In Defense of Post Processing
Dec 22, 2018 19:33:50 #
Delderby wrote:
Sounds as if you don't know about Pre-Processing your camera, which you should be able to set up for WB, Contrast, Saturation, Sharpness etc. If you really know your camera such settings can be adjusted in seconds. 
Why would you assume that?
Mike
Dec 22, 2018 19:50:25 #
AndyH wrote:
It is all about having fun and producing work that... (show quote)
Agreed Andy. I think we all want to produce the very best images we can. How we get to that point is up to the photographer. Granted PP will ultimately produce stunning images for those who lean in that direction. I at this point do not have the time or desire but cheers to the fantastic PP images I have seen at UHH. Later this year may be different for me.........
Dec 22, 2018 20:17:11 #
mwsilvers wrote:
Oh yeah. I looked at most of the images he's poste... (show quote)
Judicious use of PP might rescue some of them, but the rest are better discarded unless the specific subject renders them important enough to keep despite their mediocre quality. If you are going to talk the talk, you better be able to walk the walk. This guy "talks" but can't "walk". I always try to understand why they talk. So far I haven’t succeeded.
Dec 22, 2018 20:32:39 #
ronpier wrote:
Later this year may be different for me.........
Hmm ... Today's date December 22 ... Better Hurry!
Enjoy the holidays!
--
Dec 22, 2018 20:40:40 #
Delderby wrote:
Sounds like all posters in this topic are defending their own position.
Only when we have an amateur hour is there any reply like DAN’s. Do you think there are talented photographers who sit around having disagreements about PP or no PP? Only ignorant people will speak against shooting raw. Like it was mentioned earlier, only the end result should matter.
I said it before and I will say it again. What DAN said, had been said before on this forum a handful of times. All came from people who are untalented. I yet to see someone produce a decent example. Before you jump on me, we are not talking about photojournalism, sport photography, where you need to use jpegs or you can’t edit.
Can you show me a landscape photographer who doesn’t processes his or her photos?
It is one thing to be happy with jpegs, but to insult all photographers who post process is another thing.
You might as well get on a racing forum and insult all race car drivers for using “‘’hill/toe’’’ while you can only drive automatic cars.
DAN’s post is that silly.
This should NEVER happen on a photography forum.
Dec 22, 2018 21:09:05 #
mudhen wrote:
Sometimes you can push a camera to its max, then end up with a lot of noise. PP can reduce that. We don't see digital noise or grain with our eyes. The other thing is lens distortion. That can only be fixed in PP.
Around here, we push a controversy to its max and we end up with a lot of noise.
Welcome to UHH mudhen.
Mike
Dec 22, 2018 21:39:25 #
I'm starting to wonder why I've followed and read each post in this topic.
Dec 22, 2018 21:47:11 #
bsprague wrote:
I'm starting to wonder why I've followed and read each post in this topic.
If you don't read them all, or at least skim, you could miss learning something. No promises, but possible.
--
Dec 22, 2018 22:38:33 #
Bill_de wrote:
What? That light flowing through a lens, falling on a sensor, recorded to digital memory as zeros and ones needs to be processed before the human eye can see it?If you don't read them all, or at least skim, you could miss learning something. No promises, but possible.
--
--
Dec 22, 2018 22:53:51 #
bsprague wrote:
What? That light flowing through a lens, falling on a sensor, recorded to digital memory as zeros and ones needs to be processed before the human eye can see it?
See that, I just learned something. I didn't know you needed light. Is that why all my pictures look like this?
--
Dec 22, 2018 23:10:36 #
Bill_de wrote:
Hmm ... Today's date December 22 ... Better Hurry!
Enjoy the holidays!
--
Enjoy the holidays!
--
LOL...NEXT year probably would better phrase it. We’re closing out 2018 at work and getting ready for 2019 which is soon to be THIS year. Have a Merry Christmas to you also, Bill.
Dec 22, 2018 23:33:25 #
Joelwexler wrote:
Please. This guy knows his camera. Doesn't need your snarky tips.
I was answering the written word - he did not acknowledge successfully adjusting his camera - which is a common fault among so many "snap and get it right in the computer" photographers who write in a similar vein. I enjoy all four possibilities with my hobby - SOOC, JPG PP, RAW PP, and also the fourth dimension of encompassing "faults" for artistic effect - especially sharpness and DOF - even in landscape work.
Dec 22, 2018 23:45:47 #
Thanks Mike.
Blenheim Orange wrote:
Around here, we push a controversy to its max and we end up with a lot of noise.
Welcome to UHH mudhen.
Mike
Welcome to UHH mudhen.
Mike
Dec 22, 2018 23:48:06 #
Wow, all the pixels must have fallen out of your camera.
Bill_de wrote:
See that, I just learned something. I didn't know you needed light. Is that why all my pictures look like this?
--
--
Dec 23, 2018 07:32:29 #
Aldla
Loc: Central NJ
I agree. Too many beginners rely on post processing and don't take the time to compose a good photograph. PP can make a good photo great.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.