Madman Loc: Gulf Coast, Florida USA

As I've said before, I am a minimalist when it comes to post processing. Generally, I will make light, color balance, sharpening and cropping changes only. I've experimented with oil paint, framing, etc. but all I am trying to achieve is an image that matches what my eyes saw when I squeezed the shutter release. I find that the camera does not have the same range when it comes to shadows and highlights as the eye so those are adjustments I routinely make to get what I want. Sharpening is a must, the camera gets the color balance correct MOST of the time, but not always.

I have gone back to shots I took years ago that I was happy with then, but found I could improve now.

Bottom line, keep an open mind - PP is not a bad thing if it gets your where you want to go.

A hint on the advice you will get here: most of it is very useful, most of the participants offer very excellent information, others not so much. I find it useful to check the skills of the adviser by looking at the photos that they have posted. As in all aspects of life, sometimes we are the student and sometimes the teacher. When it comes to PP, I am definitely the student.

cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

Sure, do whatever floats yer boat, but don't call it a "film mentality," as if post processing were something new, different, illicit, etc.

Probably the King of Film - or one of them, anyway - was Ansel Adams, and he literally wrote the books on post processing. He described what he called the Zone System, in which he began with exposure (but always with an eye to the future post processing in the darkroom) to produce the negative, which he called the "score." Then he went into the darkroom to produce the print, which he called the "performance" of the score. When he talked about getting it right in the camera, it was always and only in preparation for getting it really right in the post processing.

I doubt that Adams had a mouse in the darkroom but, if you've ever tried darkroom work, you know that you can spend as much time there as at the computer, perfecting you performance.

Those who shoot RAW look at the result as analogous to a negative, and the post processing with Photo Shop or whatever software as their "lightroom," in which they produce their performance from their score.

The result comes from the camera and the mouse, just as Adams' came from the exposure and the darkroom.

BTW, I understand your impatience with editing. I always HATED the darkroom, so much so that, when I discovered Kodachrome, I gave up black and white for over a quarter century, till I picked up a digital camera and Photo Shop.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

I've never seen an image - film or digital - that didn't need at least some post-processing.

Back in the days of film, a lot of folks just sent it off to a lab for the bulk of the processing. Now shooting digital, practically everyone is responsible for the bulk of their own processing, start to finish. This is more similar to those few of us who had our own darkrooms and handled everything back in the days of film.

IMO, there simply is no such thing as a "finished image" straight out of the camera.

davidheald1942 Loc: Mars (the planet)

I know what your saying and after 50 years of film photography it's hard to change. I start out with Adobe elements and tell myself I'm going to spend at least one hour on it, but after about 20 minutes I've had enough.
(I meant to post this on the OP's post)

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Great! Lots of good responses and opinions here- good conversation too!

I would like to just talk a little more about shooting ratio, that is the quantity of images one needs to make in order to produce a good shot- even before post processing. As I alluded to in an earlier post; I don’t feel that the production of good photographic imagery is some kind of a contest as to who can land the best image of any given subject in the least amount of time and the least quantity of shots. The goal, for me and many others, it to get the best possible results (as my old editor used to say when I shot news) “by hook or by crook”!

So first let’s look at bracketing. With transparency film bracketing is almost mandatory. When shooting commercial work and bracketing you may end up with 3 decent transparencies but the one that is slightly underexposed may have better color saturation or the one that is slightly over exposed could be more delicate and airy- you get to choose the mood. Any of the three may be more compatible with the reproduction method that is used by the lithographers that are producing the advertising peace. It’s a win/win outcome. In many cases the same approach applies to digital files; when you bracket you will find that one of the exposures will process more easily and thereby helping you achieve the exact effect you envisioned when you were shooting. Many digital cameras are now equipped with automatic bracketing features so there are no delays or inconveniences while shooting. After over 5 decades of shooting, I have developed a “built in exposure meter” in my head. Nonetheless, I still run into lighting conditions that I have never encountered before and you can bet you bottom that I am gonna bracket my head off. I have no reason to “flex my ego” so I can say I nailed it in one shot. In professional work, the clients, the art directors or the editors demand results and they don’t care how you do it. In personal work you want results for you own edification and imagery that you can be proud of; folks like seeing impressive pictures not hearing “the fish that got away stories”!

It is logical that the shooting ratio will be different for various subjects and situations. Even in the confines of a portrait studio with controlled lighting the photographer may shoot quite a bit more frames of an active or impatient child than he or she would of a calm adult. Some folks have a tendency to blink or tense up during a sitting and so quite a bit more shootin may be necessary to land a good choice of expressions. Sometimes it is easier to shoot motor sports or a tennis match where the ball is doing 90 mph than a rangy kid or a nervous bride. Even with a state-of-the-art DSLR that can knock off frames like an automatic weapon it is possible to loose the peak of action so there is a combination of skill in anticipating the action and rapid firing techniques to achieve perfect fast action shots. As photographers gain experience in certain skill sets it is possible to naturally reduce their shooting ratio somewhat but that is not the ultimate goal. Remember, you are out there to get pictures not engage in a verbal “urinating contest” at the camera club, the association meeting or on your favorite online photo forum as to who can or can’t nail it in one or two shots. My advice to photographers, especially new ones, is to shoot as much as you need to, shoot more if you are out of your comfort zone and you will do just fine. With experience, photographers get to know when they have the shot under their belt even without “chimping”.

Editing??? The same philosophy applies! You want results, not bragging rights! Perhaps I am from the old school but custom printing of my images was always prerequisite to better results. Of course you want to hone you camera skills to the point where you don’t need to reconstruct each film or file in postproduction procedures. There are two things you can do in a darkroom or a computer; enhancement or restoration. On most of my work I prefer the enhancement mode- a tweak here and there and I am off to the races. Restoration mode kicks in when clients bring me a torn, tattered, cracked, abused and/or faded image- I pull out all the stops in an effort to resuscitate and virtually dead photograph- it’s a challenge and when it is done properly and successfully, I become a hero to my client. I don’t wanna do that in my regular work flow. I don’t condone sloppy shooting but it’s nice to know if I do make a big bubo I can usually clean it up in post. In certain situations, as in photojournalism, one may really have to gun and run (big-time). A photographer may find themselves in the midst of a riot, in a war zone or just winding up some place where he or she is not exactly welcome. One may be called upon to shoot from the hip, over ones head or lord knows how else and that’s where your trusty old computer can save the day!

Ansil Adams! I once had the opportunity, pleasure and honor of attending one of Mr. Adam’s work shops- something I will never forget to my dying day- even after I’m dead my ghost will remember that experience. WOW! I got to sit in on a darkroom session when the master was producing a photo-mural on an 8x10 horizontal enlarger (running on tracks). Each negative was stored in a glassine envelope with a map or diagram drawn on the outside surface indicating where all the dodging and burning was done in previous printing sessions. One would expect that the inventor of the Zone System would have perfect negatives that would need absolutely no further manipulation or control other that proper printing exposure and development.
Well- those negatives were to die for but nevertheless, Mr. Adams did a virtual dance in the light path of the enlarger and proceeded to perform all the dodging and burning he deemed necessary to perfect his final print- he did it to his likening in two attempts! Witnessing that kind of craftsmanship was inspiring and an indelible learning experience.

Think of photographic manipulation this way and all the hang-ups and arguments will hopefully go away: In the days gone by, some photographs were heavily and skillfully airbrushed right on the surface of the print. Some airbrush artists would skip the photography step altogether and create amazingly realistic imagery on a sheet of paper. Both methods are forms of creative art. Nowadays this kind of imagery can be generated by computer as well. Being a paid photographer and a bit of a purist I prefer the straight photography approach but I say “live and let live”!

It’s all a matter of common sense and the right perspective.

Ed

papakatz45 Loc: South Florida-West Palm Beach

Wow! As always you have given good advice to someone who ask a question. I always learn so much from your advice.

4ellen4 Loc: GTA--Ontario

I still use film and love it--have you ever had your film images burned to a DVD? This can be done when film is at the lab and the results can be very amazing. Only images of that film strip can be burned on the DVD and it can not be re-used

If I have to do anything more than a little touch up like what I would do in a darkroom then I delete that image. This way any image on my computer is a good realistic showing of my work.

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

Well said. The notion that PP is only an attempt to fix "lousy" photos is erroneous. A good photo can almost always be made better by PP. It has been done since the beginning of photography by masters of the art.

AzPicLady Loc: Behind the camera!

Your comment sort of resonates with me. I shot a lot of film. I had a darkroom. When I found that my perfectionism was causing me to spend all my time in the darkroom instead of out shooting, I reverted to having the lab print my shots. They knew I liked saturated, dense prints and after a few weeks were getting them right the first time. A happy marriage for everyone.

I find PP work just like darkroom work. It takes a LOT of time and somehow I always feel it's still not "right," so I'm never completely satisfied.

What I've come down to is this: In LR I tweak the contrast, bring up the blacks, up the clarity and vibrance and sharpen. I also frequently have to straighten. I also find that on a particular set of images I can usually apply a "set" of corrections to all of the images as they are being uploaded because they all contain a particular set of charisterics. Then I only need to tweak a few. That has resolved the time issue a LOT.

gessman Loc: Colorado

With regard to straightening your images in "post," I'll share with you a url to a thread posted by an astute member here from the UK for your consideration. If you like your images as sharp as possible, this may cause you to want to concentrate on getting your images straight more often at the time of shooting. As you will see demonstrated, the more you straighten an image, the more blurry it becomes: http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-145626-1.html

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

To me, shooting digitally with a "film mentality" doesn't necessarily mean keeping post processing to a bare minimum or avoiding it altogether. Rather, it's about staying focused, putting thought into every shot, and most importantly, shooting with a clear vision of what the final product should look like, then working the camera towards that goal. When you have a vision of what the final image should look like, you spend less time fiddling around in post processing searching for it.

skywolf

I look at PP as the electronic version of developing and printing film. You could pick up another stop of light by altering your developing temperature or the time of development (push or pull processing). Different types of chemistry could give you higher or lower contrast or color shift. With electronics, you eliminate the chemistry. But you've still got to process the "Film."

DianeL Loc: Charlotte, NC

I am also new and totally see where you are coming from. I enjoy taking many photos and keeping only the very best. I do very little PP. Has anyone used Paintshop Pro Ultimate? I get nice results quickly.

waegwan Loc: Mae Won Li

I just upgraded to Paintshop Pro Ultimate x7 from x3. I still have a lot to learn but I have a lot of fun with it in fixing portraits, stuff that was done with dodging and burning in the darkroom, and taking power lines and other unwnted stuff out of landscapes. :)

Boone Loc: Groundhog Town USA

[quote=kcrunchone]I know that I have been told a 1000 times that I need to get into post work editing. I find it very monotonous a process. I have seen some post work pict

kcrunchone, do not let another's out of line comment bother you. Not many on here waste their grey matter!

As far as your feelings:
At one time I became really disenchanted with photography. I (like many on the Hog) come from the old school of film, and when digital came about, and my equipment lost it's value, and I suddenly had to learn a whole "NEW LANGUAGE", I temporarily lost my passion.

But...I wasn't about to give up, so I began to "Open my Mind", and started to read...read...read, and then read some more. In a short time I once again found my passion, and I am glad to this day that I did!

As far as PP is concerned, I don't believe anyone ever really masters it. You learn more every day! And the beauty of todays PP software is that you can retouch your photos to any extent. You only need to please yourself.

Yes there are some people (mostly newcomers to PP) that "Over Cook" some photos. It is easy in the beginning to do this due to the vast amount that you can do in Post, and it is almost intoxicating at first.

If you let yourself open to what is now.." The World of Digital"...you will soon find your way.

BTW: Welcome to our forum! Lots of really talented people here that are more than willing to help you along. Just ask...and you will find!!

Just my 2C's worth. Again, welcome and thanks for the post as well. Thanks, Boone.
:roll: :thumbup: