Thread: Post Processing

i'm hoping a few more people that like to PP win.....some of us actually enjoy that side of things......

Originally Posted by dullbird

i'm hoping a few more people that like to PP win.....some of us actually enjoy that side of things......

The irony is that in film days you *had* to post process, unless of course you enjoyed looking at very small negative images...

I'm happy to open it up to PP if that's what is wanted, so far I see that 2 people want it and one of them has "picked up his goal posts and gone home" .

I'm not really fussed either way but do appreciate that some have neither the software or knowledge to 'fully' implement PP other than what is done 'in camera'.

So I'm happy to alter the rules to allow PP. What I didn't want was backgrounds removed/altered, fences, power lines etc removed bits added (if you get my drift).

However the valid exif data rule still applies, and that already rules out one of the entries.


Martyn

Bushy I dont think you should change the rules just because one or two of us have had a squinny

its just seems like almost all the comps your not allowed to do it in now......which in a way is sad as just because some might not have the software (which is easy to get off-line) or can't be bothered to learn or give it ago, all of us that like to do it don't have any fun.
it can be particularly frustrating for me only because my tamron lens doesn't give good colour like other peoples lenses it always seems to have that slightly washed out look and I can't adjust that which I feel sometimes may give me an unfair advantage in the comps...

I'm only saying why I would like it included (every now again) as you can see I still entered so if people don't want to that's fine(it is their rules after all)....I will just have to do everything with the 70-200 the only lens I have that takes rich photos

Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus

Personally I think that no PP shows just how good a photographer is. You might all argue this, but if you can get a good shot, not have to PP it then in my eyes that makes you a better photographer than someone who has to tweak every pic they take.

you kind of do have a point NM but even the professionals PP. if you have a **** photo you have **** photo despite whether you PP or not so should really have no bearing on anyone that doesn't want to do it really.

i.e it should make no difference whether you can PP or not if people are looking at the foundation of the photo so why disallow it?

Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus

Personally I think that no PP shows just how good a photographer is. You might all argue this, but if you can get a good shot, not have to PP it then in my eyes that makes you a better photographer than someone who has to tweak every pic they take.

I agree with this. I am more impressed by a really well taken and composed shot that is sans PP than one with.

I don't post process at all pretty much. I do work at getting things right at the time though because of my film background.

That doesn't mean I don't appreciate the work done in post processing as it is quite a skill (albeit one I'm not really interested in).

Maybe the photo competitions can stay excluding PP, but then have a PP competition.. showing before and afters ?

I know I hardly ever enter but I just seem to miss the whole competitions or the criteria. Like I took some crackers on the 1st but I'll save them for next time!

Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus

the average person looks at the pic as a whole not the foundation of the pic

DB...can we take this lot into a separate thread so we are not filling the comp thread with discussion?

by all means NM just star one....

Originally Posted by Numpty's Missus

the average person looks at the pic as a whole not the foundation of the pic

DB...can we take this lot into a separate thread so we are not filling the comp thread with discussion?

yeah thats kind of what I mean in why I use it though...if me and you took exactly the same pictures you took yours with a Nikon I took mine with a tamron.....and your colours came out better (more saturated) due to the lens is that really fair. as we both took a very good photo!!!

so you would have an added advantage would you not?

I only use PP for this very reason boosting colour back into the shot.

I totally understand what bushy is saying though in regards to cloning out fences and pylons etc...in this instance he and you guys are right take the photo right in the first place...(however there are occasions when thins in your photo are unavoidable)
But that then only leads me back to it shouldn't really matter if you PP or not as you always need a good photo to start with......and that is what people should be looking at whether its a good photo to start with and then good overall.

I do feel sometimes when people make there choice they make it on what looks nice and not what is involved in the pic like whether it is sharp or out of focus etc etc. which really is what I think people should be looking at along with the rest of the photo.

so no one would ever choose mine over others as it wouldn't look at nice, because of the washed out colour. I'm just using this as an example by the way

Oh and I know its only a fun thing before anyone jumps n me for that...i'm merely putting up example arguments for why I think PPs should sometimes be allowed...as pointed out PP is not about totally takeing a pic away from its original form can be as simple as a straightened horizon for someone that doesn't own a tripod, or a boost in colour for someone that has a cheaper lens....or even someone that thiks the colours distract form the picture and its meaning and simply want to put it to black and white.