Real life photography/photo editing

[raedor 8]

Where is the fun of digital photography without post processing?

Taking tons of pics without paying for it I'm too dumb for postprocessing...

[Ironsight 1]

Nice pics guys

A day at the beach....

[MI_Fred 0]

Where is the fun of digital photography without post processing?

Actually I was waiting for some smart-behind to point out in-camera processing is always postume work  

If my Nikon had more processing options that I listed I'd surely use them. Altho that yellow tone sure beats sepia any given day. B/w would be nice though. Then there would be filters, but that is a matter of €s. I only edit failed photos... or just leave them gathering dust. Or to wait for the odd artistic usage. A single photo shouldn't need it, but a collection, but then what is a collection really if it wasn't achieved by what was at hand when shot... edited to be uniform with other shots alters reality. But this is just my silly dogmatic way of seeing this activity  

And to answer with a picture:

The insides of anything are worth colour. Just when things were looking good: plumbing renovation with a 15 minute notice at 9am. Ah hell!  

[earl 0]

If my Nikon had more processing options that I listed I'd surely use them

[...]

if it wasn't achieved by what was at hand when shot... edited to be uniform with other shots alters reality. But this is just my silly dogmatic way of seeing this activity  

Okay, i'll bite :-)  You would use in-camera processing, but not photoshop?  It's all software processing either way.  It just means you are leaving the adjustments up to someone else, who coded the prefab processes: whitebalance, sharpening, colour profiles, etc.  If you shoot RAW, you get exactly what the CCD recorded, and then you can do it all yourself instead of relying on simplified internal presets.  It gives you the chance to add a bit more personal vision to the image.

And for some general semantics; I say 'reality' is altered as soon as it is recorded - film type or CCD quality, lens distortion, flare, shutter speed, DOF... down to the context of where people see your images.  The only difference is that photoshop offers so much more control that the inexperienced (i include myself here) can make things ugly really quickly.

I admire this guy's work: http://www.markscholey.co.uk/landscapes/landscapes.htm

And which reality do you prefer: http://www.pbase.com/hiv/ps_skillz

[Messiah 2]

this is one guy who I think's got a golden touch with photography:

http://www.neilmcintyre.com/

his landscapes are stunning

[Ares1978 0]

"Targets of opportunity" while burning reed last sunday.

[MI_Fred 0]

If my Nikon had more processing options that I listed I'd surely use them

[...]

if it wasn't achieved by what was at hand when shot... edited to be uniform with other shots alters reality. But this is just my silly dogmatic way of seeing this activity  

Okay, i'll bite :-)  You would use in-camera processing, but not photoshop?  It's all software processing either way.  It just means you are leaving the adjustments up to someone else, who coded the prefab processes: whitebalance, sharpening, colour profiles, etc.  If you shoot RAW, you get exactly what the CCD recorded, and then you can do it all yourself instead of relying on simplified internal presets.  It gives you the chance to add a bit more personal vision to the image.

And for some general semantics; I say 'reality' is altered as soon as it is recorded - film type or CCD quality, lens distortion, flare, shutter speed, DOF... down to the context of where people see your images.  The only difference is that photoshop offers so much more control that the inexperienced (i include myself here) can make things ugly really quickly.

I admire this guy's work: http://www.markscholey.co.uk/landscapes/landscapes.htm

And which reality do you prefer: http://www.pbase.com/hiv/ps_skillz

Okay, that's all true, but what I was aiming for was that:

If you plan on taking 5 shots of 5 different things with the desire to capture them all in the same lighting conditions/tones but fail and go create the lighting conditions in photoshop, you distort the reality that you just didn't succeed out in the field to create unity. I'm the worst when it comes to that, perhaps 4 of my last 6 abstract'ish photos have some similarities about their qualities, like near unrecognizable shapes due to spanning out of the area. This is a part of reality I want to portray to create a certain unity and reality, not actual factual reality, but a metonymy which would also be achieved by cropping in PS. This isn't really helping with my already unvoluntary compulsory habits, I might go do shots over and over and again just because the horizon got tilted a bit too much and I can't go straighten the photos in any ewww software.

shoot me.

E: agh, forgot one the or a out of there and now I can't really fit neither in any better than the other... bah.

[berghoff 11]

[verbal 0]

very nice ares

heres my small contribution. nothing special, i was just scanning for art thread

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Wild fires in Oklahoma South of OKC

[earl 0]

you just didn't succeed out in the field

Okay, I see what you mean. The ease of editing makes people lazy when shooting. That's when photoshop starts to be used as a crutch instead of an important final stage. It's important to pay attention to mistakes, and turn them into useful feedback at the next photo shoot (even if photoshop lets people minimize the mistakes). I definitely have this problem.

[killagee 0]

WooHoo my new lenses have arrived!

The Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 HSM is a big lens, and feels quite intimidating to carry around. People seem to shy away when they see you with it, so it would be a hindrance for people photography, but it just takes the most beautiful images, and with the 1.4x Converter attached the autofocus is still incredibly fast.

Here are a few quick test shots from it...

I dont understand how the Sigma 10-20mm can be so wide without undue distortion, but this lens will be amazing for landscapes!

I cant wait to tkae these babies out for some real photo missions... I will keep you posted...

P.S. Work is rapidly underway on my website, www.stereoimage.co.nz

Cheers!

[MI_Fred 0]

you just didn't succeed out in the field

Okay, I see what you mean.  The ease of editing makes people lazy when shooting.  That's when photoshop starts to be used as a crutch instead of an important final stage.  It's important to pay attention to mistakes, and turn them into useful feedback at the next photo shoot (even if photoshop lets people minimize the mistakes).  I definitely have this problem.

That's pretty much it. What's worse is it will inevitably become a standard anyway for sure to edit and use the software, that's why it's there - why waste it. It's not about effort and skill or intuition or the eye if you got a neat gui everyone can use... to make art? It's so terrible I have an example, every young Fin must know a certain irc-gallery. Practicly everyone has become an artist and has a folder besides self portraits and whatnot drunken photos. Why am I this bitter? It's obvious, and this anti-PS attitude is a reaction to the attrocity of that gallery... But enough of this. Almost didn't even notice Ares' work, great catch there. I wish I'd catch a fire...

[Supah 0]

WooHoo my new lenses have arrived!

The Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 HSM is a big lens, and feels quite intimidating to carry around. People seem to shy away when they see you with it, so it would be a hindrance for people photography, but it just takes the most beautiful images, and with the 1.4x Converter attached the autofocus is still incredibly fast.

Here are a few quick test shots from it...

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WEBBarbarella2.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebBarbarella3.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebAirport.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/Fauna%20and%20Flora/WebPukeko.jpg[/img]

I dont understand how the Sigma 10-20mm can be so wide without undue distortion, but this lens will be amazing for landscapes!

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebWesternSprings.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebBusWideAngle.jpg[/img]

I cant wait to tkae these babies out for some real photo missions... I will keep you posted...

P.S. Work is rapidly underway on my website, www.stereoimage.co.nz

Cheers!

Nice shots man! Babes in boats always do the job Got any photo's of the lenses themselves? If you think a 200mm lens is intimidating try carrying a 500mm sigma around for a day, total upper body work out!

[GoOB 0]

Someplace in Bayswater, London through a Lensbaby 1.0.

[killagee 0]

WooHoo my new lenses have arrived!

The Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 HSM is a big lens, and feels quite intimidating to carry around. People seem to shy away when they see you with it, so it would be a hindrance for people photography, but it just takes the most beautiful images, and with the 1.4x Converter attached the autofocus is still incredibly fast.

Here are a few quick test shots from it...

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WEBBarbarella2.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebBarbarella3.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebAirport.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/Fauna%20and%20Flora/WebPukeko.jpg[/img]

I dont understand how the Sigma 10-20mm can be so wide without undue distortion, but this lens will be amazing for landscapes!

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebWesternSprings.jpg[/img]

[ig]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v128/chrisgee/General/WebBusWideAngle.jpg[/img]

I cant wait to tkae these babies out for some real photo missions... I will keep you posted...

P.S. Work is rapidly underway on my website, www.stereoimage.co.nz

Cheers!

Nice shots man! Babes in boats always do the job Got any photo's of the lenses themselves? If you think a 200mm lens is intimidating try carrying a 500mm sigma around for a day, total upper body work out!

Wow you have a SigMonsta? Cool. I really like your aviation shots, do you have a website i can visit?

[Supah 0]

my website It does still lack a gallery but if you check out http://supah.chaotic.nl/foto/ most of the pictures are in the directories

[killagee 0]

Thanks mate. Your site is amazing. Where do you live to see such a variety of aircraft?

I found this old girl struggling to cross our driveway this morning... I think she is pregnant and a bit sick maybe. I rescued here and got maybe the first OK insect macro's if have done so far...

I have worked out that with macro, even in broad daylight you need a speedlight and an aperture of at least f11 to get enough Depth of field...

[Supah 0]

Scary things those! The female actually eats the male after mating ...OUCH! I live in the north of the netherlands near one of two operational dutch military airbases left. They have a lot of exercises and this summer they have the national airshow which will also feature the Blue angels!

[MI_Fred 0]

The last one a school. Must be a terrible one.

[redliner47 0]

Went on a bit of a photo safari today

Found some weird areas that I didn't know existed like an playground in the middle of nowhere and some abandoned camp thing. Check em out

Shots

[iNeo 0]

[Necromancer- 0]

iNeo... is that an Ikea kitchen?

[Supah 0]

Looks arty!

[iNeo 0]

iNeo... is that an Ikea kitchen?

Nope