Lux, that trick of putting the text into the photo isn't done in the camera.
It's a software thing, on the computer.

I think various software programs will let you do this. The one I use is an old one, and I'm not sure which current programs do it. (I have never got the knack of doing it in Adobe Elements.)
I'm going to have to figure it out though, when I get a new computer.
What you'll want is software that will do collages.

Jeri

Lux, you won't find RAW im budget compacts. That's something only DSLRs and a few more expensive compacts and megazoom cameras have. It's an important feature for serious work where a maximum of photographic detail needs to be preserved, also to give the photographer a maximum of leeway for editing. But it's certainly not a must, especially not for beginners.

As to the cameras, Canon generally makes better *compacts* than Nikon and its Coolpix series, especially in terms of image quality - I say that as a Nikon DSLR and a Canon compact owner. Nikon has just vowed to close this gap, but I'd stay with Canon for now. Nikon and Canon are on par with DSLRs, Nikon perhaps slightly ahead with the best and most expensive DLSR on the market, the D3x.

You should do a little bit of reading about your cameras and perhaps also others on two of the best digital camera review sites, and base your decision on that:

www.dcresource.com (best for beginners, easy to follow)
www.dpreview.com (quite technical, but the gold standard)

As to important features, you shouldn't worry about RAW, but you should perhaps choose a camera that also has manual controls and not just an auto mode. The manual controls are important to control the image (e.g. depth of field) and thus offer you more opportunity to be creative, and also understand how photography works.

Just fyi, my compacts are an old Canon G5 (which has RAW), now long superseded by the current G10, and a Canon A650 IS (no RAW), which I bought a year ago and, if still available, may very well be in your price range by now. I can really recommend it for your purposes. I chose it because it has the manual controls I need, and it shares its sensor with Canon's compact flagship G10, minus the RAW and a few other sophisticated settings which I can enjoy with my DSLR. But it delivers very good image quality with a larger than normal sensor for compact standards which keeps the noise level (similar to grain in film) down even at 12 megapixels.

Generally, more megapixels do not translate into better image quality, especially not in cheaper cams with their very small sensors - the noise level often increases with the number of pixels.

However, a useful feature to have is image stabilization (called IS in Canons) which reduces or avoids blurriness in pics due to camera shake - great for closeup/macro work.

Now, the SD790 has image stabilization but no real manual controls. Manual controls mean: Av = you set the aperture and the camera chooses the shutterspeed - important for macro (flowers!), portrait, land/cityscape work; Tv = you set the shutterspeed and the camera chooses the aperture (good for sports, pets, kids and evrything that moves fast); full manual and custom settings for special effects or conditions. While the SD790 is a good camera as part of Canon's Digital Elph series, it won't give you much control over your image since it works pretty much only in auto mode. Thus, it's a nice, solid and good looking snapshot camera. But it may fit your bill anyway and be good enough for starters, and you can always buy something more sophisticated later:

http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/powershot_sd790-review/

Hope this helps,
Andrea

Here is a link that might be useful: www.dpreview.com

You can get a whole lot of digital camera in your range if you're willing to buy used.

To be honest, I'm not sure you really want to shoot in RAW if you don't know much about photography and you aren't a interested in spending time on your computer. There's a learning curve, to be sure. The easiest camera isn't always the cheapest. If you would spring for the Cannon Powershot G9 for $350, you'd get an easy-to-use camera with RAW format and plenty of pixels. My husband uses it point and shoot, and it's excellent. It has enough controls for very nice shots, it's light and compact, and you can use it to learn with.

Your Mac's iPhoto software will do a lot of things, like organize your photos, but you will also need an image editor. I recommend Photoshop Elements, which will let you tweak photos and to add captions. You can still store and display your photos in iPhoto.

For roses exclusively, it really helps to have more controls and the kind of adjustments for lighting conditions you can get only with digital SLR. Bright light, color, and highlights are much easier to preserve with a digital SLR, You can buy the camera I use for travel used, Nikon D40X kit with lens, for $390 from B & H mail order. It's refurbished, and the obvious question to ask is about the warranty. B & H is closed for Passover. Those guys know their stuff.

BTW, you don't have to shoot most shots on manual settings. These cameras have excellent software and accurately detect lighting conditions. I followed the advice of a lifelong professional photographer: I set the white balance and then shoot on Aperture mode, allowing the camera software to adjust many other settings.

Whatever you choose, be sure to add in the cost of at least three memory cards, a second rechargeable battery, and a charger.

Here is a link that might be useful: Used Nikon D40X at B & H

be sure to add in the cost of at least three memory cards, a second rechargeable battery, and a charger.

*** That last is important advice.
The last thing you want to do is get out in some fascinating place and find that you're out of
battery -- or out of memory.

The memory's cheap.
As to the rechargeable battery -- the proprietary battery for my Olympus was PRICEY.
I bought instead a knockoff -- which has been every bit as good as the Oly one.
And CHEAP!

Jeri

My goodness, it sounds a lot more complicated than using a film camera.
Andrea, Jeri and berndoodle, thanks for the information,
I had previously thought that "noise" was found only on video cameras. I have a lot to learn before I purchase a camera, such as
What does DSLR mean?
I'll ask a freind of mine to teach me how to use a digital camera and software, before I spend money on something I might not find fun to use.
Thanks again,
Lux.

It's really NOT more complicated. Fact, it's easier -- it's just DIFFERENT.
I thought I'd never give up my old 35 mm Single Lens Reflex cameras -- but I did, and don't regret it.

DSLR is a "Digital Single-Lens Reflex" camera -- looks and operates much like a SLR film camera,
but is far more forgiving.
I don't think you're looking for a DSLR, though. You're looking for something mid-way between
that and a point-and-shoot.

If you're a Costco member, start shopping there -- maybe your friend will be kind enough to go
over some of the cameras they offer.
But really, there's NOTHING much to learn that's specific to digital.

Personally, I use an Olympus DSLR. But I carry a little Nikon Coolpix in my purse, and
find that useful, too.

You WILL need photo editing software. But that's available at several price levels --
from Free up to Pricey.
I use a free program on the road, and it does most of what I need in that situation.

Jeri

Well, a refurbished DSLR like the D40x plus kit lens is with 400 dollars still twice+ over Lux's (current) budget - and the lens included does not even include macro.

I think that you should be cautious before investing into a DSLR because you buy yourself into an entire camera system, lenses and all. If that's what you want, do some good research and hands-on testing in a shop before you buy - the camera's ergonomics/feel and accessibility of menus are important features to test.

Now another caution: Nikon's and especially Canon's entry level DSLRs have more or less severe limitations regarding their features and the lenses they can take or how these lenses perform. Example: Nikon's D40x has no lens motor in the camera body which means that some autofocus lenses are manual focus only. Canon is especially notorious for dumbing down their entry level DSLRs in terms of features and offers only a limited range of ("special" entry level) lenses for these cams. For this reason I would frankly not recommend the D40(x) nor Canon's Digital Rebel, even though they might have juiced the latest Rebel model (500D) up a bit, see what the reviews say. However, if you think you can live with these limitations, then these cameras are of course an option.

I'd still recommend a solid middle class cam like Nikon's D90 (or its predecessor D80) or Canon's 50D (or its predecessor 40D). If you buy used, then only with warranty from top notch places like B&H, as Cass recommended. Camera bodies wear out over time - shutters have limited actuation rates and sensors get dirty or even damaged, e.g. in botched cleaning efforts.

Now, Jeri will hopefully forgive me for saying that, but in my experience digital photography can very quickly become a lot more complex than film photography (for normal/amateur users in both cases) - simply because digital cameras offer you so many more on-board controls and features at the push of a button (or dig in the menu) than film cameras. And if it's just very simple things like setting the white balance correctly, switching forth and back between different ISO (sensitivity), choosing between various jpg qualities and RAW format, choosing color space or different autofocus points or which kind of noise reduction, using auto bracketing, image overlay etc. Add to this a bulky camera body of a DSLR with even more functions/buttons and endless menus plus perhaps several (big) lenses, and the beginner might quickly feel overwhelmed and intimidated - I've seen this many times.

That's the reason why I think that a good compact camera equipped with manual controls is a good starter for a beginner in photography. Master that thing first, see how you like it, and then see if you want to spend more money on a DSLR system. If you want a DSLR, now or later, go with Nikon or Canon, they make the best ones, hands down.

Here's food for thought:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond90/page36.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond40x/page27.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos50d/page31.asp

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canoneos500d/

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos450d/

Canon's flagship compact, the G10:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canong10/

Sony, Panasonic and Fujifilm also make good compacts, although I think that Canons have generally better image quality.

Good luck!
Andrea

I think in some cases it might be easier to start with a very simple-to-operate camera, and get used to taking digital photos, and working with them on your computer. After some experience you'll get a feel for what is important to you. I bought a relatively inexpensive Olympus camera many years ago, and it hooks up automagically to my mac's iPhoto application, and loads all the photos in it, where you can easily find them and work with them.

After using that camera, I was able to decide what was important to me: the ability to change lenses, and color fidelity. So, I started using the Sigma SD series of cameras (I'm on my 3rd iteration now), because they have the ability to change lenses, and have excellent color fidelity, without so many artifacts as well. I'm happy with my choice, but you really are buying into a system, because lenses from one manufacturer do not work on other cameras (unless adapters are available).

But, I think trying to learn to use a camera, and trying to learn how to manipulate the images on a computer, when all of it is new to you might be overwhelming, and lead you to just give up with so many variables and what may seem like excessive complexity. After you get your feet wet for a while, a lot of it will begin to be easier to understand, and you can build on that knowledge to make an informed choice that fits your needs/desires.

Once I settled on the camera, I got a couple of lenses that I use all the time, one is an extremely nice macro lens that is just so wonderful to use, and another is a great wide-angle lens. The only other thing I would like to get is a really powerful zoom lens, but the ones I want are wildly out of budget for now, and the Macros lens, oddly enough, works well as a zoom lens.

--Ron

A friend sent me a Cannon Powershot SD550, becasue I was sending her simply terriable pic's. I find it idot proof (which was what I needed) just point and shoot. I have never taken it off auto mode and have not read the manual LOL.
I think it takes nice close ups, middle range and landscape photos. I am sure it would not suit a photographer, but allows me to take presentable photos.

Most cameras come with some sort of photo shop, you can also download some free off line. They do the basic stuff, adjust focus, light, crop and size and most also do text and frames.

If you want to see some photos it has taken email me.

RAW editing is needed for tough situations, like indoor people photographs that have windows illuminated with bright sunlight. I went to a conference this weekend and took a bunch of photos--took only about an hour to process 15 photos with Nikon View NX, even though I had never really done much with the software before. The editor of the magazine said he was never able to get useful photos with his Canon Power Shot and Adobe.

First of all, you do not need to learn how to work with Camera Raw format. That format offers you abilities to do work on an image that a JPG doesn't, but if you mostly want to publish photos on the Web, then working with good quality JPGs is going to be quite sufficient.

And yes, digital cameras all produce some degree of "noise" in images. It works pretty much the same way as film does: the higher the light sensitivity (ASA) the more visible the grain or "noise" becomes. So if you are setting your camera with a very high light sensitivity, 1600 ASA for example, the noise ("graininess") in the photos will go way up. Setting the sensitivity as low as you can is always advisable as long as it doesn't compromise your getting a sharp, clear image. Getting a good image depends on three basic factors:

1) shutter speed - the duration of the opening of the shutter must be as short as possible, within reason, to eliminate any motion of the subject or shaking of the camera operator's hands. Generally you want to use a shutter speed of at least 1/125 of a second or less.

2) depth of field - this controls how sharp the photo is by determining how much of the subject from closest-to-camera to furthest-from-camera is within the range of focus of the lens. Depth of field is determined by how small a lens opening (aperture) you set. It is usually a balancing act between shutter speed and aperture to get lots of depth of field and still use a fast enough shutter speed to eliminate any motion. Most inexpensive digital cameras don't allow you much (or any) control over these settings and simply make a decision for you. This isn't always ideal, but you may not get a full range of features from a camera in your affordability range. If possible, look for a camera that does allow you some manual control.

3) image quality settings - set the ISO/ASA ("film speed" or light sensitivity) as low as lighting conditions will allow. I personally enjoy shooting under overcast conditions which I feel best displays the full range of color of flowers and eliminates hard shadows and highlights. On a cloudy day you can often get a much more painterly look than a bright day. This means you may have to set the camera's light sensitivity to a higher setting, like 400 ASA/ISO or even higher, in order to get both a fast shutter speed and reasonable depth of field. (Keep in mind that depth of field is optional for some kinds of photos: sometimes you don't want everything to be sharply in focus from front to back, and so you may want to shoot with the lens wide open = very little depth of field)

Under cloudy conditions I will often set the camera sensitivity to 400 or even 800 if necessary. If you are very lucky and the air is very still, you can use a tripod and leave the ASA/ISO setting way down at 100 (or however low your camera allows) and when you do that, you are reducing the "noise" in the image to minimum. I work exclusively with a Nikon D80 and I find that at its lowest ASA/ISO (which is 100) I can get a very large image that shows next to no noise. Even when I turn up the sensitivity to 800, I can still get a very good image with very little image noise. Its only when I turn sensitivity up to 1600 or more that image noise becomes very noticeable.

A few other points:

Jeri mentioned image editing software. Your needs are probably going to be very basic at the start and so perhaps Photoshop Elements might be all you need. I'm not sure what other tools might be available in the cheap-to-free range. I gather that Google's Picasa offers the basic photo editing tools. See link below. If you are up to grappling with a fairly steep learning curve, there is a free Photoshop type editing suite called The Gimp and it is almost as powerful as the full Photoshop suite, minus a few of the tools and filters. There are plenty of tutorials online to help you learn how to use it.

Also, as Cass mentioned, if you are working on an OS X iMac (as I do) then you can do many image manipulations using the built in iPhoto tools. I can't tell you much about iPhoto though, since I use Photoshop CS4 as my tool of choice.

If you can get your head around the idea of buying a used camera, you will undoubtedly get a lot more camera for your money. You might be lucky enough to get a DSLR for what you have to spend. I sold my Nikon D70 two years ago for less than half what I paid for it and the person who bought it got a really good deal. It was an excellent camera and I'm sure it still has years of service in it. So, you may want to consider buying second hand. People often sell their current camera to upgrade to a newer, more capable one (as I did) and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the camera they are selling, they just want to move up a level.

Finally, if you already have an understanding of the basics of film camera photography, then you already know most of what is important in digital photography. All of the same basic principles apply to both, its just a matter of learning how to use the specific camera controls to get what you need from a digital. No need to be intimidated by digital imaging, especially if you have a friend who cam teach you along the way.

Regards,
Paul B.

Here is a link that might be useful: Picasa

I think we're seeing a trend in this advice.

1) Start with a good quality point and shoot. It's not clear to me your budget is adequate to get quite enough of a camera. I join Andrea in recommending a Canon based on my BH's experience. The Canon Powershot A650 IS (without RAW) and Powershot G10 (with RAW) are about $100 apart in price. Watch Costco and online discounters for deals. It is likely to be all the camera you will need.

2) Note that two very good photographers say you don't need RAW. Paul, Andrea and others will disagree with me about the utility of shooting in RAW vs. JPEG. I rapidly determined that the best color accuracy for shooting roses in all lighting conditions requires RAW, which in turn requires editing software. Paul and Andrea are both knowledgeable and know better how to get the most out of their JPEGs and equipment. I'm a hack who depends on technology and luck.

3) Don't bother to invest in a lot of software and hardware until after you've used the camera, processed the images and decided that it's worth your investment of resources (time and energy) to take the next step. I predict you will want a few memory cards, an extra battery, and a camera case that will hold all the junk. DSLR is totally optional.

4) By the time you are ready to move up to a DSLR, you'll know what to research. There are all kinds of opinions about what to use and how to use it once you move to the next level. Weight and size are important for travel and for us smaller female hod carriers. A tripod produces fabulous results but is oh-so-annoying to carry around on a trip. Your point and shoot will still be useful even after you own a DSLR.

5) Buying used is one way to economize. As for cameras wearing out, I've had no experience of that with digitals. I am not a professional, and the technology moves on, and I trade up, faster than I can wear out any digital camera. Buying refurbished with the backing of a good warranty is one way to get a decent discount without the risk of buying a worn used camera.

Yep, all good points here.

I totally agree with Cass about the superior quality and flexibility of RAW, no question. I shoot exclusively in RAW with my D200.

But I don't think that this feature should be a deal maker or breaker for a beginner. When I went from film to digital with the Canon G5 many years ago, I barely used its RAW feature, and I was quite happy with the jpeg images the cam produced, including the rose pics. The Canon G series has good sensors and image processors plus most if not all features found in DSLRs.

Remember that all RAW images, unlike most jpegs (ideally), require postprocessing. That's time intensive and can become a bit cumbersome if you are dealing with many pics at once (then of course there are custom curves etc to make this task faster and easier, but it's still a task).

FYI, for postprocessing and basic editing I use Nikon Capture NX 2. It's the very best RAW converter and postprocessor for Nikons, head and shoulders above Photoshop in terms of the image quality it produces, and you can also use it for jpegs, also of other camera makes. It works easily and intuitively like a darkroom, no layers or huge memory demands like Photoshop (Adobe). Photoshop on the other hand is a good tool for creative editing and image manipulation, although not a very accessible one for photographers since it's more geared toward graphic designers. Adobe Lighroom is now an alternative. (Btw, I found The Gimp absolutely awful in terms of user interface and quality, but it's been a while that I looked at it, maybe it's improved since.)

Cheers,
Andrea

I didn't start off using RAW format (my first few digital cameras didn't have that capacity), but that's all I use now, FWIW. It does give a tremendous amount more capability to fix photos and lighting than JPG does. I don't think it's necessary to start off with RAW, but it is good to get to it eventually.

No matter what, you probably won't regret going into digital photography, it lets you do a lot more for a lot less money, and more quickly, since you don't have to wait for film to be processed. I ended up going with my camera because its sensors work a lot more like film does (separate layers to capture Red, Green and Blue, instead of interpolating colors), and that's why it has such great color fidelity. Someday maybe I'll be able to grasp how Red Green and Blue can produce the full gamut of colors... (the same color space for computer monitors and cameras).

--Ron

Paul's advice on shooting on overcast days is great, especially for someone like me with a point and shoot camera. But what am I to do if I don't get any overcast days when roses bloom? Will dusk do? Or do I need to use some sort of a shading device? (I hope my neighbors don't see me...)
Masha

Dusk is not good because it'll change the colors significantly toward blue, on digital often more readily so than on film. Depending on your camera and/or software, you can compensate for this by adjusting the color temperature before or after shooting esp. when you shoot in RAW (which point-and-shoots don't have), but it's not an ideal situation. Overcast or late afternoon before sunset when the light is not harsh anymore but still still warm and not yet cool/blue is best. Avoid midday sun at all costs, unless you're after some special effect. Shading the rose will most likely produce a flat image unless you use reflectors and flashes - you can watch wedding photographers use these devices in their outdoor shoots.

Also: whenever you shoot, try to use the cams' baseline ISO (usually the lowest), even if this means using a tripod (which makes you less flexible), or trying to steady the cam by leaning on something. Higher ISO always compromises image quality especially in point-and-shoots, not just in terms of higher noise/grain, but also in terms of poorer color accuracy and sharpness (unless you shoot a Nikon D3). Another technique for a steady hand: before you press the button, calmy breathe in and out a few times, and then press it at the end of breathing out. Works like a charm, for shooters of all kinds. ;-)

Andrea

Thanks, Andrea. I will look at the shades of sunlight more from now on. I feel like I need a dictionary to follow this post... Thanks for your patience
Masha

Here's a suggested camera for you!

M