A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A Different take on Post Processing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 14th 17, 07:36 PM posted to rec.photo.digital, alt.photography
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default A Different take on Post Processing

http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/201...n-we-wanted-a-
technical-follow-up

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #2  
Old July 14th 17, 07:39 PM posted to rec.photo.digital, alt.photography
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 10:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 10:27 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 11:17 PM posted to rec.photo.digital, alt.photography
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 11:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital, alt.photography
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 11:49 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old July 14th 17, 11:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old July 15th 17, 12:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default 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  
Old July 15th 17, 12:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.