How much post processing do you do?

Katier · 07-26-2012, 04:49 AM

Friend of mind is almost the opposite of me in that he seems to do a lot of post processing, and cropping.

I crop to a bare minimum (if I can't get the crop with the equipment I have then the shot doesn't happen) because in my opinion it's just not worth it on Digital with limited pixels to work with. On film I will crop more because you can 'zoom' much more readily and indeed you crop by default as on film it's normal for the image to overlap the paper - of course.

Probably 20% of my pictures might need a bit of colour balance and/or exposure tweaking, but everything else gets used in less than 5% of the work ( and digitally I can't remember EVER using dodging or burning).

So how much work do you folks do?

To add to the debate some examples of images I've taken and what I did to them (all are RAW->LR3->jpg/png).

**blackcloudbrew** · 07-26-2012, 05:39 AM

There was at least one other thread on this topic as I recall and it's a bit of a recurring theme. You might search the site for that thread. Regardless I do the amount of PP work necessary to create each image. I do try to get it right in the camera but I'm rarely satisfied with that and will typically adjust tone, contrast, blown highlights, lens correction, and other things to varying degrees - sometimes a little and sometimes a lot. I crop far less but I still do it to complete the image I visualized. All this is because my work flow is that I shoot in RAW and work 98% in lightroom.

loco · 07-26-2012, 06:12 AM

I shoot RAW so I post process everything to some degree. It depends upon the individual picture how much work I feel needs to be done to it. I have no problem using the tools available to me to create the image I'm striving for.

Edited: I should say "TRY to create the image I'm striving for..." Sometimes I fail miserably!

Katier · 07-26-2012, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by Michaelina2

You probably miss lots of what could be great shots, but to each... his own, I suppose.

The issue I have with Cropping is cropping on Digital = less pixels = can't print as large. For general adjustment crops that's generally not an issue, but for 'zoom' crops it is an issue.

On Film, of course, it's very possible to crop to a reasonable degree, especially on MF or LF film.

Katier · 07-26-2012, 07:27 AM

The film mention is mainly because the argument my friend put forward was that 'it's done in film so has to be done in digital' - that said I shoot both so relevant in other ways.

I print up to A3 typically and I know 6mp is stretching 6mp to the limit so there isn't much headroom for 10mp - indeed it's close to the limit for 10mp. So unless I drop the DPI (old school

) down from 300 I don't have much headroom. The reason for the 6mp/10mp references is that I upgraded from a K110D to a K200D because for full double page spread shots I was really struggling to get the shot on the page - i.e. didn't have any room to crop.

Even 10mp isn't great, but at least leave some shuffle room.

magkelly · 07-26-2012, 09:47 AM

I shoot in RAW. I'm pretty good at framing my shots but sometimes I crop a little. Then I check the white balance, tweak the color a bit, sharpen a little then mostly leave it alone. I will use a filter or two if I'm going for a high level effect, like a gradient or a retro film/sepia shot, but most of my correcting these days is done in Camera Raw. If I'm going into Photoshop and doing more I'm going for an art effect or using text or editing out wires or retouching pimples off a face, something like that. I prefer to do as much as I can non-destructively. But I don't believe in limiting myself to just crop and print. Photographers in the old day certain didn't. They burned, touched up, put color in and did all kinds of post processing stuff only in the lab by hand. So why shouldn't I? I don't get the anti-processing purists actually. They're fussing about people doing in Photoshop what used to be done routinely in the lab. I don't like seeing too much adjustment on a journalistic photo but otherwise I don't care. It's up to the photographer and so long as it's done well I don't care what people do. I don't like heavy handed post processing much, but I don't particularly think that completely unteched photos are more noble or artistic either. I wouldn't want someone to leave a big old zit on my nose for the sake of their artistic honesty. Would you?

LeDave · 07-26-2012, 09:51 AM

I shoot in RAW DNG AdobeRGB and then process the images then convert to JPEG sRGB for the interwebz. I don't manipulate the photos by adding and removing elements. However manipulating can refer to many things such as a small edit of the colors or even cropping can refer to removing elements; However from my perspective, it's adding or removing elements such as a person or a vehicle from the photo or adding a person or a vehicle to the photo.

Now when I post process, Itry to minimize hotspots and overblown highlights with shadow/highlights, play with a minor S curve for more contrast, do individual hue/saturation to correct white balance, I then do a minor sharpening and avoid halos and jaggies, lastly I do a crop if needed. When I do a B&W conversion however, I play with the colors in the B&W before fully converting to B&W such as editing the red, green, blue, yellow, cyan, magenta, etc.

Speaking of anti-pp purists, I've encountered one a couple days ago on Flickr. I don't blame them, I know exactly how they felt as I feel the same way about photo manipulation of adding and removing elements of a photo, or doing layers of photos at a time. I however keep my mouth shut and avoid a stir when I see a photo processed that way. I'm a happy guy. http://www.flickr.com/groups/k5/discuss/72157630684241884/ - I'm ItzDaveee

Here's a photo of what I did from stating what I do in the above, I did all of that within this picture, I even cropped almost 50 percent.

Last edited by LeDave; 07-26-2012 at 10:08 AM.

stevewig · 07-26-2012, 10:01 AM

There is a (snobbish?) school out there which take great pride in not doing any post processing and yes most of us with a little experience behind us could do the same if we wanted to - me included.

I take great pride in all my finished pictures and that includes taking the picture and getting it RIGHT in the camera as well as using post processing to obtain the best possible results. The best results always require some post processing in my very humble opinion.

Yes, I am aware of the other extreme - which is too much post processing producing worst pictures than those straight from the camera.

sb in ak · 07-26-2012, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by stevewig

There is a (snobbish?) school out there which take great pride in not doing any post processing and yes most of us with a little experience behind us could do the same if we wanted to - me included.

I take great pride in all my finished pictures and that includes taking the picture and getting it RIGHT in the camera as well as using post processing to obtain the best possible results. The best results always require some post processing in my very humble opinion.

Yes, I am aware of the other extreme - which is too much post processing producing worst pictures than those straight from the camera.

Totally agree with this and many of the above statements.

eddie1960 · 07-26-2012, 10:24 AM

I shoot raw so do some post. how much depends on how well i managed to get it right. I crop for compositional purposes or to eliminate something i missed in the vf, or to straighten an image but keep the crop amount to a minimum.
since I prefer b/w for a lot of images i probably do more post than many people but for a series (like shooting a concert) I will process one with no crop and copy the settings to others and just fine tune them to speed the job

JohnBee · 07-26-2012, 10:29 AM

100% RAW and PP for me.

SpecialK · 07-26-2012, 12:24 PM

RAW here, therefore some PP. Crop if it helps. Frequent use of Element's horizon leveling tool :-( No printing.

For the OP, I would crop the first two for sure.

L33tGreg · 07-26-2012, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by LeDave

I shoot in RAW DNG AdobeRGB

RAW files don't have a colorspace.

Katier · 07-26-2012, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

For the OP, I would crop the first two for sure.

Maybe I should have included the RAW's

SpecialK · 07-26-2012, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by Katier

Maybe I should have included the RAW's

That would not really matter, as you say the first is uncropped. The first has the flower in the center and a lot of background in...the background. The second has a lot of asphalt in the foreground :-) That's just my take on it.

I realize this is not a critique thread, but you say you do very little PP where, to me, the examples call for more.

07-26-2012, 04:49 AM	#1
Katier Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 72	How much post processing do you do? Friend of mind is almost the opposite of me in that he seems to do a lot of post processing, and cropping. I crop to a bare minimum (if I can't get the crop with the equipment I have then the shot doesn't happen) because in my opinion it's just not worth it on Digital with limited pixels to work with. On film I will crop more because you can 'zoom' much more readily and indeed you crop by default as on film it's normal for the image to overlap the paper - of course. Probably 20% of my pictures might need a bit of colour balance and/or exposure tweaking, but everything else gets used in less than 5% of the work ( and digitally I can't remember EVER using dodging or burning). So how much work do you folks do? To add to the debate some examples of images I've taken and what I did to them (all are RAW->LR3->jpg/png).

07-26-2012, 06:12 AM	#3
loco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,846	I shoot RAW so I post process everything to some degree. It depends upon the individual picture how much work I feel needs to be done to it. I have no problem using the tools available to me to create the image I'm striving for. Edited: I should say "TRY to create the image I'm striving for..." Sometimes I fail miserably! Last edited by loco; 07-26-2012 at 06:18 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Thematic NO Post Processing!	wzdevito	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	160	03-18-2015 05:13 AM
Post Processing	Tatume	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	18	05-21-2012 10:28 PM
Machinery Post Processing	mikro	Photo Critique	19	03-16-2011 07:41 PM
Lens Correction: 15mm DA Limited (in-camera Pentax Kx processing or post-processing?)	ADHWJC	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	11-29-2010 08:11 PM
Architecture How did I do with the Post-Processing	iocchelli	Photo Critique	10	08-01-2010 11:24 AM

07-26-2012, 05:39 AM	#2
blackcloudbrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Cotati, California USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,460	There was at least one other thread on this topic as I recall and it's a bit of a recurring theme. You might search the site for that thread. Regardless I do the amount of PP work necessary to create each image. I do try to get it right in the camera but I'm rarely satisfied with that and will typically adjust tone, contrast, blown highlights, lens correction, and other things to varying degrees - sometimes a little and sometimes a lot. I crop far less but I still do it to complete the image I visualized. All this is because my work flow is that I shoot in RAW and work 98% in lightroom.

07-26-2012, 06:15 AM	#4
Katier Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by Michaelina2 You probably miss lots of what could be great shots, but to each... his own, I suppose. The issue I have with Cropping is cropping on Digital = less pixels = can't print as large. For general adjustment crops that's generally not an issue, but for 'zoom' crops it is an issue. On Film, of course, it's very possible to crop to a reasonable degree, especially on MF or LF film.

07-26-2012, 07:27 AM	#5
Katier Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 72 Original Poster	The film mention is mainly because the argument my friend put forward was that 'it's done in film so has to be done in digital' - that said I shoot both so relevant in other ways. I print up to A3 typically and I know 6mp is stretching 6mp to the limit so there isn't much headroom for 10mp - indeed it's close to the limit for 10mp. So unless I drop the DPI (old school ) down from 300 I don't have much headroom. The reason for the 6mp/10mp references is that I upgraded from a K110D to a K200D because for full double page spread shots I was really struggling to get the shot on the page - i.e. didn't have any room to crop. Even 10mp isn't great, but at least leave some shuffle room.

07-26-2012, 09:47 AM	#6
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	I shoot in RAW. I'm pretty good at framing my shots but sometimes I crop a little. Then I check the white balance, tweak the color a bit, sharpen a little then mostly leave it alone. I will use a filter or two if I'm going for a high level effect, like a gradient or a retro film/sepia shot, but most of my correcting these days is done in Camera Raw. If I'm going into Photoshop and doing more I'm going for an art effect or using text or editing out wires or retouching pimples off a face, something like that. I prefer to do as much as I can non-destructively. But I don't believe in limiting myself to just crop and print. Photographers in the old day certain didn't. They burned, touched up, put color in and did all kinds of post processing stuff only in the lab by hand. So why shouldn't I? I don't get the anti-processing purists actually. They're fussing about people doing in Photoshop what used to be done routinely in the lab. I don't like seeing too much adjustment on a journalistic photo but otherwise I don't care. It's up to the photographer and so long as it's done well I don't care what people do. I don't like heavy handed post processing much, but I don't particularly think that completely unteched photos are more noble or artistic either. I wouldn't want someone to leave a big old zit on my nose for the sake of their artistic honesty. Would you?

07-26-2012, 09:51 AM	#7
LeDave Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,067	I shoot in RAW DNG AdobeRGB and then process the images then convert to JPEG sRGB for the interwebz. I don't manipulate the photos by adding and removing elements. However manipulating can refer to many things such as a small edit of the colors or even cropping can refer to removing elements; However from my perspective, it's adding or removing elements such as a person or a vehicle from the photo or adding a person or a vehicle to the photo. Now when I post process, Itry to minimize hotspots and overblown highlights with shadow/highlights, play with a minor S curve for more contrast, do individual hue/saturation to correct white balance, I then do a minor sharpening and avoid halos and jaggies, lastly I do a crop if needed. When I do a B&W conversion however, I play with the colors in the B&W before fully converting to B&W such as editing the red, green, blue, yellow, cyan, magenta, etc. Speaking of anti-pp purists, I've encountered one a couple days ago on Flickr. I don't blame them, I know exactly how they felt as I feel the same way about photo manipulation of adding and removing elements of a photo, or doing layers of photos at a time. I however keep my mouth shut and avoid a stir when I see a photo processed that way. I'm a happy guy. http://www.flickr.com/groups/k5/discuss/72157630684241884/ - I'm ItzDaveee Here's a photo of what I did from stating what I do in the above, I did all of that within this picture, I even cropped almost 50 percent. Last edited by LeDave; 07-26-2012 at 10:08 AM.

07-26-2012, 10:01 AM	#8
stevewig Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 773	There is a (snobbish?) school out there which take great pride in not doing any post processing and yes most of us with a little experience behind us could do the same if we wanted to - me included. I take great pride in all my finished pictures and that includes taking the picture and getting it RIGHT in the camera as well as using post processing to obtain the best possible results. The best results always require some post processing in my very humble opinion. Yes, I am aware of the other extreme - which is too much post processing producing worst pictures than those straight from the camera.

07-26-2012, 10:17 AM	#9
sb in ak Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Omaha, NE Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 612	Originally posted by stevewig There is a (snobbish?) school out there which take great pride in not doing any post processing and yes most of us with a little experience behind us could do the same if we wanted to - me included. I take great pride in all my finished pictures and that includes taking the picture and getting it RIGHT in the camera as well as using post processing to obtain the best possible results. The best results always require some post processing in my very humble opinion. Yes, I am aware of the other extreme - which is too much post processing producing worst pictures than those straight from the camera. Totally agree with this and many of the above statements.

07-26-2012, 10:24 AM	#10
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	I shoot raw so do some post. how much depends on how well i managed to get it right. I crop for compositional purposes or to eliminate something i missed in the vf, or to straighten an image but keep the crop amount to a minimum. since I prefer b/w for a lot of images i probably do more post than many people but for a series (like shooting a concert) I will process one with no crop and copy the settings to others and just fine tune them to speed the job

07-26-2012, 10:29 AM	#11
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	100% RAW and PP for me.

07-26-2012, 12:24 PM	#12
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	RAW here, therefore some PP. Crop if it helps. Frequent use of Element's horizon leveling tool :-( No printing. For the OP, I would crop the first two for sure.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-26-2012, 12:38 PM	#13
L33tGreg Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Charleston, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 369	Originally posted by LeDave I shoot in RAW DNG AdobeRGB RAW files don't have a colorspace.

07-26-2012, 02:25 PM	#14
Katier Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by SpecialK For the OP, I would crop the first two for sure. Maybe I should have included the RAW's

07-26-2012, 03:06 PM	#15
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,480	Originally posted by Katier Maybe I should have included the RAW's That would not really matter, as you say the first is uncropped. The first has the flower in the center and a lot of background in...the background. The second has a lot of asphalt in the foreground :-) That's just my take on it. I realize this is not a critique thread, but you say you do very little PP where, to me, the examples call for more.