How Much Post Processing Do You Do?

[carl yeomans]

every shot i keep goes through some form of pp. ive only been into taking photos a year this month, but ive been into computers for many years, well from the zx spectrum days. before i desided to get a camera i was making images form scratch and my imagination using programs like poser,bryce and photoshop. maybe i got into photography for the wrong reasons. i go out with the intent of looking for something i can shoot and totally change it in a program, or how it should look in my mind. when i see a scene i like, i know exactly what i want to do with it in photoshop before i hit the shutter. so yeah i love to pp every image i like.
ive come to accept that iam quite stange . after all. every person that knows me in person keeps telling me that.

[wulf]

I think I am beginning to turn another corner. As I think I mentioned earlier in this thread, I have drastically cut back on the amount of post processing I do since getting a D40 last Christmas.

However, I've now taken a lot of pictures with it. I've kept almost 2,000 (and ditched another 5,000 or so more) and proved to myself that I can take some decent pictures in a range of situations without having to use post-processing as a crutch (which was required with my point and shoot camera).

As I head towards the start of my second year of DSLR ownership, I think I will quite possibly take as many pictures but start keeping far less of them. With those that I do decide to keep, I will be open to applying a bit more polish in the digital darkroom, aiming to narrow the next section of my portfolio to "very good to excellent" rather than such a high proportion of "okay" shots.

There will be exceptions, such as when I do a walk round my garden and am trying to catalogue where all my plants are at for the time of year, but "less photos, more polish" is probably going to become my watchword.

Wulf

[jaydubyasee]

Originally Posted by Paddy

Three, similar to two I suppose but it adds drama... In the UK we don't always have the quality of light that gives the blue skies, depth of colour and contrast I like to see in pictures so in these cases, it would not be possible to get it how I want in the camera.

I agree that the amount of time I have to utilise the quality light here in the UK is limited so I find myself pp many of my images.

[Kvikken]

Originally Posted by mirod

What I consider cheating is making the viewer believe that the picture captured a "magic moment" when there was none. When that beautiful orange sunset is just a filter, either a physical one or one that was added in post-processing, or when the fireworks that appear to explode right under an arch were never there in the first place, that would be cheating.

I consider a photo a piece of art, and as long as people don't give the impression that the colors, or tones or whatever that is edited in the picture is reality (like saying "this picture is not edited at all), without use of any physical or digital filter, I don't consider it cheating.

To actually add something, like a new sky, background, a firework or anything, or removing big things, is "cheating" or at least I don't consider it a photo anymore, but a photomanipulation, which is, at least in my opinion, something completely different than darkroom kind of post-processing, or the use of filters.

Of course the lines between a photo and a photomanipulation differ from person to person, but above is roughly where my lines go. I don't like all kind of post-processing, and even though I post-process my pictures a lot, and some times make them really different from the original, I try not to make them look overedited, but natural in a way.

[Delta]

I post-process every photo I take, not because I need it as a crutch but because I see it as part of the process. For me, it comes right down to what the photo needs to be a keeper. If it isn't, I toss it most of the time.

This is particularly true when I'm paid to do something. If I don't look at every photo individually and make it look snappy, I might not get hired again. : (

For those that have something wrong with them (or even if they don't really), I might re-process them via photo manipulation or HDR color contrasts.

I don't think it's cheating to use part of the digital film process to manage your photos. Adding stuff to the photo constitutes photomanipulation, methinks, but adjusting colors and cropping has both been around forever. It was done in darkroom before digital processing came about anyway. Just a tool and part of the process.

[mirod]

Originally Posted by Kvikken

To actually add something, like a new sky, background, a firework or anything, or removing big things, is "cheating" or at least I don't consider it a photo anymore, but a photomanipulation, which is, at least in my opinion, something completely different than darkroom kind of post-processing, or the use of filters.

I must say I find the line quite blurry here. I have changed the background of pictures of people for example, when the original background is really ugly I have replaced it with something neutral. The goal is not to add something to the scene, but just to eliminate distracting and useless elements. I am not sure I consider that cheating per se. More like allowing the characters to stand out, just one step beyond simply blurring the background.

If you look at the pictures in this cosplay set, most of the real interesting characters are shot in the middle of the crowd. Any trick I use is meant to just highlight them, and make the crowd disappear. If I don't do it, then the pictures are often much less interesting. Maybe I should just keep less of them, or learn where to shoot so I don't get the crowd ;--)

[Cryptic1]

You get the impression from reading this thread that there are those who see not doing any post processing as a virtue.

Should we also discuss pre processing? E.g.

- Selection of film speed
- Selection of focal length
- Position
- Use of polarising filters
- Use of any filter
- Use of flash and reflectors
- etc etc

I regard pre or post processing as irrelevant. You either get the image you are after or you do not.

For the record I pretty much post process any image I take (and want to keep). Sometimes it could be something very simple like colour correction. Often it is much more. Like some others I enjoy post processing.