I just want to do a poll, how many of you out there are anti post processing of pics and belong to the old school of thoughts that real photographers would not do post process. Even if need be is minimal and just to cover pimple etc?
How many of you anti-touch up your pics?
- Thread starter eltonteo
- Start date
Sion
Senior Member
there are one thousand three hundred and forty five threads on this...this discussing is sooo old.
welcome to the digital age. welcome to the internet. welcome to the forum, welcome to clubsnap. welcome yourself.
Those "real photographers" with "old school of thoughts" should go kill yourself then since their retina also converts visible light captured by photoreceptors into electrochemical impulses and transmit it along the optic nerve and into the visual cortex where the signal gets post processed in ways still not fully understood by modern science.
Last edited:
u mean old school b&w no burning, dodging, toning, select more contrasty or less contrasty paper etc???:think::think: or those no consider digital PP equivilent?
Last edited:
What's wrong with touch-up to make it from normal to give it a little wow. I think touching is a good thing no?
Chill lah everyone..... :sweat:
TS just asking who believe in the 'Old School' way of thinking.... not saying Photoshop-ing is a SIN. :bsmilie:
Btw.... I photoshop :thumbsup:
TS just asking who believe in the 'Old School' way of thinking.... not saying Photoshop-ing is a SIN. :bsmilie:
Btw.... I photoshop :thumbsup:
Sion
Senior Member
Those "real photographers" with "old school of thoughts" when facing with a brick wall they can train their minds to tell their eyes not to see it.
They can virtually walk through the wall.
This is no science.
It's just Panda Kungfu.
Sion
Senior Member
Last night in the quiet of the night when everybody was asleep I had sinned.
I secretly opened up Photoshop half looking over my shoulders I furtively retouched a pimple on an XMM's face with the guilt of a sinner.
I'll confess my sin to the priest for forgiveness and salvation.
Last edited:
Last night in the quiet of the night when everybody was asleep I had sinned.
I secretly opened up Photoshop half looking over my shoulders I furtively retouched a pimple on an XMM's face with the guilt of a sinner.
I'll confess my sin to the priest for forgiveness and salvation.
Say "Hail Mary" 100 times.... :nono:
Oh please... The different paper used, the time difference which the light is allowed to exposed to the paper, etc, etc, etc is all PP, just analogue, not digital.
What? Out of sight (and to most, knowledge) mean it is not PP?!?!?!
You mean you look at your dad's old wedding photos, you think nothing is done?!?!?!
What? Out of sight (and to most, knowledge) mean it is not PP?!?!?!
You mean you look at your dad's old wedding photos, you think nothing is done?!?!?!
Last edited:
Maybe TS should rephrase his question to Who is "Anti-Desktop/Laptop Post Processing"?
As we're are aware, post processing of light information is inevitable (By Camera Image processing engine). However, whether or not to use a computer to post process/touchup is another matter and is entirely at the discretion of the photographer.
So, there may be some "Old school" photographers who has refined their skill to such precision that they can get "One Shot, One Kill" with their mastery and manipulation of camera settings/accessories/equipment. And they may not be interested to learn how to use any digital imaging software. And they shoot Jpeg (bcoz no need to PP).
Anyway, I'm one of those who are dependent on Computer based PP.. bcoz no money to buy high-end gears.. :embrass: Very often, due to equipment limitation ( High ISO, or underexpose to achieve acceptable shutter speed to minimize handshake bcoz lens max aperture too small). YMMV..
As we're are aware, post processing of light information is inevitable (By Camera Image processing engine). However, whether or not to use a computer to post process/touchup is another matter and is entirely at the discretion of the photographer.
So, there may be some "Old school" photographers who has refined their skill to such precision that they can get "One Shot, One Kill" with their mastery and manipulation of camera settings/accessories/equipment. And they may not be interested to learn how to use any digital imaging software. And they shoot Jpeg (bcoz no need to PP).
Anyway, I'm one of those who are dependent on Computer based PP.. bcoz no money to buy high-end gears.. :embrass: Very often, due to equipment limitation ( High ISO, or underexpose to achieve acceptable shutter speed to minimize handshake bcoz lens max aperture too small). YMMV..
chey, next time just use two layers of black stocking as soft filter, don't need photoshopLast night in the quiet of the night when everybody was asleep I had sinned.
I secretly opened up Photoshop half looking over my shoulders I furtively retouched a pimple on an XMM's face with the guilt of a sinner.
I'll confess my sin to the priest for forgiveness and salvation.
If non processing means literally you take what you shoot at pure face value, then I do not "non process".
But my post shoot processing is quite mild. I crop now and again (I even do this on photos taken on my mobile phone), and I lighten the whole photo where it has been under exposed, like in poor light situations, or where the background is much brighter than where the subject is standing.
I do not remove or add detail per se, like remove pimples, change the body contours of women like lady magazines do or change colour of hair etc. The details of the person remain as is, warts and all.
Would the TS even consider this unacceptable?
But my post shoot processing is quite mild. I crop now and again (I even do this on photos taken on my mobile phone), and I lighten the whole photo where it has been under exposed, like in poor light situations, or where the background is much brighter than where the subject is standing.
I do not remove or add detail per se, like remove pimples, change the body contours of women like lady magazines do or change colour of hair etc. The details of the person remain as is, warts and all.
Would the TS even consider this unacceptable?
Actually there is a blind spot in everybody's vision as there are no photorecptors in the region of the optic disc, the brain automatically fills in this blind spot with information from the surrounding region exactly like the content-aware fill feature in Adobe Photoshop CS5.Those "real photographers" with "old school of thoughts" when facing with a brick wall they can train their minds to tell their eyes not to see it.
They can virtually walk through the wall.
This is no science.
It's just Panda Kungfu.
Amazing isn't it. :bsmilie:
thanks you all for the contribution... was just wondering many of us out there actually do PP their pics... well, can't deny, old school of thoughts and technic cam to do 1 shot 1 kill... but how many are actually in that league? I am wow by technology and I am also in the IT industry and therefore not anti new trend... but seeing how people PP pics until flawless and to the extent of the photos looks different from the real person really gives me the creep... we take pics to retain the best moments... but making what we retain looks different from the real person, isn't that too much bluffing? I might as well say I used to look like Aaron Kwok, David Beckham or whosoever to my grandchildren when I reach 80 years old?
I am a strong advocate of minimal-touch up of images.
When i first started, I shot badly. So I worked hard for some years and improved vastly. My images were acceptable, as I was rather careful with all the settings, etc...
Then I noticed that the other photographers' images are so nice. I found their secret recently, which unfortunately is way too late ....:sweat:
Now my standard of photography sucks badly, seriously .... but my images have more keepers.
I hate this, but is there any other way?
When i first started, I shot badly. So I worked hard for some years and improved vastly. My images were acceptable, as I was rather careful with all the settings, etc...
Then I noticed that the other photographers' images are so nice. I found their secret recently, which unfortunately is way too late ....:sweat:
Now my standard of photography sucks badly, seriously .... but my images have more keepers.
I hate this, but is there any other way?
Hi Elton
I feel your question becomes a bit more complicated if you add: "I just want to do a poll, how many of you out there are anti post processing of pics, and whether you are shooting for other people or for yourselves, and try to please your customer even if the photos will not longer reflect reality".
The purpose of the photo does dictate the amount of freedom that the digital artist has, e.g. glamor vs advertising vs documentary vs family portrait ...... etc.
just my 2cents
Oh My, I better stop admiring the works of the "fake" National Geographic photographers.
