mrpentaxk5ii

I have stated that to get the best results from a digital file that a degree of post processing should be part of digital photography. there are those that feel that if you are photographing and using JPEG files that the camera can be set up to do all of the file processing, no need for PP on a computer, while that may be true, do you want every subject that you photographed processed in camera the same way?.....My feeling is no. The computer gives you more power and a greater way of photo processing any file including JPEG files. When i shoot JPEG files i have my camera set to the least amount of processing that it can apply and finish it the way that I want the finished file to be. I picked up a Pentax F-1.4 55mm DA* lens from B&H after Christmas, I have been using it at F-1-4 to get a feel for what it photographs like wide open. the first photo is straight out of camera, a Pentax K5ii at 1600 ISO no flash. the second is processed. This is our dog Jacey. she is two years old and is a Sheppard-Lab mix. the last photo was taken in the yard with a different lens to show what she looks like....Happy New Year to all.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

wayne barnett Loc: Grants Pass, Oregon

The question that you raise is one that many of us ask that have come from the world of film and wet chemistry. While spending many hours in the darkroom cropping and adjusting the exposure we would come up with something similar to what you have produced in your example. But in digital manipulation the ability to produce an image that is not recognizable to the original begs the question of what is photography and what is just abstract art(?) using software to manipulate an image. As most of us recognize the camera may not be able to do all the processing that is required to give that shot that zip that is needed to turn a so-so shot into something that can be shown with pride. Depending on what you are going to do in the final processing it may be advantageous to shoot in raw mode and have the un-camera-edited version available for post processing.

martinfisherphoto Loc: Lake Placid Florida

Every has an Opinion, who cares.. You camera, your photography, your vision.......... As you practice, If you practice, your visions will change along with your abilities. It all takes experience.

wilsondl2 Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska

Just a point - All JPEG's are not set the same way unless you shoot them all with the green auto setting. If you set the camera on type of shot you are taking it chooses the best setting for that type of photography. For instants the landscape setting will give you different settings than portrait. Also if you go to the manual or aperture/shutter speed settings you can make your pictures warmer or colder. (Nikon) Some folks don't like to do PP and they do get the results they want making adjustments while shooting. Of course there are time when you need to go RAW and spend time in PP. - dave

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

I shoot max jpeg, but I almost always post-process. I find that for my purposes I can do enough processing that way, so the extra memory required for RAW isn't worth it FOR ME.

Bill_de Loc: US

Post processing has value. I mostly do the basics like cropping, exposure/contrast tweaking, and a little sharpening. That has value.

There are some folks, including some right here on UHH, who can turn a snapshot into a work of art. I would guess that to them post processing has a lot more value.

---

wayne barnett Loc: Grants Pass, Oregon

Who cares - Well apparently there is a select few that have opinions that are valued. Here after I will hold mine.

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

You need more memory to edit jpegs. Raw editing I'd done using small previews and saved to tiny xmp files, or the preview catalog in Lightroom. You can get by with only 8 gb for Lightroom, but typically need 16 gb or more for editing jpegs in Photoshop.

Joe Blow

I edit almost all my shots. It may be something minor such as a slight straightening of the camera. I crop a majority of my photos to remove extraneous material or focus in tighter on my subject. Doing post on my computer allows me to verify if the sharpness is acceptable or if I need other correction.

Only a few shots can actually pass my standards unedited. This is especially true for sports and action shots.

I don't worry about the memory required, I use a portable HDD to store copies of my completed photos. No, the "cloud" is not an option.

mrpentaxk5ii

Thanks for the reply, but RAW or JPEG the end result would have been the same, shooting pets, you do't want to shove a camera in their face, I would have cropped the photo to highlight the dogs face.

mrpentaxk5ii

Thanks for the reply but I am not talking about using the camera presets such as landscapes or macro or any other, I'm talking about the setting in camera for sharpness, color tone and saturation.

mrpentaxk5ii

Wayne, I don't care if you care or not, you'r free to do as you please. Any photographer that has been in digital photography for some time will give the same advice as i have posted. this is information that has been in every photo mag that i have read over 10 years that I have been in digital photography. People come on this site to learn photography, I am only passing along advice that I have learned.

mrpentaxk5ii

I thank all for your comments, as I said there are a lot of new people to photography that came here to learn. I only look to pass along things that I have learned to others. they can take the advice or not. It's some thing that will not change my life one way or another.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

And the same concept can be applied to many different crafts.

Allan Cavalcanti Loc: Rio de Janeiro

Last year I was in Madrid, Spain, and visited some museums and their photography exhibitions.

I was speechless!
How could those photographers with so many recources constraints come up with such wonderful, marvelous, astonishingly pictures??? There were simply pieces of art, dated more than 50 years ago, crispy black and white images. But more than that, the picture moment, that milisecond which creates the environment.

Coming back to the subject here...
It seems that we, as still or dynamic image producers (photo/video), are applying our efforts more and more to post-manipulate or work, to post-process as image acquisition is becoming much easier than before. I don´t say all of us, but we see more and more people "post-correcting" the picture to create visual impact. It is not wrong at all, but the art itself behind "capturing the moment" may be suffering. I am more towards photojournalism, no photo production, etc. So I like spontaneous pictures, not planned, even if I apply some post-production here and there. I like to see "the moment".

Gears just develop in such high speed pace and their prices are becoming comparetively smaller and smaller over the years... even a simple DSLR today´s camera is capable of great quality image capture. But geras themselves do no capture "the moment".

I think that that´s the only thing that can make some difference between "the post-processing" and "the moment". We when look some photos we feel it.