magazines, fine art magazines often work to inspire or show you something different. NGC is also a good one, i also like the photos but they are almost all reportage photos... surprising enough

If you like black and white this would be a magazine to your heart.
http://www.bandwmag.com/

If you like more colour.
http://www.silvershotz.com/

My advice: Don't buy Photoshop

The GIMP is just as easy to learn, just as powerful, and free!