do you guys 'photoshop' often?


Status
Not open for further replies.

foxxkat

New Member
Jun 5, 2007
252
0
0
36
#1
browsing in the Gallery and read quite a lot here at forums, seems a lot do some sort of photo editing after shoot.

any rationale? skills not good enough, or this is just the "norm"?

i thought editing pics are kept to the minimum. except for artistic effects.
 

jeff49er

Senior Member
Apr 11, 2003
1,977
0
0
48
Punggol Park
#2
I try not to. Only cropping and minor adjustments.

I have to admit that apart from not knowing a lot about Photoshop software, I jus dont have time to photo shop every pic I shot. :embrass:
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,692
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#3
If your skills are not good enough, no amount of photoshopping can save you. Post editing is often part of the work flow to enhance photos and bring out their potential to the fullest. Its not about saving bad photos.

Most often, sharpening, colour adjustment, cropping, etc are done in preparation for the final image to be sent to to printers or presentation to clients. Its all part of digital photography. Usage of photoshop does not necessarily means its applying "artistic effects" to photos. There is a line between digital photography and digital art though.
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,692
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#4
I try not to. Only cropping and minor adjustments.

I have to admit that apart from not knowing a lot about Photoshop software, I jus dont have time to photo shop every pic I shot. :embrass:
Its ridiculous to process every shot. That's where selection and editing skills come in handy...
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#5
browsing in the Gallery and read quite a lot here at forums, seems a lot do some sort of photo editing after shoot.

any rationale? skills not good enough, or this is just the "norm"?

i thought editing pics are kept to the minimum. except for artistic effects.
I only edit shots which are acceptable in my eyes. Those that can't make it gets the delete button. And since I'm converting the RAW files, I get to work on it at the conversion stage.
 

#6
I only edit shots which are acceptable in my eyes. Those that can't make it gets the delete button. And since I'm converting the RAW files, I get to work on it at the conversion stage.
Same here, i would usually eyeball those with decent sharpness and appeal, those that is deemed CMI will be banished into my DVD-R "storeroom". Would do a bit of tweaking when converting the RAW to JPEG.
 

Oct 22, 2006
40
0
0
63
#7
Even thought its fun to put time in on a rainy day ( yes I live in the UK :bsmilie: ) I only really use photoshop for some cropping and resizing and also restoring old scanned photos for friends and family , my simple philosophy is - read first - get it right and take it properly , if its not good enough , bin it
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,692
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#8
I just find it pretty hard to understand that some people still think photoshop is about saving bad pictures.....
 

Fotophilic

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2006
2,388
0
36
big tree town
#9
there are no rules to photography. just do what u like, as long as u like the outcome of the picture. don't be too bothered about these things. :D
 

picheers

New Member
Dec 10, 2006
394
0
0
KCH
www.picheers.com
#10
IMHO, a good photo depends on

80% photographer's technique/experience
10% environment/surrounding lighting
5% equipment/photography tools
5% photoshop/post processing (eventhough I used a lot of PS in my picture)

:) Agree?
 

Umeiko

New Member
Apr 27, 2007
830
0
0
#11
I only use photoshop on my favourite picks before I use my printer to print to crop and adjust brightness. Otherwise too lazy to use photoshop. The rest of the photo looks good enough as they are for viewing. :p
 

Yatlapball

Senior Member
May 13, 2006
2,351
0
0
Volcano Land
www.emotively.com
#12
Film -> Procecssing in Dark Room with chemicals etc etc

Digital -> Processing in Digital Dark Room with software

"saving" a bad pic can be done in the traditional dark room too. Trying to pull the exposure or hold back an over-exposed. So actually what are you so concerned about?

The main thing is processing helps you to deliver your final image that you had in mind when you took it. Saving is just one of the minor things that you can do. And not a main purpose of processing.

While digital bodies now are able to deliver decent straight out of cam pictures (provided you got all the settings right), a properly post-processed image will still have the upper hand.
 

Umeiko

New Member
Apr 27, 2007
830
0
0
#14
Film -> Procecssing in Dark Room with chemicals etc etc

Digital -> Processing in Digital Dark Room with software

"saving" a bad pic can be done in the traditional dark room too. Trying to pull the exposure or hold back an over-exposed. So actually what are you so concerned about?

The main thing is processing helps you to deliver your final image that you had in mind when you took it. Saving is just one of the minor things that you can do. And not a main purpose of processing.

While digital bodies now are able to deliver decent straight out of cam pictures (provided you got all the settings right), a properly post-processed image will still have the upper hand.
For Digital -> Processing in camera and stored into memory card
Software processing of photo is already post processing, right?

Not sure if I mis-interpreted your posting. I guess you are not referring to me about being concerned, right?
 

grantyale

Senior Member
Oct 4, 2004
1,798
0
36
Bedok
#15
For Digital -> Processing in camera and stored into memory card
Software processing of photo is already post processing, right?

Not sure if I mis-interpreted your posting. I guess you are not referring to me about being concerned, right?
He's not talking about the standard procedure of developing and printing, but active employment of "darkroom techniques" to better convey the vision.
 

Umeiko

New Member
Apr 27, 2007
830
0
0
#16
He's not talking about the standard procedure of developing and printing, but active employment of "darkroom techniques" to better convey the vision.
:dunno: Anyway, I was just responding to the thread's title. To each, his opinion lah.... no need to be too hard about it.
 

Yatlapball

Senior Member
May 13, 2006
2,351
0
0
Volcano Land
www.emotively.com
#17
Tks grantyale for the clarification on my behalf. You got it :thumbsup: heh.

Umeiko: Uh.. no. I wasn't referring to you. It was just a broad comment.

Anyway if you're talking about Digital being "processed" and stored into a memory card then the analogy is wrongly applied here. The film equivalent of that storing onto your memory card would be the exposure of light onto the film itself. :)
 

Yatlapball

Senior Member
May 13, 2006
2,351
0
0
Volcano Land
www.emotively.com
#18
However... straight out of cam JPG has given a total brand new dimension to photography in terms of deliverables. That you cannot deny. Suddenly news agencies are able to publish articles almost immediately complete with photos. Event photographers are able to deliver the product almost instantaneously (if that is what the customer wants).

me? I still like processing. haha. I'm a hobbyist. So i've got the time to slowly tinker around with settings and all that.
 

Umeiko

New Member
Apr 27, 2007
830
0
0
#19
Tks grantyale for the clarification on my behalf. You got it :thumbsup: heh.

Umeiko: Uh.. no. I wasn't referring to you. It was just a broad comment.

Anyway if you're talking about Digital being "processed" and stored into a memory card then the analogy is wrongly applied here. The film equivalent of that storing onto your memory card would be the exposure of light onto the film itself. :)
Just want to confirm if I am having the right concept.

The exposure of light onto the film is to the exposure of light onto the digital cam sensor. The processor in the digital camera will have done the processing and stored the output into the memory card.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom