Post processing, Subject, Photographic skills. Which is more important?
Jul 1, 2021 10:58:50 #
Burkley wrote:
Post processing, Subject, Photographic skills. Which is more important?
Yes!
All are equally important to me in order to create the final result I desire.
They all go hand-in-hand.
Jul 1, 2021 11:45:50 #
Without subject, you have nothing. Just a meaningless, pointless, uninteresting image with no artistic merit and no one cares to see.
Jul 1, 2021 15:59:05 #
As a kid, when I nagged my grandmother over and over again with the same redundant complaining or unfulfilled request she told me that my repetitious and constant nagging was like a prolonged painful illness with no cure but it won't be kind enough to kill you! It sounded cutter in her native tongue. This question is remanent of that expression! 
Come on, folks. Photograhy, that is, imaging with light-sensitive materials has been with us since the 18th century and there has always been a darkroom to somehow process the images. As darkroom technology improved and evolved to the point where the was image control beyond the camera, fine printmaking always included at least a few te tweaks to improve the image quality or composition. The same manipulations were carried on to digital imaging.
Good, savvy, and competent photographers do no shoot sloppily and re-shoot every image in the darkroom or on the computer. It doesn't make for efficient, easy and economical workflow and the result is usually not as good as those made from a well-crafted negative digital file.
Digital imaging has made special effects such as montage imaging, art simulations, and crossovers into digital art more accessible to photographers. Nobody forces anyone to venture into these special effects. You can choose to be a purist and attempt to create every image SOTC or not.
My own philosophy and methodology are simple. I try to make the best possible digital file at the time of the shooting. I will usually do a few tweaks in post-processing and if or when I mess something up I can save it with more extreme post-processing- I prefer that not to happen but it sometimes happens. There are times when I paid to include a certain level of post-processing correcting for the onset of the shoot, usually due to some difficulty in conditions etc. Previsualization is an important part of photography but on certain jobs and conditions there is no time to previsualize- you just have to grab the shot- catch as catch can! You get to work on the computer!
For me- the darkroom and the computers are part and parcel of photography but not as a Band-Aid for bad camera work. This is my slant and I do no foist it on anyone else.
As per the OP's basic question- Those great images you refer to are most likely not produced from poorly crafted files and completely resurrected in the computer.
Come on, folks. Photograhy, that is, imaging with light-sensitive materials has been with us since the 18th century and there has always been a darkroom to somehow process the images. As darkroom technology improved and evolved to the point where the was image control beyond the camera, fine printmaking always included at least a few te tweaks to improve the image quality or composition. The same manipulations were carried on to digital imaging.
Good, savvy, and competent photographers do no shoot sloppily and re-shoot every image in the darkroom or on the computer. It doesn't make for efficient, easy and economical workflow and the result is usually not as good as those made from a well-crafted negative digital file.
Digital imaging has made special effects such as montage imaging, art simulations, and crossovers into digital art more accessible to photographers. Nobody forces anyone to venture into these special effects. You can choose to be a purist and attempt to create every image SOTC or not.
My own philosophy and methodology are simple. I try to make the best possible digital file at the time of the shooting. I will usually do a few tweaks in post-processing and if or when I mess something up I can save it with more extreme post-processing- I prefer that not to happen but it sometimes happens. There are times when I paid to include a certain level of post-processing correcting for the onset of the shoot, usually due to some difficulty in conditions etc. Previsualization is an important part of photography but on certain jobs and conditions there is no time to previsualize- you just have to grab the shot- catch as catch can! You get to work on the computer!
For me- the darkroom and the computers are part and parcel of photography but not as a Band-Aid for bad camera work. This is my slant and I do no foist it on anyone else.
As per the OP's basic question- Those great images you refer to are most likely not produced from poorly crafted files and completely resurrected in the computer.
Jul 1, 2021 18:32:26 #
The major issue in this discussion is: does your subject move or is it stationary? Mostly my subjects move. The important thing is to get the shot. It must be in focus. After that first shot I can stop and consider all the things that stationary shooters talk so much about.
IMHO with post processing I can recover from almost anything except missed focus if I'm willing to work hard enough.
IMHO with post processing I can recover from almost anything except missed focus if I'm willing to work hard enough.
Jul 2, 2021 05:46:35 #
Garbage in. Garbage out. There is no "most important". A photographer needs a subject. A subject needs a photographer to capture it in an interesting way. Once you have a good photograph, you have the basis for a final image.
Jul 2, 2021 05:57:14 #
Jul 2, 2021 05:59:16 #
Burkley wrote:
I have friends who work as models, photographers a... (show quote)
A "complete" photographer is skilled in all three.
Jul 2, 2021 06:17:58 #
Burkley wrote:
I have friends who work as models, photographers a... (show quote)
" I’m also amazed that excellent post processing can turn a boring photo into something gripping."
Yes, it is by someone else's genius they have the ability to do that. The editing program is a major player.
Jul 2, 2021 06:25:17 #
Jul 2, 2021 06:25:40 #
kymarto wrote:
Garbage in. Garbage out. There is no "most important". A photographer needs a subject. A subject needs a photographer to capture it in an interesting way. Once you have a good photograph, you have the basis for a final image.
Excelent bottom-line for this issue....
Jul 2, 2021 07:10:53 #
Burkley wrote:
I have friends who work as models, photographers a... (show quote)
Well, I believe it's a three legged table... If any of the legs fails, the table will come down.
Jul 2, 2021 07:22:14 #
Another great arbitrary answer question
with everyone having their own opinion,
being adamant in their reasoning.
Great conversation starter,
as long as "others" are not
wrong....
with everyone having their own opinion,
being adamant in their reasoning.
Great conversation starter,
as long as "others" are not
wrong....
Jul 2, 2021 07:24:15 #
Jul 2, 2021 07:28:24 #
jlg1000 wrote:
Well, I believe it's a three legged table... If any of the legs fails, the table will come down.
Excellent analogy.
Jul 2, 2021 07:53:45 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
If the image is out of focus, no amount of post is... (show quote)
This is the best answer. The photographer's skill with the camera, experience with composition and lighting, and understanding of place and location comes first. Post-processing is a means of making the image a composite of the work of the photographer and the computer.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.