TheDman Loc: USA

This is a perfect example of recognizing a photo's potential. It was shot as correctly as was possible at the time. If you like the comp of the final image (I personally think it's a bit mundane, but I appreciate it's historical significance), then certainly you must like the comp of the original. The rest is just contrast. Getting the capture right involves knowing what you can change (contrast) and what you can't change (composition) in post.

TheDman Loc: USA

Gary post just did, that's what I was responding to.




Agree, but I think people are assuming that that's not an option. I've often wanted to reply "I wouldn't; I'd trash this and shoot it again", but I just keep my mouth shut and move on. :)

TheDman Loc: USA

All part of the learning process, I guess. I cringe at some of my pp work from 5 years ago.

TheDman Loc: USA

This should be repeated 1,000 times.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

It’s not an option in proportion to the expense and effort in returning to the location under similar lighting conditions.

But it really is an option in most cases. Besides, next time we should have learned something from our mistakes.

Shawak Parson

you're only partially right that shooting slides (that is "reversal" material, both color as well as B&W) doesn't require post processing ...

1stly, a reversal film (or paper) has to be developed (processed) until it can be viewable, just like negative / positive (cine-positive film for example) material has to be "post" processed, right?

2ndly, processing reversal material (just like negative / positive material) is a precision craft: you either do it right, or if you don't, then what you get in the end is 'TECHNICALLY WRONG' even if it looks colorful and fine overall and the client is happy with the 'mess' you deliver in the end! (that is --unlike what majority of people think-- one major reason why color photography is relatively 'easier' than Black & White, because the mere presence of color in an image, even if it's not correctly balanced or too unsaturated / oversaturated etc, can deceive most untrained eyes ... while a B&W image -- especially a photograph -- has to be rich in tone, wide in DR and great in sharpness and everything so that the viewers, especially those with untrained eyes, would agree with and accept it as a 'good' picture!)

3rdly, as i said this in another comment already, you can still use filters, exposure bracketing etc (and compensate for in the processing stage by over/under developing / cross processing and so on) when working with reversal (or negative / positive) material just as well ...

long story short, there is ALWAYS some kind of post-processing at work, light or heavy, in-camera or in the lab, regardless of the medium, whether it is film (emulsion) material or digital or whatever other means of image making ...

good quality SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera) imagery is also possible in both film as well as digital photography, but it's very limited, even slower than shooting in RAW or JPG and editing it later, not so easy to achieve really, and applicable only under certain conditions! not recommended for serious high quality / high volume work really!

(we can compare this to painting for example ... there are painters and illustrators who can draw a or even do a rough sketch color painting of some subject relatively fast, say in 5 to 15 minutes and the results are really good as well as usable if we have a skillful artist doing it for us ... but if they want to turn the same artwork into a masterpiece, they'll normally spend more time on it in the studio or on location later ...)

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Please explain how any of these thoughts apply to those of us who used Kodachrome and sent film to "Kodak" via mailers.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

In your example of painting, I wouldn't say you can't create a masterpiece in 5 to 15 minutes, implying it must take longer. I don't think that's provable. I would use the terms, minor masterpiece for one of Michelangelo's drawings, for example, and major masterpiece for one of his frescos or sculptures. In fact, paintings at auction are often categorized as either minor or major works of the artist. Just trying to be helpful.

TheDman Loc: USA

I remember shooting Fuji Provia and sending it to Fuji in the mailers. I would shoot two slightly overexposed shots, one in focus and one out of focus, scan them with my slide scanner and overlay them in Photoshop, thus producing an image with normal density and a dreamy soft focus feel. "Slide sandwiching", it was called. Learned it from an article in Outdoor Photographer magazine. Same thing I do today in Photoshop by duplicating a layer and blurring it.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

You are an artist. Most of us did nothing like that with Kodachrome, and I see the word "PhotoShop" in your description, which makes it a recent activity.

I'm still waiting to hear what Shawak Parson knows about how Kodachrome was usually used and how that translates to digital workflow.

TheDman Loc: USA

I did it by scanning in to Photoshop, but the technique goes back to the beginning of slide film. The reason you overexpose both is so they will be properly exposed when "sandwiched" together under the enlarger.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

This is a side issue about art. It has nothing to do with "integrity" and nothing to do with Kodachrome.

I'm still waiting to hear what Shawak Parson knows about how Kodachrome was usually used and how that translates to digital workflow.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

PP is used to develop your photographs so that you can realize the "truth" as you see it. The "integrity" issue is misplaced. And I mean that even for photojournalism.

We see nothing wrong when a journalist writing about an event does not talk about how a piece of paper blew across the ground during the event, but if a photographer edits the piece of paper out of the photo, OMG the world is coming to an end and all is honesty is lost!!!!!

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

However, this is not painting. The measure for one art form may not be appropriate for another. Dylan is said to have written "Blowin' in the Wind" in a matter of minutes. Some would say it is one of his greatest masterpieces. In this field, is a great shot of a bird in flight shot a 1/1600 a lesser achievement than a long exposure of the Milky Way?

TheDman Loc: USA

It has plenty to do with Kodachrome, because it shows that the same techniques that get scoffed at as "over-Photoshopping" today were possible with slide film. Slides were no bastion of integrity in and of themselves.