Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 22

Thread: Edited?

  1. #1

    Default Edited?

    Hi,

    How do I differentiate bewteen unedited and edited photos, especially for the portraiture? Thanks.

  2. #2
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by ipsp79 View Post
    Hi,

    How do I differentiate bewteen unedited and edited photos, especially for the portraiture? Thanks.
    unedited usually refer to "straight out from the camera", edited can refer to many meanings,
    #1, edit a bunch of images, discard the unusable image and keep the keepers. (sorting)
    #2, edit an image, adjust white balance, exposure, level etc... (basic post processing)
    #3, remove some elements from the photos or alter the appearance, etc pimples, hairs, enlarge iris, or changing the colors (advance post processing / touching up)

    depend on the level of editing and the skills of the photographers, some time you can easily tell sometime you don't.

    anyway, IMO a good "straight out from the camera" photo is always better than a badly edited photo.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  3. #3
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,392

    Default Re: Edited?

    Certain type of photography is impossible without editing, e.g. IR, HDR. The point is not whether a picture was edited or not but rather how the results is. Purist ideas of 'only straight from the camera is good' have a certain point in getting the basics right, but they miss the point that what matters is the end result, not so much how it was done.
    EOS

  4. #4

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    unedited usually refer to "straight out from the camera", edited can refer to many meanings,
    #1, edit a bunch of images, discard the unusable image and keep the keepers. (sorting)
    #2, edit an image, adjust white balance, exposure, level etc... (basic post processing)
    #3, remove some elements from the photos or alter the appearance, etc pimples, hairs, enlarge iris, or changing the colors (advance post processing / touching up)

    depend on the level of editing and the skills of the photographers, some time you can easily tell sometime you don't.

    anyway, IMO a good "straight out from the camera" photo is always better than a badly edited photo.
    Hi Catchlight,

    Can I post one pre-wedding photo here and tell me whether that photo has undergone basic post processing and advance post processing? Just curious to know. Thanks.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by Octarine View Post
    Certain type of photography is impossible without editing, e.g. IR, HDR. The point is not whether a picture was edited or not but rather how the results is. Purist ideas of 'only straight from the camera is good' have a certain point in getting the basics right, but they miss the point that what matters is the end result, not so much how it was done.
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    what's the point of buying a very expensive lens and cam if you just want to edit your pictures? rather buy a point and shot cam then PS.....
    IMHO if you trust your skills being a good photographer then no need to edit your pictures but if your in doubt then you must have a good software for editing.
    Just like a woman to know how pretty she is take out her make up, with the make up is on everything is fake..

  6. #6
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by ipsp79 View Post
    Hi Catchlight,

    Can I post one pre-wedding photo here and tell me whether that photo has undergone basic post processing and advance post processing? Just curious to know. Thanks.
    if it is not your own, you post a link so we know who is the original creator.

    like I said before, the skills of photographer play an important role, a good photographer can get 80% right in the camera, the post processing is just make it perfect.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  7. #7

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by lenechar View Post
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    what's the point of buying a very expensive lens and cam if you just want to edit your pictures? rather buy a point and shot cam then PS.....
    IMHO if you trust your skills being a good photographer then no need to edit your pictures but if your in doubt then you must have a good software for editing.
    Just like a woman to know how pretty she is take out her make up, with the make up is on everything is fake..
    Going by that angle, what's the point of shooting? Just create your picture from blank via PS.

    If a person can theoretically create a dslr-like quality picture starting from a blank white canvas in PS, does that make him any less-skilled than a good photographer? Where do we draw the line?

    I think editing and photography require different skillsets, though there is an overlap. The only reason I get curious if a picture is edited or not is to know what I can and can't do with a camera (learning process and all that stuff). Helps me adjust my expectations (that and I'm lazy. Why spend hours and hours PP-ing when I can achieve the same effect with a single shutter click? ). No matter how good you are with a camera, you are always bound by reality. Many times, the ideal situation you would like to take won't show up, but it can reach pretty close. IMO, that's when digital PP comes in. It helps you realize what you truly envisioned.

    Check out the Before and After Digital PP-ing thread. A lot of those pictures already look good out of the camera, but after editing they are really stunning. Does that take away from the person's skills in photography?

  8. #8
    Member Irvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    North? South? East? West?
    Posts
    1,037

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by lenechar View Post
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    u can be both. why not?
    Google is your friend. Make use of it.

  9. #9
    Member Irvine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    North? South? East? West?
    Posts
    1,037

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by symmetrix View Post
    Going by that angle, what's the point of shooting? Just create your picture from blank via PS.

    If a person can theoretically create a dslr-like quality picture starting from a blank white canvas in PS, does that make him any less-skilled than a good photographer? Where do we draw the line?

    I think editing and photography require different skillsets, though there is an overlap. The only reason I get curious if a picture is edited or not is to know what I can and can't do with a camera (learning process and all that stuff). Helps me adjust my expectations (that and I'm lazy. Why spend hours and hours PP-ing when I can achieve the same effect with a single shutter click? ). No matter how good you are with a camera, you are always bound by reality. Many times, the ideal situation you would like to take won't show up, but it can reach pretty close. IMO, that's when digital PP comes in. It helps you realize what you truly envisioned.

    Check out the Before and After Digital PP-ing thread. A lot of those pictures already look good out of the camera, but after editing they are really stunning. Does that take away from the person's skills in photography?
    second this..

    lenechar, to alot of ppl, post processing is like polishing ur own work before u put them on display. look at the renowned photographers from all over the world. look at their pictures, r u gonna tell me tat their pictures r completely free from post processing?
    Google is your friend. Make use of it.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    like I said before, the skills of photographer play an important role, a good photographer can get 80% right in the camera, the post processing is just make it perfect.
    Agreed. A picture with great content and composition will straightaway stand out before editing. Editing is to make it perfect.
    If you think that only PS can bring out your photo, most likely your photo doesn't have a great content.
    Kent Wong Photography |Leica Q & Leica M-P 240 | 75 & 28mm Summilux

  11. #11
    Member tortise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Commonwealth
    Posts
    771

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by lenechar View Post
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    what's the point of buying a very expensive lens and cam if you just want to edit your pictures? rather buy a point and shot cam then PS.....
    IMHO if you trust your skills being a good photographer then no need to edit your pictures but if your in doubt then you must have a good software for editing.
    Just like a woman to know how pretty she is take out her make up, with the make up is on everything is fake..
    I feel there is no need for such a skewed stand on this issue, and it has been debated in another thread with interesting and informative stuff that enlightened me when i read it http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/threa...-really-needed. one of the points is that the logic in our cameras also counts as post processing, developing film is also post processing. don't think anyone buys the 'expensive cam and lens' just to edit the photos, but just as part of the process so that they can capture a better shot (combined with their skill) and them make it even better later. in our learning process our strengths in photography and pp vary at different stages, true, there might be a stage where we are better editors than photographers but then that is when you strive to take a better photo to complement that.
    Slow...yeah, steady... not really
    My Flickr | APAD2010

  12. #12

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    if it is not your own, you post a link so we know who is the original creator.

    like I said before, the skills of photographer play an important role, a good photographer can get 80% right in the camera, the post processing is just make it perfect.
    Hi, the person inside the photo is me.


  13. #13
    Moderator catchlights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Punggol, Singapore
    Posts
    21,902

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by ipsp79 View Post
    Hi, the person inside the photo is me.

    there is no editing done.

    I can even see the sensor dust spots here and there.
    Shoot to Live, Live to Shoot
    www.benjaminloo.com | iStock portfolio

  14. #14
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,392

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by lenechar View Post
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    what's the point of buying a very expensive lens and cam if you just want to edit your pictures? rather buy a point and shot cam then PS.....
    IMHO if you trust your skills being a good photographer then no need to edit your pictures but if your in doubt then you must have a good software for editing.
    Just like a woman to know how pretty she is take out her make up, with the make up is on everything is fake..
    Do you really believe that all those pictures in magazines (be it fashion or NetGeo) are straight from the cam? What is this for a silly discussion about photographer vs. editor? Do you judge a cook by his pan and knife or by the taste of the meal (= result)? Again: please show me IR pictures without editing. Did you notice that certain effects in pictures cannot be achieved straight from the cam? Or maybe that the Picture Style effect in the camera is not what you need and you would like to do it in a different way? If not, and if you are just into taking pictures of reality, pure as they are, then please do so. But don't impose your standards to others by putting down people who edit their pictures.
    As pointed out by others, read the existing threads about the very same topic. No point that you start riding the dead horse again. And if you read my posting properly you will notice that I gave some merits to the idea 'straight from the cam' (which excludes further editing).
    EOS

  15. #15

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by ipsp79 View Post
    Hi, the person inside the photo is me.
    Definitely ZERO editing. I mean, the photog did not even bother to clean up the sensor dust!!!
    Alpha

  16. #16

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by lenechar View Post
    does it mean that you would like to be remember as good editor than a good photographer?
    what's the point of buying a very expensive lens and cam if you just want to edit your pictures? rather buy a point and shot cam then PS.....
    IMHO if you trust your skills being a good photographer then no need to edit your pictures but if your in doubt then you must have a good software for editing.
    Just like a woman to know how pretty she is take out her make up, with the make up is on everything is fake..
    The point is to create pleasing/thoughtful images.
    Make ppl feel good and happy viewing them (eg. flowers, landscapes, portraits). Invoke a thoughtful response (ie. reportage; social; portraits; still life; etc)
    Its about the thoughtful application of editing.
    What is the point you show ppl their oily, pimply face and declare that its a good truthful photo? To hurt their feelings? To tell them they are not beautiful? Tell it to friends and family?
    Yes, use photo taking skills to take good photos, but apply editing to make them the best that they can be.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by catchlights View Post
    there is no editing done.

    I can even see the sensor dust spots here and there.
    Hi Catchlights,

    Thanks for your feedback. Your eyes are very sharp because can even see the dust.

  18. #18
    Senior Member sinned79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    10,849

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by ipsp79 View Post
    Hi Catchlights,

    Thanks for your feedback. Your eyes are very sharp because can even see the dust.
    i also can see. in fact most of us can see. i have marked them out so you can see for yourself.



    sensor dust is very easily spotted when u shoot a photo at small aperture.

  19. #19

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by sinned79 View Post
    i also can see. in fact most of us can see. i have marked them out so you can see for yourself.
    Heh. You even missed some. Definitely sloppy photog work.
    Alpha

  20. #20
    Senior Member sinned79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    10,849

    Default Re: Edited?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rashkae View Post
    Heh. You even missed some. Definitely sloppy photog work.
    haha lazy lah, i leave it to the TS to spot the dust game haha.

    I hope TS dun pay alot for this shoot...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

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
  •