For those of you who love to post-process
Mar 31, 2018 16:59:44 #
lesdmd wrote:
While I subscribe to the idea that “it ends when it’s done”; and “it will be as large as it has to be”, I wonder what is the most time you have spent processing “art” and how large was the final file.
When I process a photo in Photoshop it can take minutes and no increase in size (removing debris, sharpening, touching up a bit) or much longer, even into hours (layering shots, hand-creating a pano, doing a multiple scene sequence of one subject, etc.) and the file size can increase greatly. I really don't pay attention to file size, it is what it needs to be to get the image I want. There is no "one size fits all" when working in PS or any other program, just a vision and the process it takes to reach the vision. I checked some images and perhaps the largest one is a five-shot pano of Yosemite, 245.5MP. I put some of it together in Lightroom but then had to finish the rest in PS. It's so large because of the merging of the five files (36mp files), not sure why files get so much bigger and I just don't even think about that when I am working, I'm just having fun with my photos.
Mar 31, 2018 18:44:18 #
Apr 1, 2018 05:34:51 #
Apr 1, 2018 06:20:07 #
Wow.
I guess I'm the oddball here. When I was shooting digital I'd just use a preset that I made that adjusted the WB, added a slight bit of sharpening, and boosted the contrast slightly. Sometimes I'd fiddle with the exposure if I had a really bad exposure but that was it.
This thread makes me glad I shoot film.
I guess I'm the oddball here. When I was shooting digital I'd just use a preset that I made that adjusted the WB, added a slight bit of sharpening, and boosted the contrast slightly. Sometimes I'd fiddle with the exposure if I had a really bad exposure but that was it.
This thread makes me glad I shoot film.
Apr 1, 2018 14:01:51 #
rgrenaderphoto wrote:
I spent 3 days getting an image to the point where I was satisfied with the results. Lost track of how many times I started and stopped, rejected the results and started over again.
You would never make it professionally taking that much time on one shot. As a pro you need to get the shot right first and do minimal process in computer per shot. Especially if you have 300 or more shots to go through for just one job.
Apr 1, 2018 14:45:41 #
The question was originally intended for those who love to do artistic post processing.There are comments from two people, one of whom prefers using film which obviously involves no computer post processing and another who does high-volume professional work which is time-dependent .
To me this raises two interesting points. One is, does the film user resist experimenting with technology which allows a broader range of experiences? Second is, does the professional, who I understand is trying to make a living, miss out on the purely artistic aspects of what he does?
To me this raises two interesting points. One is, does the film user resist experimenting with technology which allows a broader range of experiences? Second is, does the professional, who I understand is trying to make a living, miss out on the purely artistic aspects of what he does?
Apr 1, 2018 14:45:43 #
The question was originally intended for those who love to do artistic post processing.There are comments from two people, one of whom prefers using film which obviously involves no computer post processing and another who does high-volume professional work which is time-dependent .
To me this raises two interesting points. One is, does the film user resist experimenting with technology which allows a broader range of experiences? Second is, does the professional, who I understand is trying to make a living, miss out on the purely artistic aspects of what he does?
To me this raises two interesting points. One is, does the film user resist experimenting with technology which allows a broader range of experiences? Second is, does the professional, who I understand is trying to make a living, miss out on the purely artistic aspects of what he does?
Apr 1, 2018 17:45:04 #
TheDman
Loc: USA
drklrd wrote:
You would never make it professionally taking that much time on one shot. As a pro you need to get the shot right first and do minimal process in computer per shot. Especially if you have 300 or more shots to go through for just one job.
Only if you're a high volume content provider and not doing fine art. There are many different ways to make it professionally.
Apr 1, 2018 23:08:36 #
Ambitious project. A lot of nice work! That's the work that takes a lot of layers. More complicated than mine.
ClaudiaA wrote:
This is 58 layers of a trip to Alaska.
Apr 2, 2018 06:06:02 #
Apr 2, 2018 10:11:17 #
A nice unifying and fun element of yours is the mountains across the top with the aircraft.
ClaudiaA wrote:
Your's is neat, mine is chaotic. I like it both ways.
Apr 2, 2018 11:48:45 #
Apr 2, 2018 12:24:56 #
Don't do all that much art. Most of my postprocessing is just crop, tweak, export from LR. Maybe 10% go into PS and get up to 2-3 layers. Maybe 1% of those that make it to PS get some "art" added to them (call it what you will, considering the source).
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.