How Many...

**dirwood** · 05-18-2021, 06:07 AM

How many people do post processing of their images before posting anywhere? I have never really dived in-depth to post processing as it seems to take up quite a bit of time.

Is it better/easier to post process raw images vs jpeg's? I always shoot only jpeg because I never do any post processing...

I was considering the Topaz sharpening program. Is this worth the investment for starting out? What about the denoise program? It seems like the programs just auto sharpen or denoise with little input from the user.

I have a free version of Luminar 3 but I can't seem to get any decent results that I like. Would this change/work better if I used raw files?

Just trying to see what available out there for folks with limited time to do this.

**UncleVanya** · 05-18-2021, 06:12 AM

Raw offers much more flexibility and control when post processing. I post some things SOOC, some things are post processed, ultimately I decide based on the image and how I shot it.

**Pentax Syntax** · 05-18-2021, 06:19 AM

I shoot RAW+ and I always post process to some extent. LR is my goto tool but often the JPEG is good enough with a little tweaking for posting on most sites. Get the best of both worlds!

aaacb · 05-18-2021, 06:23 AM

I also use raw+jpeg. Jpegs are usually good enough when the light is beautiful, there are no unavoidable distractions in the image, and I get the exposure just right

That's not the case usually, but even then I tend to crop to a 5:4

Kwong · 05-18-2021, 06:28 AM

Originally posted by dirwood

How many people do post processing of their images before posting anywhere? I have never really dived in-depth to post processing as it seems to take up quite a bit of time.

Is it better/easier to post process raw images vs jpeg's? I always shoot only jpeg because I never do any post processing...

I was considering the Topaz sharpening program. Is this worth the investment for starting out? What about the denoise program? It seems like the programs just auto sharpen or denoise with little input from the user.

I have a free version of Luminar 3 but I can't seem to get any decent results that I like. Would this change/work better if I used raw files?

Just trying to see what available out there for folks with limited time to do this.

I always shoot raw and post process. I do send a jpeg to the second slot but purely for a second copy.

Wasp · 05-18-2021, 06:31 AM

I have stopped shooting JPEGs a few years ago. There are a lot more possibilities when you roll your own images. As for cropping, almost every I do ends up in 16:9.

photoptimist · 05-18-2021, 06:39 AM - **1 Like**

No post processing for me, please.

I love being out in nature, traveling around the world, and taking photographs of whatever catches my eye. I don't enjoy sitting inside at a computer (I do that all day long for work).

Sure, post processing could make my photographs a lot better but it would make my hobby of photography a lot worse. Life is too short for hobbies that suck so I'm not going to do any post processing if I can avoid it.

**pepperberry farm** · 05-18-2021, 06:42 AM

I shoot jpg only and process 99% of my shots that are posted online ..

**dirwood** · 05-18-2021, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by photoptimist

No post processing for me, please.

I love being out in nature, traveling around the world, and taking photographs of whatever catches my eye. I don't enjoy sitting inside at a computer (I do that all day long for work).

Sure, post processing could make my photographs a lot better but it would make my hobby of photography a lot worse. Life is too short for hobbies that suck so I'm not going to do any post processing if I can avoid it.

I assume you shot all in jpeg? I have the same mindset but I do have a bit more time in the house during the winter months in which I can do some post processing. However, it would take a long time to go through all my spring, summer and fall pictures over the winter to post process.

vijaykishan · 05-18-2021, 06:51 AM

Never shot jpeg, either film or PEF/RAW. Before spending money on specialist programs for processing, why not try some excellent open source programs first. I use Darktable and Hugin for example and depending on the output-format & type, I resize, apply format-appropriate sharpening, Gamut adjustment etc and deliver it.

**dirwood** · 05-18-2021, 06:52 AM - **1 Like**

I am currently using the Sigma 70-300 DG macro for most my shots and I usually don't end up with a lot of keepers coming straight from the camera after a day of shooting. I am hoping a new lens will fix this. I know I have started other threads about lenses but I was able to talk the wife into the 150-450 lens so I will be ordering that in a few weeks. It should produce more keepers than my current lens.

VSTAR · 05-18-2021, 06:54 AM

There are some photographers who will explain that they never use any post processing...WYSIWYG.

And there are many that want that physical photo to come as close to what their mind perceived when taking the photo.

Similar to when some of us would shoot film, develop it, then make a proof sheet, then a large print of the ones we liked, and then decided how to alter the photo in the darkroom in order to produce the final enlargement. Those photos were indeed one of a kind because you would never be able to duplicate a second one exactly the same. Digital printing changed all of that- in the sense you can save the final image digitally and reproduce it over and over again, exactly the same each time.

Personally, I did not have the time or the money for a complete Photoshop program, so I went with Corel. Check their website and their prices.

Hope that helps.

**jersey** · 05-18-2021, 07:00 AM

I always shoot RAW+ and always pass them through ACDSee or since I got K-3/3 Snapseed if I edit in field. Often I like shot as is so only add Exif data about me and place/content. Sometimes I tweak them a bit, mostly exposure and WB if I photograph inside museums with different lightning. But if photo requires extensive post production it goes to trash. I'm not really interested in fine art or extensive editing.

vijaykishan · 05-18-2021, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by VSTAR

I did not have the time or the money for a complete Photoshop program

There are many extremely competent opensource tools are avialable out there to help photograhers like us. Some of them equal or exceed the commercial ones in terms of versitility. I used to use the Corel Aftershot Pro as that was the only one that was available that would run on Linux, but after moving to Darktable, I have not looked back. There are other powerful programs that are free as in Beer and free as in speech (Open source) like Rawtherapee, Gimp, Hugin etc which are maintained by competent teams and photographers - worth a try.

bertwert · 05-18-2021, 07:03 AM

I started off shooting JPEG for a while... then I heard about RAW, and how useful it was, so I started shooting RAW+, but only used the JPEG files. A couple years back, I said that's it and that I'm going to work out this post-processing stuff, so switched to RAW only. I've now developed a 'style' in Darktable that I can apply to my images for a quick JPEG, and it's really fairly good, and most of the time I don't need to do more - but I like the flexibility RAW offers to do more, and do so on occasion - for me this workflow works, do in a sense 100% of my shots are post-processed, but over 50% are just run through and converted to JEPG with a quick style, rather than extensive work.

05-18-2021, 06:07 AM	#1
dirwood Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Lockport, New York Posts: 302	How Many... How many people do post processing of their images before posting anywhere? I have never really dived in-depth to post processing as it seems to take up quite a bit of time. Is it better/easier to post process raw images vs jpeg's? I always shoot only jpeg because I never do any post processing... I was considering the Topaz sharpening program. Is this worth the investment for starting out? What about the denoise program? It seems like the programs just auto sharpen or denoise with little input from the user. I have a free version of Luminar 3 but I can't seem to get any decent results that I like. Would this change/work better if I used raw files? Just trying to see what available out there for folks with limited time to do this.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro Many eyes, many eyelashes!!! :-)	Alex Braulio	Post Your Photos!	5	05-04-2021 12:04 PM
How many is too many (how many is too few)?	hooverfocus	Photographic Industry and Professionals	14	04-05-2017 02:38 PM
The Politics of Fashion Photography Part 26 How Many Calls are Too Many Calls	benjikan	General Talk	0	02-24-2012 10:43 AM
how many shutter cycles are to many on a used slr	mikejax19	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	14	08-30-2010 09:34 AM
How Many Clicks Is Too Many?	rparmar	Photographic Technique	26	06-08-2008 06:56 AM

05-18-2021, 06:12 AM	#2
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,446	Raw offers much more flexibility and control when post processing. I post some things SOOC, some things are post processed, ultimately I decide based on the image and how I shot it.

05-18-2021, 06:19 AM	#3
Pentax Syntax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 595	I shoot RAW+ and I always post process to some extent. LR is my goto tool but often the JPEG is good enough with a little tweaking for posting on most sites. Get the best of both worlds!

05-18-2021, 06:23 AM	#4
aaacb Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,726	I also use raw+jpeg. Jpegs are usually good enough when the light is beautiful, there are no unavoidable distractions in the image, and I get the exposure just right That's not the case usually, but even then I tend to crop to a 5:4

05-18-2021, 06:28 AM	#5
Kwong Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 198	Originally posted by dirwood How many people do post processing of their images before posting anywhere? I have never really dived in-depth to post processing as it seems to take up quite a bit of time. Is it better/easier to post process raw images vs jpeg's? I always shoot only jpeg because I never do any post processing... I was considering the Topaz sharpening program. Is this worth the investment for starting out? What about the denoise program? It seems like the programs just auto sharpen or denoise with little input from the user. I have a free version of Luminar 3 but I can't seem to get any decent results that I like. Would this change/work better if I used raw files? Just trying to see what available out there for folks with limited time to do this. I always shoot raw and post process. I do send a jpeg to the second slot but purely for a second copy.

05-18-2021, 06:31 AM	#6
Wasp Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: Pretoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,661	I have stopped shooting JPEGs a few years ago. There are a lot more possibilities when you roll your own images. As for cropping, almost every I do ends up in 16:9.

05-18-2021, 06:39 AM - 1 Like	#7
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,127	No post processing for me, please. I love being out in nature, traveling around the world, and taking photographs of whatever catches my eye. I don't enjoy sitting inside at a computer (I do that all day long for work). Sure, post processing could make my photographs a lot better but it would make my hobby of photography a lot worse. Life is too short for hobbies that suck so I'm not going to do any post processing if I can avoid it.

05-18-2021, 06:42 AM	#8
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,765	I shoot jpg only and process 99% of my shots that are posted online ..

05-18-2021, 06:46 AM	#9
dirwood Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Lockport, New York Posts: 302 Original Poster	Originally posted by photoptimist No post processing for me, please. I love being out in nature, traveling around the world, and taking photographs of whatever catches my eye. I don't enjoy sitting inside at a computer (I do that all day long for work). Sure, post processing could make my photographs a lot better but it would make my hobby of photography a lot worse. Life is too short for hobbies that suck so I'm not going to do any post processing if I can avoid it. I assume you shot all in jpeg? I have the same mindset but I do have a bit more time in the house during the winter months in which I can do some post processing. However, it would take a long time to go through all my spring, summer and fall pictures over the winter to post process.

05-18-2021, 06:51 AM	#10
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999	Never shot jpeg, either film or PEF/RAW. Before spending money on specialist programs for processing, why not try some excellent open source programs first. I use Darktable and Hugin for example and depending on the output-format & type, I resize, apply format-appropriate sharpening, Gamut adjustment etc and deliver it.

05-18-2021, 06:52 AM - 1 Like	#11
dirwood Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Lockport, New York Posts: 302 Original Poster	I am currently using the Sigma 70-300 DG macro for most my shots and I usually don't end up with a lot of keepers coming straight from the camera after a day of shooting. I am hoping a new lens will fix this. I know I have started other threads about lenses but I was able to talk the wife into the 150-450 lens so I will be ordering that in a few weeks. It should produce more keepers than my current lens.

05-18-2021, 06:54 AM	#12
VSTAR Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Toronto Posts: 390	There are some photographers who will explain that they never use any post processing...WYSIWYG. And there are many that want that physical photo to come as close to what their mind perceived when taking the photo. Similar to when some of us would shoot film, develop it, then make a proof sheet, then a large print of the ones we liked, and then decided how to alter the photo in the darkroom in order to produce the final enlargement. Those photos were indeed one of a kind because you would never be able to duplicate a second one exactly the same. Digital printing changed all of that- in the sense you can save the final image digitally and reproduce it over and over again, exactly the same each time. Personally, I did not have the time or the money for a complete Photoshop program, so I went with Corel. Check their website and their prices. Hope that helps.

05-18-2021, 07:00 AM	#13
jersey Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: 3City agglomeration Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,058	I always shoot RAW+ and always pass them through ACDSee or since I got K-3/3 Snapseed if I edit in field. Often I like shot as is so only add Exif data about me and place/content. Sometimes I tweak them a bit, mostly exposure and WB if I photograph inside museums with different lightning. But if photo requires extensive post production it goes to trash. I'm not really interested in fine art or extensive editing.

05-18-2021, 07:03 AM	#14
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999	Originally posted by VSTAR I did not have the time or the money for a complete Photoshop program There are many extremely competent opensource tools are avialable out there to help photograhers like us. Some of them equal or exceed the commercial ones in terms of versitility. I used to use the Corel Aftershot Pro as that was the only one that was available that would run on Linux, but after moving to Darktable, I have not looked back. There are other powerful programs that are free as in Beer and free as in speech (Open source) like Rawtherapee, Gimp, Hugin etc which are maintained by competent teams and photographers - worth a try.

05-18-2021, 07:03 AM	#15
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,172	I started off shooting JPEG for a while... then I heard about RAW, and how useful it was, so I started shooting RAW+, but only used the JPEG files. A couple years back, I said that's it and that I'm going to work out this post-processing stuff, so switched to RAW only. I've now developed a 'style' in Darktable that I can apply to my images for a quick JPEG, and it's really fairly good, and most of the time I don't need to do more - but I like the flexibility RAW offers to do more, and do so on occasion - for me this workflow works, do in a sense 100% of my shots are post-processed, but over 50% are just run through and converted to JEPG with a quick style, rather than extensive work.