is PP really needed???
- Thread starter nannan82
- Start date
- Status
nottipiglet
New Member
On the contrary... I think there are too few.
eosandy
New Member
Using film, PP involves manipulation of actual light between enlarger and paper as well as numerous chemical techniques. Negs can also be adjusted according to requirements but there is a level of uncertainty as to how they will develop. Bit of black magic combined with heaps of experimenting/experience and consistent results can happen.
On digital it's the fact that we have the image on digital paper and we can then manipulate the final results directly and non-destructively. No black magic (well maybe a little) but experience and a lot of imagination required.
Last edited:
night86mare
Deregistered
oh dear.. that is really bad. :bsmilie:
i think these days we are seeing too much of these mirror compositions.
i think it is really bad especially when you see the exact same person facing himself/herself and it's not in a mirror! that's just.. spooky!♦
night86mare
Deregistered
so big deal, it's an issue of accessibility.
fact is fact, the misconception that film ends at clicking the shutter is a misconception. nothing changes, unless you have something new that you want to say. i don't see anything there though, so what's your point? that because a is done differently from b, a is NOT b, even though they achieve similar results? oh come on.
discipline
night86mare
Deregistered
so in your book,
someone who burns and dodges to great effect and produces a beautiful photo at the end, that doesn't look overly manipulated..
is lesser than someone who just produces something decent out of camera?
well, then we have nothing to discuss. it is my firm belief that the image speaks for itself. the end result is whatever anybody sees, and processing done tastefully should be encouraged, not discouraged under some big umbrella "niche" reason like "discipline".
if you ask me, discipline sounds like a nice excuse for people who do not want to learn how to photoshop properly, and would like to think that out-of-camera images are all that there is. in the end, you just remain a slave to your camera's parameters since it has a set fixed "handling of the image" that you aren't going to be able to break free of. that isn't discipline to me, that's delusional.
in your attempt for "great discipline" you end up trapped in the box you build around yourself. which is.. just sad.carry on, keep posting images and declaring that "no photoshop done"..
chvictor
Senior Member
Taking good picture is one thing. Doing great pp is another thing. If you've both, the pot of gold is at the end of the rainbow waiting for you. I always tell my students to always start right in your camera. Then consider pp if necessary. I don't think it is cheating. You know pp is a form of skill which one should be proud of if one acquires it.
Daedalus Trent
Senior Member
so...you now think technique is more important than the actual aesthetic quality of the product?
well, you're entitled to your own opinion i guess...
i think, it should be the otherway around.
In my opinon, photography in general or put it simply is an expression of creativity, its an art. Not simply just puting what you see and put it into your monitor. I agree to the point that; PP if it's done artfully enough, no one really cares. If I see a great picture, the first thing comes to mind will be the details/creativity in it. Objective achieved.
I guess in this digital age we need both... We need craftsman skills and PP skills... Certain things like Cross processing can't be done on the camera, The exposure, Contrast etc...
We can't deny the fact we need PP skills... But still Craftsman skill is needed too...The composition, getting the exposure right, DOF etc. This in turn save us a lot of time doing Post processing, cropping etc... One is left hand, one is right hand and we need both hands to clap to produce that master piece...
We can't deny the fact we need PP skills... But still Craftsman skill is needed too...The composition, getting the exposure right, DOF etc. This in turn save us a lot of time doing Post processing, cropping etc... One is left hand, one is right hand and we need both hands to clap to produce that master piece...
Last edited:
That will depend how good is your camera skill.
I find that if u are confident on the picture u are taking, then no need to use PP so no need for RAW image. Likewise, if u wanted to really perfect a photo ( maybe it's something that u are in doubt or some very nice scene ), then use PP.
Professional photographer usually do nothing or little using PP.
I find that if u are confident on the picture u are taking, then no need to use PP so no need for RAW image. Likewise, if u wanted to really perfect a photo ( maybe it's something that u are in doubt or some very nice scene ), then use PP.
Professional photographer usually do nothing or little using PP.
night86mare
Deregistered
you base this on?
iNotion
Member
For those who think pp is cheating, then all Top photographers are cheating then...
just name me 1 well-known photographer who don't post process their works?
Take a look at Chase Jarvis's work. http://www.chasejarvis.com
Let see whether your little skill of photoshop can achieve what he achieve.
just name me 1 well-known photographer who don't post process their works?
Take a look at Chase Jarvis's work. http://www.chasejarvis.com
Let see whether your little skill of photoshop can achieve what he achieve.
I guess skill photographer is experience enough to minimum or do not use the PP.
I doubt they depend much on that ?
If PP can do wonder, then why we still need a 1Ds3 or D3s ?
:think:
Last edited:
night86mare
Deregistered
why?
have you seen the speed? the build?
you think the output of a 1ds3 or d3s is going to look a lot better than that of a 400d or d90?
if a landscape photographer consistently uses an expensive camera and doesn't pp, i'll eat my hat.
it depends on the genre you're talking about.
It's suppose to ?
If not, why do we still need a 1ds3 or d3s ?
Are you telling me that a D90 IQ almost = D3s ?
I read that some photographer believed PP is god. Is it to say that D90 + PP = or better than D3s IQ ?
Then I think we can forget about all higher end DSLRs.
:dunno:
to TS,
unless the pictures are meant to disseminate evidence,
just do whatever that is needed to be done to get that picture of yours out.
its much to your benefit to stop nitpicking over such trivial issues.
if not, might as well argue that industrial light and magic is the mother of all cheaters.
go have fun.
unless the pictures are meant to disseminate evidence,
just do whatever that is needed to be done to get that picture of yours out.
its much to your benefit to stop nitpicking over such trivial issues.
if not, might as well argue that industrial light and magic is the mother of all cheaters.
go have fun.
night86mare
Deregistered
you think a higher end dslr is going to give better images?
you think it matters when you print 6R?
i'm not going to bother responding, since you obviously have not much idea of what you are talking about. next time, i hope you pick up a d3s and become a photography god.
you are no different from the people who think that PP is god.- Status
Similar threads
