Bare minimum post processing

S

steve_w

Suspended / Banned
Messages
89
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys

Please forgive my rather ignorant questions but whats the bare minimum the people do in post processing?

Im asking as I like the idea of minimal processing (read none) but it seems (please bear in mind its probably me running off with the wrong end of the stick) that there is lots of post processing on images and I suppose I like the idea of images being natural yet feel I should be doing something with the images.

If so what do people consider the key things to tweak / play with if anything at all?

Cheers
 
Levels, curves, saturation, midtone shadows and highlights with a final sharpen. It all depends on subject and intended use of the final image I imagine :shrug:
 
If you shoot jpegs then your camera is doing some processing for you and it is quite reasonable that what you get straight out of the camera is fine for most general use. If you shoot raw then you almost always need a bit of added contrast (possibly through levels/curves) and/or sharpening. Tweaking the white balance is also probably worth considering.

I don't count cropping and straightening as post processing but I do that to almost every shot.

I do whatever I need to make the shot look how I want. I've a thread on some shots from Yosemite that didn't quite work a shot, but after quite a bit of work (convert to B&W, blend, tone, play with contrast etc) they are now framed and ready to go on my wall.
 
If I'm shooting raw, then tweaks to curves, possibly some clarity and saturation, and then some sharpening inlightroom is the bare minimum I will do. If jpeg, then normally nothing. On most slr's, you can adjust the camera settings for sharpness, contrast etc to get jpeg outputs to your taste if you don't want to bother with post processing.
 
Out-putting to JPEG is post processing. It's just that the camera does it for you automatically according to the choices you make with the camera pre-sets before you take the picture.

There are lots of permuations in picture styles for sharpening, contrast, saturation etc, plus white balance, noise reduction, highlight tone priority, auto lighting optimiser etc etc.

Spend a little time tweaking these how you like them and you need never go near a computer - as many people don't.
 
steve_w said:
Hi guys

Please forgive my rather ignorant questions but whats the bare minimum the people do in post processing?

Im asking as I like the idea of minimal processing (read none) but it seems (please bear in mind its probably me running off with the wrong end of the stick) that there is lots of post processing on images and I suppose I like the idea of images being natural yet feel I should be doing something with the images.

If so what do people consider the key things to tweak / play with if anything at all?

Cheers
Click to expand...

ah..! a man after my own heart.

a lot depends, invho, on whether one like messing about with pp, i don't.
and whether one is good at it, i'm not.

i tend to stick to the 'auto' settings most of the time :shrug:

d in w
 
Shoot RAW, you then have to 'develop' your digital negative, so necessarily involves some pp.
Shoot JPEG, entrust the camera to do most of the processing.

Personally, it depends on what I'm shooting. If I've shot 300 images, I don't want to spend ages on converting them all, so often shoot JPEG. On other days I'll shoot RAW. I nearly always (1) straighten the horizon! (2) crop for best composition (3) adjust the curve for a bit more contrast (4) sharpen for output.
 
Last edited:
Hi guys thanks for the responses plenty for me to mull over.

Essentially the common theme is if shot in JPEG then look at the camera settings to obtain a result I like and invariably leave it at.

If I choose to shoot RAW then I can go that little extra and tweak the image further.

So (again please forgive my ignorance) on that note why not just tweak the JPEGS?
 
steve_w said:
So (again please forgive my ignorance) on that note why not just tweak the JPEGS?
Click to expand...

You can, but there are some limitations, because you've already 'lost' some of the data (esp if you want to change the white balance), you can't pull back over-exposure.
 
Buy good glass and shot in good light with proper exposure and there is little you need to do. Mess up your shots and you could spend hours in post.

I'm very much a less is more kinda guy and leave it to wb, levels and sharpening more often than not.
 
steve_w said:
Hi guys thanks for the responses plenty for me to mull over.

Essentially the common theme is if shot in JPEG then look at the camera settings to obtain a result I like and invariably leave it at.

If I choose to shoot RAW then I can go that little extra and tweak the image further.

So (again please forgive my ignorance) on that note why not just tweak the JPEGS?
Click to expand...

You can. Purists will say that it degrades quality, which it will if you keep tweaking and saving repeatedly as the file just gets more and more compressed and each time more and more data gets locked into the revised file.

But if you just want to adjust the colour and exposure once, do a bit of a crop etc and nothing too dramatic, you can do a lot more with a JPEG than some folks make out - with no visible loss of quality.

On the other hand, memory is cheap these days - dramatically so compared to just a few years ago. So why not shoot both JPEG and Raw?
 
steve_w said:
So (again please forgive my ignorance) on that note why not just tweak the JPEGS?
Click to expand...

Because some of us actually enjoy a pit of post-processing.. :eek:

For a bunch of technical reasons (read this if you're interested) by optimising the jpg in the camera you're not making the most of a digital cameras image recording capabilities.

But it depends on the sort of photographer you are and how much you want to get involved in tweaking the image directly.
 
Thanks for all the responses guys given me plenty to think about and look into.

Alastair please dont confuse my questions for comments on peoples choices far from it, in fact I like the idea of playing with the odd image. I suppose for my own interest (and any new blood that may happen to find this thread) its important for me to realise that pp isnt the be all and end all but it does open up avenues with which I can expand my photography and skills.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top