When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I vowed I would simply steer clear of this nonsense as I don't agree at all with after processing and am going to be brutal as my pics have won several awards with ZERO after processing. For HDR I agree blending has to be done that is what it is all about, but if you take a standard photo and run it through after processing, you simply don't get it.
In my original post of Landscaped pics, many of the early shots posted are horrific, way over processed, and actually look phony. I did not waste my time looking at any others. Some in here look phony
None of my pics are after processed, NOT ONE, and the promotion of after processing is why I stopped posting in here. I simply don't get it, after processing IMO is simply making up for a bad picture and lack of skill.
Ya I have heard and have seen some of the most famous photographers did after processing but in no way shape or form did they have the cameras and in camera processing that we have today. While I was doing actual film, both black and white and Ektachrome, I still did not manipulate my pics after the fact when I developed them. Did I waste film on bad pics, you bet, and I threw away more than I kept.
You would be amazed at how much a CMOS camera does after processing, IMO WAY TOO MUCH. It is why I chose a CCD type camera(Pentax K10D) as it does do after processing but retains a much more natural image based on my settings.
Call me a snob, and I am, but I take tremendous pride in being able to manually setup my DSLR camera for the best pic. Do I change settings on the same scene, you bet, but if my pictures can't come off the lens the way I want, I delete them after I study/document what I did wrong.
I have no doubt the defenders will jump in here, but I am not going to even waste my time with them as they simply aren't that good if they have to defend after processing,
Bottom Line: Get the pics at your lens to be the best they can be and you will have pride in your shots and not have to manipulate them increasing your skill as a real photographer. Learn your camera understand F-Stop, ISO settings, Depth of Field and so on understand how your camera does 1/2 steps. Spend time in your own backyard shooting pics with different settings, write them down. Learn it and understand it.
For night shots/stars I have a tiny piece of paper 1"x3" that I took and covered with shipping tape, so when I want to do those, as they are rare, I have complete instructions and they do not get mangled
I have a manual 70-210/Macro that I love. My Wildflower Macro shots are award winning. I have the same size paper that tells me exactly how I need to setup the camera for the best pics both Macro and distance and for instance detailed moon shots.
any questions PM me as I am not going to respond here
If we're talking smartphone photos with automatic filters... Well, that's as real as an Instamatic picture taken using damaged film and boogers smeared over the lens as a "filter". You get a picture out of it but if this is all you do you're still just an annoying kid with a picture-producing box.
If we're talking actual Photoshop work/image editing that's a different ballgame as that's an art in itself.
Me? I like to do it in camera, do some slight editing (in the case of portraits; remove zits and stuff that you wouldn't notice in real life anyway, aim more for the feeling than the gritty details), adjust white balance, that sort of thing. Crop, add some vignetting or texture, you know, little things. If it's crap out of the camera I really can't do much to save it, unlike some people.
Ive been a Photog for almost 60 years.. I have a degree 2 year minor in Photography from 45 years ago... I learned discipline and the basics... and the dark room...
Today the darkroom has been replaced by post processing.. both are a part of Photography. Todays digital cameras use a digital image that compresses the file content.. so you dont have a real image to work with unless you are shooting RAW.
Post processing takes a lot of skill.. Most people use the sliders way too much and over cook the shot with too much saturation and too much sharpness. Post processing is in the hands of Photographer, and their talent.. much like the sculptor.. who sees a piece of stone and removes all of the funk around the artwork inside the stone.
Ive been a Photog for almost 60 years.. I have a degree 2 year minor in Photography from 45 years ago... I learned discipline and the basics... and the dark room...
Today the darkroom has been replaced by post processing.. both are a part of Photography. Todays digital cameras use a digital image that compresses the file content.. so you dont have a real image to work with unless you are shooting RAW.
Post processing takes a lot of skill.. Most people use the sliders way too much and over cook the shot with too much saturation and too much sharpness. Post processing is in the hands of Photographer, and their talent.. much like the sculptor.. who sees a piece of stone and removes all of the funk around the artwork inside the stone.
Excellent analysis, and I agree 100%! I do NOT like photos that are over edited, though there is a huge misconception that "in the old days" when you took a photo on film that is the way it came out when you printed it. They are totally discounting developing the film which is/was an art in its own right. The difference is nowadays you can either have your camera develop it for you (shooting in JPEG) or you can control the developing (shooting in RAW)...and anyone who thinks that the Legend Ansel Adams did not do photo manipulation in his dark room does not understand the history of photography.
Let me offer some insight to Post process and its relationship photography. As I said.. you have to know what you are looking at first... If you cant see what is wrong then you cant fix it.. Post processing allows you to
"Fix " the flaws in your photography.. things like correcting for the rule of thirds. but not exclusive of composition, light exposure, noise, etc.
Good photographers choose a composition that tells a story. Com[position is very import.. Ive been doing this for over 60 years and Im still learning..
Here is an example of Post processing correcting a poor lens with distortion be it pin cushion of barrell diction or perspective distortion Post processing can fix it.. but it take the photographers talent to correct these flaws.. its part of modern day Photography
Here is an example from this thread as a show and tell... did any one viewing this photo see the flaw???? the distortion??? Probably not But when I point it out,,, you see it..
Here we go :
This photograph has severe perspective distortion.. its not the fault of the shooter.. its the poor gear. used.. while the subject and composition are good.. the presentation is poor.... Post processing can correct this, but first you have to see what is wrong, then know how to correct it
Here is my attempt to correct the distortion and giving a much more believable photograph.. the above photos would never bee seen by the nakid eye like this with so much distortion.
Here is some Post Processing.. I hope you can see the difference... and I hope this answers the question about editied photographs being a major part of digital photography
Let me offer some insight to Post process and its relationship photography. As I said.. you have to know what you are looking at first... If you cant see what is wrong then you cant fix it.. Post processing allows you to
"Fix " the flaws in your photography.. things like correcting for the rule of thirds. but not exclusive of composition, light exposure, noise, etc.
Good photographers choose a composition that tells a story. Com[position is very import.. Ive been doing this for over 60 years and Im still learning..
Here is an example of Post processing correcting a poor lens with distortion be it pin cushion of barrell diction or perspective distortion Post processing can fix it.. but it take the photographers talent to correct these flaws.. its part of modern day Photography
Here is an example from this thread as a show and tell... did any one viewing this photo see the flaw???? the distortion??? Probably not But when I point it out,,, you see it..
Here we go :
[img]https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.corvetteforum.com-vbulletin/1000x668/dsc_5522_395bcbd1ec1d6a834c9e9bee6c53202 08e5c855f.jpg
This photograph has severe perspective distortion.. its not the fault of the shooter.. its the poor gear. used.. while the subject and composition are good.. the presentation is poor.... Post processing can correct this, but first you have to see what is wrong, then know how to correct it
Here is my attempt to correct the distortion and giving a much more believable photograph.. the above photos would never bee seen by the nakid eye like this with so much distortion.
Here is some Post Processing.. I hope you can see the difference... and I hope this answers the question about editied photographs being a major part of digital photography
Evil-Twin, I saw that you reworked the photo to remove the distortion from the right hand side with the buildings and posts now in a more true to life position.
M question, and please forgive me for asking a "typical newbie" question relates to how were you able to manipulate or correct the distortion on a jpeg file? My thoughts were that you needed the files to be saved as Raw files?
I think there may be some basic editing software that allows for some corrections to jpegs, but I am uncertain they would let you make the corrections that you performed without potentially causing an issue with the rest of the picture?
Just curious, and really looking to learn more of what may be possible to make improvements to any photos.
Typically all the photo files I save on my camera card are jpeg so I do know that the camera does perform some modifications to them automatically.
Evil-Twin, I saw that you reworked the photo to remove the distortion from the right hand side with the buildings and posts now in a more true to life position.
M question, and please forgive me for asking a "typical newbie" question relates to how were you able to manipulate or correct the distortion on a jpeg file? My thoughts were that you needed the files to be saved as Raw files?
I think there may be some basic editing software that allows for some corrections to jpegs, but I am uncertain they would let you make the corrections that you performed without potentially causing an issue with the rest of the picture?
Just curious, and really looking to learn more of what may be possible to make improvements to any photos.
Typically all the photo files I save on my camera card are jpeg so I do know that the camera does perform some modifications to them automatically.
I'm going to respond for ET/Bill as I believe we may not see him in here for awhile due to an issue he was having with a few members in another section of the forum. I will not comment openly on that any further but those of us that have been on the forum for awhile will understand there is quite abit of history with certain members of this forum. To that point, when he comes off vacation he will be welcomed back onto the forum like everyone else.
To your question. All lens do have "some" degree of distortion. Ones that are closer to what we consider normal focal length (what our eyes see) which is about 45-55mm have no real deceptive distortion and the really long lens compress the images abit (which is normally looked at favorably). When you start getting in wide and ultra wide angel lens ~12 - 24mm (on a full frame camera) it is much more prevalent. There are (2) types of distortion Optical and Perspective.
Optical Distortion is when Straight Lines appear curved. These fall into the category of either Barrel, Pincushion or Mustache. Meaning these are how the lines appeared curved.
Perspective Distortion is a big issue specifically in Ultra Wide Angle Lenses. The main distortion is called "Keystoning" and this is where the part of the image that is closer to you appears much bigger and the top of the image seems to fall away. You can really see it clearly if you are photographing a tall building. Now that I have explained what distortion is...is it a bad thing? Well almost always when you have distortion you want to fix it, but there are exceptions IMO and this is where Bill/ET and I likely differ in our opinion. When using a Wide Angle lens shooting low you are always going to get some sort of Keystoning effect, but what you have to understand is when you are dealing with a lot of distortion is when you are "correcting" it in post production production you are essentially "Digitally Warping" it in the opposite direction and that can do a lot of damage to the picture quality. Now go back and look at both of the before and after of the train photos and pay attention to the sharpness of the train. What do you see? By pulling out that much distortion, sharpness/focus was sacrificed pretty significantly. To be clear this does not mean one or the other is right or wrong, IMO it often comes down to personal preference.
To answer your other question, software to fix distortion can be found in any of the Adobe Programs or editing software that comes with your camera. Some correction can and does happen in camera if you are shooting JPEG images...that said extreme distortion can only be fixed/adjusted in software.
I'm going to respond for ET/Bill as I believe we may not see him in here for awhile due to an issue he was having with a few members in another section of the forum. I will not comment openly on that any further but those of us that have been on the forum for awhile will understand there is quite abit of history with certain members of this forum. To that point, when he comes off vacation he will be welcomed back onto the forum like everyone else.
To your question. All lens do have "some" degree of distortion. Ones that are closer to what we consider normal focal length (what our eyes see) which is about 45-55mm have no real deceptive distortion and the really long lens compress the images abit (which is normally looked at favorably). When you start getting in wide and ultra wide angel lens ~12 - 24mm (on a full frame camera) it is much more prevalent. There are (2) types of distortion Optical and Perspective.
Optical Distortion is when Straight Lines appear curved. These fall into the category of either Barrel, Pincushion or Mustache. Meaning these are how the lines appeared curved.
Perspective Distortion is a big issue specifically in Ultra Wide Angle Lenses. The main distortion is called "Keystoning" and this is where the part of the image that is closer to you appears much bigger and the top of the image seems to fall away. You can really see it clearly if you are photographing a tall building. Now that I have explained what distortion is...is it a bad thing? Well almost always when you have distortion you want to fix it, but there are exceptions IMO and this is where Bill/ET and I likely differ in our opinion. When using a Wide Angle lens shooting low you are always going to get some sort of Keystoning effect, but what you have to understand is when you are dealing with a lot of distortion is when you are "correcting" it in post production production you are essentially "Digitally Warping" it in the opposite direction and that can do a lot of damage to the picture quality. Now go back and look at both of the before and after of the train photos and pay attention to the sharpness of the train. What do you see? By pulling out that much distortion, sharpness/focus was sacrificed pretty significantly. To be clear this does not mean one or the other is right or wrong, IMO it often comes down to personal preference.
To answer your other question, software to fix distortion can be found in any of the Adobe Programs or editing software that comes with your camera. Some correction can and does happen in camera if you are shooting JPEG images...that said extreme distortion can only be fixed/adjusted in software.
If I may.. I am aware of the perspective issue in my photograph.. and I laugh at the "Poor Gear" comment. I was using a Nikon D600 and a 16-28 zoom lens that was about $400 lens Hardly "Poor equipment." Poor choice of tools, maybe but I was not hauling every lens i own with me. my mission was not that Locomotive, I was shooting something that needed the wide angle. anyway, I just did the changes in color to BW and the filters to illustrate my viewpoint. comparing the filtered image vs the out of the camera shot, I think the processed shot is better. I had no intention of spending 40 minutes getting the photo "just right" to post here.
03-16-2020, 04:50 AM
