To edit or not to edit? /To be or.../
Feb 19, 2012 07:47:04 #
MMC wrote:
My question is 'Is it possible to have perfect picture from camera without editing?"
...the eye of the beholder.
Feb 19, 2012 07:52:14 #
I find that most images need a little help from editing, but you can keep it to a minimum by using the proper camera settings. One way to do this is to shoot in manual mode. This gives you all the control of the final image. Most people are afraid to go this way because they don't understand how the camera works and what happens to the image with different settings.
I shoot in manual mode most of the time and most of the time I get the image I want. If you are interested in learning more about this, I would recommend the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. He puts things in easy to understand terms that even I comprehended.
Good luck and enjoy
I shoot in manual mode most of the time and most of the time I get the image I want. If you are interested in learning more about this, I would recommend the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. He puts things in easy to understand terms that even I comprehended.
Good luck and enjoy
Feb 19, 2012 08:21:25 #
Gary Truchelut wrote:
I would recommend the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. He puts things in easy to understand terms that even I comprehended. Good luck and enjoy
I second this recommendation. Here is a quick synopsis of the Exposure Triangle:
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography
Feb 19, 2012 08:29:48 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
It's certainly possible, but equally, there are times when you can improve a picture by post processing. A lot depends, too, on what you're shooting and why. I'm about to shoot a series of 'how-to' shots, and I expect to need no post processing. But there are times when I want a degree of cropping, or local burning, none of which is possible in camera. I also find it easier to control sharpness and saturation in PP rather than in camera.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Feb 19, 2012 08:45:23 #
arphot wrote:
I second this recommendation. Here is a quick synopsis of the Exposure Triangle:
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography
Gary Truchelut wrote:
I would recommend the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. He puts things in easy to understand terms that even I comprehended. Good luck and enjoy
I second this recommendation. Here is a quick synopsis of the Exposure Triangle:
http://www.digital-photography-school.com/learning-exposure-in-digital-photography
That's a good site.
Feb 19, 2012 08:58:28 #
Whether or not you can take a "perfect" picture, that is one that does not need post-processing, is one thing. To paraphrase one comment above, perfect is in the eyes of the beholder. Every picture looks perfect on the back of the camera.
However, when we look at the image later on a big screen, almost ever picture could benefit from a little tweak here and there. The "perfect" picture becomes a little more "perfect".
As in the days of film, if one settles for the picture exactly how it was shot, then one lacks much artistic sensibility, is just plain lazy or needs a gimmick to massage one's ego. Altering photos has been around since the beginning of photography. What is the difference between posing a subject or touching it up later?
PS Notable exceptions to this are photojournalism, scientific photography and forensic photography. However, even manipulation of the last two may be necessary to bring out important details.
However, when we look at the image later on a big screen, almost ever picture could benefit from a little tweak here and there. The "perfect" picture becomes a little more "perfect".
As in the days of film, if one settles for the picture exactly how it was shot, then one lacks much artistic sensibility, is just plain lazy or needs a gimmick to massage one's ego. Altering photos has been around since the beginning of photography. What is the difference between posing a subject or touching it up later?
PS Notable exceptions to this are photojournalism, scientific photography and forensic photography. However, even manipulation of the last two may be necessary to bring out important details.
Feb 19, 2012 09:02:52 #
I am an in the camera man. I check the white balance often. I shoot in Apature so that I can use the depth of field I need. I check the screen to see that everything is in the ball park. I check backgrounds. I don't get this "I shoot in Manual" thing. The only time I use manual is when I use a lens that does not support my camera settings. For your d90 go to Ken Rockwell's site he has a step by step guide to setting the d90. I found it very usefull. - Dave
Feb 19, 2012 09:52:45 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
MMC wrote:
I have Nikon d70 and d50. Almost every picture which I took I am editing with Photoshop. Sometimes I can improve my picture very fast sometimes not. My question is 'Is it possible to have perfect picture from camera without editing?"
yes
Feb 19, 2012 09:53:02 #
docrob
Loc: Durango, Colorado
docrob wrote:
yes
MMC wrote:
I have Nikon d70 and d50. Almost every picture which I took I am editing with Photoshop. Sometimes I can improve my picture very fast sometimes not. My question is 'Is it possible to have perfect picture from camera without editing?"
yes
but not often
Feb 19, 2012 09:53:38 #
Feb 19, 2012 10:39:37 #
Back in my day we know the camera we used. NO PHOTOSHOP all retouching by hand. Try it you will like it.
Feb 19, 2012 11:39:35 #
Just put it on "P" (Program) and have fun. Unless you are selling photos and need to improve what you have taken, then shoot RAW. If in Program, you see that your images are either too dark or too light, then adjust your camera to + or -, to correct this. Use your Histogram. You will find that you will soon be able to improve on this. I know a lot of photographers will disagree on this, but it has worked for me and I do not need to be a slave to my computer.
Feb 19, 2012 12:52:43 #
senad55verizon.net
Loc: Milford, NJ
tainkc wrote:
Now then, let us define the word "perfect".
MMC wrote:
Absolutely! I have to do it all of the time 'cause I suck at photoshop. Lol.I have Nikon d70 and d50. Almost every picture which I took I am editing with Photoshop. Sometimes I can improve my picture very fast sometimes not. My question is 'Is it possible to have perfect picture from camera without editing?"
Now then, let us define the word "perfect".
Believe it or not, after some serious study of Camera Raw and Photoshop, postprocessing can be just as much fun and just as rewarding as running around pushing the shutter button.
Feb 19, 2012 13:36:17 #
Roger Hicks
Loc: Aquitaine
senad55verizon.net wrote:
Believe it or not, after some serious study of Camera Raw and Photoshop, postprocessing can be just as much fun and just as rewarding as running around pushing the shutter button.
No, really, I don't believe it. And I've been using both for years.
You may like it. May regard it as a necessary evil.
Cheers,
R.
Feb 19, 2012 13:44:45 #
MMC wrote:
I have the same opinion but some people said that good photographers with good cameras do not need PP .
I'm sorry but who ever said this to you knows nothing about photography. (shaking my head)
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.