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
  #11  
Old July 15th 17, 12:06 AM 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 6:17 PM, Savageduck wrote:


snip



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.


Somebody here regularly accuses me of doing that. ;-)

A subject for further discussion and thought.

A few days ago I had in interesting discussion about when pixel
manipulation of a photograph reaches a point where it is no longer a
photo, but a stand alone piece of digital art. Our discussion was
whether images that have crossed this threshold should be considered as
photography.

The particular image we discussed was this one where the original image
was a picture of a Chihuly:
original:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/r8w53i3y3m9cv8m/Dale%20Chihuly1.jpg?dl=0

Manipulated:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t2quthg7matfxs8/Boron%20Botanical1filtered.jpg?dl=0

It was agreed that there is a line. It was agreed that the manipulation
crossed the line. It was also agreed that it is almost impossible to
formulate a universal rule as to where the line is.



--
PeterN
  #12  
Old July 15th 17, 12:15 AM 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, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.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?


It is the way I choose to configure the slot set up. I have the RAW and JPEG
files separated, and I can address them seperately. Also, doing things that
way speeds up the write time, and clears the buffer faster. I still have the
other twin slot options of duplicate/backup copy, or overflow available when,
or if I need them.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #13  
Old July 15th 17, 12:23 AM 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, Alfred Molon wrote
(in . com):

In iganews.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.


....but sometimes it takes somebody putting his particular workflow into words
to extend his experience to those who have yet to learn, and to remind those
who might have forgotten the principles.
I guess it is not intended for folks like you who know all of those basics.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #14  
Old July 15th 17, 12:26 AM 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 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.


Different strokes...
It isn’t what either of us would do, but it is the way he works.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #15  
Old July 15th 17, 12:30 AM 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 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.


I think the most important take away from all of this, he is not dictating
that everybody shoot, and process his way. He is just a capable photographer
demonstrating the way he does things, and that is interesting.


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

  #16  
Old July 15th 17, 12:45 AM 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 6:41 PM, 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."


You do remember that RAW images from Nikon cameras will be pretty much
the same as in your viewfinder, if you use Capture for RAW processing.
Thus you can have the best of both worlds.


--
PeterN
  #17  
Old July 15th 17, 12:53 AM 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 6:52 PM, Bill W wrote:
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.


Ah! but the lighting may or may not be similar. Think Hudson River
School, emulation. (For those who may not be familiar with HRS, the
lighting emulates the soft delicate diffusion we see after a rainstorm
has cleared.


But with any passing subject, you've
lost the photo with any serious errors in settings.


Yup!

--
PeterN
  #18  
Old July 15th 17, 01:46 AM 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, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/14/2017 6:41 PM, 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."


You do remember that RAW images from Nikon cameras will be pretty much
the same as in your viewfinder, if you use Capture for RAW processing.


To start with I don’t use Capture for RAW processing, and I still have and
use my D300S.

Then with all the Nikon DSLRs I am familiar with none of the RAW (NEF) files
will ever be “pretty much the same as in your viewfinder”. The only way
to get a WYSIWYG RAW is if you are shooting with the LCD in Live View mode.
The OVF in Nikon and other DSLRs is just that, optical. It does not reflect
the RAW sensor image in real time in the way the EVF in mirrorless cameras
does.

With a RAW file from a DSLR you are not getting WYSIWYG, regardless of the
software used for PP.

You still have to rely on your memory of the scene you saw through that OVF
to get close to what you believe you saw. It will never be exactly that
captured moment. Images are subject to the vagaries of memory, and perception
warped by emotional recall of any particular scene. You might think that
colors were that saturated, or not. That the sky was that tone, or not, That
a shadow was that deep, or not. Ultimately your final product is going to be
your interpretation of the captured scene regardless of software used.

Even if you use the LCD to check your image captures in-camera, all you are
viewing is the JPEG thumbnail not the actual RAW capture.

....or did you mean something else altogether?

Thus you can have the best of both worlds.


Which two worlds might those be?

--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #19  
Old July 15th 17, 01:56 AM posted to rec.photo.digital,alt.photography
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default A Different take on Post Processing

On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:36:38 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

http://www.laroquephoto.com/blog/2017/7/13/all-the-green-we-wanted-a-technical-follow-up

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #20  
Old July 15th 17, 02:00 AM 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 16:30:32 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On Jul 14, 2017, Bill W wrote
(in ):

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.


I think the most important take away from all of this, he is not dictating
that everybody shoot, and process his way. He is just a capable photographer
demonstrating the way he does things, and that is interesting.


Well, I'm not criticizing *him*, just the choice of shooting jpeg
only, even if it's not all the time. I'm saying this from personal
(bad) experience. When I started out with digital, I didn't even know
what RAW was, or care. So as I took an interest in learning
photography, I went back over some of those old jpegs, photos I really
liked, and quickly found that I couldn't do much of anything to fix
the photos with problems. I learned my lesson quickly.
 




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 11:30 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.