[myacreative]

What are your thoughts on editing a photo? I don't have any problems with editing of a photo, generally if its done right you can't even tell. Even if you can tell...doesn't mean its bad IMO. Images straight out of camera rarely have the WOW factor for me that minor tweaks and adjustments or heavy editing can bring.

I've met a couple people that don't believe in any editing what so ever. What you get straight out of camera is what you get.


Discuss......

[djdorifto]

I think editing is just another part of the photography process thats bring out your pictures even more. I love editing my pictures in lightroom.

[Foques]

what I can do in a photoshop, is the same that my dad used to do in his film "shop".

The end product is what matters, imo.

more so, if you use a digital camera, then some editing is done right there, on the spot.

[myacreative]

Originally Posted by Foques

what I can do in a photoshop, is the same that my dad used to do in his film "shop".

The end product is what matters, imo.

more so, if you use a digital camera, then some editing is done right there, on the spot.

truth.

[BillLee]

i dont like using photoshop, only because i'm too lazy to learn how to use it properly.

[CJW]

Most of my shots have some sort of PP, but I haven't gotten too crazy with adding/combining shots. I have started to work a bit with textures and layers though...that seems pretty neat.

[john]

most of my images are heavily edited :|

[Fat Buff Guy]

Originally Posted by Foques

what I can do in a photoshop, is the same that my dad used to do in his film "shop".

The end product is what matters, imo.

more so, if you use a digital camera, then some editing is done right there, on the spot.

Very true, I love being in the dark room, its like photoshop with your hands. no joke.

and your absolulty right, what you do in a dark room when it comes right down to it, isnt that much different than what you do on photoshop, i mean obviously you can do more w/ photoshop but, its still mind blowing to find out what you can do in the dark

[BMDubz]

Photoshop is the dark room for digital photography. I don't see why some people frown upon it when it is obviously there to aid in the final output of the photo. Like what Froques said, the end product is what matters.

[CJW]

I am hoping to post up my first 2 picture merge soon. I cant wait to hear everyone's opinion.

[Phiberglass]

Lots of adjustments in photoshop, masks, highlights, shadows, etc.

[lucky7]

editing is necessary to get all you can out of a digital image. i just laugh at the people that are so "against post processing." they really dont seem to have a clue.

[CJW]

Here is a crude analogy I have used before:

Say you grew up running carbureted motors your whole life...It's all you know-that is all you fix. Then you hear about this "fuel injection" stuff, but it needs computers and stuff...bah humbug...I'll stick to my carbureted motors...

Then after hearing about this new "FI" stuff, you want to get into it, but you don't know anything about it. You down talk it, even tease those who run with it. Eventually, you learn more and more about it, and you realize that it is very customizable, reliable and easy to do.

There will always be those guys out there that are going to run a carb...if it isn't carbed, don't talk to me. There is nothing wrong with that. However, if you expand your knowledge to include FI...you have more to talk about, and if you are a mechanic...you make more.


Yes, its a crude analogy regarding the "to p/p or not to p/p", but for me, its pretty accurate.

[johnny]

Originally Posted by BMDubz

Photoshop is the dark room for digital photography. I don't see why some people frown upon it when it is obviously there to aid in the final output of the photo. Like what Froques said, the end product is what matters.

it gets frowned upon because some people make a hack job out of it. we all have seen some crappy ps jobs. the trick is to ps an image and not let it look ps'ed

[Vudoo4u2]

I think just like film photographers like ansel adams spent more than 75% of their time in the darkroom adjusting exposure, playing with proper lighting all alterations to get the images just right, digital photography shouldnt require camera only output to be considered quality work.

look at 99% of photo work thats hanging in museums, and its all edited somehow. It is a matter of bringing images to life. Movies are all color edited, certain colors bring out certain moods/emotions, others are too dull. I'm sure we've all seen what a handheld movie looks like, and how dull the colors are, and the frame rate etc is junk...then we watch movies and dont question the reality of the coloring....its NOT just a better camera...its a whole process of coloring that brings images to life as we think we see them.

we perceive scenes differently than we can directly photograph them, adjusting the images to be in line with a vision or emotion is hardly against the basic rules of art

[myacreative]

the last 3 posts in this are epic win. awesome analogies and everything guys.

[NYG8GT]

Phew, so Im not the only one around editing my photos lol. I mainly do stuff in Lightroom (which I LOVE after learning it!) to enhance the lighting and provide more pop that my D40 and kit lens just cant provide. Usually I'll do some editing to make it looks like I had a decent lighting setup instead of just an on-board SB600.

For instance, I took this picture on Saturday of a buddies bike. The lighting wasn't great and I didnt use the flash for fill because I didn't think it would work out too well. So I'll adjust the exposure and add some fill light, and add some clarity/contrast/blacks to give the picture whatever pop it didnt have off the camera. Honestly, I'm not that great at taking the picture, but I have become halfway decent doing the editing. I find it's cheaper than buying multiple flashes, a commander, stands, ect. lol. And then other PP stuff will usually be the typical cropping/fixing angles, cloning, and if I want to do something different I'll use the Topaz Adjust filter in CS4 and have some fun.


BEFORE:


AFTER:


Had I had some off camera fill flash going on for the front and rear areas of the bike, I probably would have been able to go with less PP'ing and maybe even a better picture. With a baby on the way, I just cant commit 600 bucks to another SB600 flash and the commander I need to fire them off camera.

[Foques]

ugh.. d40 can provide enough pop. Its what the photographer can't get it to do.. yet.

and shots such as in example, IMO, need to be turned into an HDR or ask for more then one flash.

but it is strictly my opinion.