Post processing vs. no-Post processing
Yup, I do alot of processing. To me, taking the image is like finding a Christmas gift under the tree: it has my name on it, I have an idea of what it is and I can imagine the adventure we'll have. Lightroom/Photoshop/etc. are what I use to open that gift. Sometimes, the gift is exactly what I want and I'm pleased. Other times, the gift is more wonderful than expected; and I'm delighted. Either way, receiving a gift and not unwrapping it, seems unthankful... perhaps rude... like a book unread, a tie not worn... a breath mint not used...
Personally, I enjoy both picture taking and post processing equally. Creating the photograph brings creativity in the composition, exposure and the various technical skills involved. Post processing refines the resulting picture to become what you want it to be. Sometimes all you need to do post is the crop down to your desired image, other times you can do a lot more to produce what your mind imagined when you took the initial picture.
I confess that I am a bit of a computer geek so the tediousness of post doesn't bother me and I enjoy the challenge of what could be. To each his/her own.
It’s like my old darkroom work. Image is not done until I make it look like what I was trying to photograph. Wish I was better at it, but I’ll keep working.
I started shooting RAW when I saw that there was more detail in the file than with a jpg. But that requires PP work. And I hate it. It was sort of like doing the printing myself. I'm such a perfectionist that I would spend days making a print. I finally decided I'd rather spend that time shooting than working on prints. A lot of my photos come out pretty much the way I saw it, and that's what I want. But RAW is bland, so a touch more contrast and clarity usually does the trick. If I apply that upon import into LR, then usually all I have left to do is metadata info (some of which is also applied at import). When I come back with thousands of images to go through, having to sit in front of a computer for days on end to work on them isn't fun. It's fun to see them all, but not to work on them! But I have to admit that if I'm not DONE with an image in less than 5 minutes, it doesn't get done.
elliott937 wrote:
I am simply very curious to learn from my fellow members ... how many enjoy post-processing as much as taking the picture snap? Post-processing ... like a lot? Post-processing ... don't like it at all?
I get satisfaction from post-processing, but I have fun shooting. So if you ask me whether I would like to go out shooting for a day or stay home in front of my computer and post-process all day, its a no brainer.
Alan
elliott937 wrote:
I am simply very curious to learn from my fellow members ... how many enjoy post-processing as much as taking the picture snap? Post-processing ... like a lot? Post-processing ... don't like it at all?
Yes, I enjoy Post-processing a lot. I know how to use Photoshop. Also, these days taking photographs is a chore as I have arthritis in my hands and every place else. So handling a camera is an effort. Processing has always been a part of photography. Even in the film days the process did not end with exposing the film. One still had to develop the film, and before reversal films, make prints by processing with yet more chemicals.
A raw file is like a negative, a processed image is like a print. A camera jpg file is sort of like a slide, but Kodachrome and Ektachrome and similar did not have massively less resolution or color fidelity like a mediocre jpg might.
May the arguing begin. Few minds will ever be change in any case. Peace, happy St. Valentine's Day.
lamiaceae wrote:
Yes, I enjoy Post-processing a lot. I know how to use Photoshop. Also, these days taking photographs is a chore as I have arthritis in my hands and every place else. So handling a camera is an effort. Processing has always been a part of photography. Even in the film days the process did not end with exposing the film. One still had to develop the film, and before reversal films, make prints by processing with yet more chemicals.
A raw file is like a negative, a processed image is like a print. A camera jpg file is sort of like a slide, but Kodachrome and Ektachrome and similar did not have massively less resolution or color fidelity like a mediocre jpg might.
May the arguing begin. Few minds will ever be change in any case. Peace, happy St. Valentine's Day.
Yes, I enjoy Post-processing a lot. I know how to... (
show quote)
Slides are often cited as not being able to be post processed, but as one who printed slides on Cibachrome back in the day, they can be burned and dodged like B&W, but with the effect reversed (burn to lighten, dodge to darken).
I like postprocessing - initially I didn't but then I realized that it would help me develop my photographic eye and it has - it's a never ending process, at least for me.
Exactly: "just as the darkroom was to film."
tcthome wrote:
I enjoy it as much when I'm in the mood. Some days just the basic panel in LR. Other days I'll get a little more into it using AP. I see it as an extension of the hobby just as the darkroom was to film.
Lucian
Loc: From Wales, living in Ohio
If we go back to film days, then for many of us, we had to process and print our own images. That too was post taking the photograph work. Back then we had post photographing (the processing of the film}, then Post processing, the printing of the image.
I enjoyed the old days but enjoy the modern days even more, because I can do all sorts of creative things to an image today. Things that were simply not possible back in the days of film. I love creating fantasy scenes with my children and that would not have been possible in the old days. I'll try and include a sample so you can see what I mean. I love all that is possible with today's PP, possibly more than even taking the image, sometimes.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.