Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

Why is it so important....


FatHandedChap 8 1.3k England
25 Jan 2010 8:52AM
Those who shun digital manipulation obviously haven't spent days (and lots of money) in a dark room trying to get the perfect print out of a neg. Digital is just a different means to a similar end, just cheaper, quicker, less smelly and open to everyone.

I prefer to get as much right in camera as possible, but purely because I'd rather be out with a camera than stuck in front of a screen.

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

fraser 10 631 14 Scotland
25 Jan 2010 12:38PM

Quote:I prefer to get as much right in camera as possible, but purely because I'd rather be out with a camera than stuck in front of a screen.


Ditto, but when you can't get out (as has been my case recently) I quite enjoy spending time going through some old images to see what I can get out of them. At the very least it allows me to learn and practice new PS skills.
pablo69 6 200 6 England
25 Jan 2010 12:49PM
For those that say no manipulation at all.
Can I ask if you use filters in front of the lens?
If you stick a filter on on is this not manipulation!!

Paul
LensYews 6 1.3k 1 United Kingdom
25 Jan 2010 1:25PM

Quote:For those that say no manipulation at all.
Can I ask if you use filters in front of the lens?
If you stick a filter on on is this not manipulation!!



You don't even need to add a filter, just choosing which lens to use could be call manipulation, with a wide angle or a telephoto changing the perspective that that human eye would see, if presented with the same scene.

It's all a continuum really, from not taking the image in the first place through to the final result having no reference points to the original image.

Personally I'd love my camera to do all the post processing, but know for the moment to get the results I want I have to fight with lightroom and photoshop a little first.
User_Removed 8 2.1k 7 England
25 Jan 2010 1:32PM
I haven't read all of this, but, I am not someone who is put off by computers - I am an eLearning manager, I have CS4 through work and all the CS4 books I could want in the college library. But, I still hate spending time on the processing in PS. On average I spend about 5 minutes from opening the image to having it ready to print. I really only adjust the exposure a little if needed, the blacks, sharpening and contrast, that's about it.

I think maybe those who like to get it right in camera come from a film background where you needed to get it right really. Unless I guess you had your own darkroom which I didn't after left school.

It would be interesting to see two people swap images, someone who spends time in PS and someone who doesn't. Just to see the difference in processing of the same images.
NikLG 9 1.7k England
25 Jan 2010 1:41PM
I have only had a little bit of experience in the darkroom, when I was a college, but I do remember that no-one ever simply printed out what was 'in camera'. You'd make a contact sheet, choose what one you wanted to take further, do a load of exposure tests to get the correct timing with the enlarger, then make the print proper and dodge and burn all the suspect areas away so they didn't show up, and maybe zoom / pan a bit to crop to the area that you want. More or less what I ( and I suspect many many others ) do in photoshop. Same horse, different jockey IMO.
spaceman 10 5.2k 3 Wales
25 Jan 2010 4:23PM

Quote: Digital is less smelly.




Depends who's doing it.
Kris_Dutson 12 8.2k 1 England
25 Jan 2010 4:37PM
I like getting some shots right in camera and manipulating the hell out of others so what does that make me?

Fingers in ears la la la .........
n8trm 7 4.4k United Kingdom
25 Jan 2010 4:44PM
Just like the sensible rest of us - remember when you would struggle all afternoon and evening to produce two or three prints and twenty duff ones in the bin. Now its five or fortyfive minutes and the print that you really want. Appreciate the range of plain straightforward prints through to complicated manipulation to achieve what you want the world to see - and it all your own work still, just a different way of getting there.
fraser 10 631 14 Scotland
25 Jan 2010 5:22PM

Quote:I think maybe those who like to get it right in camera come from a film background where you needed to get it right really.


I'm not entirely convinced. I started taking photographs in the '70's and had ground to a halt about five years ago, at which time I bought my first dSLR and I have never looked back. In fact, as my PS skills have grown I'm even more inclined to get out and get the raw material to make a picture. The flexibility and creative potential is an inspiration to me.
User_Removed 8 2.1k 7 England
25 Jan 2010 5:29PM
For me, at some point an image taken with a digital camera that is manipulated a lot becomes more, maybe, digital art. Please don't ask me at which point that is, it can only be determined on each individual image, and, of cause, is completely subjective to the person viewing the image.

It doesn't really matter how much manipulation one does as long as you like the end result yourself.

Sometimes I just look at an image and think it's over done. But whatever the creator is happy with I am too.

I only thought that ex film users might just have been disciplined into getting things right at the point of clicking the shutter to make things easier later.
Overread 6 3.9k 18 England
25 Jan 2010 5:32PM

Quote:
I think maybe those who like to get it right in camera come from a film background where you needed to get it right really. Unless I guess you had your own darkroom which I didn't after left school.



I think this view mostly comes from the fact that digital only shooters (ie those with little or no experience of photography before digital) are really rather new. Digital cameras are still pretty new which means those who have learnt and grown with them are also pretty new to photography - comparing them to people who have shot for 20-30-40 or more years on film there is obviously going to be some major differences when you look at the groups as a whole.
Also in part the methodology of taking a photo has changed - instant review images and histograms mean that a digital shooter (with time to take repeat shots of course) can take a series of shots to make certian that they get exactly what they want in camera - whilst in the film days it was reliant on experience and also taking many shots in the hope that one came out just right when it came to processing (with of course a great part of the "hope" being experience and skill with the gear and shooting environemnt)
JJGEE 9 6.4k 18 England
25 Jan 2010 6:47PM

Quote:I only thought that ex film users might just have been disciplined into getting things right at the point of clicking the shutter to make things easier later.

Exactly, you cannot change a transparency (slide) !
FatHandedChap 8 1.3k England
25 Jan 2010 6:59PM

Quote:Exactly, you cannot change a transparency (slide) !


That's what bracketing and clip tests are for. Wink
25 Jan 2010 7:46PM
I hate the part of photography is the editing part. As far as I'm concerned the whole point of photography is the get the best image you can when you take the picture, and you shouldn't have much to do when you put it on the computer.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.