Processing?

Andyvalver

Andyvalver

Messages
572
Name
Andy
Edit My Images
Yes
Ive been browsing and reading lots of posts and threads in the forums for a while now. Alot of what i read to do with phot's is about processing.

People saying, it was badly processed or over processed ect...

Im just wondering. Are all photo's tampered with? It just seems like no photo's are genuine untouched and how they should be and so on. It just seems everyone is out to make their photo perfect, thats ok but who defines what is good or bad.

Just curious what people think or if im talking utter **** as i dont know alot about it :)
 
Its all very subjective really but even the purist would mess about with processing in a darkroom, so my opinion is whats the difference. My dads darkroom was a converted bathroom, my darkroom is on my lap top :lol:
he spent a fortune on chemicals and paper, i spend a fortune on hardware and software, its just called technological progress.
 
If you shoot in RAW you have to convert it into a jpg for the web. When doing this you will apply adjustments to it Contrast, Brightness, White light balance and sharpening are the main ones.
If you were using film you would do most of this by choosing your film, chemicals and timings first, then Paper type etc.

If you shoot in JPG then you will be letting your camera do this for you, some cameras will let you make the settings for this.
You can then, with both, do more to it after such as adjusting colour more sharpening, whiter light balance as so on
The thing is to get it looking at you remembered it; you might ad some changes to create the mood and ambiance of the vista you seen.
I hope this helps you under some of the points it a very big subject to go into on one post.
 
Everybody seem to have different ideas about what makes a good photo. I think if you are a professional then it is necessary to do processing to make the picture as perfect as possible and sometimes the camera settings dont always give the best results so a little bit of help is needed.

I have got a bit fed up with to much processing so have I have tweeked some settings in the camera (sharpness, contrast etc..) and experimenting with just taking jpeg. My photos are for my own pleasure so it's not so important, but I expect I will end up going back to RAW and more processing again.
 
Cheers guys. I was just wondering really. I mean, if you open a magazine like fhm or something like that, alot of the images have been shopped. To me its kinda fake. A peson who looks good in the mag but in real life or the original photo she or he looked a bit tatty lol. I know thats not quite the same and its extreme but you get me :)
 
Processing can also be handy if your a little limited on lens choices, wanted a headshot but couldnt get close enough without ruining the shot? crop!, im not a fan of heavily post processing but most images can be tweaked slightly, alot need it especially ones shot "on the fly" in my opinion
 
Andyvalver said:
Cheers guys. I was just wondering really. I mean, if you open a magazine like fhm or something like that, alot of the images have been shopped. To me its kinda fake. A peson who looks good in the mag but in real life or the original photo she or he looked a bit tatty lol. I know thats not quite the same and its extreme but you get me :)
Click to expand...


Well they are kinda fake, but they're only supplying what the customer (magazine buyers) want.
They like the images, whether its a photograph or not isn't relevant, its the image that makes the sale, they aren't necessarily the same thing.
You can't get away from doing at least some processing, the camera hardly ever records the scene as you see it, if that's what you're trying to reproduce.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top