Adobe Photoshop

[Chris Hammond]

Is anyone able to reccomend an evening college course or similar which would teach me advanced usage of this software? It would need to be photographer orientated and applicable to PC users (Most of the stuff I've found on Google is design specific and only relevant to Mac users.)

If an evening course then it would also need to be relatively local, say no further than fifty miles from me. (Newmarket in Suffolk.)

I don't really want to enter at 'complete idiot' level, but I'm not great with technology. I can use the basic adjustments, so I don't really need to learn how to crop, resize, adjust lighting etc, although I appreciate that there would probably have to be some sucking of eggs..

Regards Chris

[ron1863]

There are lots of photography courses advertised that include photoshop classes. I don't know if they would be suitable for you though.

[badger426]

Try a site called Elements Village it's very much like this site but for Photoshop and photography.
Cheers,
Badger.

[Badllarma]

To be honest Chris I'd get myself a good book on Photoshop from a photographers side of things take some photos and work on them you will learn much more.

Or have a look at the hands on courses in the photographic magazines. I find courses at collages etc...are either AT a 'complete idiot' or the tutors are not very good and come from a totally educational back ground (teaching, which is what they do of course). But there is a huge difference in prating around for and hour on one image and commercially editing 100's of images.

BTW if you can do Photoshop on a PC the only difference is the short cuts on a MAC it's just commercial snobbery that still makes it a MAC platform.

I work commercially on Photography, Video, CGI and web design and I've done or tried 4 courses heres my experiences I wont mention the collage names but they are mostly Nothwest based.

1) C&G Photography (commercial level) tutor was never there or when he was there was very poor , with very little interest, teaching out dated skills.

2) Days course Photoshop (all levels apparently catered for) left after an hour as the tutor agreed I was wasting my time as I knew more then her.

3) Web Design 12 months collage course half way though the course ended up helping others on the course with the tutor, needless to say I passed.

4) Wildlife filming course hands on with assments in front of your entire group by guys who worked on the BBC Survival series camping and filming (how it should be ) Private course cost a abit and took me 6 1/2 hours to get there (poor weather). Best money I ever spent beside the camera of course

There is one place you may want to try not only will you be like minded individuals but you will always find others with more experience .....................your local camera club

[galanthus]

I got a cs3 for dummies book. This covers all of cs2 plus new bits. There's a weeny sucking of eggs bit but most of it is quite a challenge and a fab read. 9 books in one I believe. I paid around £18 for it last year. I also subscribe to digital photo which is monthly and gives video step by step guides for projects in photoshop.

[DavyG]

Hi Chris,

I'm based in Suffolk also and couldn't find any training locally that I thought worthwhile.

I bought Scott Kelby's book: The Adobe Photoshop CS3 Book for Digital Photographers, and I've found it very useful.

The book is available for previous editions of Photoshop CS also.

Another good way of learning is via Lynda.com, they have online video tutorials on all versions of Photoshop and they allow you to subscribe monthly.

Although they only allow you to stream the video tutorials, the videos can be found on your pc for later use or storage.

I hope this is of some help.

Dave

[jay37]

hello chris
i came across this on my searches its an on line diploma in photograpy with £600 off photoshop Diploma in Digital Photography - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides, photography courses, competitions, photography forums
if for some reason this dont work let me know
jay

[Chris Hammond]

Thanks folks, some excellent advice there.

I only have Elements Five at present and I have brought an idiots guide, but I am much happier with an expert on hand to explain the head banging bits.

I take the points about colleges and the quality of learning. And I would concur, having attended several adult education classes over the years (including a photography one)that, in my experience too, more often than not the classes are aimed at complete begginers.

The first year of a photography degree course I once attended offered next to nothing in terms of learning, and I gained a distinction at the end of the year for basically nothing. Worse still the college pulled the plug on what had been advertised as a three year course at the end of that first year and the nearest college at where I could have carried the course on was over sixty miles away. That's partly why I put it up as a question on here. I thought that perhaps there would be some positive experiences put up.

Perhaps it would be worth persevering with the books and DVD tutorials afterall.

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by jay37

hello chris
i came across this on my searches its an on line diploma in photograpy with £600 off photoshop Diploma in Digital Photography - Amateur Photographer - news, camera reviews, lens reviews, camera equipment guides, photography courses, competitions, photography forums
if for some reason this dont work let me know
jay

Thanks Jay. I'll have a look. Though I must admit it's the distance learning that I have trouble with. (In truth I suppose it's part laziness on my behalf too. )

[Rob Jones]

Hi Chris, I'm not familiar with Elements only the full photoshop package.

I haven't searched for a while but there are loads of tutorials on the web. I downloaded an ebook from somewhere once that was brilliant for teaching the array of tools in the program.....I'll see if I can find it for you. I use to buy PS books and booksellers stalls are often a good place to look for cheap used books. They maybe written for older editions of PS but the principles are much the same. I gave a load away to a school a while ago......sod's law or you could have had them!

To be honest though the use of Photoshop in the context of nature and wildlife photography should be minimal.

[Earth Hart]

Originally Posted by Badllarma

4) Wildlife filming course hands on with assments in front of your entire group by guys who worked on the BBC Survival series camping and filming (how it should be ) Private course cost a abit and took me 6 1/2 hours to get there (poor weather). Best money I ever spent beside the camera of course

Was this with WildEye? A friend, Mike Linnley, teaches there some times.

[ron1863]

[quote=DavyG;320065]Hi Chris,



I bought Scott Kelby's book: The Adobe Photoshop CS3 Book for Digital Photographers, and I've found it very useful.

The book is available for previous editions of Photoshop CS also.


I also have this book, very easy to follow and covers everything you need to know asit is for photographers.

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by Rob Jones

Hi Chris, I'm not familiar with Elements only the full photoshop package.

I haven't searched for a while but there are loads of tutorials on the web. I downloaded an ebook from somewhere once that was brilliant for teaching the array of tools in the program.....I'll see if I can find it for you. I use to buy PS books and booksellers stalls are often a good place to look for cheap used books. They maybe written for older editions of PS but the principles are much the same. I gave a load away to a school a while ago......sod's law or you could have had them!

To be honest though the use of Photoshop in the context of nature and wildlife photography should be minimal.

I agree Rob, however I don't shoot wildlife exclusively.

Re the tutorials, DVD's, books etc, I've got several of them already. I have picked bits and pieces up, but I often find with distance learning that misconceptions can be formed and without a tutor on hand to point out the error that misconception may never be altered and subsequently can have ramifications with many of the associated techniques.

Last night I was reading a magazine article in the 'Outdoor Photographer' about metering. I have a fairly good understanding of the basic principles of light and the way cameras and hand-held meters read and act on light values, but I will read such articles as a means of reinforcing, or strengthening my knowledge of a particular subject. Half way through the article I threw the mag across the room in frustration. In reading the piece I had ended up confused about something I already understand. That's the sort of brick wall I often encounter when trying to learn from books etc.

Here's one of the paragraphs that left me pulling my hair out:

"The best hand-held reflected light meters offer a one degree spot metering facility, allowing users to assess the light from very specific parts of the composition. While some DSLR's can spot meter from a 3-4 degree area, none offer this high level of metering precision and creative control."

"One degree" of what???

And I find magazine articles and books generally to be rife with these assumptions. Assumptions that the reader already knows or understands the subject before reading about it. What's that all about?

Anyway, I would prefer a proper course with a tutor on hand to explain the bits I don't understand, rather than just struggle through and hope the penny drops eventually. THe demands on my time are already too excessive to allow me to get out with the camera as much as I like. I don't want to worsen that situation by spending my evenings banging my head against the wall trying to understand minor facets of the subject.

[Badllarma]

Originally Posted by Earth Hart

Was this with WildEye? A friend, Mike Linnley, teaches there some times.

Yes And I met Mike very nice bloke and very knowledgeable. He was out with our group and assessing our footage. I was there July 13-15 2007

And I'll repeat again people join your local camera club you will get lots of "FREE" information from people who are more experienced and most run competitions etc that will have you improving your work in no time.

"One degree of what???" Chris, One degree of the subject surface of what is in your composition.

E.G
I'm in woodland and see a yellow flower I want to take a shot of and I want the yellow flower to be what my exposure is based off to I take a spot meter reading of One degree (this is what ever the spot meter reading can be taken with your light metre could be 1 degree could be 5) by aiming the spot meter at the yellow flower this then gives me a reading for the exposure.

Whether this will give you the correct exposure for the entire composition is a different matter of course.

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by Badllarma

Yes And I met Mike very nice bloke and very knowledgeable. He was out with our group and assessing our footage. I was there July 13-15 2007

And I'll repeat again people join your local camera club you will get lots of "FREE" information from people who are more experienced and most run competitions etc that will have you improving your work in no time.

"One degree of what???" Chris, One degree of the subject surface of what is in your composition.

E.G
I'm in woodland and see a yellow flower I want to take a shot of and I want the yellow flower to be what my exposure is based off to I take a spot meter reading of One degree (this is what ever the spot meter reading can be taken with your light metre could be 1 degree could be 5) by aiming the spot meter at the yellow flower this then gives me a reading for the exposure.

Whether this will give you the correct exposure for the entire composition is a different matter of course.

Thanks again for the input, and I know I'm probably being extremely obtuse, but I still don't see the relevance of a 'degree'?? If it had read 'one percent' I could understand it perfectly, but a degree is a completely ambiguous term. I mean there are 360 degrees in a full circle or 90 degrees in a quarter circle and water boils at 100 degrees C. I just don't understand the significance of the term in this particular respect. It's a failing of mine (as was often pointed out to me at school) that I have to fully understand what I'm reading before I feel happy to move on, but that's how my mind operates I'm afraid.

[Chris Hammond]

BTW I will be trying to source a local camera club following your advice.

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by Chris Hammond

Thanks again for the input, and I know I'm probably being extremely obtuse, but I still don't see the relevance of a 'degree'?? If it had read 'one percent' I could understand it perfectly, but a degree is a completely ambiguous term. I mean there are 360 degrees in a full circle or 90 degrees in a quarter circle and water boils at 100 degrees C. I just don't understand the significance of the term in this particular respect. It's a failing of mine (as was often pointed out to me at school) that I have to fully understand what I'm reading before I feel happy to move on, but that's how my mind operates I'm afraid.

it's not just you Chris, a degree means little in this context. I could imagine a beam of light moving in a straight line from the camera (or light meter) to the object and perhaps 1 degree refers to the beam moving 1 degree in all directions around the spot that it landed on (if that makes sense). So the meter would be measuring light from a very small circle. Five degrees would see the beam moved 5 degrees in all directions around the spot and hence would form a larger circle. I wonder if that is how it works?

Never assume that those writing articles in magazines (or teaching in colleges) fully understand what they're talking about. They may not be assuming knowedge on the part of the reader (as you state), instead that may not simply understand it deeply themselves. Many talk a good game until you ask them a difficult question

Matt

[Badllarma]

Ok no problem about the degree I'll try and explain a little differently.

Have you ever used one of the those garden hose guns you can attach to your garden hose? So if you twist it one way you get a very narrow shot of water coming out and if you twist it the other way you get a much wider shot of water coming out?

Right so your standing at your back door step with the hose gun in your hand in front of you is a " A Typical" English garden you've got a grass lawn, a soil boarder, some plants the kids red football lying on the grass little Freds plastic yellow tractor on the grass as well.

So you twist the hose gun to it's narrowest and fire it down the garden, what did it hit? The lawn, the football, the tractor or just the soil it will have only hit one or two of those items as it's a narrow beam.

Now twist the hose gun the other way to it's widest setting and fire it at the same scene again what did you hit? My guess is everything

So getting back to photography the narrow beam would have give you a very tight light meter reading E.G if you hit the red football this would be the part of the scene your exposure will be for.

One the other hand with the wider spread you will get a average reading of the entire scene Hope this helps

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by matt_xyz

it's not just you Chris, a degree means little in this context. I could imagine a beam of light moving in a straight line from the camera (or light meter) to the object and perhaps 1 degree refers to the beam moving 1 degree in all directions around the spot that it landed on (if that makes sense). So the meter would be measuring light from a very small circle. Five degrees would see the beam moved 5 degrees in all directions around the spot and hence would form a larger circle. I wonder if that is how it works?

Never assume that those writing articles in magazines (or teaching in colleges) fully understand what they're talking about. They may not be assuming knowedge on the part of the reader (as you state), instead that may not simply understand it deeply themselves. Many talk a good game until you ask them a difficult question

Matt

That's been my experience of adult education teachers in general too Matt. Ask them to explain certain aspects of what they've told you and they very often cant. They can relay facts, but don't neccesarily understand those factors. I can learn things parrot fashion myself. That doesn't mean I fully understand what I know ... err... if you get my drift.

[Chris Hammond]

Originally Posted by Badllarma

Ok no problem about the degree I'll try and explain a little differently.

Have you ever used one of the those garden hose guns you can attach to your garden hose? So if you twist it one way you get a very narrow shot of water coming out and if you twist it the other way you get a much wider shot of water coming out?

Right so your standing at your back door step with the hose gun in your hand in front of you is a " A Typical" English garden you've got a grass lawn, a soil boarder, some plants the kids red football lying on the grass little Freds plastic yellow tractor on the grass as well.

So you twist the hose gun to it's narrowest and fire it down the garden, what did it hit? The lawn, the football, the tractor or just the soil it will have only hit one or two of those items as it's a narrow beam.

Now twist the hose gun the other way to it's widest setting and fire it at the same scene again what did you hit? My guess is everything

So getting back to photography the narrow beam would have give you a very tight light meter reading E.G if you hit the red football this would be the part of the scene your exposure will be for.

One the other hand with the wider spread you will get a average reading of the entire scene Hope this helps

Now I think I fully understand that, it's a nice analogy, but isn't that really reinforcing what I said about the relative term needing to be 'percent' rather than 'degree'?

I'm sorry to labour the point, but I really do find much of the written media relating to photography to be rife with such ambiguity.

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by Badllarma

Ok no problem about the degree I'll try and explain a little differently.

Have you ever used one of the those garden hose guns you can attach to your garden hose? So if you twist it one way you get a very narrow shot of water coming out and if you twist it the other way you get a much wider shot of water coming out?

Right so your standing at your back door step with the hose gun in your hand in front of you is a " A Typical" English garden you've got a grass lawn, a soil boarder, some plants the kids red football lying on the grass little Freds plastic yellow tractor on the grass as well.

So you twist the hose gun to it's narrowest and fire it down the garden, what did it hit? The lawn, the football, the tractor or just the soil it will have only hit one or two of those items as it's a narrow beam.

Now twist the hose gun the other way to it's widest setting and fire it at the same scene again what did you hit? My guess is everything

So getting back to photography the narrow beam would have give you a very tight light meter reading E.G if you hit the red football this would be the part of the scene your exposure will be for.

One the other hand with the wider spread you will get a average reading of the entire scene Hope this helps

yes, that's how I was trying to explain it above. The beam is forming a cone wth the tip of the cone coming from the camera and the base of the cone on the subject. A cone with a narrow base has sides that are only 1 degree from the straight beam. A cone with a wider base may have sides that are 5 degrees or more from a straight beam. So the greater the number of degrees the greater the size of the surface area from which a reading is being taken. I think.

Matt

[Hobjob]

Originally Posted by Chris Hammond

BTW I will be trying to source a local camera club following your advice.

Thre is an active camera club in Ipswich with a digital
sub-group. Very friendly on phone, but I got no further
due to other committments.

Cambridge must have something too?