Why we need Post Processing?

[kentwong81]

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]

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.

 

[musicpls]

because the answer is about what you want.

what you want your photos to be?

is that simple.

could not agree more!

 

[kentwong81]

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.

 

[marios_pittas]

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]

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.

 

[Khowen]

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".

 

[ed9119]

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

 

[TriggerHappy]

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]

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]

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 !!!

 

[johnlim]

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.

 

[jepnxs]

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.

 

[kentwong81]

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 !!!

Who kena ZAP? What happened actually?

 

[kentwong81]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Khowen]

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]

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]

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