Why saturate . . . when mother nature does it for you
Nov 6, 2017 09:12:54 #
jonjacobik
Loc: Quincy, MA
I'm not against post. I'm not even against bumping up saturation till it bleeds, if that's what it takes to make a great photo. It's the outcome that matters. I've been in a creek bed surrounded by mud banks that make for horrible backgrounds. If I can make the mud look like a planned backdrop-I'll go for it. Mostly though, I'm imitating nature.
Nature saturates, man imitates.
Nature saturates, man imitates.
Nov 6, 2017 09:44:53 #
I go on the opposite direction with sunsets and sunrises, I usually desaturate to taste.
Nov 6, 2017 11:15:45 #
DMGill wrote:
Post processing is often needed to make the photograph look like what you saw before you took the photograph and is needed even more often when you want the final print to look like what you imagined long before you found the photo. In my experience, Raw images in particular seldom look right straight from the camera.
Nov 6, 2017 20:06:10 #
Nov 6, 2017 20:17:50 #
I don't know about post processing, but I do believe in processing. Ansel Adams remarked that the negative is the score, the print the performance. Sitting looking at the score to Beethoven's Ninth Symphony is never going to be as stirring as experiencing the performance. It's the same with a photograph. Whether one processes it only a little or dramatically, it needs the artist's interpretation.
--Bob
--Bob
jonjacobik wrote:
untouched by post processing. Why saturate this?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.