[LeRolls]

I know no one asked my opinion but I have actually put a lot of thought into my feelings on post processing. I generally don't like looking at images that scream Photoshop to me from the moment I see them. If I look at a picture I want to see it as a photo first meaning the elements that were caught in the camera initially. If the first thought through my head is the post processing rather than the subject then it makes it harder for me to view it as a photograph and instead I see it as something bordering on digital art instead. In which case it loses a lot of its relatability to me. Of course there are probably people who think my images are overly processed so what do I know.

---

Last edited by LeRolls; 06-03-2018 at 01:26 PM.

[Jorgario]

Very cool flare rainbow's Jorgario! I like the silhouettes too, very moody.My Irix 15mm does a kinda red ring of flare like that sometimes if I shoot directly into the sun, but of course the legendary Pentax FA85mm has to do a full-on rainbow, I would expect nothing less!

Indeed, the FA85 is a great lens ... thanks for your comments !!

---------- Post added 06-03-18 at 02:02 PM ----------

I know no one asked my opinion but I have actually put a lot of thought into my feelings on post processing. I generally don't like looking at images that scream Photoshop to me from the moment I see them. If I look at a picture I want to see it as a photo first meaning the elements that were caught in the camera initially. If the first thought through my head is the post processing rather than the subject then it makes it harder for me to view it as a photograph and instead I see it as something bordering on digital art instead. In which case it loses a lot of its relatability to me. Of course there are probably people who think my images are overly processed so what do I know.

I do agree with you, the difficult point when post-processing is where to stop: ... Le Rolls, i would like to have your point of view about my photos:

[biz-engineer]

Jamón ibérico (K1, DFA24-70):



All the recommended veggies to stay healthy (K1, DFA24-70):

[awscreo]

I know no one asked my opinion but I have actually put a lot of thought into my feelings on post processing. I generally don't like looking at images that scream Photoshop to me from the moment I see them. If I look at a picture I want to see it as a photo first meaning the elements that were caught in the camera initially. If the first thought through my head is the post processing rather than the subject then it makes it harder for me to view it as a photograph and instead I see it as something bordering on digital art instead. In which case it loses a lot of its relatability to me. Of course there are probably people who think my images are overly processed so what do I know.

Your pictures make me lust over the 85 1.4 so much lol, although I know it's not the lens as much as the photographer and the subjects. But my budget is drained, so I'll humbly keep looking at your images for now

---------- Post added 06-03-18 at 01:33 PM ----------

I know no one asked my opinion but I have actually put a lot of thought into my feelings on post processing. I generally don't like looking at images that scream Photoshop to me from the moment I see them. If I look at a picture I want to see it as a photo first meaning the elements that were caught in the camera initially. If the first thought through my head is the post processing rather than the subject then it makes it harder for me to view it as a photograph and instead I see it as something bordering on digital art instead. In which case it loses a lot of its relatability to me. Of course there are probably people who think my images are overly processed so what do I know.

Is there any chance we can get a "behind the scenes" video from your shoots? I think it'd be highly educational for others (I can't be the only one lol) to learn how you light and work with your models

[BruceBanner]

I like the idea, although given the dynamic range of the K-1 I might be able to post a black rectangle and the resulting apparently well-exposed photo!

And that I think illustrates nicely the recovery rate and capability of the K-1! I'm sure the thread wouldn't consist of only black 'before' rectangles and then the after better exposed shot, but a few images like that I think would really assist in the threads point

There's only a problem with that: "what they actually captured" doesn't exist: a SOoC jpeg is an interpretation, and a RAW requires an interpretation (be it CameraRAW default, Darktable default, your own etc.)
A lot of things can have a massive impact on the shot: WB, contrast, sharpness, etc. and there's no magic setting that can exactly replicate what my/your eyes were seeing.

Personally, I like my pictures to be "how I remember what I saw": they are more pictures of my memories than of a real setting. That's not saying I like to go overboard with excessive PP, but when I feel that a given choice in PP will give me something that's closer to what I felt when I looked at the scene I'm editing, then I go for it.

Well that's true, we'd need some rules to the idea of the thread, because as you say in a way as soon as you 'view' the shot (regardless of touching a slider anywhere), it's already being 'edited'.

Off the top of my head the rules might be something like for RAW files, only open them in software for the purpose of converting Exporting to Jpg. I know if I view one of my RAW's in say FastStone Image Viewer I'm given a more vibrant image (jpg preview), but then when I import it into LR it becomes the flat lifeless RAW that we have all come to know and love .

Maybe if it's a Jpg SOOC and then edited Jpg, just stipulate that fact etc. The point is not to show Jpg vs RAW but just what the file was like to start with (on whatever software is used for editing) vs the final thing.
Am I the only one that sometimes toggles the 'before and after' features of software to see the changes I've made to the shot, to ensure I like the changes and that I haven't 'went too far'?

Thank you ! I always underexpose -1Ev and I use often Topaz Clarity...

That's how I roll too! I also like Adaptive Exposure in my images along with Clarity from time to time.

I know no one asked my opinion but I have actually put a lot of thought into my feelings on post processing. I generally don't like looking at images that scream Photoshop to me from the moment I see them. If I look at a picture I want to see it as a photo first meaning the elements that were caught in the camera initially. If the first thought through my head is the post processing rather than the subject then it makes it harder for me to view it as a photograph and instead I see it as something bordering on digital art instead. In which case it loses a lot of its relatability to me. Of course there are probably people who think my images are overly processed so what do I know.

I actually don't mind the incredibly edited post processed shots... if they're good! I try not to come at things with any preconceptions, as far as my eyes are concerned I'm looking at a flat image, I don't care if it comes from a camera or 100% pure photoshop creation, if I think the image is good then I like it regardless (even if it screams photoshop). Examples of this might be the work of Ken Lane;



It screams post processing, but that is a real car parked somewhere lol. He's just a talented photographer and editor, if you scroll enough through his photostream you will see images that are far far less edited.

I also did 'Lego' photos, and many of that work is heavily post processed, usually dust removal! So yeah, I don't mind heavy post processing, it just depends how well executed it is imo.

I just think it comes down to some not knowing how to post process properly, they either stray away from it and thus merge with the 'purist' camp, or those that try it and do it badly. Then there are those that always edit (yours truly) and sometimes get it right, sometimes wrong, sometimes spend 30secs improving an image drastically, sometimes 30mins for little gain or difference

A large proportion of photography does come down to what happens after the shot is taken, unfortunately it can be a time consuming and difficult thing to master, I can understand why many bail out of the process.
Yes you can get good images SOOC, and if that is your preference just go for it, you'll likely get better and better negating the necessity for as much PP as others, but you might find it limiting in some capacities. But then you probably have a better life than us 'RAW'ers, room to do other stuff with your life! ahahah

Your pictures make me lust over the 85 1.4 so much lol, although I know it's not the lens as much as the photographer and the subjects. But my budget is drained, so I'll humbly keep looking at your images for now

---------- Post added 06-03-18 at 01:33 PM ----------



Is there any chance we can get a "behind the scenes" video from your shoots? I think it'd be highly educational for others (I can't be the only one lol) to learn how you light and work with your models

Yeah, I'd love to see a youtube channel from you lerolls, I'd like to think its a viable financial (earning) option for you, because not only are your shots of a magazine/professional end result/quality, the girls you photograph are beautiful, which alone will bring subscribers lol. The videos wouldn't even need to be long, a couple minutes, perhaps you talking about where you are, what's going on with the sky and natural light, whether you're deciding to use a speedlight or not (and the thinking behind that process), then at the end a still of the shot you captured etc. They could just be multiple quick 2-3min vids etc, not necessarily heavy 10min long stuff.

I guess the problem you're facing is you'd need more staff, a second perhaps to do the video whilst you do the shooting and operate as per normal. And because it's your name and reputation at stake you'd want some control over that process, a decent video and sound recording set up, which all adds cost and time. You don't want to come off too amateurish with the whole video set up, you'd want it polished like your own work I guess, tricky to get all that working out for you.

[c.perkins]

A few flower photos from this weekend.

Clarence

[eaglem]

It sparkles

[Jorgario]

Is there any chance we can get a "behind the scenes" video from your shoots? I think it'd be highly educational for others (I can't be the only one lol) to learn how you light and work with your models

I do agree as well !!

[ivanvernon]

Five images SOC (except minor cropping). For purposes of discussion and exchange of opinions, I would be pleased to receive suggestions on how to improve these images via photoshopping (using the term generically of course).
KIT: K-1 with adapted Pentax 67 135mm f 4.0 macro.

[GvilleRick]

We took a trip to the Biltmore House in Asheville, NC this weekend. Since the photo rules were no flash in the house itself I took my K1 with a Sigma 28-75 f/2.8 lens and carried my Pentax 50mm f/1.4. Many of the rooms were pretty dark so I was pleased with the high ISO performance. This one was of the library at f/2.8, 1/80th, and ISO 6400.


This was with the Pentax 50mm at f/2.2, 1/125th, and ISO 4000.



Outside shots were a bit easier.



And finally, part of the Chihuly at Biltmore art exhibit.

[felixkh]

Wow! This is nice!

[Tas]

Contre jour and dust from the faster riders created an interesting look for me. K-1 and the D-FA* 70-200mm.



I see there's a PP discussion so thought I'd share a jpeg of the RAW with none of the PP I added above. Beyond the 4:5 crop, the PP I chose will be considered heretical by some but the extra contrast makes better use of the light rays coming through the dust. Like the earlier post I added yesterday I'm not trying to create something garish I'm aiming to subdue the less relevant parts of an image and provide detail and light to the part of the image I want people to look at. There's one adjustment to the PP image that I'd make other than that, which do you prefer?



Tas

[WPRESTO]

Pretty far removed from the preceding image - one of the flowers open in my wildflower garden (SMCA 200mm f4 macro on a K1)

[LeRolls]

I do agree with you, the difficult point when post-processing is where to stop: ... Le Rolls, i would like to have your point of view about my photos:

Everyone has a different line they do not want to cross when it comes to PP. The more experience you gain the better aware you are of that line. As far as your portraits shots are concerned the most obvious critique I can give is probably the placement of the subjects in relation to the sunlight. I usually either have the person backlit with the sun directly behind them to add a rim light and a bit of glow in the hair or have them face the sunlight directly for nice even lighting. You seem to have chosen something in between these two options which has resulted in uneven lighting and unflattering shadows on the face. The first thing I do at a location is assess the lighting and where I can place the model in relation to that light to give the most desirable results. You may also want to think about utilizing the rule of thirds when place the subject in a horizontal composition.

Your pictures make me lust over the 85 1.4 so much lol, although I know it's not the lens as much as the photographer and the subjects. But my budget is drained, so I'll humbly keep looking at your images for now



Is there any chance we can get a "behind the scenes" video from your shoots? I think it'd be highly educational for others (I can't be the only one lol) to learn how you light and work with your models

Yes, the FA 85 1.4 has served me well and highly recommend it. There are plans for an eventual YouTube channel as well as a website. I have thought about it a great deal and I do not want to attempt the usual BTS style that many other Youtubers seem to gravitate towards. I instead want to focus on subjects and info that other photography channels do not discuss.

I actually don't mind the incredibly edited post processed shots... if they're good! I try not to come at things with any preconceptions, as far as my eyes are concerned I'm looking at a flat image, I don't care if it comes from a camera or 100% pure photoshop creation, if I think the image is good then I like it regardless (even if it screams photoshop). Examples of this might be the work of Ken Lane;

It screams post processing, but that is a real car parked somewhere lol. He's just a talented photographer and editor, if you scroll enough through his photostream you will see images that are far far less edited.

I also did 'Lego' photos, and many of that work is heavily post processed, usually dust removal! So yeah, I don't mind heavy post processing, it just depends how well executed it is imo.

I just think it comes down to some not knowing how to post process properly, they either stray away from it and thus merge with the 'purist' camp, or those that try it and do it badly. Then there are those that always edit (yours truly) and sometimes get it right, sometimes wrong, sometimes spend 30secs improving an image drastically, sometimes 30mins for little gain or difference

A large proportion of photography does come down to what happens after the shot is taken, unfortunately it can be a time consuming and difficult thing to master, I can understand why many bail out of the process.
Yes you can get good images SOOC, and if that is your preference just go for it, you'll likely get better and better negating the necessity for as much PP as others, but you might find it limiting in some capacities. But then you probably have a better life than us 'RAW'ers, room to do other stuff with your life! ahahah

Yeah, I'd love to see a youtube channel from you lerolls, I'd like to think its a viable financial (earning) option for you, because not only are your shots of a magazine/professional end result/quality, the girls you photograph are beautiful, which alone will bring subscribers lol. The videos wouldn't even need to be long, a couple minutes, perhaps you talking about where you are, what's going on with the sky and natural light, whether you're deciding to use a speedlight or not (and the thinking behind that process), then at the end a still of the shot you captured etc. They could just be multiple quick 2-3min vids etc, not necessarily heavy 10min long stuff.

I guess the problem you're facing is you'd need more staff, a second perhaps to do the video whilst you do the shooting and operate as per normal. And because it's your name and reputation at stake you'd want some control over that process, a decent video and sound recording set up, which all adds cost and time. You don't want to come off too amateurish with the whole video set up, you'd want it polished like your own work I guess, tricky to get all that working out for you.

I get what you are saying about PP but I do not consider that image to be a photograph but more digital art that used a photograph as its foundation. I find nothing wrong with the image and as you say it is well executed as digital art but my time is quite limited and I am not as interested in looking at images that were mostly created in a computer as that is most definitely not a path I wish to go down. I generally look at other people's photography as a way to be inspired or motivated to do better in my own work as that is a major driving force in my life currently. Some may consider this philosophy as narrow mindedness but I look at it as a more focused and disciplined way of living and something I am quite proud of.

Unfortunately, I have done the research and YouTube is not really a viable financial earning path. I still want to do it but I would be lucky to make $200-$500 a month even after establishing a decent following if I ever manage to do that. My main reasons for launching a YouTube channel are to share my work with even more people, to inspire others and show what can be achieved with fairly modest resources, and to discuss subjects and issues that I do not see other photographers talking about on YouTube. I think doing these things will make me different and hopefully help me stand out from the crowd a little which in turn can hopefully open more doors as well granting me access to even more opportunities in the future. I have put a lot of thought into the production side of things and will most likely to be turning one of the bedrooms in my home into a dedicated YouTube room much in the same way I am converting my living room into a dedicated studio space for photography. I do not consider myself a teacher and I am not interested in doing tutorials. I am merely a working photographer that wishes to share his experiences, a few insights and some of his work.

I do agree as well !!

I appreciate the support.

Wow! This is nice!

Thank you kindly!

[BruceBanner]

Everyone has a different line they do not want to cross when it comes to PP. The more experience you gain the better aware you are of that line. As far as your portraits shots are concerned the most obvious critique I can give is probably the placement of the subjects in relation to the sunlight. I usually either have the person backlit with the sun directly behind them to add a rim light and a bit of glow in the hair or have them face the sunlight directly for nice even lighting. You seem to have chosen something in between these two options which has resulted in uneven lighting and unflattering shadows on the face. The first thing I do at a location is assess the lighting and where I can place the model in relation to that light to give the most desirable results. You may also want to think about utilizing the rule of thirds when place the subject in a horizontal composition.




Yes, the FA 85 1.4 has served me well and highly recommend it. There are plans for an eventual YouTube channel as well as a website. I have thought about it a great deal and I do not want to attempt the usual BTS style that many other Youtubers seem to gravitate towards. I instead want to focus on subjects and info that other photography channels do not discuss.



I get what you are saying about PP but I do not consider that image to be a photograph but more digital art that used a photograph as its foundation. I find nothing wrong with the image and as you say it is well executed as digital art but my time is quite limited and I am not as interested in looking at images that were mostly created in a computer as that is most definitely not a path I wish to go down. I generally look at other people's photography as a way to be inspired or motivated to do better in my own work as that is a major driving force in my life currently. Some may consider this philosophy as narrow mindedness but I look at it as a more focused and disciplined way of living and something I am quite proud of.

Unfortunately, I have done the research and YouTube is not really a viable financial earning path. I still want to do it but I would be lucky to make $200-$500 a month even after establishing a decent following if I ever manage to do that. My main reasons for launching a YouTube channel are to share my work with even more people, to inspire others and show what can be achieved with fairly modest resources, and to discuss subjects and issues that I do not see other photographers talking about on YouTube. I think doing these things will make me different and hopefully help me stand out from the crowd a little which in turn can hopefully open more doors as well granting me access to even more opportunities in the future. I have put a lot of thought into the production side of things and will most likely to be turning one of the bedrooms in my home into a dedicated YouTube room much in the same way I am converting my living room into a dedicated studio space for photography. I do not consider myself a teacher and I am not interested in doing tutorials. I am merely a working photographer that wishes to share his experiences, a few insights and some of his work.



I appreciate the support.




Thank you kindly!

Good advice!


When I see heavily processed but good professional processed shots I enjoy seeing them, because although (like you say) they have indeed moved far away from the original photographic foundation, they also show what is possible in the hands of a competent user. I agree that the image moves from a photograph and towards just basic '2d art', but I'm ok with that as I try not to discriminate too much between art mediums, I should learn to appreciate general art more as I get older and not just the photographic stuff we do.
But like you I also tend to appreciate the shots that are more 'obviously' taken with a camera than guessing whether or not the 2d image has anything to do with a camera, because at the end of the day I am a shooter and not a professional photoshop guru. I do however sometimes wish I had tbetter skills, I might not take things to that extreme like in the above example, but to know your way that well around post processing to that degree does fill with me jealousy lol. I imagine if I was that competent then my own work quality would improve as well as hopefully improving in efficiency in pp time spent.

I think your youtube channel sounds like a great idea, and it is probably best approached from a perspective of not making a profit than becoming disgruntled with less than stella returns. But I think if you do as you say then indeed you might succeed more than you think.
I follow some of Matt Granger's work, not a huge fan or anything, but I really do enjoy the clips where its completely ad lib and you're watching mistakes and the general set up of the shoots, that kinda knowledge I find really useful and the approach authentic, non-pretentious and refreshing at times.