unaltered shots
Jan 15, 2024 14:00:33 #
bigruckus
Loc: montana
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
Jan 15, 2024 14:03:21 #
bigruckus wrote:
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
Share your images in the Photo Gallery in any format and level of processing as best represents your vision and purpose for sharing.
Jan 15, 2024 14:14:59 #
bigruckus wrote:
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
Not that I am aware.
If they did that, someone would probably suggest a section for each editor out there.......
Isn't cropping altered?
Jan 15, 2024 14:16:25 #
bigruckus wrote:
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
What Paul said. If SOOC is so wonderful they should be able to stand their own ground when compared side-by-side with edited photos. Any superiority that they may have should be self-evident and they shouldn't need a special section to draw attention to how much better they are.
(As an aside, "edited" can mean many things. Some people like to hold on to a natural look when editing their photos while others prefer a bold and vivid (but not natural) look. In other words the editing styles are many and varied, so sweeping generalisations about editing are seldom appropriate).
Jan 15, 2024 14:31:32 #
larryepage
Loc: North Texas area
bigruckus wrote:
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
Just as a comment...you will find that the vocal majority here are quite hostile to the notion that it is possible to achieve worthy results directly from the camera (read that as "any camera).
You will get the best results by posting such images without comment or distinguishing notes. When responses come back positive, you can later inform that no processing was done.
Jan 15, 2024 14:32:39 #
R.G. wrote:
What Paul said. If SOOC is so wonderful they should be able to stand their own ground when compared side-by-side with edited photos. Any superiority that they may have should be self-evident and they shouldn't need a special section to draw attention to how much better they are.
...
...
Everyone's mind interprets (perceives) what their eyes sense differently. How I "see" an image is most likely not how someone else sees it. Perfect color/contrast/brightness/... for one person may be yucky for another person.
So many erroneously think that how they see an image is exactly how everyone else sees it.
Everyone's eyes and mind visualize things differently, however, there may be a certain degree of commonality between people, but not all.
Jan 15, 2024 14:35:47 #
I normally don't alter my photos but I almost always do the following. Change the color temperature. Change the contrast level. Often adjust the shadow level. Change the saturation level.
Jan 15, 2024 14:38:12 #
Jan 15, 2024 14:42:56 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The unprocessed image is not worth sharing ...
I think we have many SOOCERS here, especially the ones who just like to press the shutter button many many times. And then force me to use my scroller to exhaustion.
Jan 15, 2024 14:44:03 #
CHG_CANON wrote:
The unprocessed image is not worth sharing ...
Jan 15, 2024 15:06:26 #
BebuLamar wrote:
I normally don't alter my photos but I almost always do the following. Change the color temperature. Change the contrast level. Often adjust the shadow level. Change the saturation level.
Why? Because
a) Cameras don't record things perfectly.
b) Cameras don't record things exactly the way we perceive them.
c) Reality doesn't always provide us with ideal circumstances.
Do I want a photo to reflect exactly how the camera saw something or exactly how I saw something? Or maybe I want the photo to depict an idealised version of what I saw, despite the fact that the idealised version didn't exist in reality (but that doesn't stop me from envisaging it).
Jan 15, 2024 15:15:56 #
A camera sees the world differently than the human eye, so who cares what the camera saw?
Jan 15, 2024 15:46:04 #
bigruckus wrote:
I am fairly new at this site and am just curious as to whether or not there is a section for unaltered shots with maybe the exception of cropping? Thanks.
If you are new to this here is something to think about (as though there isn't enough). Most here shoot RAW. If you go that route you will discover that you need to 'alter' your shots from the way the camera presents. RAW is not ready for Prime Time. What you see on the back of your camera is an altered preview and not what the downloaded RAW will look like. RAW needs work! The camera can alter a jpeg and if that is your output (what you download), it might be alright. RAW has the most potential but is not for general viewing.
Jan 15, 2024 15:55:34 #
R.G. wrote:
Why? Because br br a) Cameras don't record thin... (show quote)
My question is really what I do are considered altered or not?
Jan 15, 2024 15:59:54 #
Longshadow wrote:
Not that I am aware.
If they did that, someone would probably suggest a section for each editor out there.......
Isn't cropping altered?
If they did that, someone would probably suggest a section for each editor out there.......
Isn't cropping altered?
Nope. Its like cutting a matt.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.