Honestly, post processing does not need a defense. Many of those who criticize its use don't really understand its purpose and use, and a lot of them find their mediocre out of the camera images acceptable. Some people deride the sometimes gross overprocessing that often is used by those who believe that if a little processing is good, than a lot of processing must be better. And then, of course, are the "purists" who either believe that the engineer designed algorithms do a better job of rendering a final image than we can do in post processing, or fail to understand that all jpegs are already post processed in camera using default and user updated settings for things like white-balance, contrast, sharpening, tones, etc. I know what post processing is, what it does, and its numerous and very clear advantages over jpegs SOOC, and don't need to defend using it to anyone. As a rule I generally ignore the arguments of those who think that post's only advantage is to fix poor exposures. It's their loss.

Sorry, but this is my Only Rant for 2018... I just have to get it out there or burst.

I was recently invited to help judge a Close-up &/or Macro Flower Photography Competition. I was delighted to be asked... until I started looking through the photographs themselves. Nearly 50% of the images were of flowers arbitrarily sprayed with water droplets. So, I started disqualifying every photograph that I believed was “artificially enhanced” by photographers with a camera in one hand, and a spray bottle in the other.

I realize that “water droplets on flowers” is a common exercise for those being taught photography, but it seems that some of the guidance might be a bit hit and miss? My perspective (and I freely apologize in advance, as I’m often wrong):

1. If you really must spray a flower for a photograph, PLEASE gently & lightly spray the whole flower and surrounding leaves from one direction only, preferably above? It looks SO phony when the flower has lots of droplets all over every petal... but projections on the stem, and surrounding leaves are dry as a bone in a desert. FAKE!

2. In the art of photographing flowers, less is so often more. True of water droplets as well. Consider dripping a few drops from above, rather than spraying using the “flower under a shower head approach”. FAKE!

3. Lastly, Lighting that shot. If your intention is to depict a flower (a) at Dawn, with the dew still upon it, or (b) after a Summer Shower, then make sure your lighting is NATURAL and appropriate. Low angle for Dawn shots, diffused for Summer Showers, or a beam from the Sun peaking through clouds... think about your concept and initiate, plan, and execute accordingly. Ideally, be outside (shock, horror, yes, in Natural Light!) at Dawn or directly after the rain, to capture the shot. Think of your sense of achievement in capturing the moment. Anything else when artificially lighting a flower, can tend to make the subject look a bit fake, even when it isn’t.

Apologies again, Rant over for 2018. I awarded the prizes to some wonderful photographs... none of which had a fake raindrop / dewdrop anywhere in shot.