Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: I have a big question going on in my head.

  1. #1

    Default I have a big question going on in my head.

    I'm a noob at photography, all I do is take pictures, and enjoy the photos I take.
    Every now and then, I see ppl take pictures that are very vibrant, very shape, full of contrast, etc... essentially, photos which I can never take..
    And i always attribute it to the fact that.....

    1) Their camera must be FF , very high end.
    2) The lense they use must be those L ones, good ones...

    And then i was reading this webpage,
    http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...uction_cs3.htm

    And i was seeing the "before" and "after" of post processing....
    I was stunned... seeing how much vastly a picture could improve after doing post processing.

    My question is ....
    "Are all (or almost) all pictures that are sharp, vibrant... all because of post processing? And it's really not possible to take very vibrant pictures straight from the camera?"

    When i say vibrant, sharp pictures, i meant those in the webpage... the ones in the "after post processing" categories.

    Would appreciate if anyone could shed light on this question that i have.

  2. #2

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    How about looking at it this way? What is beauty to you: natural beauty or cosmetically aided beauty?

    The key to a good image starts with the right steps - exposure, composition and focus. While the cam and lenses play a part, don't expect a noob to take good pic with a $70k Leaf. Neither can you expect a pro to take good pic with a pin-hole cam. And use pp as another tool to make a great image even greater.

  3. #3
    Senior Member ovaltinemilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sin jia Po lah
    Posts
    2,820

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    juz my 0.02cents...
    I feel tt post processing is a courtesy of photographers..if a photographer who took pics and do not do any post processing and end up producing disappointing images, I wud tink that he/she is being lazy(if he knows he shd but he didn't)...haha..after taking the photo, the photographer most likely is the person who shd try to bring out the feeling/mood of the photo in post process...as he is the person knows best what intention did he take the photo during the situation for and what was he going to depict in the photo...

    I know high end cams are great...but lower end dslr can also do the job that at least you yourself is proud of(it's ur cam so u shd make urslf happy first right? )...if u search this forum, many of the experienced guys here can reali take "solid" images with probably the same cam as you and leave you perplexed...this all boils down to personal taste and how much you know about producing good images...

    A lousy image can only be improved to make it less lousy but definitely can't wow others... photographers have to take photos that he knows has potential to "wow" others then enhance them with post process to bring out a piece of work...rather than juz a photo...

    by the way, converting raw files to jpg, sharpening when converted to jpg, cropping etc all these are post processes too...do you really think gd images shd come out gd without doing all these?
    ...:::..::.Nikon.::.:::..
    RGB Metering & Focusing.

  4. #4

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mascaporne View Post
    My question is ....
    "Are all (or almost) all pictures that are sharp, vibrant... all because of post processing? And it's really not possible to take very vibrant pictures straight from the camera?"

    When i say vibrant, sharp pictures, i meant those in the webpage... the ones in the "after post processing" categories.

    Would appreciate if anyone could shed light on this question that i have.
    can, up sharpening and contrast and saturation in cam.

    but in the end also same, just that you have less control, become slave of whatever the camera wants. that's quite sad, because now the camera directs what comes out, not you.

    when you think that way, it becomes a lot more justifiable.

  5. #5

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Hmm... so is it possible to take those "after" pics just from the camera itself?

    Or it's a must and only way to use pp to get that effect?

  6. #6

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by mascaporne View Post
    hmm... So is it possible to take those "after" pics just from the camera itself?
    yes.

    Quote Originally Posted by mascaporne View Post
    or it's a must and only way to use pp to get that effect?
    depends.

  7. #7

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.


  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    TPY
    Posts
    2,458

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Firstly, if the composition of the pic is off...... no amount of PP will help..... so the basic must be done right first....

  9. #9
    Senior Member ricleo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Eastern Singapore
    Posts
    6,557

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mascaporne View Post

    And then i was reading this webpage,
    http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...uction_cs3.htm

    And i was seeing the "before" and "after" of post processing....
    I was stunned... seeing how much vastly a picture could improve after doing post processing.
    see this paragraph on the link you shared

    "With Adobe Camera RAW, I set all the parameters and the controls on neutral values, as shown in the following screenshots. I prefer to avoid enhancements with ACR, because its controls are not as fine and advanced as the tool of Photoshop. Converting the file with these settings, you get a very flat, soft file: while it looks bad, it is actually a very "unthouched" image that has the maximimum detail you can extract from the file, and it is very workable with the tools of PS."

    the reason why his "before" images looked so lousy is because all his default parameters, sharpness, contrast, saturation are all set to the lowest/most neutral possible, resulting in the image that looks "bad" before processing.

    If you set the contrast, sharpening and saturation on the camera's JPEG settings to an appropriate level, i believe you would have already reached 50-70% of his processed pics. What's left is whether you want to put in that additional effort to shoot and process the raw images, crop, clone away distractions, enhance colors further, or increase dynamic range.
    A7R3|V12|V15|FE28|MS17|MS35|MS50|50lux|50C|50Artis an|FD85L|FE85|90 cron|
    Σ24|35L|Σ50|135L|70-200G2

  10. #10

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    It takes more than 1 thing to get a good picture. Good post-processing is but one element of the entire process.

  11. #11

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Please read this thread:

    How does a newbie like me, achieve such clarity and definition in a photo?
    http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=668640
    Alpha

  12. #12

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    For those who'd experience from using Kodachrome 25 would certainly agreed that to get it right ( or near perfect ) at the moment the shutter is pressed is very crucial.

    As all who'd used it would know that...when the shutter clicked...it means full stop for that picture. And the film had to sent all the way to Australia for processing, and you won't get to see your result until 3 weeks later.

    In a way, due to these type of difficulties and constrain, all who are learning photography during those period, has to ( no other choice ) be very , very , meticulous in every aspect regarding to the exposure, colour, lighting, composition, subject expression etc.

    That's why there was a popular saying those time...

    if one can handle Kodachrome 25 well...he/she is almost qualified as a pro.
    Last edited by cabbySHE; 22nd March 2010 at 02:30 AM.

  13. #13

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    When you ask these questions, you are no longer a noob since your desire has exceeded your current boundary.

    The immediate answer to your question is yes, vibrant colors can be taken off a camera. The vivid mode offers you that. However majority is dependent on the condition. Tropical sun harsh and unless morning or evening, the mid day can be hazy. E.g it is very difficult to get blue skies her in SIN without filters and post saturation.

    Post processing is to tweak the picture to suit the view. Some camera and dSLR lens tends to produce soft output and soapy feel, thus post sharpening is required. Computer monitor view can handle more saturation because of backlit.

    Leaving everything to camera's in processing can be risky as the camera cannot differentiate between a mouse and a hamster. So the PP is left to people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mascaporne View Post
    ......
    1) Their camera must be FF , very high end.
    2) The lense they use must be those L ones, good ones...
    ....
    And i was seeing the "before" and "after" of post processing....
    I was stunned... seeing how much vastly a picture could improve after doing post processing.

    My question is ....
    "Are all (or almost) all pictures that are sharp, vibrant... all because of post processing? And it's really not possible to take very vibrant pictures straight from the camera?"

    When i say vibrant, sharp pictures, i meant those in the webpage... the ones in the "after post processing" categories.
    ...

  14. #14

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    So that BIG problem of yours is actually not big after all.

    To fully understand your BIG problem, you had to get your hand in to solve that problem yourself...then BIG problem will become small problem and eventually become no problem.

  15. #15

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by cabbySHE View Post
    So that BIG problem of yours is actually not big after all.

    To fully understand your BIG problem, you had to get your hand in to solve that problem yourself...then BIG problem will become small problem and eventually become no problem.
    I think up to now... sometimes i dunno what is possible with just using camera, and what is not possible.

    Take for example, u look at a photo, u like it very much, and u wonder... did they achieve this effect by pp? or because they have special lighting, equipment, lens, camera, etc?

    Maybe i should go read up on photoshop stuff, to understand what is possible , and what is not first.....

    cheers!

  16. #16

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    I can only relate to my own limited experience. There was once I was taking a series of close-up shots of a flower in raw. Amongst the number of shots I took, one looks "wow" to me. The rest, pales in comparison. My initial conclusion then was that the lighting happens to be at the "right" at that moment for ideal amount of shadows and contrast.

    Now I went home, and play around with DPP. I found that I could actually get the same "wow" effect by doing some exposure compensation to the rest of the other shots that initially looks pale. In the end, I took the sharpest pic amongst the lot and adjusted the exposure, getting best of both worlds.

    The lesson I learn is that:
    1) Apart from composition, lighting is equally important.

    2) A fraction of a stop can differentiate between a passable vs good pic, a good vs great pic, a great vs impressive pic, etc. Same goes for with vs without PP.

    3) Ideally, exposure should be on the mark everytime but to newbies like me, getting it close to home and then recover via post-process will still hopefully get you what you want. Always tweak around with exposure to see if can yield better results. Can't quite say the same for composition (unless you only refer to cropping and rotation).


  17. #17
    Deregistered allenleonhart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,656
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    ok. to give u an idea.

    when images were shot with 35mm film, no photographer back then could tell u how it looked like. the only reason they could give u a hard copy was they darkroomed teched it.

    so if ur images are shot digital, the camera does lightroom tech at minimal in it for u. yet u still have to shape the rest urself.

    easy enuf?

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    here
    Posts
    1,350

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    A well-taken photo has much more potential to be fantastic than a badly-taken photo through post-processing.

    Post-processing is not a miracle cure. If what you intended to be sharp is out of focus when you shot it, there is no way post-processing can help you to achieve the sharpness you will (and be able to) get with a correctly focused image.

    There are things that can only be achieved with a properly composed/exposed/etc image. Likewise, there are are some things that are only possible in post-processing.

    How you use both tools (your gear and your post-processing) will define how you present your images.

  19. #19
    Member Radiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    239

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    I am a noob myself. But you should read up more. One notable person you need to read up on is Ansel Adams. If he can take amazing pictures way back that time, I am sure with DSLR, you can as well.
    Canon User

  20. #20

    Default Re: I have a big question going on in my head.

    So to sum it up... the ans is...

    A sharp picture with vibrant colors is the combination of a sharply taken picture + good ps skills?

    (Leave the composition skills alone for the time being, to bring it in will complicate matters)....

    So.. i should stop thinking that camera alone can get those vibrant images? and start learning about what's possible and what's no possible with ps?

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •