Does DPC "Colour" Your Photography?

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

09/27/2011 08:02:20 PM · #1

I was looking at another photography site the other day and I noticed a lot of the shots looked quite ordinary and "photo" like. I found myself thinking that a photo could do with a bit more of this and a touch more of that and then realised that I wasn't so much looking at the photo, but at the quality of the "finishing".

This caused me to stop and wonder when I got to thinking more about how to best edit a photo than admiring the photo itself, and I'm pretty sure it's a product of spending a lot of my photography time at DPC.

Is this a bad thing? I think so, I think it may have taken some of the simply joy out of photography that I need to take the time to get back to.

Has anyone else discovered they think about photos in this way? Did you do anything about it? I'm thinking of putting my D700 in a box for a month and shooting film only!

Cory

Canon EOS-1D Mark IV

09/27/2011 08:16:42 PM · #2

*shrug*

I think most photography looks like pure shit. DPC is somewhat better, on average.

NiallOTuama

Google Pixel 2

09/27/2011 08:16:53 PM · #3

I come from an engineering and coding background. I liken image processing to optimising code, to get the best out of images with the time, rules and size permitted. I do often feel I tend to look at the finish over the pleasure of the image. It's nice to enjoy an image. But I find enormous satisfaction in getting what I want from an image too. Optimised to me. That's all I can do, right? Who else can I please? So keep your 700 (or give it to me) and shoot what makes you happy.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

09/27/2011 08:18:44 PM · #4

Originally posted by NiallOTuama:

Ha, no plans to get rid of it, I just want to get out of the habit of going straight to the editing and thinking more about the photography.

Judi

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

09/27/2011 08:26:17 PM · #5

Anybody can take a photo but not everybody can finish a photo. If DPC has taught you that then DPC is a good thing. How many blurry face shots and cat shots do you see scattered over sites like Facebook and how many 'oohs' and 'ahhs' do you read on those photos....yet you wouldn't show those photos to the world. But they seem acceptable to the general public.

Digital photography has brought out a lot of 'mummy photographers' and snapshotters who think they can charge as much as a professional just because they have a digital camera and can press a button. If this keeps the professional photographers that little bit further ahead so that the clients can see what they are paying for then so be it. Let colour or finishing of a photo be an acceptable practice within this industry.

Message edited by author 2011-09-27 20:27:33.

pixelpig

Sony Alpha a55

Sony DT 1.8/50mm SAM

09/27/2011 08:27:06 PM · #6

I shoot always with PP in mind. To put it another way, I shoot so I can PP later. Has nothing to do w/DPC. I like it like that!

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

09/27/2011 08:30:21 PM · #7

Originally posted by Judi:

Anybody can take a photo but not everybody can finish a photo. If DPC has taught you that then DPC is a good thing. How many blurry face shots and cat shots do you see scattered over sites like Facebook and how many 'oohs' and 'ahhs' do you read on those photos....yet you wouldn't show those photos to the world. But they seem acceptable to the general public.

Digital photography has brought out a lot of 'mummy photographers' and snapshotters who think they can charge as much as a professional just because they have a digital photo and can press a button. If this keeps the professional photographers that little bit further ahead so that the clients can see what they are paying for then so be it. Let colour or finishing of a photo be an acceptable practice within this industry.

Quite true, and don't get me wrong, I think sometimes it's as important as taking the photo itself, especially when like many of us you shoot RAW, and when you're doing it for commercial reasons. My point however wasn't to dispute the importance of the editing, my point was the mindset you get into where you look at the editing over looking at the photo itself.

GeneralE

Canon PowerShot S3 IS

09/27/2011 08:31:10 PM · #8

Originally posted by Covert_Oddity:

... I just want to get out of the habit of going straight to the editing and thinking more about the photography.

It may help if you start out by assuming* that the photographer meant it to look exactly the way it does, and think about why they may have chosen that look/processing. Then, if you think about how you might have processed it differently, you will do so within the context of how that changes the meaning/context, and be in a better position to evaluate whether that's a "good" change or not.

You also don't know what the photographer started with as source material, and therefore whether the look you suggest is even possible.

*I know, never Ass|U|Me anything ... in this case perhaps "postulate" is a better verb

Message edited by author 2011-09-27 20:31:50.

snaffles

Nikon D7100

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

09/27/2011 08:42:24 PM · #9

Originally posted by Judi:

Here's a site you may want to check out...youarenotaphotographer.com. It calls out all the 'fauxtographers' out there and shows many truly horrendous examples of krazee kolor processing, photos with no composition whatsoever...*sigh*...getting a headache just thinking about them!