kshapero
South Florida Man
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I must be psychic! I pour a coffee, light a bidi, click on the computer, and there I am.
This was before the food arrived. Notice the hungry look in my eyes? Or is that the crazed gaze of someone who's been soaking his hands in photo chemicals for far too many years? It does seem to grow hair though.
Back to image processing: At which point does it start? When you start playing with pixels on your computer. When you choose the subject, light, lens, angle, or pefect moment? Choose color over B&W? When you decided to buy this camera rather than that camera? Choice of film or digital capture? Isn't choosing Rodinol over Diafine "image processing", since it affects speed, contrast, and grain? They're all part of the processing sequence in the broader sense.
I'm about to soup some 120 ISO 400 ARISTA EDU ULTRA because it's dirt cheap, in Diafine because it's simple and easy. I'm thinking of using a glass carrier in the enlarger because it'll give me four extra surfaces for dust, and printing right out to the film edges. All creative decisions, right? All "image processing".
This was before the food arrived. Notice the hungry look in my eyes? Or is that the crazed gaze of someone who's been soaking his hands in photo chemicals for far too many years? It does seem to grow hair though.
Back to image processing: At which point does it start? When you start playing with pixels on your computer. When you choose the subject, light, lens, angle, or pefect moment? Choose color over B&W? When you decided to buy this camera rather than that camera? Choice of film or digital capture? Isn't choosing Rodinol over Diafine "image processing", since it affects speed, contrast, and grain? They're all part of the processing sequence in the broader sense.
I'm about to soup some 120 ISO 400 ARISTA EDU ULTRA because it's dirt cheap, in Diafine because it's simple and easy. I'm thinking of using a glass carrier in the enlarger because it'll give me four extra surfaces for dust, and printing right out to the film edges. All creative decisions, right? All "image processing".
Last edited:
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Because the style of my photography is to convey information / emotion about the subject, usually a person, I tend to be a basic post processor.
I suspect if instead, I did landscapes or photos that relied on the visual impact of a place, that I would do very involved post processing. Just like Ansel Adams or Edward Weston did with their work.
I suspect if instead, I did landscapes or photos that relied on the visual impact of a place, that I would do very involved post processing. Just like Ansel Adams or Edward Weston did with their work.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
My work is done in camera, doing very little post.
NiccaFile
Focus-Stacker
processes
processes
HDR has been mentioned, but no one has said anything about focus-blending
(focus-stacking). Focus-stacking, like HDR, is much easier to work with 100%
digital images. Are these weird manipulations of your images for the use of some new art form?
No. Both of these processes are used to overcome some of the limitations of digital cameras:
1) HDR - Simply increases the resolution of the digital image, or you might say to make the result more film-like.
2) Focus-blending is an attempt to process several images from a non-view camera to accomplish a greater depth-of-field,
similiar to a view camera.
Four image stack:
processes
HDR has been mentioned, but no one has said anything about focus-blending
(focus-stacking). Focus-stacking, like HDR, is much easier to work with 100%
digital images. Are these weird manipulations of your images for the use of some new art form?
No. Both of these processes are used to overcome some of the limitations of digital cameras:
1) HDR - Simply increases the resolution of the digital image, or you might say to make the result more film-like.
2) Focus-blending is an attempt to process several images from a non-view camera to accomplish a greater depth-of-field,
similiar to a view camera.
Four image stack:
Last edited:
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Nice set of shoes. I prefer mine SPIT SHINED, a habit I picked up in the US Army.
David R Munson
写真のオタク
Unfortunately, the problem with HDR is that it is almost universally abused to produce horrific results. Not to pick on someone I don't know at random on flickr, but an example. Clearly, some people are into it, but I just don't get it.
I have seen some excellent images used with HDR, but frankly the end up looking like images with long scales and nothing weird about them. It's not until someone points out that it's HDR that you think, "oh yeah, so it is." It shouldn't be used to bludgeon the viewer like a roll of quarters in a tube sock swung at arms length.
I digress.
Focus stacking is an interesting tool, but I have never found it to be much use in my work outside of the occasional, "how the **** do I make this work" sort of situation. Just a matter of what and how I shoot, really.
"Post processing" is such a huge and highly-varied category as to be pretty much impossible to summarize. Many do nothing but basic tonal adjustments and spotting for dust on scans. Some go so far as to create something in which little of the original remains evident. HUUUUUUUUUGE can of worms.
januaryman
"Flim? You want flim?"
Great thread. It's interesting how we approach photography
either as a pure art/craft or a way to construct an image
that we want with all the tools at our disposal. I'm a bit of both,
but when I shoot a photo with a best guess Sunny 16, no flash,
I sometimes end up underexposed on the subject and
overexposed in the sky. (example is below, it needed help
because I do not use a flash)
I have used Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop all at one time
or another in my history and rarely do anything drastic (although
I have done it! like below...)
So it depends on what you want to say with your photo. If an
element of the photo prevents the "statement" from being
made, then I, for one, have not reluctance to changing the pure
photo to something that works. It's the same as I used to do in
the darkroom with dodging, burning and cropping.
That's my story.
either as a pure art/craft or a way to construct an image
that we want with all the tools at our disposal. I'm a bit of both,
but when I shoot a photo with a best guess Sunny 16, no flash,
I sometimes end up underexposed on the subject and
overexposed in the sky. (example is below, it needed help
because I do not use a flash)
I have used Elements, Lightroom and Photoshop all at one time
or another in my history and rarely do anything drastic (although
I have done it! like below...)
So it depends on what you want to say with your photo. If an
element of the photo prevents the "statement" from being
made, then I, for one, have not reluctance to changing the pure
photo to something that works. It's the same as I used to do in
the darkroom with dodging, burning and cropping.
That's my story.