IAZA Web Photo Program

[squishy]

very good way of putting it john.but still, sometimes it really bugs me when i see my friend with his £140 digital camera, not even doing anything to the photos. you dont need to go through tutorials or use complex software, but just a little more contrast, saturation and sharpness, can turn a photo from an ordinary snapshot into a lovely capture of a memory in a matter of seconds. don't worry, i'm not saying everyone with a camera should learn how to photoshop like an expert it does bug me how much people will spend on a camera and not even do something ever so simple, like reading the manual

[John D]

Originally Posted by squishy

very good way of putting it john.but still, sometimes it really bugs me when i see my friend with his £140 digital camera, not even doing anything to the photos. you dont need to go through tutorials or use complex software, but just a little more contrast, saturation and sharpness, can turn a photo from an ordinary snapshot into a lovely capture of a memory in a matter of seconds. don't worry, i'm not saying everyone with a camera should learn how to photoshop like an expert it does bug me how much people will spend on a camera and not even do something ever so simple, like reading the manual

Hi Squishy, I agree in part with what you are saying but don't let what others do 'bug' you. There is enough to be involved in without letting what others do 'bug' you. Lifes too short for that! Remember others may be 'bugged' with some of the things you do or say.Everybody has a choice and it will not necessarily be the same as yours.

Contrast,saturation and even sharpness are seen and judged very differently by people so what is acceptable for some may not be acceptable for others.
Photography like art in general is very much a subjective topic. That is one of the factors that make it so interesting.

How often have we seen a thread where someone asked for advice on composition,cropping,sharpness etc etc and then went on to read the wide variation in replies. It's very much an opinion on what is correct in most cases.

John D

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by squishy

very good way of putting it john.but still, sometimes it really bugs me when i see my friend with his £140 digital camera, not even doing anything to the photos. you dont need to go through tutorials or use complex software, but just a little more contrast, saturation and sharpness, can turn a photo from an ordinary snapshot into a lovely capture of a memory in a matter of seconds. don't worry, i'm not saying everyone with a camera should learn how to photoshop like an expert it does bug me how much people will spend on a camera and not even do something ever so simple, like reading the manual

Also photoshop cant make a bad photo into a good one , it is more important to get it right in camera as far as possible and to recognise when tweaks in photoshop are needed and when they arent. If a photo isnt focussed propperly or is badly composed no ammount of photoshop will help.

adding contrast, saturation and sharpening does not automatically improve a photo (particularly one taken with a cheap compact) they can sometimes improve a shot but just as often can turn an okay photo into an over saturated, artifact ridden mess.

[squishy]

very good points

[tristanba]

These things certainly are personal and ones preferences and habits can change over time as well. When I started taking digital photos I always used to post-process to produce punchy, saturated and fairly high-contrast images; now I prefer a slightly more muted image which preserves as much detail as possible. The way I sharpen images has changed as well.

I would agree that photoshop cannot rescue a poorly shot JPEG, but shooting in RAW is a different matter and gives much more scope for rescuing shots which would otherwise be binned immediately.

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by tristanba

I would agree that photoshop cannot rescue a poorly shot JPEG, but shooting in RAW is a different matter and gives much more scope for rescuing shots which would otherwise be binned immediately.

I agree that raw gives more flexibility but you still cant turn a bad shot into a good one. If a photographer isnt able to focus correctly , hold your camera still, use the appropriate shutter speed, or compose a decent shot then no post processing will help - what will help is time spent practicing with the camera , rather than sat in front of a pc trying to polish a xexexexe.

[tristanba]

Originally Posted by eeyore

I agree that raw gives more flexibility but you still cant turn a bad shot into a good one. If a photographer isnt able to focus correctly , hold your camera still, use the appropriate shutter speed, or compose a decent shot then no post processing will help - what will help is time spent practicing with the camera , rather than sat in front of a pc trying to polish a xexexexe.

Sure - I was really referring to the ability to correct exposure problems, particularly slight overexposure. In an out of camera JPEG this would result in blown higlights and a binned shot. The ability to alter white balance and contrast can also make an enormous difference.