Was it a high ISO that caused these poor quality shots?

[arthurking83]

.... so if I'm going to start shoot and post-production work in RAW ....

This is good.
If you download ViewNX2, then also download Capture NX-D.

View is a much better program in that speed and stability isn't an issue, whereas Capture NX-D is a very badly written software.
But CNX-D has features that VNX2 doesn't, and noise reduction is one of them(as well as many others). But in this instance it's the NR feature you will want to try.

I don't use CNX-D much simply because it's slow and generally unstable, and I have Capture NX2(which does everything), but I have it and generally use it just to see how well(or more accurately badly it's working), but the tools in CNX-D are handy to have if you have some patience.

Then, as you said, you can convert to jpg to edit in some finishing touches to an image. You could try to use the tiff option instead of jpg, but I don't think it's worth the hassle.
If you find that you could use tiff to advantage later on, you can revisit this option at a later point in your learning curve if the need arises.
Tiff can provide a higher quality file type to work with than jpg does .. but for most people just starting out jpg is more than fine.
The important point to remember is that once you have the raw file, the other files types then follow.

Doing this(for now) your workflow is then all free.
Once you have some experience with understanding what to do to an image in (PP)Post Production, you can then safely convince yourself that paying for something like Lr or Adobe's CC software will be worth it.

This is just my point of view, and hence just a matter of preference, but I've already purchased LR. But to be honest it was a waste of money. Not because it's no good, more so because I hardly ever use it.

I start with ViewnX2.
I sometimes try to open an image with CNX-D, but this is because I can understand just from looking at an image if the tools in CNX-D will do what I want for an image.
More often tho, if VNX2 doesn't do what I want to an image, I then open in it CaptureNX2.

If I need any more intricate editing, I also prefer to open the image(usually a jpg) in PDN .. for example if I need some cloning/healing.

[MadMax1412]

If you can, can you send me a copy of the raw file(if shot in raw), and I'll see what CNX-D can do with it in terms of NR.

If you shot in jpg mode, then this is it. You may be able to squeeze 1 or 2% more quality out of this image, but as a jpg, it's now cooked like this and that's about it.
With an NEF file, the ability to eke out more detail is quite significant.

Unfortunately, it was shot in JPG. The reason I do this is only because I'm still learning all the controls etc of the camera and haven't learnt any post production skills yet so to save space on my hard drive, I shoot in JPG. Also, if I was to shoot in RAW, I'd want a good batch program to convert them once I was "finished" with them, once again, to save hard drive space.

- - - Updated - - -

From reading your posts I get the feeling that you want to be more creative with your photography than using camera pre-sets allow. My tip is to familiarise yourself with the 'Sunny 16 Rule'. It doesn't matter if you are using the most basic 'Point & Shoot', or the most expensive high-end DSLR, all their operating algorithms are based on that rule.

Yes, that's exactly it. I want to learn the features of a SLR to take stunning shots, rather than use it in a point-and-shoot manner and take good "holiday" shots.

[Cage]

Just a thought.

Are you waiting until the VC 'locks on' before you press the shutter button?

I don't have your particular lens, but i do have the 24-70 and the 70-200 Tamrons with VC, and it is quite obvious in the viewfinder when the VC locks on.

I have my camera set to back button focusing so I use my thumb to focus and my index finger to activate the shutter button. I also almost exclusively use single point focus.

[bitsnpieces]

Arthur is correct, and Cage has a point also - there can be various reasons why the image doesn't turn out the way we thought it would.

So something to check again is to see how your auto focus is set on the camera, is it wide? Centre only? Free to choose? etc

If it was on wide, as Arthur said, the camera sometimes focuses on the wrong part of the image (like for your daughter, the focused area is the bottom corner bit of her jacket - I think the button just above the bottom one)
Usually the camera will recognise a face, but misfocus can happen.

I'm guessing it's not centre as the focused area isn't in the centre, and the other possibility is, you're manually choosing one of the points to focus on, and you may have used it for a previous shot and forgot that it was on the side of the camera somewhere, and not centred.

However, one variant is that you used portrait mode, I'm not sure what it may have put your auto focus on, it probably would have automatically switched to wide.

So with that assumption, I have 3 things, 1 is as Arthur said, the camera chose that spot, 2 is as Cage said, it fired off before completely focused correctly, and 3, is back to what Arthur said, or along the lines of, when he said that it misfocused.
I wonder more about that and wonder if there could be a little bit of front focus happening.

So when you focused on your daughter, I don't know if the Nikon system has a way of letting you know if something is focused on or, like on Canon, I know their viewfinder has a quick flash of red in the little box where it's focused, Sony has the box turn green, not sure on Nikon, but if your focus was dead on your daughter's face, and this was the result, it's a possibility, 2 actually - as you took the shot, you moved a little, and the VC/VR compensated for the movement so it's not blurry, but that slight shift in view just so happened to put the corner bit of her jacket at the right spot to be in focus, or there are front focus problems.

How the movement could have happened is 2 things, just you generally moving (it can be hard holding still, I struggle too, but as Arthur said, there are techniques to help), or when you pushed the shutter button as you had mentioned, as that push usually causes slight movement.
Something you can try is setting a 2 second timer. So when you push the button, you have time to release, hold still, and let the camera take that shot.

So regarding the front focus, there are charts to test it with, but you can also just try setting the camera on a table (tripods can be unstable if it's a cheap one), turn off any vibration reduction assists, put something in the middle but on an angle, like a book lying down, but with one of it's corners pointed to the camera, rather than a side, centre that point, take a shot. If the point is focused, no problems, if it isn't, you'll see if there's front focus or not as the table just in front will be focused a little more.

[Cage]

Nikon's free VIEW NX 2 allows you some basic editing and the ability to convert your RAW files to .jpg

[Cage]

I agree totally with Arthur's comments above.

Please don't strangle your post processing capabilities with the desire to save on hard drive storage. A good quality external hard drive will cost you around eighty bucks.

I don't think there are too many, if any, award winning photos presented as straight from the camera.

[Cage]

Max, welcome to the frustrating world of photo processing.

I've bitten the bullet, or swallowed the bitter pill that Adobe offer, and gone for the Photoshop CC deal at $9.99 per month. Don't get me started on what I think of Adobe's price gouging tactics in Australia.

I'm generally reasonably pleased with it, however, and isn't there always a 'however', for me, the noise reduction program sucks, big time.

I try to avoid shooting at high ISO levels, but occasionally, in the interests of getting maybe a reasonable shot, I get sucked into pushing it that little bit higher. It almost never works, but then, unfortunately for me, I'm a bloody hard marker of my own work.

There are commercial noise reduction programs available for processing in RAW which may, or may not, interfere with info you don't want touched. In my limited experience, I've noticed that noise reduction seems to equate with an equal reduction in sharpness.

I suppose the bottom line of this dissertation is to avoid, if possible, shooting at high ISO levels. Add light with a flash, use different sun angles or whatever.

Some dude, who is a hell of a lot smarter than I am, made the statement that 'photography is all about light'.

It's how we use it that defines us as photographers.

[Mark L]

Agree with AK, start using and processing raw as soon as you can. It helps in the long run.
Or take you photos in raw and jpg if your camera does that. Once you gain experience you may want to come back and PP some photos from the raw files later.
Your cameras processing abilities can't do this. Or the computer using a jpg file (I think).

SOOC
IMG_8199.JPG

With some basic PPing of the raw file that I was forced to learn by shooting raw from the start.
IMG_8199a.JPG

- - - Updated - - -

I want to learn the features of a SLR to take stunning shots, rather than use it in a point-and-shoot manner and take good "holiday" shots.

A good way to help is to post some photos for CC. The feedback will help you on your way.