[NothingInCommon]

Why are 99% of all of the pictures absolutely perfect. They all seem to be perfectly sharp, super colorful, etc , etc..

When I see samples from reviewers, or common internet folk showing their pics, they never seem as good as you find on PPG.

Is it all post processing?

For instance, the folks at dpreview are as professional as it gets.. here is their K20D sample gallery:

Pentax K20D Review: 35. Samples: Digital Photography Review


if you compare those shots to the PPG for the K20D it seems like a completely different camera:

PENTAX Photo Gallery


I ask this because I want to achieve the perfection you see in PPG at some point. But, I just wanted to know if its [PPG level quality] only possible when combined with photoshop.

[DAZ]

First off for the most part after the 2 part revue only the close to technically perfect are let in. A lot of people are not that good at self editing what is good or not and this gets a lot of the chaff out. You should see the photos that I vote on. Next all photos can only be 600 pixels tall so most photos are down sized. This reduces the ability to pixel peep. There is some PP but the rules limit how much and what kind. Although some may not like the kind of photos on PPG with the above limits the photos tell more about the skill and eye of the photographer then the technically limits of the cameras and lenses. So although the camera and lens can make a differents most of the photos on PPG could have been taken with most any make of camera. As it has been said by others 90 percent of the DSLR are better then 90 percent of the photographers.

DAZ