Does that mean I'm lousy?
Does that mean I'm lousy?
Photoshop is part of digital photography. Like the good old days, you need good darkroom skills to produce good b/w prints.
Digital photography doesn't mean good/nice/saturated pics out of the cam. You are now taking over the role of the operator behind the machine in the lab. And you should have full control on how your final output will be like.
can try to shoot slide film if u prefer straight out of the cam results.
If you increasingly see the need to touch up your pictures, it could mean you're getting more discerning about quality.Originally Posted by Geckorian
I believe that PS processing is unavoidable when your digi cam 's limit couldn't produce the quality pictures that you want. Taking myself for instance, noise level is rather high for my camera, thus has to PS it to remove or reduce them.
In other words, PSing is just improve the quality of your photos not much a determinant of your photography skill. This is just my personal opinion.
Hehe a newbie 's 5cents worth of thoughs~~
NO.Originally Posted by Geckorian
Is good to touch up your photos in PS but not changing the orginal photo.
(Eg. adding things in to a orginal photo )
TO SEE, TO FEEL, TO PHOTOGRAPH.
Actually, it depends on what kind of effects you want out of that photo. If you're just satisfied with the photo alone, then it's OK. If not, just proceed on with the necessary touch up. Nothing wrong with it.
However, if you constantly touch up on only the brightness and contrast, then you may want to improve on your shooting skills and try playing around with the different settings of your cam.
but i personally feel that if i do cropping a lot (which i admittedly do ), it means my composition needs to be worked on.
i kinda still crop quite a bit. it means that i cant get the shot composition right the first time. and then i need PS to 'rescue' me.
also, my exposure with 350D is sometimes wrong also. im suspecting the 350D intentionally underexposes(anyone can confirm?), so if i decide a photo is under, i use PS to tweak curves and levels.
these two above, i believe, is the fault of me the photographer.
but there are certain factors that dont mean ur a lousy photog
for example u tweak saturation. if ur using the kit lens, like i am, colours are quite muted. prob hafta increase contrast and saturation
my 2 cents
As for your 350D I suspected the same thing until I updated my firmware.Originally Posted by Isaiahfortythirtyone
Originally Posted by ob1canob
hmm mine is at 1.0.2. thats the latest right? im quite sure i get the exposure right, but somehow i'm down by 1/3 or 2/3 stops all the time according to the histogram and to my eyes also. is urs 1.0.2?
Yes, mine is 1.0.2. Then I don't think it's due to the firmware anymore. Sorry. I encountered about 2/3 stops down when I was at 1.0.1 particularly whenever I use the flash it got even worse.Originally Posted by Isaiahfortythirtyone
Most affordable SLRs/dSLRs nowadays have pretty lousy viewfinders that don't show you everything that will be recorded. Maybe this is what you're experiencing.Originally Posted by Isaiahfortythirtyone
Apart from that, cropping is normal. In the film days in the darkroom, one had to crop if only because the aspect ratios of the negative and the paper were usually different.
A photo that looks dark is not necessarily underexposed. With typical high contrast scenes, pictures inevitably must look dark if the highlights are to be preserved, pretty similar to slide film. Adjusting the curves is IMHO normal and not a sign of bad exposure.also, my exposure with 350D is sometimes wrong also. im suspecting the 350D intentionally underexposes(anyone can confirm?), so if i decide a photo is under, i use PS to tweak curves and levels.
Maybe the colours of the original scene really are that muted? Our vision of a scene does quite often not correspond to reality.for example u tweak saturation. if ur using the kit lens, like i am, colours are quite muted.
Very insightful guys. Just the feeling of cheating gnawing away~ Thanks!