Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-05-2014, 11:53 PM   #61
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
Technically speaking, the camera's image engine does what we are calling post processing on a computer. The algorithms may be different/simpler/etc but it works to some formula. We call them digital filters or presets. Most of the time for most people it all works out OK. I have some presets loaded in Aperture that take the place of anything the camera's image engine would have done. The preset can be stamped to all my images and then I can tweak and adjust to taste. It also gives me a chance to understand all the levers that can pulled and I learn a thing or two along the way. I think if we looked at true RAW data (not the JPG preview of RAW data) then we would be horribly disappointed with what we see. The image engine (aka post processing - whether in camera or out of camera) does a lot of work we easily take for granted - me included!

My biggest gripe is that JPG down samples everything to an 8-bit per channel color depth. Once down sampled and saved the information is gone. RAW give you a chance to save the original 12 or 14 bit color depth.

05-06-2014, 12:40 AM   #62
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lyngby, Copenhagen
Photos: Albums
Posts: 742
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
I think if we looked at true RAW data (not the JPG preview of RAW data) then we would be horribly disappointed with what we see.
I don't think "looking at raw data" makes any sense.
You can't visualize raw data from a file to a computer monitor (in order to "look at them") without making decisions about gamma, saturation etc. ("post processing decisions") about how to render them.

Regards,
--Anders.
05-06-2014, 12:56 AM   #63
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,245
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
I'm sorry but film pros that shoot slide film get it right in camera. Photography practically ends when they trip the shutter. A JPEG is way more forgiving than slide film and you have immediate feedback on the LCD. No reason you can't get it right. Others have been doing this for ages.

Those that shoot negatives previsualize the print and they shoot accordingly. Adams expose for the shadows and develop for the highlights. Digital photographers now don't even know what they got until they get to their computers and spend another 5 hours clicking a mouse. Huge difference.

I am not against post processing but there is a time for everything.

I play the guitar as well and it's funny when you listen to beginners play the intro to Sweet Child Of Mine when they can't even bar a chord. That is the closest analogy I can think of.

Originally posted by Macario
there is no such thing of when not to shoot, there is only how to shoot.
That's what a lot of togs think. They think they can just get in a tour bus and expect a good shot.

Actually, you are totally wrong here. When you are talking about slides, then please also tell that when shooting slides, you choose which type of slide film you will shoot Also which developer, how to develop, push/pull process, cross process etc etc. So when talking about getting it right in camera as comparison to slides, then also please tell if somebody wants that. They have to tweak their jpg settings every time to suit their needs for that shot to get it right in camera. (very beginner friendly ) As when shooting with slides, you also do that. And let's not talk about film, then you also had to take in account paper, developer, dodging/burning. And when on this subject, let's talk about B/W film, even more PP is going, or do you really think that the greats (like Ansel Adams) got their shot's right in camera and did not do any PP while printing? Yes Adams did expose on shadows and develop on highlights, but then he had to print, and dodge, and burn, and choose the paper, and choose the grade.

There is much, much more to than to say you have to get it right in camera, because that is just totally untrue.

and what you said about trogs, well. Like I said before. There is no when not to shoot, only how to shoot. If you know how to shoot, you also know how to shoot a good picture from a bus, even if it would be moving.
Or do you really think that pro's that cover sports, or war or demonstration etc stop shooting because the sport etc is at noon and the light is then too harsh? Like what every beginner is told, don't shoot at noon, light is too harsh. Really? No, they know how to shoot. There is no when not to shoot.
05-06-2014, 04:55 AM   #64
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
Actually, you are totally wrong here. When you are talking about slides, then please also tell that when shooting slides, you choose which type of slide film you will shoot Also which developer, how to develop, push/pull process, cross process etc etc. So when talking about getting it right in camera as comparison to slides, then also please tell if somebody wants that. They have to tweak their jpg settings every time to suit their needs for that shot to get it right in camera. (very beginner friendly ) As when shooting with slides, you also do that. And let's not talk about film, then you also had to take in account paper, developer, dodging/burning. And when on this subject, let's talk about B/W film, even more PP is going, or do you really think that the greats (like Ansel Adams) got their shot's right in camera and did not do any PP while printing? Yes Adams did expose on shadows and develop on highlights, but then he had to print, and dodge, and burn, and choose the paper, and choose the grade.

There is much, much more to than to say you have to get it right in camera, because that is just totally untrue.

and what you said about trogs, well. Like I said before. There is no when not to shoot, only how to shoot. If you know how to shoot, you also know how to shoot a good picture from a bus, even if it would be moving.
Or do you really think that pro's that cover sports, or war or demonstration etc stop shooting because the sport etc is at noon and the light is then too harsh? Like what every beginner is told, don't shoot at noon, light is too harsh. Really? No, they know how to shoot. There is no when not to shoot.

That reply triggered my interest

I shoot a lot in jpeg. All that brouhaha about choice of slide film and developer and what not, I do on the camera. You know there is a menu that you can access from the LCD right? The LCD is where I order my developer and choose my lab. Most of the time I really like what comes out of my camera. Unlike film, you really can't change how it looks until after 36 shots but I can from shot to shot with a click of a button.

So now let's assume that I am absolutely wrong and an epic failure. That none of my jpeg shots can even come close to your processed shots. Can you show us then how it is done? Let's see the dodge and burn and paper choice and grade. Let's see what you can come up with all that.

05-06-2014, 07:59 AM - 1 Like   #65
Veteran Member
Imageman's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 461
Aha, how interesting,


I have shot slide film since 1958, I had to choose the film according to its wrong colours that I would find acceptable, the red cast of kodachrome or the blue cast of ektachrome for example, no colour film existed that was neutral That was an impossible dream anyway, from the blue light of morning to the harsh but neutral light of noon to the yellow light of late afternoon, the colour of daylight changed through the day and the film could not compensate at all, so nothing was ever going to be the right colour.


And ive got news for you, daylight still changes colour in exactly the same way today, and ive got further news, many digital cameras are inconsistent in exposure and white balance even on consecutive shots, so they never get it the same way consistently anyway. Why do digital photographers spend 1 minute on each shot photographing and 5 minutes on each shot chimping, the reason is they never know what the camera is doing.


Getting it right in a film camera consisted of getting it close enough to be acceptable and pretending that you like pink flesh tones, but that was acceptable because no manufacturer could ever make colour film that was correctly balanced.


And with good reason, the different dyes reacted differently with the age of the film and changed over time, and additionally a long exposure leads to breakdown in colour balance and bizarre colour casts, Reciprocity failure was always a risk beyond a 10 second exposure.


You mentioned Adams, I seem to recall his method was the zone system, far more sophisticated than simply expose on shadows and develop on highlights as you suggest, he invented the zone system after all, he tone mapped the darkest to lightest tones in the image and assigned each a value. He developed each sheet of 10x8 individually, varying the development as his zone system suggested and the amount of contrast in the image he was looking for, true pushing and pulling of each image independently. Where is the getting it right in camera here.


You mention Ken Rockwell, well as it happens im familiar with his opinions and his work and I respect the guy immensely. Shall we follow his advice?


He says digital cameras are for family snapshots and serious work is done on large format 5x4 film cameras. so throw your digital camera in the dumpster buy a 5x4 film camera and do some real photography Rockwell style.


Or follow another of his recommendations, instead of using a digital camera use a film camera, expose a roll of film and have it processed in a store and have them scan it to cd and then use post processing to create the final image. He recommends this approach to be able to get the image right in post processing. Not in camera.


Don't suggest that Rockwells advice is about getting it right in camera that's just not true.


I would argue that as Rockwells experience comes as a cinematographer, that's the ultimate in post processing. The film industry shot on negative stock, then in post processing copied the negatives onto more negative stock to end up with a positive copy, adjusting for brightness and colour balance as they did it. This is the ultimate in post processing, reprocessing copies of the original changing tonal values and colour as you go.
They had to do this because from take to take in camera the colour balance and brightness changed.


Even Hollywood on a multimillion dollar budget could not get it right in camera.


However you slice it, theres no such thing as "getting it right" only getting it how you want it, and to be honest how I want it is never how the camera wants it, and I may change my mind tomorrow and want more saturation or less or more brightness. Am I to buy another air ticket to Greece so I can retake those shots of the Parthenon and get them right in camera, or shall I increase the brightness in post process. mmm let me ponder that one.


There isn't a right answer to an image that you can dial into a camera, this isn't maths, this is art.


Take the best image you can with your camera, then after you have the best image the camera can produce, make it the way you want it in post processing. simple.


Or, if the image that comes out of the camera is exactly as you want it, don't post process, simple.
05-06-2014, 08:31 AM   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 451
Listen and learn. Hah.

It's not so much the message that you are trying to convey, it's more the way you are conveying it. Of course it is preferable to know what you want from a shot, and how to get it straight from the camera.

Adams expose(d) for the shadows and develop(ed) for the highlights - but surely that is post-processing. And surely you don't believe that his system was not the result of a long period of failed post-processing, a learning curve?

Most, maybe even all, photographers using slide film to get wondrous results also had a learning curve. Probably they had a success rate of 1 in 1000 as beginners, then 1 in 100, and now they are your exemplars they are skilled enough and may well think themselves lucky enough to get a couple of keepers from a roll of 12 or 20.

---------- Post added 05-06-14 at 11:38 PM ----------

You get it right in camera, you say. Maybe so, but I find it hard to believe, but if you do, I bet it's as a result of a long learning process. And with digital, post-processing is a valuable part of the learning curve.

But let,s look at it from a different point of view. Perhaps the most satisfying shot I have taken in recent weeks was impossible to achieve in-camera. I was in a dim workshop lit mainly by fluorescents, and I wanted a chiaroscuro/silhouette effect. Maybe there are ways to get the effect I wanted in camera, but does your dogma

---------- Post added 05-06-14 at 11:42 PM ----------

Mean that I must not get my image using the most efficient method, post-processing.

As a guideline, your idea is worthwhile, but as an inviolable rule, it is unsupportable.
05-06-2014, 01:16 PM   #67
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
Why post-process?

Wow! Some very long winded responses here as if I was implying that post processing is bad. Bad bad. No, no, and no. I NEVER said do NOT process. I said BEGINNERS should get it right in camera and not post process.

Adams is an expert. He has the right to process and that is why his workflow is like that. He shoots KNOWING what is going to happen in the dark room. You would not expose for the shadows just like that if you have no control of the highlights later. Yeah, tell a beginner to do that. Have them read all three books of Adams before going out to shoot because that is more practical. ROFL!!!

Again, long-winded but utterly baseless responses people.

---------- Post added 05-07-14 at 06:32 ----------

I also noticed that WB is frequently referred to as a weakness of shooting jpeg. True that's why "experts" shoot in raw so they can adjust it later in the computer. So instead of setting the WB in camera they fix it in post. Way to go experts! Way to teach beginners the proper way of shooting. Bravo!!!
05-06-2014, 02:52 PM   #68
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
Here's a message to all beginners in this forum. According to the EXPERTS you will NEVER get it right in camera no matter what you do. Give up on trying. That means you will have to learn to post process EVERY IMAGE that you capture if you expect them to even come close to getting it right. Every time you hear the camera click you are being told that you are wrong. It's a futile exercise. You might as well hire a graphics artist. An expert graphics artist.

That goes for all you film shooters as well. Unless you choose your own developer and paper and die in chemical exposure you will never get it right. That's probably why film labs are closing. They never get it right.

Rant over!

05-06-2014, 02:54 PM   #69
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
Nahhh... You won't get it wrong in the camera. My personal opinion is that you'll just get it better post processing the image in Aperture, Lightroom, etc vs. processing it in the camera.
05-06-2014, 04:03 PM   #70
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
On what definition of better? Like those in youarenotaphotographer.com? Clown vomit HDR kind of better?

Learn to walk before you run. That's what I have been saying.
05-06-2014, 04:04 PM   #71
Veteran Member
Imageman's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 461
Im beginning to be irritated now by your strident and self righteous attitude.


Increasing the brightness of an image, because it looks a bit dark when you upload it to facebook, is called post processing.


This is not about doing things right in camera. facebook images are viewed at screen intensities of thousands of home monitors that you have no control over, some bright some not so bright.


You might wish to make the image brighter, because all your mates say they cant see it properly. It wasn't exposed "wrong" but you still want to brighten it. Or if you print it and the image looks a bit dark you might want to lighten it instead of printing dark rubbish.


Its about what you want to do with the image and if it looks ok when you do.


This will be the third time I will say this so this time have the decency to read it, I will bolden it for you so you can easily spot it.


If you don't like the way the image looks post process it.

If you like the way the image looks don't post process it
05-06-2014, 04:08 PM   #72
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
Maybe facebook doesnt get it right. After 6 hours editing your raw file FB ruins it. We should ban FB. It's never right. ROFL!

This is getting more ridiculous.

---------- Post added 05-07-14 at 09:10 ----------

Here's what, shoot in raw then write a FB app that will let you process your shots within FB.
05-06-2014, 07:16 PM   #73
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
Adams is an expert. He has the right to process and that is why his workflow is like that.
Some of you keep speaking of Adams in the present tense. He may be "immortal," but he died 30 years ago.
05-06-2014, 07:27 PM   #74
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 451
And I quote: Again, long-winded but utterly baseless responses people.

Geez this guy has such an arrogant attitude.

Guys, do not feed the troll.
05-06-2014, 07:39 PM   #75
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
On what definition of better? Like those in youarenotaphotographer.com? Clown vomit HDR kind of better?

Learn to walk before you run. That's what I have been saying.

Post processing on my computer gives me more freedom and more tools to adjust the image in ways that my camera would have a very, very hard time doing so. For example, I can selectively add contrast, brightness, definition, etc to specific areas. I can tweak my white balance and adjust my color curves. If all of this and more were possible in-camera then all of us would be doing it in-camera and products like Aperture and Lightroom would have no market. Digital cameras are not perfect. They don't see what our eye sees. The raw image data is starting point and even that data goes through some processing before the embedded system in our camera creates the file. Post processing gets us a little closer. At some point we say the image is good enough and we leave it.

I completely agree with you that no amount of post processing can save a poorly composed shot that was not executed correctly. Nobody would argue with you there.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
adams, beginners, bit, camera, colour, curve, dont, duncan, effect, fb, film, image, ken, pentax help, photo, photography, pm, post, post-processing, process, processing, responses, result, shot, slide, slides, wb
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to post-process photos? kcobain1992 Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 7 11-30-2012 08:05 PM
People A post-process dilemma mikolotko Photo Critique 3 08-08-2012 01:56 PM
how to post process trevorgrout Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 6 08-10-2010 04:56 AM
Cityscape Post Process on a photo miss_alexx Photo Critique 6 12-18-2009 03:48 PM
how not to post-process mattdm Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 43 10-28-2007 05:17 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:51 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top