vaxvmsferroequine fan Premium Member join:2005-03-01 Polar Park
1 recommendation |
to 29886823
Re: Excellent photo?Why does an excellent photo need to be processed? |
|
|
29886823 (banned)
Member
2012-Dec-25 10:10 am
said by vaxvms:Why does an excellent photo need to be processed? It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there. |
|
rcroningD700 Rocks Premium Member join:2005-05-21 Winnipeg, MB |
rcroning
Premium Member
2012-Dec-25 11:59 am
"It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there."
That's goose poop. I have several that have never seen post processing and are nice enough to view. |
|
Coma Thanks Steve Premium Member join:2001-12-30 NirvanaLand |
Coma
Premium Member
2012-Dec-25 12:32 pm
said by rcroning: I have several that have never seen post processing and are nice enough to view. That is what I strive for but those are rare. |
|
|
to rcroning
Great, what else is new? I think you willfully misunderstand, making a mountain out of a molehill. I was under the impression that images are raw, and if you choose jpg you have a whole host of in-camera settings which you can control, or simply choose the manufacturer's settings. Same for raw. Still ready to throw out your editing software? |
actions · 2012-Dec-25 12:59 pm · (locked) |
vaxvmsferroequine fan Premium Member join:2005-03-01 Polar Park
1 recommendation |
to 29886823
said by 29886823:It doesn't ever get to the viewing stage without processing, and there just might be a reason for all the photo editing software out there. Sounds like you're starting with less than stellar photos and using software to cover over the flaws in the photos. Reminds me of Tammy Faye Baker. |
|
|
29886823 (banned)
Member
2012-Dec-25 8:48 pm
Take a trip to Dxomark.com. There you will find that cameras and sensors differ natively, and some receive much better marks for their different photographic uses, ie, some cameras simply do a better job out of the box than others, but software and other shooting techniques enable a photographer to make up for these deficiencies. It's one of the reasons most people shoot raw.
As to starting with less than stellar images - why the sort of personal attack about my starting with less than stellar images? How do you know what my out-of-camera images look like? Have you ever shot in IR or HDR, just to name two techniques that you'd find impossible, unless your camera had special settings, and even then, they wouldn't compare with the possibilities offered by fine software.
If you take "excellent" photos right out of the box perhaps you might point them out in your Gallery. |
actions · 2012-Dec-25 8:48 pm · (locked) |