User ID

By the foundational premise of the forum this thread’s title is counterproductive, dead in the water, and possibly just dead wrong. Acoarst I have zero doubt that you clearly knew that before posting it.

(Download)

Jim-Pops Loc: Granbury, Texas

[quote=Curmudgeon]
Now, through PP, we can at least save them in a form that allows us to recreate the memory. Occasionally we actually, through PP, create photos that challenge the best the experts display.

This is so true. Back when I was 19 in the Army in Vietnam I had a Minolta camera. Took some pictures, some OK some not so good. Sold the camera and bought a I think called a half frame or 3/4 camera for taking slides. I think I could take twice the amount of pictures on a roll of film. Many of these pictures were just bad. Recently I've taken some of the slides made them digital and did PP work on them. Now they are considerably better not worth showing on the UHH for critique but good enough to bring back the memories. I can show them to my children and grandchildren, not for the quality but for understanding the time of life I went through. Pictures are the best way to do that good or bad with some PP improvement.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

I agree, but I look at the process from an entirely different angle. Post Processing is only one part of the equation!

I’m an advanced amateur, and a devoted hobbyist. I frequently make large prints for my own use, but I also spend a lot of time improving shots that I deem worthwhile, though no-one but extended family is likely to see them – ever. Even studying PS & LR can be rewarding in its own right.

I like to think I hold myself to a high standard.

Result: for me and I suspect many others like me, “Process” means the entire act, from selection of equipment, through selection of locations for creation of images, moving same to the computer, and creating a print-ready image. All of those individual acts go into the “Process”, and each contributes to the pleasure of doing so.

I’m free to shoot what and when I want to, and when to work at this “process”; I’m free of any burden to create for pay. I will never feel pressure to produce an image to suit someone else, and I will always enjoy the entire process of creation of those images. If I HAD to produce, pressure would probably create burden from what is now pleasure.

Yes, I agree with the OP and most of the other posts, but my reasons are different! I'm indeed fortunate to be in this position!

mffox Loc: Avon, CT

I get enjoy the entire process of planning, preparation, shooting, culling and post-processing. From the end result I get satisfaction (or dissatisfaction).

Mark

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I don't think that professional v amateur is the issue here. Many photographers have their roots in film, and in that arena, getting it right in camera is far more critical almost to the point of being an essential requirement, and that becomes a part of the required mind set. In the digital arena post processing provides far more options and far more leeway than dark room processing, and to accommodate that extension to the possibilities, a different mind set is required. Unfortunately some photographers are reluctant to release their hold on the hard-won mind set they acquired through learning photography in the film era, so they try to force their old mind set to fit the new situation.

While it's true that some people don't give as much care and attention as they should to get it right in-camera, most people don't see post processing as a crutch to fall back on as an alternative to improving their camera skills. Post processing is a way to maximise the potential of each shot, and that is how it should be seen - by everybody.

The simple fact is, with most shots, regardless of how carefully they were taken, they can be optimised with appropriate PP. The exceptions to that are VERY rare. To turn your nose up at PP is to turn your nose up at the possibility of optimising your shots. I believe that is the point you were trying to address when you worded this thread's title.

Delderby Loc: Derby UK

Oh dear! I have the highest regard for pro photographers - I obviously did not choose my words with enough thought. Please - I would never ever suggest that pro photographers were "not ethical, artistic and take pride in what we (they) do and how we (they)serve our (their) clients". My sincere apologies to pro photographers.
I will not elaborate on what I meant to say in my post - save that I said too much.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

Absolutely right!
Just the same, I don't miss the wet darkroom one bit. I still own a pile of equipment, covered in dust, and likely to stay that way. PP was a lot harder back in the day...

Horseart Loc: Alabama

I may have it all wrong and someone will tell me if I do, but I think PP is not only for everyone who wants to TRY to improve a photo but especially for people like me. I have been an artist since I was a small child and didn't get my first camera til I was 10. I probably should just stick to painting, but I want so badly to improve on my photography and don't seem to be doing that. Soooo, with PP I can at least sell a few and keep a few for the memories they provide. I keep on trying and hoping something will surely click and I'll improve, but at my age, that isn't very likely. There will always be great photographers, good photographers, bad photographers and the "in-betweens". I'll just try to fit in there somewhere. May it be a great photo year for all of you!

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

It depends on the situation. For some images, the important thing is capturing a moment and technical perfection is unimportant. The same for unsophisticated audiences such as on social media.

For my own satisfaction, technical issues matter.

DRam11 Loc: Polson, MT

Toment Loc: FL, IL

I think it’s fun to try and rescue a good but poorly exposed photo. PP away, I say…😀

Gilkar

Well said Mr. Shapiro,
I always completely read your comments as they are insightful. To say the least, I agree with them. Especially in this case. I have been a "professional" photographer for over 60 years, and like the person who posted this article my first "real" camera was an Argus C3, (affectionately known as "The Brick"). I can remember metering almost every shot with my Good ole Weston Master 4(?) light meter. Then I could hardly wait to get home to the darkroom and start printing. Your comments about post processing in those days are spot on. I can remember dodging and burning, using warm Dektol, and many other techniques to "enhance" my mediocre images. When digital came along I was just entering my sixties, but I was the proverbial "kid in the candy store", I lost no time in learning new techniques, new processes, and I also found out how much I didn't know. My only lament is now that we all have phones with cameras built right in, everyone thinks they are a photographer without learning the whys and wherefores of the craft. Moreover, they equipment of today does most of the thinking for you. So a lot of the adventure and the wait to see if you did it right is removed. Heck, I even chimp at my pictures to be sure. I guess that "P" camera setting really does stand for "professional", well, most of the time.

khildy Loc: Brownsburg, IN

User ID

A “good but poorly exposed photo” ?!?!?

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

If you ever shot Kodachrome 25 you would clearly understand good but poorly exposed photo. It happens to most people from time to time.