Photographing w/o post-processing

[Ferderico]

I love PP. It is limited by your own creativity.
If your photos turn out to be the way you imagine it, then there is no need to PP.

again, to each his own.

 

[kentwong81]

It really depends on how you want to present your photos, especially for commercial, the level of your expectation and creativity.
PP can give artistics impact on the photos and helps to make certain level of amendment(unless you go back to the same place same time to shoot again). Or from another point of view, if PP, you do the processing manually yourself rather than letting the camera processor do it automatically for you. And camera processor is not human, sometimes it does not follow what we would expect.
Anyway, most importantly we enjoy ourselves in photography as a hobby. How we do it or whether the photos are nice or not doesn't matter as it is very subjective and diversed among the people around the world.

 

[allenleonhart]

i realised this qn is only asked by ppl who has never shot film before.

 

[daredevil123]

i realised this qn is only asked by ppl who has never shot film before.

Bingo!

 

[henry soh]

Hi, The camera is not always correct and some times makes photos not intended by the photographer. So, a PP is helpful and useful to make the necessary adjustments. A device is not always accurate or reliable to recognise every difficult lighting conditions, though made by human. To rectify the slight misjudgement, a PP is needed.
A simply PP system is good enough to do the job required rather than a sophicated one which takes time to learn. So, photography without PP leaves the photographer unfinished with his work of art.

 

[mayhemics]

Hi, The camera is not always correct and some times makes photos not intended by the photographer. So, a PP is helpful and useful to make the necessary adjustments. A device is not always accurate or reliable to recognise every difficult lighting conditions, though made by human. To rectify the slight misjudgement, a PP is needed.
A simply PP system is good enough to do the job required rather than a sophicated one which takes time to learn. So, photography without PP leaves the photographer unfinished with his work of art.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Lionheart86]

Hmm, since PP is part and parcel of the photographer's workflow (for most anyway), then all those talk of this and that camera IQ, brand etc etc is better than another is shallow in a sense. Moral of the story, it doesn't matter which brand you compare or boast about 'cos photos will be PP one way or the other.......:bsmilie:

Hi, The camera is not always correct and some times makes photos not intended by the photographer. So, a PP is helpful and useful to make the necessary adjustments. A device is not always accurate or reliable to recognise every difficult lighting conditions, though made by human. To rectify the slight misjudgement, a PP is needed.
A simply PP system is good enough to do the job required rather than a sophicated one which takes time to learn. So, photography without PP leaves the photographer unfinished with his work of art.

 

[rainxp]

Below example editted by me for discussion.

Before ...

After ...

Comments welcome.

 

[sinned79]

Below example editted by me for discussion.

Before ...

After ...

Comments welcome.

pardon me but both looks awful to me. very unnatural colors.

 

[rainxp]

Removed as requested.

 

[rainxp]

pardon me but both looks awful to me. very unnatural colors.

The original photo was taken from some web not by me. Let learn from each other by input our comments.

 

[allenleonhart]

Bingo!

:bsmilie: yep.

back then in film, there wasnt a thing called a "preview image".

what you get was what you are fiddling in the darkroom... its film processing.

now just because camera does the processing so u get the "image" doesnt mean it was what you saw or intended. that is where photoshop comes in:sweat:

 

[sinned79]

With some PP based on the photo provided for open discussion...

good work but i find the colors too saturated (blue is too blue, black is too black) for me. i still prefer my own original unedited version.

i noticed your PP is overly done and quite saturated which makes the colors look unnatural.

you can also notice its over sharpen too, look at the edges of the rooftop of the roof.

btw, as a form of courtesy/copyrights, please kindly let me know you are using my image for educational and discussion purpose. Please kindly remove my image by today thanks.

 

[allenleonhart]

good work but i find the colors too saturated (blue is too blue, black is too black) for me. i still prefer my own original unedited version.

i noticed your PP is overly done and quite saturated which makes the colors look unnatural.

you can also notice its over sharpen too, look at the edges of the rooftop of the roof.

btw, as a form of courtesy/copyrights, please kindly let me know you are using my image for educational and discussion purpose. Please kindly remove my image by today thanks.

rofl he murdered your image?:bsmilie:

 

[Philomae]

i also perfer my original unedited version of photos i took as it looks more natural.

 

[kentwong81]

I think your concept is wrong. The JPEG photos you get right from your camera are not original as they are already "edited" by the camera processor based on the basic settings you have setup in the Menu. Many people like this because they can get their JPEGs quickly and conveniently from the camera without painfully process every single photos themselves.

What post-processing means is that we human take over the role of the camera processor to process the original unedited version of photos which are in RAW format. The settings offered by the software like Photoshop and Lightroom are more advanced than the camera processor as they can provide more creative and artistic impact onto your photos. Post-processing is exactly the same as how the people processed the films in the darkroom decades ago.

i also perfer my original unedited version of photos i took as it looks more natural.

 

[derrickder]

What's the point of PPing if your photograph doesn't look good to begin with. But that said, PPing can also turn a bad photograph into something good if you know how

 

[Lionheart86]

Ha ha ha.....I'll go a bit further on this. A lot of forumners or even professional photographer's pics are photoshopped one way or the other to make them look good on screen and print...air brush so to speak or like a lady putting on make up before she venture out if put it another way. Moral, it's part and parcel of a photographer's workflow irregardless of brand of camera, IQ, lens used. So no point arguing about camera IQ etc etc...:bsmilie:

What's the point of PPing if your photograph doesn't look good to begin with. But that said, PPing can also turn a bad photograph into something good if you know how

 

[jasonyjw]

i want to focus more on the clouds and the sky.

before..

after..

i want to give this photo a really old feel.

before..

after..

it depends what message you want to bring across to your audiences

 

[weimng]

Shoot film la!
Only the choice of film matters in 35mm film photography.