wootsk
Deregistered
Nah, maybe can recycle.
Input:
Very blur subject photo
Process:
Soften the Image.
Increase contrast and saturation
Crop Subject out
Sharpen Image
Output:
New CGI character:bsmilie:
Is one considered a photographer if he relies alot on photo-enhancing software?
- Thread starter naheuy
- Start date
- Status
Nah, maybe can recycle.
Input:
Very blur subject photo
Process:
Soften the Image.
Increase contrast and saturation
Crop Subject out
Sharpen Image
Output:
New CGI character:bsmilie:
OoStarDustoO
New Member
But then it actually depends on what you process right?
For example using a photoshop to do cropping? That's perfectly fine right.
Or changing the level of contrast, brightness, exposure which can be done in the camera.
But then if this guy changes the whole sky to make the photo more dramatic, then i guess that is a different story.
I guess it the photo represents faithfully of what our eyes see it without distorting any object in the photo, that should be find. Right?
Even our camera comes with digital creative filters like grainy mode, miniature mode, soft skin mode. Note that those kind of photos are already considered "post processed" within your camera already.
For example using a photoshop to do cropping? That's perfectly fine right.
Or changing the level of contrast, brightness, exposure which can be done in the camera.
But then if this guy changes the whole sky to make the photo more dramatic, then i guess that is a different story.
I guess it the photo represents faithfully of what our eyes see it without distorting any object in the photo, that should be find. Right?
Even our camera comes with digital creative filters like grainy mode, miniature mode, soft skin mode. Note that those kind of photos are already considered "post processed" within your camera already.
I respectfully disagree, Kenny888... while there are some individuals who have no shame in pumping in whatever effects possible in photoshop, most of us truly believe in the ideal that less is more
just sharing from ONE designers' point of view.
Any other designers share the same sentiment?
Genie In A Lightbox
Senior Member
There is a reason why people refer to PP software as "digital darkroom". Many great photographers use various developers and agitation techniques to develop their negatives and then manipulate their prints in real darkroom, so are they not good photographers? Taking photos is only part of the process. PP and printing are subsequent stages. A skilful photographer integrate these stages. They begin with the end in mind. There is a difference between being a snapshooter and photographer.
Last edited:
It all depends on context and purpose of the image. Just check your own statements against two different scenarios: An accident and a landscape picture, both with upcoming rain in background. Obviously the dramatic sky is better off in the landscape image and changes to the accident picture might distort important details.
Even simple cropping could be wrong, if you crop out elements that have a relation to your main subject. Cropping out the person in front of the firing squad leaves just a bunch of guys with guns, looking like a simple exercise. The question is not about which software and which processing steps. A good photographer takes the tools that it needs to produce the image that he has in mind for a certain purpose.
kentwong81
Senior Member
Ha, not really, I asked my photographer not to do any PP on my wedding photos because I want to look originally-the person who I am
Reason being I have seen too many friends' wedding photos which I can't recognize them at all in their album books.
Truly ... if U are a photorapher and U ignore about editing ...than U are just a point and shoot type of a guy ... editing is and art ... i still remember when i was in my primary six.. i used to loiter at old photostudio.. and i see those old apek photographer .. how they used to edit manually with paint or some sort of chinese ink and brush, they used color paper, i forget what it's call and i have too experienced it... and when in my teenage i do editing in the darkroom.. i think many of us in the film era does that.. so if U are the guy, who point and shoot type ... don bother about editing..i luv to edit photo... its really worth it .. its an art ...
Last edited:
wildcat
Senior Member
Ha, not really, I asked my photographer not to do any PP on my wedding photos because I want to look originally-the person who I am
Reason being I have seen too many friends' wedding photos which I can't recognize them at all in their album books.
do you consider yourself as part of the majority group that wedding photographers target, or a minority group?
OoStarDustoO
New Member
It's up to individual on what to crop. If the person wants to portray guys with guns, then he got to remove ther person in front of the firing squad, then that would be just fine.
I understand your point bro, but the question is not about whether you are a good or bad photograher. It is "Is one considered a photographer if he relies alot on photo-enhancing software?" So my answer will still be yes.
Like one of our example stated. If women put a lot of make up, is she still beautiful? It depends whether do u have a chance to see the woman without make up. if you don't, she will remains a beauty in your heart.
Same for photos. As long as people wont get to see those raw version. :bsmilie:
All photos of model in magazines are with make-up and edited and yet people go gaa gaa over them.
So do you think those portrait photographers did a good job?
Last edited:
OoStarDustoO
New Member
At the same time, we can also talk about efficiency.
For example an actual day wedding photographer.
As you know, for wedding, timing is very crucial.
When the couple march in, and u notice the exposure or composition is not fantastic, do you start taking like shots of them, and digitally enhance, or crop them later, or u start to adjust your setting on the spot while the couple is already walking down the red carpet and resulting in missing out several critical moment?
This applies for sports when timing is very critical.
I mean if u have the luxury of time, then you can ensure those shots are all one shot one kill with the best possible setting. Else, we got to lay back to post processing.
For example an actual day wedding photographer.
As you know, for wedding, timing is very crucial.
When the couple march in, and u notice the exposure or composition is not fantastic, do you start taking like shots of them, and digitally enhance, or crop them later, or u start to adjust your setting on the spot while the couple is already walking down the red carpet and resulting in missing out several critical moment?
This applies for sports when timing is very critical.
I mean if u have the luxury of time, then you can ensure those shots are all one shot one kill with the best possible setting. Else, we got to lay back to post processing.
Last edited:
kentwong81
Senior Member
:bsmilie: No idea bro.
I'll try not to PP unless there are some serious distortions, underexposure or colour imbalances, but it's good to learn more PP skills though even if you don't like to use them, so that you know how to amend a bad photo whenever it is critical and necessary.
ManWearPants
Senior Member
Er, if the photographer opens up a blank canvas in Photoshop and starts editing with the brush, of course he is no good photographer :bsmilie:
Seriously, I would think a good photographer is judged by the work he produce, not by the process of producing the work.
My 2 cents worth. ;p
Seriously, I would think a good photographer is judged by the work he produce, not by the process of producing the work.
My 2 cents worth. ;p
eh, If a woman always put on a lot of makeup and she looks good then yes I would consider her a beautiful women. Why not?
If a ugly women puts on alot of makeup and looks beautiful, then I would consider her beautiful.How can I say she's not beautiful when she looks beautiful?
Unless If a women puts on a lot of makeup and still look ugly, then I will not consider her beautiful
Last edited:
Doctor Inferno
Member
Welcome to the 21st century where post processing/editing is part of photography. Look at the famous and successful works of professional photographers like Chase Jarvis or Drew Gardner. Their PP goes way over board at times, but their photos simply look awesome.
Shooting in RAW already requires some basic PP anyway.
Shooting in RAW already requires some basic PP anyway.
At the same time, we can also talk about efficiency.
For example an actual day wedding photographer.
As you know, for wedding, timing is very crucial.
When the couple march in, and u notice the exposure or composition is not fantastic, do you start taking like shots of them, and digitally enhance, or crop them later, or u start to adjust your setting on the spot while the couple is already walking down the red carpet and resulting in missing out several critical moment?
This applies for sports when timing is very critical.
I mean if u have the luxury of time, then you can ensure those shots are all one shot one kill with the best possible setting. Else, we got to lay back to post processing.
Cropping matters. You can change the meaning of a photo...
See this:
http://observers.france24.com/en/content/20080317-cnn-accused-propaganda-tibet-riots
- Status
