getting photos as beautiful as after processing

[mimiya]

Originally Posted by zona5101

take your best photograph and make it better...

well put!

[BryanC]

Originally Posted by carinlynchin

I guess where I started out liking photography while digital cameras have been around, I just assumed that prior to that the film photographers where just that good. Like when you saw work in magazines and all that, that those were just amazing photographers that knew their stuff and shot the photos and did no processing on them, I didn't know that they used to do the same things in a dark room...very interesting.

Post processing, in one form or another, is as old as photography itself. And, just my opinion, it is a part of photography. Whether it's just a little 'tweaking' or more extensive post work. I don't believe post processing takes the place of having a good eye, composition, interesting subject matter or the other certain technical skills with a camera that are needed, but it becomes another tool available to the photographer to achieve the final result that is desired. Again, my opinion only, this has been the most important aspect for me, either in my photography, or the vast numbers of others' that I have enjoyed viewing...the final image. Not so much the path that was taken to achieve it, but the result.

The amazing photographers that you mentioned were/are definitely that...amazing photographers. I think I can confidently say that more often that not, their images have had some kind of post processing done to them. I don't think this diminishes their greatness, it's a part of photography, film or digital. Ansel Adams, a famous photographer that almost everyone has at least heard of, did some extensive post processing on a lot of his work. This did not take away from the fact that he was an amazing photographer. But, if he was to have lived in the digital age, I suspect he would have been 'photoshopping' right along with the rest of us. (As a side note, terms and techniques such as 'dodge and burn', come from the days of film post processing.)

Now, having blabbed on about all of that......it comes down to what you think is right for you. If you want to use as minimal post processing as possible, more power to you. If you want to use more, don't consider it as 'cheating', either. Whatever gives you the final result that you desire...that's what's right. Post processing can't take the place of certain photography skills, but it can be another tool to achieve the images that you want.

[Baydem]

Originally Posted by zona5101

..... I am not sure if any camras have built in vignette:....

You can use a full frame digital camera (Canon 1Ds MKIII, Canon 5D MKII, Nikon D700, Nikon D3x, Sony A900 etc.) with fast lenses (50mm f/1.4 - f/1.2, 85mm f/1.2) for vignette.

Or another way to built vignette, using a Canon 10-22mm lens with UV+CP filter

Example: (Canon EOS 30D - Canon 10-22mm)

[carinlynchin]

Originally Posted by BryanC

Post processing, in one form or another, is as old as photography itself. And, just my opinion, it is a part of photography. Whether it's just a little 'tweaking' or more extensive post work. I don't believe post processing takes the place of having a good eye, composition, interesting subject matter or the other certain technical skills with a camera that are needed, but it becomes another tool available to the photographer to achieve the final result that is desired. Again, my opinion only, this has been the most important aspect for me, either in my photography, or the vast numbers of others' that I have enjoyed viewing...the final image. Not so much the path that was taken to achieve it, but the result.

The amazing photographers that you mentioned were/are definitely that...amazing photographers. I think I can confidently say that more often that not, their images have had some kind of post processing done to them. I don't think this diminishes their greatness, it's a part of photography, film or digital. Ansel Adams, a famous photographer that almost everyone has at least heard of, did some extensive post processing on a lot of his work. This did not take away from the fact that he was an amazing photographer. But, if he was to have lived in the digital age, I suspect he would have been 'photoshopping' right along with the rest of us. (As a side note, terms and techniques such as 'dodge and burn', come from the days of film post processing.)

Now, having blabbed on about all of that......it comes down to what you think is right for you. If you want to use as minimal post processing as possible, more power to you. If you want to use more, don't consider it as 'cheating', either. Whatever gives you the final result that you desire...that's what's right. Post processing can't take the place of certain photography skills, but it can be another tool to achieve the images that you want.

wow, thank for all the info...