Quote:
Originally Posted by l4wr3nc3
True, but at the end of the day, the one who did use photoshop will render a image greater then that in which your camera can take.
|
I couldn't disagree more.
I almost always tweak the contrast or color correction, but I don't agree that it's better than what the camera can take. These cameras capabilities (and therefor complexities) far outstrip the capabilities of all but the most experienced photographers. The digital darkroom is good for creating images that don't naturally exist, or fixing mistakes. I've taken many an image that after post-processing, I go back to the original, crop it, and send it out for printing. That's rare, but it does happen. I've made far more images that I go in and correct becuase I didn't have the camera setup correctly.
At the end of the day, it's all about what you like. An image is an image is an image. I'm old-school (at 32, go figure), in that I prefer to minimize the post-processing and make my image in the field. Things like filters, whacky lens applications, gimicks like extension tubes, etc, that's what I like to play with.
The reason I push this ahead of photoshop or other digital dark rooms is that in Pshop, you can only work with what's there. You really can't create content. Sure, you can merge, weave, etc, but you can't create an image that doesn't already exist in some format.
For instance, when you understand filters (on the camera), you can capture images that then allow you to do some amazing things in the digital lab. You can capture the sun rise up through a canyon, and have the whole thing properly exposed if you know how to use a gradient filter. Something I'm trying to learn now. Without that filter, either the sky will be over exposed, or the canyon under exposed. Sure, you could take two images and weave them together, but IMHO it doesn't look as good as a proper exposure on the camera.
With tubes, you can do some CRAZY macro work, and then process that in Pshop. But you still need the tube to get the image to go process.
I'm certainly not downplaying the value of post-processing, I'm just saying you're handicaping yourself if you do that and don't learn how to properly use your equipment first. It's like any photography class - manual focus, manual exposure. No automatic anything. That forces you to learn the CAMERA. When you master that, your post-processing will be minimized, but potentially yield even better images than it did when the photographer was just shooting snapshots and photochopping all day long.
In the end, it's all art, so it can't be wrong.