In defense of photoshop

[murfam]

On the post processing controversy, I generally vote "yea". Even when I'm shooting landscapes or florals, ect. and I have the time to set my exposure and depth of field and all, I still believe in doing a bit of tweaking to get just what I want. On the other hand, when I'm trying to get a good photo of a fast moving subject like my two year old grandson, I just set it all to "auto" and hope for the best. This makes post work absolutely essential, as can be seen in this shot that I got yesterday on a dark, rainy day. I won't go into the details of all the small and subtle changes that I made but you can see and judge the results for yourselves. The EXIF for the original is on my flickr page.

riginal by D.J.Murphy, on Flickr">riginal" />
.

[Alex168]

Yeah post processing is a nice deal of photography, did you fire with a flash? i always have my SB 600 mounted on my camera, and if this was to be the case and i was shooting on auto my image wouldn't have comed out as dark as this....so it would ease the post processing the onyl thing i would have done would to be give it crop just like you did or some what diff!

imple post makes alot of diff

[murfam]

I had the built-in flash on my camera (Canon EOS 40D) firing but I was across a fairly large room so the effect was minimal.

[i_luv_ph0tos]

The second shot is better... I love those dazzling blue eyes!