[mccririck]

I have never really done any Digital processing, so I watched some YouTube videos. It looks quite complicated! I am currently shooting in RAW and JPEG as I understand you are best to process in RAW. Some people say RAW+?

I think I understand sharpening, but it looks like it can get complicated with different layers. I think I'm worried my photos might end up looking artificial.

---

Last edited by mccririck; 04-21-2019 at 01:19 AM.

[biz-engineer]

Most used for me:
- Tone curve(s) / levels: pretty much anything can be done with adjustment of black level, white level, and tone curves

For color:
- White balance
- Saturation

For B&W conversion:
- Color filtering.

[pepperberry farm]

it's also going to depend upon what software you decide to use - be it Lightroom/Photoshop, DarkTable, or something else...

[Pentax Syntax]

RAW+ is a good way to go since you will have a decent JPEG you can use as a reference when you process the RAW file in post. The JPEG engine in Pentax DSLRs has slowly improved with each upgrade. The K-1ii is impressive even in auto mode. I use LR for RAW but there are many options. The sharpness issue is real. Just have a look at photo sites like instagram if you want to see the effects of over sharpening and exaggerated HDR. I took a two week LR course at a local art studio and got some good advice. The sharpening sliders are addictive. Don’t touch them unless you have to and then add as little as necessary. The different sharpening algorithms do different things so make sure you understand what they are doing to your image. Here might be a good start:

http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/image-sharpening-intro/

and:

http://www.imatest.com/docs/sharpening/

---

Last edited by Pentax Syntax; 04-21-2019 at 05:31 AM.

[thazooo]

Since the Adobe products are the most popular you'll find More forums and videos dedicated to Adobe. Lot's of info to get you started. I've never used Adobe so this is an unbiased opinion.
I never did get along with sharpening but found a few Plugins that gave me the control I wanted over who got sharpened and who didn't.
It will take awhile, I was fortunate to have a Graphic Artist as a Mentor. Start with Basics and go from there.
Good Luck.

[dave2k]

I suggest you start simple and then progress as far as you desire. Assuming you've got enough computer storage space and your SD cards are a good size, you can't really go wrong with RAW+ capture. Some will argue this point, but you can get very high quality images starting with JPEGs if your initial capture is high quality with good exposure. If you need to recover dark areas or make large prints RAW will be better. I've used Adobe Photoshop Elements for years and it meets my needs most of the time. There are many things I don't like about it, but for basic through to intermediate editing it's a good low-cost option. There are three different editing modes, Quick, Guided and Expert. I usually use Guided and Quick. I have used layers in the Expert mode, but frankly I can do 95% of my desired edits in Guided and Quick. I much prefer taking pictures to editing pictures, so I like an application that is easy to use and fast. Good luck!

[wm_brant]

Post processing is a skill that you develop over time

In my experience, you start off using post processing to fix something in you don't like about a picture. You might crop out a bit of litter in one picture, adjust the exposure of another. Maybe your changes make a big difference; sometimes they don't. That results in more YouTube video watching and more experimentation with the post processing tool. As you gain experience in post processing you will start to notice problems in your pictures that you missed before and you will learn how to address those issues.

Over time, two things will happen:

1. You will learn what can (and cannot) be done in post processing and how to best use the post processing tools to improve your images
2. You will learn that many issues are best dealt with via prevention rather than in post processing and so you will learn how to take pictures that contain fewer issues that need to be addressed in post

Give it time. As others have suggested, start off shooting RAW+ to get both raw files and jpegs. You may find that it will take a while before your post processing efforts turn out as good as the jpegs created by your camera.

[Rondec]

I think the most important thing is to decide on the software you are going to use and then to learn a process that works for you. Personally, I use Lightroom and sometimes Color Efex/Silver Efex. Most of the time I am just doing some basic presets that include bumping of contrast, some sharpening and maybe some added clarity of shadow bumping. Depending on the image, I might do some cropping or cloning, but for the most part, that's about it. I seldom use layers or do HDR or things like that.

The important thing is that your photos come out and match your vision for the image. Sometimes that might take a little more work than others, but often it isn't as involved as it might seem. It's more about knowing your tools.

[derekkite]

Most software starts with decent defaults. So you can start using it without causing a disaster.

Then you want to solve problems.

Maybe you have a spot on your sensor that shows up in the photo. You can learn how to fix it.

Maybe your shots are soft.

Maybe there is to much grain and noise.

Maybe you want to crop.

The sky is too bright and the foreground under exposed.

The color cast is wrong.

The photo is dull and flat.

You have lots of photos and you want to organize them.

Etc. The software is available to do all these things, with a few good choices available. It is a matter of learning one thing at a time.

[alamo5000]

I have never really done any Digital processing, so I watched some YouTube videos. It looks quite complicated! I am currently shooting in RAW and JPEG as I understand you are best to process in RAW. Some people say RAW+?

I think I understand sharpening, but it looks like it can get complicated with different layers. I think I'm worried my photos might end up looking artificial.

I had the same learning curve that you are describing. I am still not what I consider good at it (or photography in general) but the learning of digital developing is a skill in an of itself.


Tip #1. Start out with a good image. This means getting your exposure right, getting good lighting, having good composition and exposure and so on a so forth. You say 'but that has nothing to do with digital processing!?'... but I say it has everything to do with it. Digital processing can make a good image better but it cannot correct things that are just done wrong from the start. You have to know what your end goal is going to be with each image.


Typically, at least for me, this has revolved a lot around exposure and light balance.


By "light balance" I would give the example of say you take a photo of something that is beautifully lit but the sky in the background is completely blown out...it's an example of bad light balance. However on the flip side if your background is lit just as good as your foreground and subject (to the desired effect) then it is 'good light balance'. Things that are bright and shiny reflecting light spots and whatnot can be your nemesis.


Take Away: The more you have to jack around with a picture the more fake looking it can become. The less you have to correct basic errors the better.


Tip #2. Whatever software you use--read the instructions. They even have classes about just post processing. There are also numerous videos online. Even the older versions and tutorial videos for those will be helpful. Just take an image--any image of yours-- upload it and carefully go through each setting and button one by one. See what it does. When doing this--TAKE NOTES.


Later on when I need to move along to another computer I will be changing software. I will not use Lightroom any more because they went to a subscription based model. Sorry but if I buy it it's mine and I won't pay $10 a month or whatever for the privilege of using their tools. That said your basic tools and adjustments will be about the same thing even across various platforms. They might call it something different but it's basically the same stuff (more or less) although some programs might have a better work flow than others.


Take Away: Reading, watching videos (regarding any software) for tips and hints, and just literally jumping right in and playing around will pay off in the long term. Taking a class will pay for itself. Heck, go to the local university where kids are learning photography and pay somebody $100 to give you a couple of tutorials and/or demonstrations. That kind of investment in time and/or money will pay off.

You can take the time to become 'self taught' but that doesn't mean you have to start completely from scratch. My personal interest level in software and computers is about 25 times less than it is in photography itself so my drive to just go it alone is not that great. I did just that---but it was mundane and not all that exciting to me. I will probably never become an expert in baking up photoshopped images because that is not where my interests lie, but if you use digital tools to clean up the images you take it becomes a supplement to achieving the fundamentals like described in point #1.

[Apet-Sure]

I much prefer taking pictures to editing pictures, so I like an application that is easy to use and fast.

I think the most important thing is to decide on the software you are going to use and then to learn a process that works for you.

For both photography and music, I like software that doesn't get in the way of the creative process. It can be a trade-off between intuitive, user-friendliness on one hand and powerful features/tools on the other hand. In my case, I have zero budget for photography software. Fortunately, there is some excellent freeware out there. You could ask 10 people and get 10 different opinions about which is 'best'. I have used the free version of PhotoFiltre (currently v. 7) for years. http://www.photofiltre.com/ It's great for JPGs. It's fairly easy to learn and has a surprising number of sophisticated editing features for freeware. Even after years of use, I still discover things I didn't know it could do. Check out my albums; they are almost all processed with PhotoFiltre. For more features (and a steeper learning curve) you can try GIMP. GIMP - GNU Image Manipulation Program It has a very robust community of support. I've learned a lot about digital photography and processing by reading its help screens. For RAW files, I messed around with RawTherapee a little. RawTherapee Blog I never warmed up to it personally, but probably didn't give it the time it deserved. It certainly is very powerful. Recently I downloaded darktable. darktable You'll see darktable mentioned here on the forum.occasionally. Apparently, there are some good darktableprocessing videos by Robert Hutton on the net. I haven't started using it yet, but in reading about it, it seemed to have some aspects that make it attractive. I'm a relative newbie at RAW processing, but the results will be worth the time and effort spent to learn. Perhaps others will weigh in on their favorite software. Ease-of-use will make the road from capture to print less painful.

[jlstrawman]

Maybe start with a basic and relatively easy-to-learn editor such as FastStone Image Viewer - Powerful and Intuitive Photo Viewer, Editor and Batch Converter
Faststone.org even supplies a portable version, so you don't have to load it on your computer. Load photos into
Faststone and experiment with the editing options. Their tutorials are good and did I mention it is free. Once
you have an idea as to what various adjustments do, you can decide whether to move on to a more comprehensive
program.

Good luck.

[K-Three]

regardless of the software you pick, don't be afraid to explore, and push the sliders to the end stops. See what they do; colors, sharpness, saturation, contrast, etc., it will take you a while to get used to what happens with each control, and sometimes it helps to see the extremes.
I would pick one software to work with while you learn how to do it, then see if other softwares fit your workflow better. They all are working with the same information, some just go at it differently, and with different names for the same controls (confusing!).

You can't really make bad, unrecoverable mistakes, as you can always undo the changes you make, especially with RAW files.
There really is no one "Right" processing, there is "Good" and "Better"; what ever you do with an image, there is always one more touch you can add.

[emalvick]

1. Start with the RAW+ as others suggested. There will be less pressure that way.

2. Pick a few different programs to try out. While online videos tend to be heavily geared towards LR (only you can decide if you want to go that route), other software is essentially the same with the complication that nomenclature and work flow will change... For instance, levels, contrast, sharpening, etc are all there in each software and the concepts are the same. It's the how that will vary here and there.

I argue that most software can get to a similar endpoint, it's the steps that slightly change, and the software selection really depends on how your mind sees the process. LR is conceptually one of the easier ones to use, albeit I realized after switching from it that the starting point was quite a few steps from an end point: a. it took a lot of steps to get to an end for each image but b. I completely understood the process and didn't find myself going overboard.

I use DxO now, and the user interface is not as straight forward, although coming from LR, it's easy to figure out, but man, I can get to a finished image in seconds.

Finally, in terms of an exercise, I would actually suggest shooting a bracketed group of images on your camera (say -2, -1, 0, +1, +2 ev) and run them into your software of choice and see if you can get them all to look the same as your 0 (or whatever you find as the ideal image). Understanding how to play with exposure and contrast is probably the most important benefit of shooting raw (well color tone is huge too), and it's those instance in the field when you accidentally make a shot that under or overexposed that you are happiest you have a raw file.

On the color side of it, I usually shoot auto-wb, and I have had instances (shooting in Utah for instance where most rocks are red) where the Auto-WB was quite different from what I intended. Again, the RAW software saved the day.

Have fun. Having the RAW+, makes that easier. It is a lot of work to process RAW files, and if you don't have to for every image, you'll be able to learn at your own pace and when it is most necessary.

[R. Wethereyet]

I have never really done any Digital processing, so I watched some YouTube videos. It looks quite complicated! <Snip> I think I'm worried my photos might end up looking artificial.

I like John Greengo's rule of thumb for processing digital images: "Set your sliders to 1/3 of too far"

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Basically, move each slider (one at a time) to the right until you cringe, note the value on the slider scale and back it off to about 1/3 of that value.This will get you "in the ballpark" without having your images look too processed.

Of course there is a lot more to processing images and you can get yourself into a very deep rabbit hole trying to learn all there is to know about post-processing. This is a very safe and logical place to start. Then make copies of your images and play with the sliders/presets until you develop a style of processing that you are happy with and that can become "your look".


Have FUN! :-D