| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/05/2006 10:02:33 AM · #1 |
Straight from the camera is a great idea,They should have that challenge every week.
Message edited by author 2006-08-19 14:29:43. |
|
|
|
07/05/2006 10:06:07 AM · #2 |
Originally posted by herbh:
.....In fact,thats what this site should be about,(no gimmicks). |
Sorry, and no offense intended, but that's crap. Photographers have been doing post processing since the very first camera. We now do our post processing on our computers rather than in the dark room, but we use the same techniques that have been used in dark rooms for ages.
Its nice to have a Straight from the Camera challenge occasionally, but it isn't what digital photography is about.
Edit to mention - processing isn't a gimmick - its how we turn snapshots into professional-quality work.
Message edited by author 2006-07-05 10:07:06. |
|
|
|
07/05/2006 10:09:12 AM · #3 |
I agree with the idinator 100%.
|
|
|
|
07/05/2006 10:46:14 AM · #4 |
I happen to be enjoying the "straight out of the camera" thing quite a bit, actually. Other than minor cropping, I think a lot of my entries will be SOOC from now on. I don't expect the score to suffer much for it, as I apparently can't edit anyway. :-)
Caveats: Not a professional; didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. |
|
|
|
07/05/2006 11:59:24 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by Melethia:
Caveats: Not a professional; didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. |
LOL
Totally agree with Cindi. The straight from camera challenge helps one to slow down and think however as has already been stated processing has always happened (even with straight from camera images). The straight from camera images are edited in the camera. Editing on the computer rather than in the camera provides much more flexibility. Sure, as with a lot of things, it can be taken too far.
Always start with the best image possible and use PP for enhancement. |
|
|
|
07/05/2006 07:02:51 PM · #6 |
| Only beginners take a picture. The true pros make a picture. |
|
|
|
07/05/2006 07:14:00 PM · #7 |
I'll join the chorus that says "That's NOT what this site is 'all about'!". It makes an interesting change of pace, sure, but the careful optimization of images is what separates great photographers from good ones IMO. If this challenge makes you slow down and get it "right" in camera, instead of working more sloppily, then that's great; but a lot of us manage to do that as a matter of course. We don't use post-processing to "rescue" images, we use it to "optimize" them, and there's a big difference.
I found it intriguing that my thought process in doing this challenge had to be restructured in what I consider a non-constructive way; that is to say, I had to concentrate hard to produce an image that was the best compromise given the editing restrictions, rather than using my usual approach of producing the best "negative" to allow me to attain my desired visualization in the final processing. I could definitely have made my picture "better", even if the changes wouldn't have been dramatic...
R.
|
|
|
|
07/06/2006 07:33:11 AM · #8 |
Originally posted by idnic:
Edit to mention - processing isn't a gimmick - its how we turn snapshots into professional-quality work. |
I'm not disagreeing with the rest of Cindi's post but.....
Some of us aspire to produce professional quality work straight from the camera. Every time I press the shutter release when my camera is loaded with transparency film I have no choice.
Not very digital, I know ;)
Roger |
|
|
|
07/06/2006 08:03:55 AM · #9 |
Why use a Studebaker for processing when you could use a Cadilac?
... and pretty much any software (using the power of the computer) is a Cadilac compared to the processing power of the camera.
As has already been stated, get the best from the camera, then make it sing in PP.
Message edited by author 2006-07-06 08:10:12. |
|
|
|
07/07/2006 12:14:22 PM · #10 |
Originally posted by Mustardhead:
Every time I press the shutter release when my camera is loaded with transparency film I have no choice. |
The big difference there is that someone has gone and done lots of work optimising the transparency film for you. The limited choice that you have is over which transparency film to use to suit your conditions (to Velvia, or not to Velvia...!).
|
|
|
|
07/07/2006 12:26:30 PM · #11 |
Even in the good old days of film, retouching/post-processing was (and still is) a standard part of the photographic process. In B/W, of course, this was often done by the photographer her/himself, in the darkroom, plus the wonderful task of "spotting" prints after they had dried (yes, we had dust spots to deal with even then).
In professional color work, retouching was done as a matter of course in commercial/product and fashion photography, just to name two fields. This usually involved airbrushing, and was a very specialized skill. Those who were good at it made a lot of money as professional photo retouchers. Then came Photoshop, and the high-resolution scanning of film images, and digital retouching hit the film world in a big way. Now, of course, a lot of work is done direct to digital, but nevertheless the trend towards digital retouching began long before serious photographers started shooting in digital instead of film.
It should go without saying that even in the digital age any professional photographer should be a master of all the "traditional" photographic disciplines such as exposure, lighting, composition, and so forth; but I don't see any convincing reason why we should suddenly be considering post-processing as something "evil" or something that somehow lessens the "photographic" aspect of our work.
It all seems silly to me...
Robt.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2006 05:51:55 AM · #12 |
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Originally posted by Mustardhead:
Every time I press the shutter release when my camera is loaded with transparency film I have no choice. |
The big difference there is that someone has gone and done lots of work optimising the transparency film for you. The limited choice that you have is over which transparency film to use to suit your conditions (to Velvia, or not to Velvia...!). |
I grudgingly accept you make an excellent point there ;) Blasted lawyers...
I hadn't really considered it in these terms before but one of the frustrations of the digital age is having to do so much work to make a picture acceptable. For me, 99% of the pleasure in photography is being outdoors, preferably in the wild somewhere, taking photographs and just enjoying the sun, wind, rain and the company of the birds and insects. Sitting in front of the computer fannying about with hue and saturation just isn't the same somehow...
Roger |
|
|
|
07/08/2006 08:35:19 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by Mustardhead:
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Originally posted by Mustardhead:
Every time I press the shutter release when my camera is loaded with transparency film I have no choice. |
The big difference there is that someone has gone and done lots of work optimising the transparency film for you. The limited choice that you have is over which transparency film to use to suit your conditions (to Velvia, or not to Velvia...!). |
I grudgingly accept you make an excellent point there ;) Blasted lawyers...
I hadn't really considered it in these terms before but one of the frustrations of the digital age is having to do so much work to make a picture acceptable. For me, 99% of the pleasure in photography is being outdoors, preferably in the wild somewhere, taking photographs and just enjoying the sun, wind, rain and the company of the birds and insects. Sitting in front of the computer fannying about with hue and saturation just isn't the same somehow...
Roger |
Roger,
It's still all about getting the best image possible out of the camera. If you find that you're doing a lot to an image to make it acceptable then may it wasn't the bet out of the camera.
This isn't saying that this is the case all the time but maybe look at what you did to capture the image, think about the technical aspects and determine what to do differently (if anything) the next time.
I don't know how much control you have in your camera but experimenting with all the image settings like contrast, sharpening, saturation etc may get you where you want to be and limit the amount of PP required.
Colette
PS. I'm no expert in PP however I'm a computer geek so I like that aspect of digital imaging as well as enjoying the outdoors and shooting. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 04:22:09 AM EDT.
