to edit or not to edit

Editing to an extent. I feel like you are cutting yourself short if you do not edit because I always think of what the image could have been. I am not talking about completely re-creating an image though. Also, sometimes I feel like editing is necessary. For example in the following photos. I did not add any colors to these pictures or anything. I primary edit the lighting, shadows, contrast, etc..

I edited in photoshop RAW then photoshop cs5 and then lightroom 3.
I am not a pro or even close so these were probably not edited the best they could have been.

These are the jpegs un-edited. (RAWs are basically darker but pb won't store them)

Before
IMG_2129.jpg



After
Boston_20done.jpg






Before
IMG_2131.jpg



After
Boston_22done.jpg
 
Last edited:
I took some pictures today and some i noticed i edited nicely enhancing not changing the image others looked too colorful and almost drawn in that makes sense
 
Thanks. Have you tried uploading them on pb and then downsizing them on there?
 
I think editing to make the photo more closely represent what you actually see in person is totally ok, but I don't think it is ok to embellish the piece. Unless for personal enjoyment. For instance, I think in the pics that KLR posted above that the edited pictures, while stunning, don't look like they represent what is seen if you were standing there looking at the city scape... unless you had help.
 
editing is an art and its pure peference.

im a wedding a photographer by trade and i do edit to a point as there are things the human eye does not notice or "overlooks" or can adjust too that the camera can not adjust too.

for example bags under eyes are super prevelant in a lot of shooting situations, i edit that.

also i turn all auto type settings in the camera off, i want control.of the final product, so my.images are muddy, flat and soft straight out of the camera and i fix it all in post.

i have a workflow that allows me to cull and edit 5000+ photos in about 2 hours time, but most people that just take a few photos dont need an super streamlined workflow.

again its all preferance, for people who think.overly saturated and edited photos dont sell, look up peter lik and attempt to buy one of.his, this hobby will look like peanuts. :-)

Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk
 
Editing to an extent. I feel like you are cutting yourself short if you do not edit because I always think of what the image could have been. I am not talking about completely re-creating an image though. Also, sometimes I feel like editing is necessary. For example in the following photos. I did not add any colors to these pictures or anything. I primary edit the lighting, shadows, contrast, etc..

I edited in photoshop RAW then photoshop cs5 and then lightroom 3.
I am not a pro or even close so these were probably not edited the best they could have been.

These are the jpegs un-edited. (RAWs are basically darker but pb won't store them)

Before
IMG_2129.jpg



After
Boston_20done.jpg






Before
IMG_2131.jpg



After
Boston_22done.jpg

why would edit raw, then cs5 then light room? light room should really be before cs5, ps is really a much more pixel bending and super deep editing program.


Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk
 
I think editing to make the photo more closely represent what you actually see in person is totally ok, but I don't think it is ok to embellish the piece. Unless for personal enjoyment. For instance, I think in the pics that KLR posted above that the edited pictures, while stunning, don't look like they represent what is seen if you were standing there looking at the city scape... unless you had help.

i would agree, it looks as though a global saturation was up and there are huge cyan color casts on the cars, if that was removed i think you would feel differently, but again all personal perferance for people.

Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk
 
when taking pictures of non tank related things do you guys like or dislike the editing that can easily be done nowadays?

its all a personal.preferance, and it has its fads, i will tell you that people do hravy, hravy editing on photos in hopes of making a medicore photo appear better then it is, a stellar photo will pretty much stand on.its own, with minimal post done to it.

Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk
 
why would edit raw, then cs5 then light room? light room should really be before cs5, ps is really a much more pixel bending and super deep editing program.
Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk

I stated I was not even close to proffessional. I am still learning the programs.
I edit in that order because of:
Photoshop RAW-Change temp, exposure, highlights, shadows, etc. and then I sharpen the image
Photoshop CS5-I think take that image^ and edit in layers if it is needed and edit gamma, color balance in the different regions, etc. if it is needed
Lightroom 3-I take that image^ and edit in LR3 to basically touch up whatever I missed, when I sharpen in LR3 my image becomes VERY VERY grainy. This why I only sharpen in photoshop RAW.

Sorry if I used the programs incorrectly, it is a learning process for some people.


Also, I did not enhance cyan greatly in that image. However I edited lighting, shadows, exposure, etc. greatly. I am pretty sure you did not see the sky in Boston that night. You do not know how blue it actually was. I actually took the picture because the blue sky behind the cityscape looked sweet. That is what really caught my eye. Thank you for the criticism.
 
editing is an art and its pure peference.

im a wedding a photographer by trade and i do edit to a point as there are things the human eye does not notice or "overlooks" or can adjust too that the camera can not adjust too.

for example bags under eyes are super prevelant in a lot of shooting situations, i edit that.

also i turn all auto type settings in the camera off, i want control.of the final product, so my.images are muddy, flat and soft straight out of the camera and i fix it all in post.

i have a workflow that allows me to cull and edit 5000+ photos in about 2 hours time, but most people that just take a few photos dont need an super streamlined workflow.

again its all preferance, for people who think.overly saturated and edited photos dont sell, look up peter lik and attempt to buy one of.his, this hobby will look like peanuts. :-)

Sent from my SPH-P100 using Tapatalk

What is the purpose of making the images from the camera come out terrible looking? I understand the point about editing, but I dont want my images to come out muddy and dull looking, yes, I know that this can all be fixed in post processing, but when I edit in both cs5 and LR3, when increasing the saturation to make the colors pop again, I tend to get noticable effects of that, granit, that isnt the only way to fix the dullness, it is the best way to IME...

Also, may we see some of your wedding work, you can send it via PM if you wish, I have 5 weddings books to shoot in the next 6 months, and I would love to see some of your work! :-)
 
Last edited:

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top