Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 36789 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 165

Thread: is PP really needed???

  1. #141

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by giantcanopy View Post
    but many of us use photoshop to PP
    Not for me.. Because I can't afford Photoshop. I use Irfanview, GIMP and Photoshop Elements.

  2. #142

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    If you attended a seminar recently held by National Geography @ Traders Hotel, you would hear loud and clear from one of the NG photographer that he DID NOT do any PP at all!
    That is because his job require him to come up with photo as 'natural' as possible without any 'help' from PP.

    Quote Originally Posted by iNotion View Post
    To those who are just pure ignorant about PP & photography
    and still called yourself photographer, only because you owe a camera,

    Before you continue to brag about photography, please do read, watch and learn more about the great masters of photography and their works. There is a lot of books in the library, a lot of film documentary in the internet [Youtube]. Many top photographers learned in college. Many are self-taught. And what is 'self-taught'? Taking thousand of photos isn't self-taught. Owning expensive camera equipments isn't self-taught. Learning a lot about your camera equipments doesn't make you a better photographer, But it Does make you a good Salesman.


    From street photographers to magazine/ product photographers to studio photographers to war photographers, there is no pro photographer in this world who don't do post proceed. When you tell me PP is not needed for a good photographer, it seems that you're trying to say your work are better than them because you don't post proceed.

  3. #143

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by UandMe View Post
    seriously curious to find out also
    too bad I forgot the name of that NG photographer

  4. #144
    Member Burnings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    152

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    As Scott Kelby mentioned, "All top photographers are masters of PP"....

  5. #145

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    If you attended a seminar recently held by National Geography @ Traders Hotel, you would hear loud and clear from one of the NG photographer that he DID NOT do any PP at all!
    That is because his job require him to come up with photo as 'natural' as possible without any 'help' from PP.
    That's for his job... their requirements are no photoshop, not, you can use it but he chooses not to. It's different since he does not have a choice as opposed to an amatuer or other professionals.

    I'm sure he/she also has access to every filter and equipment to allow them to get most of stuff done in camera.

  6. #146

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by 2evans View Post
    That's for his job... their requirements are no photoshop, not, you can use it but he chooses not to. It's different since he does not have a choice as opposed to an amatuer or other professionals.

    I'm sure he/she also has access to every filter and equipment to allow them to get most of stuff done in camera.
    I'm sure he/she also has access to every filter and equipment to allow them to get most of stuff done in camera.[/QUOTE]

    Well, there are always 2 sides of pros: pros that will not use PP and pros with so much PP... as you said, it depends on their job requirements.

    what I m trying to say here is that those NG pros are really pros and they dont do PP and yet they can come out with superb photos...
    but some of ppl in this forum think that ALL PROS do PP! which i think that statement not true!

  7. #147
    Senior Member Kit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Upper Bukit Timah
    Posts
    11,651

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    If you attended a seminar recently held by National Geography @ Traders Hotel, you would hear loud and clear from one of the NG photographer that he DID NOT do any PP at all!
    That is because his job require him to come up with photo as 'natural' as possible without any 'help' from PP.
    I'm sure he doesn't take B&W photos. That would not look natural except for the colour blind.....

  8. #148
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Little India
    Posts
    68

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    IMHO,
    Photography is art. So, PP is OK to express the photographer's intention. Just like paintings, writings, etc. That is ART.

    But, it is UNETHICAL to claim that the photo is non-PP whereas it IS.

    Honesty and integrity matters, even in art.

  9. #149

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    I'm sure he/she also has access to every filter and equipment to allow them to get most of stuff done in camera.
    Well, there are always 2 sides of pros: pros that will not use PP and pros with so much PP... as you said, it depends on their job requirements.

    what I m trying to say here is that those NG pros are really pros and they dont do PP and yet they can come out with superb photos...
    but some of ppl in this forum think that ALL PROS do PP! which i think that statement not true! [/QUOTE]

    Just out of curiosity, how many professionals, including the claimed 'NG' ones did you work with personally, for what period of time, and did you see their entire workflow even before the files came out of the camera?

  10. #150

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    Well, there are always 2 sides of pros: pros that will not use PP and pros with so much PP... as you said, it depends on their job requirements.

    what I m trying to say here is that those NG pros are really pros and they dont do PP and yet they can come out with superb photos...
    but some of ppl in this forum think that ALL PROS do PP! which i think that statement not true!
    Just out of curiosity, how many professionals, including the claimed 'NG' ones did you work with personally, for what period of time, and did you see their entire workflow even before the files came out of the camera?[/QUOTE]

    hehe relax bro.. no need to say until so sarcastic
    i heard that statement from NG pros and shared it here...that's all!
    i m not guru.. i m not pros... i m amateur.. i m newbie... and still lotsa things to learning... so of course i don't know the whole processes...

    fyi, i m not against PP here... and as the matter of fact, i m also doing and learning PP wor...

    peace!!

  11. #151
    Member 9V-Orion Images's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Autenticate ALGRN @ 7987.8270
    Posts
    1,760

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    If you attended a seminar recently held by National Geography @ Traders Hotel, you would hear loud and clear from one of the NG photographer that he DID NOT do any PP at all!
    That is because his job require him to come up with photo as 'natural' as possible without any 'help' from PP.
    Seems like an exaggeration on his part, even if he does no post-processing himself, there are still editing departments involved in post-production and post-processing before an issue of the magazine goes to print.

    Quote Originally Posted by National Geographic Magazine - Blogs



    Film is dead, long live film
    Posted On 2008.05.01

    ...

    And finally, Fritz observes that digital requires time to handle the images after they are shot. “With film, the image is pretty much set when you shoot it. But with digital you have to deal with all this post-processing to get the images to look like you saw them.

    ...
    Last edited by 9V-Orion Images; 31st December 2009 at 01:16 AM.
    CS Aviation / Flickr
    Per aspera ad astra

  12. #152

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post

    hehe relax bro.. no need to say until so sarcastic
    i heard that statement from NG pros and shared it here...that's all!
    i m not guru.. i m not pros... i m amateur.. i m newbie... and still lotsa things to learning... so of course i don't know the whole processes...

    fyi, i m not against PP here... and as the matter of fact, i m also doing and learning PP wor...

    peace!!

    I wasn't being sarcastic. Really. I aszked a straightforward question.

    I was just curious, because you spoke with such steadfast assurance and firm authority, and made such absolute statements that I was wondering if you had the benefit of working alongside many CS professionals.

    Peace.
    Last edited by Dream Merchant; 31st December 2009 at 01:40 AM.

  13. #153

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    If you attended a seminar recently held by National Geography @ Traders Hotel, you would hear loud and clear from one of the NG photographer that he DID NOT do any PP at all!
    That is because his job require him to come up with photo as 'natural' as possible without any 'help' from PP.
    "one of the NG photographers" said such a bold statement?
    I assume he shoot in digital?
    [he can't be shooting in film, or else, without post processing, his photo will still be in the film canister."]
    I assume he shoot in RAW format?
    and he just show or published his "raw" works, with no Post-Processing?

    If this is true, i really need to see his work and know what camera he use.
    Cos i will definitely buy his camera that shoot raw aka "digital negatives" that absolutely need no PP at all.

  14. #154

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    I wasn't being sarcastic. Really. I aszked a straightforward question.

    I was just curious, because you spoke with such steadfast assurance and firm authority, and made such absolute statements that I was wondering if you had the benefit of working alongside many CS professionals.

    Peace.
    hehehe..

    ok.. lemme share more details about that seminar..

    there were 2 photographers from NG..
    one is portrait specialist and the other is landscape specialist...
    (i m seriously can't remember their name.. i m so sorry).

    anyway, portrait specialist said that he did not touch up his photos... (crop may be yes?! if need to fit into magazine or something like dat. but he did not do something such as: sharpening, change contrast etc). he even jokingly said that he did not want to spend too much time in front of the computer.
    but yeah, once in awhile he does PP only when he want to convert color to b/w (no sharpening/contrast etc except color to b/w)
    so yeah, i dont know whether he was exaggerating or not like what 9V-Orion Images said...

    the landscape guy is different story... he did lotsa PP... becoz he did lotsa "stitch" using adobe and need to touch up a lil bit here and there after the "stitch" completed (seriously, i don't know how much touch up he did before and after "stitch" processes).
    and yeah, he uses filters (ND grad etc)...

    so yeah.. those are interesting things i found out during that seminar...

    anyway, wishing you all a happy new year 2010!!!!

    peace!!

  15. #155

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by iNotion View Post
    "one of the NG photographers" said such a bold statement?
    I assume he shoot in digital?
    [he can't be shooting in film, or else, without post processing, his photo will still be in the film canister."]
    I assume he shoot in RAW format?
    and he just show or published his "raw" works, with no Post-Processing?

    If this is true, i really need to see his work and know what camera he use.
    Cos i will definitely buy his camera that shoot raw aka "digital negatives" that absolutely need no PP at all.
    ah yeah... he shoot in RAW... but he said he only convert it to JPEG without any touch up... he even said that he can show anyone who asking him to see the original file.... (btw, i m referring to NG portrait photographer, not the landscape one)

  16. #156

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    I wont be surprised that certain magazines will not accept PP'ed work. They'd probably ask for the raw files and do their own.

  17. #157

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    hehe relax bro.. no need to say until so sarcastic
    i heard that statement from NG pros and shared it here...that's all!
    i m not guru.. i m not pros... i m amateur.. i m newbie... and still lotsa things to learning... so of course i don't know the whole processes...

    fyi, i m not against PP here... and as the matter of fact, i m also doing and learning PP wor...

    peace!!
    I hope you have a clear understanding what post processing is.

    White balancing, burning, dodging.. or even clicking on "auto tone" = Post-processing.

    Anything that looks surreal = Photo/Image Editing, and NOT called post-process

  18. #158

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by jazzspeed View Post
    ah yeah... he shoot in RAW... but he said he only convert it to JPEG without any touch up... he even said that he can show anyone who asking him to see the original file.... (btw, i m referring to NG portrait photographer, not the landscape one)
    Read this.
    He said, "convert Raw to jpeg, w/o PP", right?

    To be viewed or printed, the output from a camera's image sensor has to be processed, that is, converted to a photographic rendering of the scene, and then stored in a standard raster graphics format such as JPEG. This post processing, whether done in-camera or later in a raw file converter, involves a number of operations, typically including:

    defective pixel removal replacing data in known bad locations with interpolations from nearby locations

    demosaicing interpolating the partial raw data received from the color-filtered image sensor into a matrix of colored pixels.

    noise reduction trading off detail for smoothness by removing small fluctuations
    color translation converting from the color space defined by the spectral sensitivities of the image sensor to an internal working color space such as CIE XYZ

    white balancing accounting for color temperature of the light that was used to take the photograph

    color space transformation conversion from the internal working color space to the output color space (typically sRGB for JPEG)

    bit-depth reduction and gamma compression for JPEG files, the 10 or more bits per pixel of color data stored in the raw file are nonlinearly reduced to 8 bits per pixel for a smaller file size.

    compression for example JPEG compression

    Cameras and image processing software may also perform additional processing to improve image quality, for example:

    • removal of systematic noise bias frame subtraction and flat-field correction
    • dark frame subtraction
    • optical correction lens distortion correction, vignetting correction, and color fringing correction
    • contrast enhancement
    • increasing visual acuity by unsharp masking
    • dynamic range compression lighten shadow regions without blowing out highlight regions

  19. #159

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    I think there's a lot of confusion between post-processing and Digital Imaging or Digital Image Manipulation aka making a fat person look thin, changing or altering reality etc.

    Truth be told, it's virtually impossible for us to see the images we do, presented in the usual manner, without any form of post-processing ... unless we want to look at a whole bunch of data in it's native form.

    At any rate, even if we do not want to look at the files, a whole lot of pre-determined and/or adjustable parameters of post-processing already occurs the moment the shutter of a digital camera is depressed.

    I seriously fail to see the point of these prolonged and often painful discussions.

  20. #160

    Default Re: is PP really needed???

    Quote Originally Posted by Dream Merchant View Post
    At any rate, even if we do not want to look at the files, a whole lot of pre-determined and/or adjustable parameters of post-processing already occurs the moment the shutter of a digital camera is depressed.
    If you shoot in Jpeg, your camera will automatically post process the image for you.
    But if you shoot in Raw, you will have more control of the post-processing.

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 36789 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •