russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

I do only as much editing as necessary to create my Photographic Art, which I then market as close-of-escrow gifts to Realtors, loan agents, title agents, and escrow agents. Once the people in those four groups see the looks on the faces of the people receiving the gifts, they eventually start buying my work for themselves, their friends, and their relatives for births, birthdays, confirmations, Christmas, graduations, baptisms, bat/bar mitsvahs, marriages, wedding anniversaries, divorces (yes, one Realtor bought her friend a huge 40x60 picture of a sunflower to cheer her up when her divorce was finalized), pet deaths, new pets, deaths, and just about anything you can think of. I never know when I start just how much editing is necessary; when I'm happy with it, that's enough editing. I have found that even if I like a special software preset for one flower, that preset might not work for any other flower. Same with landscapes, cars, trains, planes, etc. But I figure as long as my work keeps selling, then I'll keep editing.

10MPlayer Loc: California

Nice. Before reading you comment I would have thought you did some blurring on the background. I wonder if you should have left the mole on her chin. It is a part of her after all and not a blemish. Many actresses and models have them more or less as a trademark. But you knew that I'm sure.

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

Even though I like playing around with special effects in post processing, I get tired of seeing all those landscapes post-processed with the exact same settings. But yours! You made it something unique and beautiful. I'm hoping the pp fad settings start disappearing so we can see art like this.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

Intereresting you would notice that. The image I uploaded is a mistake - the mole. The one she has does indeed have that little mole. The one I uploaded is sitting right next to the one with the mole. I should have deleted that one. I took it out by mistake, I re-did the image but did not delete the file I ended up showing you. It is now gone! Thanks for the slap upside the head.

TheDman Loc: USA

What settings are those?

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Sorry, but it looks way over-processed to me. Try backing off everything 50% or so.

via the lens Loc: Northern California, near Yosemite NP

"if it happens that way I didn't do a very good job of capturing the image in the first place," sometimes that is not the case. Photographing wild animals can be very difficult and may require a fair amount of work after to get things just right. Animals simply do not cooperate! For landscapes or posed shots, it is very different, but even then a shot can be often greatly improved with some adjustments. In reverse to you, I do not use the crop tool a lot as I normally shoot to size, but I do use the Transform tool in Lightroom. So, we all do something different it seems.

BlackRipleyDog

Thanks. I think what you are alluding to is the heavy reliance on "presets", of which my in-box is inundated with offers to purchase everyday.
The point is that I worked this image myself without canned presets. I took something out of a camera obviously not known for it's dynamic range and rescued it. The result maybe a little HDR'ie-looking but no one else shooting that morning had the same take-away.
I am not Trey Ratcliff, so why would I want my images to look like his? Even though the herd is moving in that direction.

Manglesphoto Loc: 70 miles south of St.Louis

As much or as little to get the image I saw in my mind when I took the shot.

sgt hop Loc: baltimore md,now in salisbury md

as much as i need to satisfy me.............

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

I have 3-5 editors on my computer but I mostly limit myself to what I can do with Picasa. it meets most of my needs. I include photomatix for hdr shooting, and a few stitching editors for panoramas.

traderjohn Loc: New York City

Your memory is much better than mine. Lately, when I go to the bathroom I sit down. Half the time I forgot what I'm in there for.

BlackRipleyDog

I wanted give some thought to your comment before i replied.
To a certain extent, i agree. But back off 50% on what adjustment layers is the salient question. This image took a lot effort with one adjustment building on others.

The point of my comment was to challenge the notion put forth that if you couldn't get a decent print SOOC, all the PP in the world would not help. Which is BS. And i showed why.
I drove 3 hours south to take this image at sunrise, spent a couple hours on-site and drove back home later in the afternoon. Then i spent time on the computer working the files.
Now, according to some jaded souls, at first glance, this image was a loser and not worth any further efforts. I did not see it as such and put that effort in. I printed it and framed it and have sold three copies of it. It is not a standard image of this feature.
So it was worth the effort. And yes, some people like it and for others; not so much.
If SOOC is what most aspire to, that is fine. But I am not one of those. I have 4 PP packages on my desktop but not Lightroom and use them interchangeably for their features.
But remember that post and in-camera picture controls are essentially the same thing. The former is geared more toward the artist who may view the world a little differently.

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

i take what is there and do no editing other than cropping the frame, if needed. what i see is what the camera records - i use film only.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Actually, there's not a camera in the world that can record what the eye sees.