Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
I might stir up a hornets nest here...and whilst I am more restrained than most on use of post processing software, it would be nice to see some "real" techniques shown as well as the usual photoshop tricks.
Don't get me wrong, having an in depth walk through on many subjects, aka software techniques is really good; but um that's about it folks, where is the real stuff? Or is it a bit too old hat?
Anyone who has read in the UK "Digital Photo" magazine will know what I mean. Traditional behind the camera techniques are absent almost. With an emphasis on " fixing it later" etc etc.
I know the editor of this site is a photoshop guru and author, but it would be nice to have some balance too...
Whatever happened to exposure, reading the light, understanding metering properly, composition tips, creative use of behind the camera skills, shutter speeds, apertures etc etc.
Or are we all too lazy to bother, nah let's fix it on the pc later..dont worry about composition, or light...or much at all...PS will save you!
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
Drop down list at the bottom of the page here?
I don't think photoshop can ever save a picture. If its bad to start with then its still going to be bad after post processing.
I personally try to get everything right in camera and use photoshop to clean up dust spots, tweak contrast and WB (I shoot RAW so this is a neccessary part of my workflow) and fix schoolboy erros like off kilter horizons etc. The only time I spend more than 5 or 10 minutes processing a picture is when I do a black and white conversion (from digital.) This inlvolves locallised contrast control which takes extra time.
I use photoshop professionally for illustration and production design so try and limit its use in my hobby :O)
Quote: let's fix it on the pc later..dont worry about composition, or light...or much at all...PS will save you!
I am sure that in the golden age of photography much dodging and burning took place on photos in the dark room, as well as adjusting levels, toning, cropping, layering negatives etc etc.
Most images on here have been carefully cropped, taken with a bit of knowledge of lighting conditions and knowledge of how to use the camera.
Photoshop can equally ruin an image that in the first place didnt require much adjustment.
It's horses for courses I suppose.
I understand your point to some extent though.
As I always say "You can't polish turd"
fixing in PS never looks as good as an image that was correctly taken in first place.
That said the whole art of black and white photography was in the print. You took your shot with half a mind on how you would print it. In many ways PS is just a digital darkroom, if used correctly.
I think there is something fundamentally incorrect about the proposition here.
Just by looking through a viewfinder you are choosing to crop what is in front of you. The camera crops it to a arbitrary format. e.g. 3:2 or 4:3, which may not necessarily suit the subject.
The camera is a mere tool. There is nothing sacred about it. Software is also a tool, and there's nothing sacred about that either.
If you shoot a digital image in RAW, you will of necessity have to process the picture in imaging software because the result is not what you will have seen with your own eye.
Nothing can save a bad picture. You can take perfectly exposed, compositionally "correct" rubbish!
As i speak my mind and i get punched and kicked from all corners!
All i will say is, your right in what ya say. My stuffs exposed correctly in camera.Ok i play a nd play a lot in ps.But at least its right in the first place...
What is "right" exposure though? Correctly exposed for the sky, the foreground, the background? A compromise? Do we ban ND filters and HDR?
The longer one has been at it in photography, the more one realises that there is a range of exposure that can effect the mood etc of the picture.
The exposure can, within limits, be a matter of personal choice. Using digital it is preferable to avoid blown highlights because it can be impossible to recover a picture with them.
It's probably time to wake up to the fact that we are in the digital age.
Sure the basics have not changed, But the process from camera to final image has.
If someone wishes to spend time trying to recue an image in software, That might not have required rescuing if a better choice of settings had been applied, Prior to the shutter button being pressed, Thats thier choice.
It does not require the "" Getting it right in camera police "" to constantly whine about it.
Horses for courses & Each to his own.
Quote: Anyone who has read in the UK "Digital Photo" magazine will know what I mean.
I never have. Ignorance is bliss.
Quote: It does not require the "" Getting it right in camera police "" to constantly whine about it.
I don't think we have that - the OP seems to be about undue emphasis on fixing mistakes afterwards, rather than avoiding them.
I did a short course where we were shown how to remove redeye, or edit out the lamppost from someones head. Better if you learn not to do these things in the first place, I thought.
Quote: or edit out the lamppost from someones head
Could make them 'lightheaded', I suppose.
It's not just a digital thing. I stopped taking 'Black and White Photography' because of the amount of space devoted each month to printing - page after page of fairly crap photo's with details of dodging, burning and split grade printing all to the ultimate goal of producing a well printed but uninspiring photograph.
As a realative "newbie" to camera technique it is one arae that I feel is being neglected. Its quite easy to find information about digital manipulation, and also composition, but very little I have discovered on the practicalities of camera technique. Mike
Quote: Whatever happened to exposure, reading the light, understanding metering properly, composition tips, creative use of behind the camera skills, shutter speeds, apertures etc.
Try here trouble is there is a lot to learn not just the basic camera operation but digital then PS on top. I learnt shooting slide fill and mistakes on the exposure or aperture then you knew about it. Now days it feels like not matter what the picture looks like once you press the shutter button you can recover it in PS.
If' its not 95% right when i press the shutter then it's in the bin. why spend hours trying to recover a bad shot when you could have spent the extra few minutes thinking about what you where doing before you pressed the button.
I'm sure there will come a time when we put aside digital and go back to the enjoyment of shooting slide and knowing all your skill went into that slide at the time of pushing the button rather than a week later and half an hour on the computer.
Camera Cat quote:
"It's probably time to wake up to the fact that we are in the digital age"
I was not trying to start a thread about the pros and cons of digital v film. I am happy to use both..and enjoy the unique benefits both offer. A far as I am concerned photography is capturing images.....regardless of what medium you use.
Neither was it intended to knock those who are heavy into post processing...they are you shots, do with them as you wish.
"It does not require the "" Getting it right in camera police "" to constantly whine about it."
I think you misunderstood my slant on things. For example the "Using Photoshop to create speed" tutorial on this site is good...but fails to mention a very simple (and let's be blunt far easier), panning....aka selecting a slow shutter speed...and following the target. Now maybe there is brief mention of this in shutter speeds..brief that is...why no link?
That is just one example...I could go down the road of .....adding digital skies to photographs isnt photography..but that is not what I am trying to say. Its just that while there are some good articles here..and some good pp ones, there is precious little on the fundamentals.
I typed in metering, got nothing back. exposure..some came up but nothing specific to that, aperture or F stops, again nothing. I am not saying this place is any different to most magazines. What I am saying is that having a great software technique section, good. Let's have some real info about stuff like I mention too. Address the balance more to cover all areas of photography...less focus on the digital element.
I mean after all if you don't know how you metering works, or exposure, how to create different effects..why pick up a camera and hit the pc? Surely we need some element of skill here too folks?
I wonder how many would last if they had their pc taken away? Not long I bet
Sorry to do corny phrase..but "Let's get back to basics!" lol
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
01/09/2014 - 30/09/2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View September's Photo Month Calendar