Why we need Post Processing?


kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,793
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#1
If we have a good DSLR with good lens and filters, why do we need post processing? Considering the huge money we have invested in DSLR and lens, is it worth to spend hours again in post processing to achieve the quality of photos like oil paintings? This is a question I always ask myself but I cannot find a good answer yet. :dunno:

In my opinion, post processing should be meant for point and shoot cameras with limited functions and capabilities. To achieve DSLR-like quality, certain post processing in Photoshop or Lightroom has to be done. What do you think? :think:
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#2
If we have a good DSLR with good lens and filters, why do we need post processing? Considering the huge money we have invested in DSLR and lens, is it worth to spend hours again in post processing to achieve the quality of photos like oil paintings? This is a question I always ask myself but I cannot find a good answer yet. :dunno:

In my opinion, post processing should be meant for point and shoot cameras with limited functions and capabilities. To achieve DSLR-like quality, certain post processing in Photoshop or Lightroom has to be done. What do you think? :think:
because the answer is about what you want.

what you want your photos to be?

is that simple.
 

kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,793
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#4
I see. But isn't it fake the photo will look like after plenty of post processings? While a little bit of post processings are still acceptable for me, sometimes I notice that some people put in too much post processings by Photoshop and make the photos look like oil paintings and not real. I know they want to add-on some imaginations but somehow a digital photo is still a digital photo, it is not comparable to oil paintings in terms of value. Sorry to those who like to use a lot of post processings. This is just my personal opinion.
 

Jun 24, 2003
837
0
0
Visit site
#5
I see. But isn't it fake the photo will look like after plenty of post processings? While a little bit of post processings are still acceptable for me, sometimes I notice that some people put in too much post processings by Photoshop and make the photos look like oil paintings and not real. I know they want to add-on some imaginations but somehow a digital photo is still a digital photo, it is not comparable to oil paintings in terms of value. Sorry to those who like to use a lot of post processings. This is just my personal opinion.
Not every photo is meant to capture what we see (not that what we see is what the camera captures, lenses, ISO, over expose, under expose, "right exposure", when you click the shutter, composition etc.). :)

-- marios
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#6
I see. But isn't it fake the photo will look like after plenty of post processings? While a little bit of post processings are still acceptable for me, sometimes I notice that some people put in too much post processings by Photoshop and make the photos look like oil paintings and not real. I know they want to add-on some imaginations but somehow a digital photo is still a digital photo, it is not comparable to oil paintings in terms of value. Sorry to those who like to use a lot of post processings. This is just my personal opinion.
yes, no right or wrong.

萝匍青菜,各有所爱 , to each it own.



:)
 

Last edited:

Khowen

New Member
Jan 19, 2006
179
0
0
#7
Spending hours in doing post processing doesn't necessary guarantee that the pictures will turn out beautiful. One needs to have the right skill and knowledge in using tools like photoshop in order to achieve the ideal results. In my opinion, post processing is an art by itself and I don't quite agree that post processing should only meant for pictures produced by compact cameras.

I am actually looking at it this way; on top of all the expensive lenses, body, and other accessories, photoshop is just another tool to add on to the list of photography items for producing pictures that hold impact. And well, if I am in the mood of being a "pure-photographer", I will stick to the principle of not editing the photos, and then proudly declare its organic form. But if I suddenly feel like being a little creative, I will bring out my photoshop and start to apply the skill and knowledge to decorate my photos, and then proudly present it's new (and hopefully nicer) form. So I guess, I am sort of repeating what catchlights said: "It's about what you want".:)
 

Last edited:

ed9119

Moderator
Staff member
Mar 11, 2002
11,014
38
48
56
Singapore
www.walkeast.com
#8
my PP on a single image is usually about 30 sec ..... adjust a little contrast/brightness, a little burn or dodge , sharpen, resize and its done

PP can take from 10 sec to 10hrs

comparing the need to PP for Point and Shoot cameras and DSLRs is like comparing buying a shirt from Giordano (like it or not your body has to fit into the nearest fitting size) or tailoring a shirt SPECIFICALLY to your tastes and requirements
 

Dec 18, 2004
38
0
0
#9
If you have shot with film cameras before...a certain amount of post processing also takes place in the darkroom. Its no different from what we do now digitally.
 

mabmy

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2009
721
0
16
Simei
#10
Post processing, or pp in this matter, why do you think it has been named as so? You see, taking a picture, with all the mambo jumbo settings that have been applied on the camera is a part of a process in taking a picture as well. Sometimes it does not gives you the result that you may hope for. This is where post process kicks in. Its all part of the process of achievingthe picture that you want. Lets put it this way, as a landscape shooter myself, exposing for both foreground and the sky may require more then just an nd or a gnd filter. Sometimes i have to blend multiple exposures to achieve what my eyes saw at that moment then and there. There is only so much that a good camera and a good lens can do. Its all a matter of choice. If you only shoot in jpeg and you think that no pp has been done, I think you will then need to do alot of reading. :) I do agee however some people do pp to the extreme.
 

ed9119

Moderator
Staff member
Mar 11, 2002
11,014
38
48
56
Singapore
www.walkeast.com
#11
spam message deleted and spammer ZAPPED as requested.
I'm all sympathetic and everything caring BUT ..... WHAT ON EARTH has this anything to do with the Thread Title "Why we need Post Processing?"

Barging in like this and going immediately off-thread is very rude.... ZAP !!!
 

Last edited:

johnlim

New Member
Feb 26, 2004
554
0
0
#12
In my opinion, post processing should be meant for point and shoot cameras with limited functions and capabilities. To achieve DSLR-like quality, certain post processing in Photoshop or Lightroom has to be done. What do you think? :think:


To those with more discerning eyes(more experience in photography), they will know why post processing is essential. Whereas to the average people(especially newbie), a photo is a photo.
 

#13
In my opinion, post processing should be meant for point and shoot cameras with limited functions and capabilities. To achieve DSLR-like quality, certain post processing in Photoshop or Lightroom has to be done. What do you think? :think:
would you tell someone not to add salt just because he is already eating a $200 steak?

got a friend who puts ketchup on practically anything that he eats.

it's just a matter of personal taste. :)
 

Last edited:

kentwong81

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2010
1,793
1
38
Singapore
www.kentwongphoto.com
#15
Another question:

Can I use Photoshop/Lightroom to edit a photo taken by a cheap camera, let say cost SGD200, to achieve a DSLR-like quality? I know Photoshop is a magic tool. There's no "impossible" in its dictionary. If I were a Photoshop master, would it be possible? :think:
If so, then we can save a lot of money from buying expensive cameras and lens. Hmmmm...
 

Khowen

New Member
Jan 19, 2006
179
0
0
#16
Who kena ZAP? What happened actually?
I think someone just put up a post to invite everyone here for some kind of event. Which, ya, not related to this thread :sweat:
 

wildcat

Senior Member
Sep 8, 2004
3,269
1
38
Bedok
#17
Another question:

Can I use Photoshop/Lightroom to edit a photo taken by a cheap camera, let say cost SGD200, to achieve a DSLR-like quality? I know Photoshop is a magic tool. There's no "impossible" in its dictionary. If I were a Photoshop master, would it be possible? :think:
If so, then we can save a lot of money from buying expensive cameras and lens. Hmmmm...
You can use Photoshop to process any pictures, even those from phone cameras, cheap $200 cameras, scanned in film photos.

However "DSLR-like" quality means what? Can you process a 6MP pixel picture to a 21MP pixel picture? Yes but it won't be the same as a 21MP picture, taken with a 21MP camera. If you're asking whether a compact camera 1/2.3" sensor (0.28 cm²) PP already can be as good as a 8.64 cm² sensor size full frame DSLR, then sadly, the answer is no.
 

Last edited:

Khowen

New Member
Jan 19, 2006
179
0
0
#18
Another question:

Can I use Photoshop/Lightroom to edit a photo taken by a cheap camera, let say cost SGD200, to achieve a DSLR-like quality? I know Photoshop is a magic tool. There's no "impossible" in its dictionary. If I were a Photoshop master, would it be possible? :think:
If so, then we can save a lot of money from buying expensive cameras and lens. Hmmmm...
Don't think so leh. Though Photoshop is a powerful tool, it's not a magic wand. Let's say if a camera doesn't handle high ISO well, and it turns out that the picture taken is filled with noises, I don't think there is any way that these digital noises can be removed.

Not everything broken can be fixed. And if a picture with lesser flaws can be produced, it would definitely save a lot of effort in post processing.;)
 

johnlim

New Member
Feb 26, 2004
554
0
0
#19
Another question:

Can I use Photoshop/Lightroom to edit a photo taken by a cheap camera, let say cost SGD200, to achieve a DSLR-like quality? I know Photoshop is a magic tool. There's no "impossible" in its dictionary. If I were a Photoshop master, would it be possible? :think:
If so, then we can save a lot of money from buying expensive cameras and lens. Hmmmm...
I think you need to find out more about the differences between a dslr & a compact cameras. A Dslr in the wrong hand will still gives you a bad photo. It very much depends on the skill of the photographer.

Photoshop doesn't give a photo the "DSLR" look.
 

yc2005

New Member
May 14, 2009
698
0
0
#20
Another question:

Can I use Photoshop/Lightroom to edit a photo taken by a cheap camera, let say cost SGD200, to achieve a DSLR-like quality? I know Photoshop is a magic tool. There's no "impossible" in its dictionary. If I were a Photoshop master, would it be possible? :think:
If so, then we can save a lot of money from buying expensive cameras and lens. Hmmmm...
No, not possible. You cannot create details not captured.

If it is possible, every one will just use a 0.3 megapix handphone camera and spend the rest of the money on PS or LR
 

Top Bottom