DSLRUsers.com

Ok... I've been on a few forums, and everyone talks about their Post Processing and Photoshopping.... I don't get it! I have yet to any PP on my images, I want to be able to take them from the camera and show them. I guess a few questions:

- am I seriously missing out on some grand photographic technique by not post processing?
- is PP the "next step" in photography evolution, i.e. pro-amature to pro. something like that?
- what is the most common thing you do on PS/PP?

One thing to keep in mind if you decide to answer is, I have never worked in a dark room, I've been seriously shooting picture since I purchased my D70. So vague references to "PP being the new darkroom" doesn't help me understand :-/ thanks to all those who replay! I'm off to take the last final of my undergraduate career...o.o

mateo

Mateo, I'll reply with an example.
Which of these two photos do you prefer, the 1st is the original, the 2nd was PP. (probably overdone but should illustrate the point.)

mateo :

Ok a few things ... i presume youre shooting JPEG, not RAW. This is kinda like shooting with a polaroid as opposed to shooting with a negative that you then produce.

That aside, i shoot a lot of jpeg ... if youre NOT wanting to post process your images, then you need to set your d70 up so that pictures "out of the box" are quite nice.

For this I would suggest you load a custom curve, specifically the "point and shoot" curve which really brightens things up. Also set your sharpening quite high in camera, seeing as youre not doing any true sharpening in post processing. Also turn saturation to maximum, colour space SRGBIIIA (essential.) ... check all these thigns, and then go shoot some jpegs, youll find your images looking MUCH nicer.

The d70 "out of the box is quite dull.

The idea behind post processing is that you use software such as Photoshop to do the saturation, curves, sharpening, levels etc to your images, and therefore utilising the processing power of a computer, instead of the small (though respectable) processing power of your camera. PC with photoshop, or whatever, does a much better job IMHO.

I guess in some regards, we didnt have these choices in the old days (that youre not familiar with) because we'd simply shoot a roll of film , then have it processed as the lab sees fit. (obviously theres a lot more to it than that, if you choose to have your own lab, or do own processing etc, but compartively, it was a lot more out of reach than it is in digital realms.)

SHooting RAW is another kettle of fish, its basically a dump of every bit of info the sensor captures, in a lossless format, and gives way better results when post processing, really oepning up the ability to use your PC's power to implement the image processing, instead of relying on the camera.

Show us some of your images, and perhaps we can give you opinion on how they'd look with 1) custom curve P&S loaded, 2) saturation on full, 3) sharpening on full ... and even we can grab them and do some editing to show you what youre missing.

Some people argue that post processing is "fake" ... i really disagree with it, as i feel its simply an extension of the processing done in camera, and is no different to film days where we chose our film types, chemical types and techniques. I do however disagree with modification of content. (not that i dont do it from time to time just to stuff around.)

hope this helps

pp or post processing is the digital darkroom, to keep it simple, you can change contrast, ajust colours, crop your image, all the things one once did in a photographic darkroom is now done with photoshop or similar programs, also change white balance if you shoot raw, and much much more........have a look at http://www.russellbrown.com/tips_tech.html

cheers
big pix

ps my gallery of favourite images is at http://darb.net/select-photos most are post processed. A few are almost out of the box, but with the custom curves and other things i mentioned earlier.

mateo wrote:
- am I seriously missing out on some grand photographic technique by not post processing?
- is PP the "next step" in photography evolution, i.e. pro-amature to pro. something like that?
- what is the most common thing you do on PS/PP?

1) Yes, at very least you should load a custom curve and adjust settings for sharpening and saturation.

2) Pro or not, its part of any good digital photography, IMHO.

3) COnvert from RAW to JPG, boost saturation, levels, and apply a Sharpening USM mask to the image to sharpen. (automated photoshop stuff.) ... also cropping and straightening of horizons etc if need be. If shooting JPEG, still a bit of the above, just often not as much as doesnt need it, i run a curve as mentioned.

ps, nite nite ... stonkin headache and think im getting a loitering head cold back again. Grrr.

first.. I do shoot JPG, I used to shoot RAW but found that it took up too much room on the card. 1/3 of the storage space. I've heard the millions of arguments here, still haven't made up my mind here.

But allof that aside, I'm not sure... mywebsite (the link at the bottom) has a lot of my photos on it.. mostof the good ones, which have come out of my camera, I'll see if I can dig some up that aren't on the webstie which didn't come out.

With that picture of the plane... the second one looks much better.. .and I suppose if I knew how to do that I would, but that's an entire other story.. how to work photoshop. But I don't want to have to do that to my images for them to look good, I guess I'm a bit of a purist, minimal alteration.

As for the in camera settings, I have a lot of set the way the one poster recommended (sorry, I'm blanking on the name here)... Color saturation high, sharpening etc.

thanks for the replies though, it's helped, and I will see if when I get home I can get some images out that are not as I had hoped, or cruise my website for some, there might be a few.. but there aren't many as dial-up cramps the ability to upload.

mateo

I would say atleast understand curves and or levels, as this is one of the single most basic ways to make average pictures good. Not doing this means throwing away otherwise decent pics. Also, shooting in raw wouldn't make a lot of sense if you weren't PP'ing. It's in PP that RAW really shines. I won't shoot another way. If nothing else, JPEG blurs many of the dots where Raw maintains each dot as it's very own. It will be good to see some pics, just resize so that they're 7-800 pixels on the long end, and 8 or 9 JPEG quality and it probably won't take too long to upload. There isn't a serious photographer out there that doesn't do some kind of post process and that includes film photogs. Even the in camera settings are post processed. Much of the advantage of the D70 is in PP. I used to rail against PP and RAW etc but that was because I was lazy and afraid of what it all meant. Now I just love it all. Hope that helps.

Hi mateo, if you're interested in really easy PP, check out this thread. It talks about rawshooter essentials and it is a really easy and intuitive program to use.

Hello all

I would like to jump in and ask a few extra questions, hope no one minds...

Darb says

For this I would suggest you load a custom curve, specifically the "point and shoot" curve which really brightens things up. Also set your sharpening quite high in camera, seeing as youre not doing any true sharpening in post processing. Also turn saturation to maximum, colour space SRGBIIIA (essential.) ... check all these thigns, and then go shoot some jpegs, youll find your images looking MUCH nicer.

1. Where do you get the custom curves from?
2. If you set the camera up as suggested above for JPEG shooting, do these settings have any impact if you then shot in RAW?

I don't have my manual with me at the moment....

Cheers
Gecko

1. Where do you get the custom curves from?

Please check into the "Important Link" section

If you shoot in RAW you DO NOT need customs curves as any adjustments can be done in photoshops raw converter and will give you a better result. With photography and post processing there are no short cuts

cheers
bp

Hi,

IMO, Nikon Capture is still the way to go. Nikon Capture can also do batch processing. Alternatively, Each time you modify all the images, there is an asterisk appearing next to the thumbnail. When you exit Nikon Capture, you can let it save all the files with all your adjustments. It is best to use Capture to adjust WB and exposure. Nikon Capture lets you transfer the image to PS for further processing.

Once you are proficient with Nikon Capture, you will find that you only need to do a little touch up in PS and certain processing that Nikon Capture does not have. Examples, cloning, feathering, healing etc..

If your pictures are well taken, you don't need to do too much processing.

regards,

Arthur

yeocsa wrote:Hi,

IMO, Nikon Capture is still the way to go. Nikon Capture can also do batch processing. Alternatively, Each time you modify all the images, there is an asterisk appearing next to the thumbnail. When you exit Nikon Capture, you can let it save all the files with all your adjustments. It is best to use Capture to adjust WB and exposure. Nikon Capture lets you transfer the image to PS for further processing.

Once you are proficient with Nikon Capture, you will find that you only need to do a little touch up in PS and certain processing that Nikon Capture does not have. Examples, cloning, feathering, healing etc..

If your pictures are well taken, you don't need to do too much processing.

regards,

Arthur

I agree with Arthur. I always first open the NEF's in Nikon Capture, where I alter things like WB and exp. comp (if req'd). I don't touch levels or Sharpening in NC though, I always import the shot into Photoshop CS. From PSCS I then check things like levels, curves, shadows & highlights, Unsharp Mask and anything else that will give me the desired look for the photo taken.

I am still yet to take a serious JPEG image with my D70. I, of course, played around with the settings when I first bought the camera, but the versatility of shooting RAW is, to me at least, far more important than how many shots I can fit on my CF card (which is 1Gb in size - Sandisk Ultra II).

Some people, usually purists from days gone by, say that digital loses it's artform to get the shot "using only the camera". I believe that the dSLR is a completely different beast. The CCD is not film, it has it's own characteristics and as such, performs differently. The ability in this modern world to electronically capture and image, then enhance it to look it's absolute best (if you're lucky and good at PP), is an artform unto itself. I see digital photography as two parts. The first is using your skill as a photographer to take the shot (with the camera) and the second is to use your skill as a photographer to enhance the shot (with the PC). It's not often that you can make a really bad photo look fantastic with PP, but to make a really good photo look even better is what it's all about......

JMO