I hardly post process. I don't see the point. If I can't get it right in camera, why am I taking photos at all? Unless it's for artistic purposes (or something I absolutely can't get in camera) I tend to use the raw image.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
That's what I've decided to do too, especially after I got my Sony. I do take raw images but also jpg and often the jpg image is so good that I just decide to use that. Perhaps just a little levels tuning and that's that. Raw image fine tuning if I have to dig out details but that's it nowadays. The goal is to learn to be good enough photographer so that time is saved as you don't have to post process that much.
Yes! A little tweaking of levels to bring out details is one thing, but I almost feel like some photographers overdo the post processing just so they feel like "artists". I have made my fair share of highly manipulated images, I don't consider them photography, I consider them digital art. Maybe I'm just being a semantic snob?
Exactly. Manipulating images and building a whole new world is a completely different thing which I do love but that truly isn't photography anymore. And I do appreciate good photography which is talent, effort and years of training. I don't think over tweaked or over saturated, every little detail enhanced photos are good photography. And that's not being a snob.