If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Jul 14, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com): http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up ....and he has some other interesting stuff: http://www.laroquephoto.com/the-process -- Regards, Savageduck |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up I just don't understand why *anyone* would limit his options by shooting jpeg only. If one wants to work with jpeg, that's fine, but why not shoot jpeg + raw, leaving all options open? Is he trying to save electrons? Or is this just something certain people do to position themselves as elite photographers? And I really don't think burst speeds come into play with landscape photography... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On 7/14/2017 2:39 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 14, 2017, Savageduck wrote (in iganews.com): http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up ...and he has some other interesting stuff: http://www.laroquephoto.com/the-process I have not seen this before. he has an interesting viewpoint. Thanks for posting. -- PeterN |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Jul 14, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ): On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck wrote: http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up I just don't understand why *anyone* would limit his options by shooting jpeg only. I guess for some folks it brings a different challenge, and these days many in-camera SOOC JPEGs are so good it is possible to avoid post altogether. If one wants to work with jpeg, that's fine, but why not shoot jpeg + raw, leaving all options open? My normal shooting workflow is to shoot RAW+JPEG, and having a camera with dual SD slots I write RAW to slot #1 and JPEG to slot#2. It is in my nature to take advantage of the RAW files to tweak and adjust for hours, but sometimes I can overthink post. Is he trying to save electrons? I doubt it. ;-) Or is this just something certain people do to position themselves as elite photographers? I doubt it. Having the SOOC JPEG along side the RAW does a few things for me: 1: I get a pretty good JPEG for immediate sharing. 2: Sometimes the SOOC JPEG is so good there is little need to even bother with RAW post processing. 3: These days, depending on the situation, still shooting RAW+JPEG, I will shoot a bracket of three different film emulations, and have them immediately available. 4: Finally, there have been a few examples of SOOC JPEGs which I have found difficult, if not impossible to match with an adjusted RAW file, even with all the tools I have available. And I really don't think burst speeds come into play with landscape photography... Agreed. Burst speed is the last thing I would have thought comes into play with landscape photography. However, it can come in handy for other types of photography such as wildlife, action sports, motorsport, and airshows. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Jul 14, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ): On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck wrote: http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up I just don't understand why *anyone* would limit his options by shooting jpeg only. If one wants to work with jpeg, that's fine, but why not shoot jpeg + raw, leaving all options open? Is he trying to save electrons? Or is this just something certain people do to position themselves as elite photographers? And I really don't think burst speeds come into play with landscape photography... Of course he does say this: "Would raw files have allowed for more extensive manipulations? Of course. A JPEG is a limited object. But it also contains an initial personality we can quickly build on if we’ve exposed correctly (read: correct for a particular image*). And let me say this again in case someone is visiting for the first time: yes, I do shoot raw as well. But personal work is probably close to 98% JPEG with all Fuji cameras...processed similarly." -- Regards, Savageduck |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:17:11 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On Jul 14, 2017, Bill W wrote (in ): On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck wrote: http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up I just don't understand why *anyone* would limit his options by shooting jpeg only. I guess for some folks it brings a different challenge, and these days many in-camera SOOC JPEGs are so good it is possible to avoid post altogether. I agree, but it's not a big deal to also have a RAW just in case. If one wants to work with jpeg, that's fine, but why not shoot jpeg + raw, leaving all options open? My normal shooting workflow is to shoot RAW+JPEG, and having a camera with dual SD slots I write RAW to slot #1 and JPEG to slot#2. It is in my nature to take advantage of the RAW files to tweak and adjust for hours, but sometimes I can overthink post. Is he trying to save electrons? I doubt it. ;-) Or is this just something certain people do to position themselves as elite photographers? I doubt it. Having the SOOC JPEG along side the RAW does a few things for me: 1: I get a pretty good JPEG for immediate sharing. 2: Sometimes the SOOC JPEG is so good there is little need to even bother with RAW post processing. 3: These days, depending on the situation, still shooting RAW+JPEG, I will shoot a bracket of three different film emulations, and have them immediately available. 4: Finally, there have been a few examples of SOOC JPEGs which I have found difficult, if not impossible to match with an adjusted RAW file, even with all the tools I have available. And I really don't think burst speeds come into play with landscape photography... Agreed. Burst speed is the last thing I would have thought comes into play with landscape photography. However, it can come in handy for other types of photography such as wildlife, action sports, motorsport, and airshows. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 15:41:35 -0700, Savageduck
wrote: On Jul 14, 2017, Bill W wrote (in ): On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck wrote: http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up I just don't understand why *anyone* would limit his options by shooting jpeg only. If one wants to work with jpeg, that's fine, but why not shoot jpeg + raw, leaving all options open? Is he trying to save electrons? Or is this just something certain people do to position themselves as elite photographers? And I really don't think burst speeds come into play with landscape photography... Of course he does say this: "Would raw files have allowed for more extensive manipulations? Of course. A JPEG is a limited object. But it also contains an initial personality we can quickly build on if we’ve exposed correctly (read: correct for a particular image*). And let me say this again in case someone is visiting for the first time: yes, I do shoot raw as well. But personal work is probably close to 98% JPEG with all Fuji cameras...processed similarly." It makes no sense. If the initial jpeg is good, then you can do some minor tweaks and be done. Or no tweaks at all. But if there is a problem beyond minor tweaking, then you've possibly lost that photo. Why take that chance? With landscape, it's not such a big deal - the subject isn't going anywhere. But with any passing subject, you've lost the photo with any serious errors in settings. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
In article .com,
Savageduck says... My normal shooting workflow is to shoot RAW+JPEG, and having a camera with dual SD slots I write RAW to slot #1 and JPEG to slot#2. My camera can do that as well, but what is the point of having the JPEGs and RAWs on different memory cards? -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
A Different take on Post Processing
In article .com,
Savageduck says... http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a- technical-follow-up He is putting into words things which anybody who has been processing RAWs already knows... We all know for instance that contrast and brightness have an impact on colours. -- Alfred Molon Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/ http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
post processing | Nige Danton[_2_] | Digital Photography | 170 | March 19th 14 10:00 PM |
Does anyone know how much post processing goes on at DPreview? | Alien Jones | Digital SLR Cameras | 59 | October 7th 08 01:18 PM |
Filters vs Post processing | M[_2_] | Digital SLR Cameras | 7 | January 3rd 08 05:57 AM |
Post-Processing RAW vs Post-Processing TIFF | Mike Henley | Digital Photography | 54 | January 30th 05 09:26 AM |
Post Processing & Printing | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | December 23rd 04 03:12 PM |