ClioSport.net

Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Post processing



How many of you do any PP?

Or are most pictures you use straight from the camera?

I find I do PP with almost every picture, whether it's tweaking the saturation, contrast or cropping.

Let's see your non PP pictures (ie straight from the camera with zero editing)
 
4271794658_98b4374a02_b.jpg


100% as it came from the camera.

But that was a one off. It depends what I've been doing. Like when I went to Goodwood/FCS, I couldn't be arsed to sit and crop/edit every single picture. So just left them pretty much.

Anything I put a bit of effort into gets the photoshop treatment.
 
Don't think I have many non PP shots, all have some kind of work done, even if it's a trivial as straightening a horizon that I didn't notice on location.
 
  chumpmobile
i never use photoshop or any of that
i dunno but i guess i just think its cheating, its not a good picture unless its done all by yourself on the camera on manual settings, otherwise its not yours if you get what i mean, so yeah, never have, never will.
www.flickr.com/jambradley
 
  Fiesta ST-3
I deffinatly do post processing. An example of two of mine. I had some good examples but recently lost them all :(

DSC_0029.jpg


5347373624_744cb680f2.jpg


And

DSC_0013.jpg


5340035859_336db36a0d.jpg
 
I disagree that doing PP is cheating. Photographers have always done it, it was just more effort in the darkroom rather than on a PC.

I read something on POTN where somebody was saying that using Autofocus was cheating too and that good photographers only shot manual, with manual focus.

Complete b****cks IMHO.
 
i never use photoshop or any of that
i dunno but i guess i just think its cheating, its not a good picture unless its done all by yourself on the camera on manual settings, otherwise its not yours if you get what i mean, so yeah, never have, never will.
www.flickr.com/jambradley

*breathes*

No.

Developing photos is part of photography, always has and always will be. Why is letting a camera decide your contrast, white balance, saturation etc etc doing it yourself?
 
  chumpmobile
well i meant manual as in shutter and aperture. just feels so much more rewarding taking a picture on film and scanning it in then using it un edited, all your own work if you get me
 
Who develops your film, its them post processing! I've only shot a lomo a little so don't get the process, assuming someone else does it before you can scan...
 
  chumpmobile
my mate does it himself, gives me then negatives back and then i scan them in with my negative scanner :)
 
nice nice, that'd be a massive PITA shooting sports mind ;)

Ok, so lets play the game, heres an original and an edit, it was shot in RAW so needed processing & I wasn't going to perch on a rock at 6am for a dull sunrise... :)

IMG_4419-Original.jpg


IMG_4419PS.jpg
 
  Ultra Red Megane 175
Pete, that sensor needs a good clean!

Anyone who doesn't PP is not getting everything out of their photography they can, end of story! PP is the difference between a good image and a great one.

I'm also a recent convert to RAW. The CS4 RAW plug in is a fantastic bit of software which drastically reduces the time taken processing RAW images. So much so that I wouldn't even consider shooting JPEG now.
 
  Looking for 182
Anyone who says that post processing is cheating, either isn't a photographer, or doesn't understand photography.

Post processing has, and always will be a part of photography.

Besides, if you shoot in RAW you should ALWAYS post process your photo. A RAW file is what it suggests, it's raw, there is no saturation, sharpening, contrast boosts that the camera adds itself. Without post processing a RAW file every image will be flat a lifeless.

Having said that, it can rescue what might otherwise be deemed a bad photo (this is a RAW out of the camera)



4090498504_b8a262dcb1_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
  Sprint/climb 106 gti
I use lightroom which is ideal for shooting in Raw and for doing quick edits if I need to do anything else I then move it across to PS.
 
  BMW Z4
What does everyone use for PP? i take it the main one is photoshop ive never used it how do people find it to use is it easy once u get the hang of it or...?
 
Another vote for Lightroom. Amazing program.

Hear, hear. Have downloaded the 30 day trial. Really impressed - provides a lot more editing options that Canon DPP (what I have typically used) and is likely to mean that I no longer need to jump to Photoshop Elements where I need / want to perform more detailed edits.

Aside from the editing functionality the Database / Catalogue functionality is completely new to me and appears very useful and user friendly. No doubt I'll be purchasing when my 30 day trial expires.
 
I use Lightroom 3 for 90% of the pictures I take. I'll use Photoshop CS5 when wanting to blur/delete content.
 

ipodsandguns

ClioSport Club Member
  GW X200 CUP
Not much of my stuff goes much further then CameraRaw.

Correction in temp and Im typically happy.
 
I dont really PP as much as I should.

But when i do its mainly, adjusting horizon/constrast/cropping nothing too technically

Really need to get round to learning more
 


Top