Michael66 Loc: Queens, New York

In the dark ages... I mean darkroom days ( yeah, I do miss them ), would you have considered developing the film and exposing that image on to paper part of the photography process? And what about all the decisions you made; D76 or Microdol-X, border or no border, matte or glossy, plain or rosin coated paper, dry or wet mounted, ad nauseam. Those things were all part of the photographic process.

I think it is a bit disingenuous to dismiss post-processing on a pc with software as something less than desirable and to be avoided.

Photography is the entire process of composition, choosing a medium, picking a camera and/or lens, determining an exposure, shining light on some film or a sensor and producing a final image.

mechengvic Loc: SoCalo

:thumbup:

Nikonian72 Loc: Chico CA

My sentiment, exactly.

JPL

1. Most important of all in photography is knowledge and proper use of the gear you have.
2. Second most important thing in photography is the knowledge and tools for post processing.
3. Third most important is more gear and better gear.
4. Many people agree on the above things and practice their photography according to this, but in reverse priority order.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Taking your last statement. If you have ever played a quality guitar then moved to a "entry level" student quality instrument you will see that while you can finger the notes on the fretboard of both instruments, the pro quality guitar will be far easier to play - the action is better, the tuning accuracy better, and the sound, especially if acoustic will be better. A professional musician can make great music on both, but it will be easier and sound better on the better instrument.

I do cabinetmaking and the same analogy applies. Quality in hand tools means sharper, more accurate, and generally easier to use. You can buy a low angle Stanley block plane at a Lowe's or Home Depot for $35, or you can get a Lee Valley equivalent for $300. The differences are night and day. The LV is comfortable to use, machined to .0001" precision on sides and bottom and uses nickel resistant ductile iron (not cheap but one of the best materials to use for a plane) and it uses a high precision PM-V11 steel blade - which means I get a sharper, harder more impact resistant edge than on a cheap plane.

Both will cut, but I will spend much more time maintaining my "el cheapo" plane and I will never get smooth, tearout free results on wood that reverses grain or on end grain. So, the cheap Stanley is used for rough work, on old, painted wood etc. and I reserve the good tool for the high precision work on difficult hardwoods. Again, no contest.

I can most certainly purchase a Nikon D3200, 18-55 and 55-200 lenses for $530 at Best Buy and take stunning images with it. As long as the light is good, and I don't need to spend a lot of time adjusting the camera settings for changing situations. Hell, it will even give me the same frame rate that I get with my D800s. The lenses are certainly capable of delivering pro-quality sharpness at F8, and if you shoot at base ISO the image quality is pretty darn good. However, it is slow to use, clunky even, in comparison to any of Nikon's pro cameras. The bokeh that you get using an 85 1.4 or a 105 F2 DC is not easily attainable on the D3200's small sensor. The camera is tiny in my giant hands. It is plastic, and needs to stay home when it rains or snows, as do the lenses because they are not sealed against the elements. If you need to change settings, most of these are buried in menus, which take time to go through to reset. Oh, there goes a bird in flight - well the AF system is generally not up to the task - unless you are very patient and lucky. Yeah, you can take great shots, but not nearly as easily as you can with better tools. And in some cases, not at all.

As a counterpoint, there is a world renowned Japanese photographer, Daido Moriyama, who shoots exclusively with point and shoot and small mirrorless cameras. His prints hang in the most prestigious galleries around the world and his prints often fetch $10k or more.

Post processing can enhance an image, but as far as technical quality is concerned, it cannot put back what wasn't initially captured (detail, bokeh, etc), and often cannot produce the image quality especially if you compare results from full frame cameras against APS-C or smaller, especially in low light/high ISO or high contrast settings.

Sorry for the rant, but at the end of the day, I would never trade in my higher end DSLRs and collection of lenses for smaller, cheaper gear. I have been spoiled. :)

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Unless the quality doesn't matter, like when I'm taking a reference shot, or taking shots while disassembling something, I post process everything. I'll lighten/darken, adjust WB and focus, and correct distortion.

Good equipment, within your budget, is the starting point. From there, you use software. Start with something good and make it better. Like love and marriage, "You can't have one without the other."

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

:thumbup: :thumbup:

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Right. "Post processing" is what fence installers do before putting the posts into the ground.

http://www.ehow.com/way_5654983_prevention-fence-post-rot.html

anotherview Loc: California

Here's the approach to getting new gear I try to follow:

You will know you need better gear when you sense the limitations of the gear you use.

Then you will have to decide if you want replace the gear in question with a better piece.

Read reviews on the Internet to help with your buying decision.

Also consider renting to try before you buy.

This approach helps in two ways. First, it moderates the impulse buying of gear, sometimes called Gear Acquisition Syndrome (GAS) or Lens Lust. Second, stating the obvious, it avoids the unnecessary spending of money on photography gear.

This approach induces the side-effect of pushing the photographer to make the best of the gear he already owns.

As well, this approach lends support to the view that a photographer needs only one lens and one camera to do worthy photography.

oldtool2 Loc: South Jersey

You have made some good points and have pretty much answered your own question. Almost all photos can be improved in PP. What needs to be remembered though is that you can only improve in PP if the information you have in the photo is there to work with. Where does this info come from? Better equipment. The more information you have in the photo the more you have to work with when you do your PP. PP is limited, you can only improve so much. This is why so many of us shoot in raw.

I personally start with better gear. Your IQ is then better, and you will have more information stored in the original photo. You also need to learn to properly use the gear you have. You can then get better PP.

Jim D

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

My opinion - in general, the best results require the best equipment and skills to use them to their full potential. Practice is the thread that binds the two. It exposes our flaws, and displays the genius of our efforts.

I believe there are two types of artists. Those that learn what the masses want, and those that follow the beat of their own drummer. Both can be successful.

I also think the gap between professional and amateur, hobbyist, or sem-pro is narrowing dramatically due the evolution of the equipment, and software, but mainly because of the increases of tutorials and opportunities to learn.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Garbage in, garbage out. You can go farther with good gear--your potential is greater up front, but it doesn't help if you don't realize the potential.

MtnMan Loc: ID

This isn't a real conflict. You can't see your images without post processing.

You have many choices on how to post process, including accepting your camera's limited capability to make jpegs for you. Depending on your camera you might have some control over the intensity of the processing applied.

Even in that case you need to do something to see the jpeg and choices like color space and media (screen, print) affect what you see. All are post processing.

Planning for the processing you intend to do is necessary. For example if you plan to do HDR you need to take bracketed shots. The need for bracketed shots might dictate your camera choice.

If you plan to do serious post processing out of camera you need to shoot in RAW. That means you need a camera that gives you that option.

You can't do in post processing some things equipment can do for you, such as using a CP filter to cut out glare.

But you can do some things to eliminate the need for equipment, such as apply a graduated filter in post processing vs. buying a graduated neutral density filter (which can be quite costly and cumbersome to use). Although even in that case you need to plan certain shots with that thought in mind (e.g. sunsets including the sun).

So choices, but no conflicts. No "vs.", IMHO.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Hell, I can't even play the stereo, but I have photoshop!

jackm1943 Loc: Omaha, Nebraska

I think you need both, along with a good dose of technique and imagination.