DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

Threads will be shown in descending order for the remainder of this session. To permanently display posts in this order, adjust your preferences.
DPChallenge Forums >> Challenge Results >> Post-processing is DP Challenge !
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 68, descending (reverse)
AuthorThread
09/12/2008 09:30:05 AM · #1
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by fldave:

I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Source?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music was an assistant to Mr Adams, and has stated this opinion here several Times.

Independently, I got an extensive tour of Mr. Adams' house/studio in Carmel a few years ago, and one of his other assistants said essentially the same thing. Of course, Mr. Adams states it himself in several of his books, notably The Print, the opening of which I've quoted in another thread.

Yeah. I remember Bear talking about it. I'd like to find the post. I was under the impression that Ansel would have used PP tools, but the "use any tool" part doesn't feel right. Thought he might use some restraint.

I'll look for Robert's postings on this later tomorrow if it's not already been sought out.

ETA - I have a recently acquired Ansel Adams book myself, written just before his passing...I'll have to reread the intro part. :-)


"Use any tool"? I wouldn't go that far. There were MANY "tools" Ansel could have used in the analog darkroom that he did not utilize. For example, Ansel never did anything like what Jerry Uelsmann did with prints from multiple negatives to produce fantasy scenes, though I know for a fact that he admired Jerry's work.

Ansel was all about "previsualization" looking at the scene and seeing with the mind's eye how he wanted the print to look, and then using his "tools" (primarily Zone System and darkroom wizardry) to accomplish that result. Within those limits, he'd have embraced the digital darkroom. For digital photography, HDRI is the equivalent of Zone System, and I'm sure he'd have loved it. Not the "exaggerated" tone mappings some of us play with, but HDRI as a tool to expand the tonal range of the medium, because that is what is what Zone System is all about.

R.

Thanks for the follow-up Robert! Much appreciated. :-)
09/12/2008 12:48:03 AM · #2
Originally posted by Judi:

For those bitching about Post Processing...why don't you put your money where your mouth is and enter the new challenge...and while you are at it....how about voting on 100% of the entries...oh and you can also comment on 100% of the entries and tell us how bad we all are....~!

Oh and if you aren't a member....definitely put your money where your mouth is and cough up the measley $25USD and become a member. You get to enter challenges on here and participate in the bitching for nothing...so it is payback time!


oooooh my! Didn't even see that. Judi who is excellent with her photoshop skills will showcase another set of her skills that is even better....her photography skills!

I am gonna love entering this one and I am definitely going to enjoy voting on all of the entries.
09/12/2008 12:40:21 AM · #3
It seems the boss has a sense of humor, look at that new “member” challenge..
09/12/2008 12:36:43 AM · #4
Thank you ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music for the history and clarification, and translation of the zone system into pp terms. Someday I might understand it all better - may have to, without close associates willing to do it for me!
09/12/2008 12:35:55 AM · #5
Originally posted by Judi:

For those bitching about Post Processing...why don't you put your money where your mouth is and enter the new challenge...and while you are at it....how about voting on 100% of the entries...oh and you can also comment on 100% of the entries and tell us how bad we all are....~!

Oh and if you aren't a member....definitely put your money where your mouth is and cough up the measley $25USD and become a member. You get to enter challenges on here and participate in the bitching for nothing...so it is payback time!


Tell 'em straight! :)
09/12/2008 12:33:54 AM · #6
For those bitching about Post Processing...why don't you put your money where your mouth is and enter the new challenge...and while you are at it....how about voting on 100% of the entries...oh and you can also comment on 100% of the entries and tell us how bad we all are....~!

Oh and if you aren't a member....definitely put your money where your mouth is and cough up the measley $25USD and become a member. You get to enter challenges on here and participate in the bitching for nothing...so it is payback time!
09/11/2008 11:57:37 PM · #7
Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by Citadel:

Its funny I came back to this thread. I just read an article about adjusting contrast in different ways including dodging and burning. The really interesting thing was they mentioned that Ansel Adams did a lot of dodging and burning and in fact, prints made from his original negative without the dodging and burning look nothing like what his prints. (The article btw, was in this months Nature Photographer).

And another funny thing? A great quote from him: "Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships."

So while I agree, a certain amount of over processing does occur there is also level of necessity for it.


Since I notice that your Forum Signature quotes Cartier-Bresson (one of my heroes), let me add as an aside that C-B is often (and erroneously) held up as an example of a purist photographer who did it all with the camera and felt that the darkroom was incidental. But this simply isn't true.

In fact, he had no patience for the darkroom, and admitted he had no skills in it; he relied on close associates to bring his images to perfection, and often marveled at what they had wrought. I have taped a fascinating show on him: "The Impassioned Eye" I think it's called, where he touches on this several times.

R.


So from this (and what I wrote as well) I'd like to put this forward: Post-processing can help an image but it isn't always a necessity.

I would also add however, that the online photographic community in general (not just DPC) adores a razor sharp image, free of noise with bright saturated colors. In fact, I read an article on Time's website (I wish I could find it) that said that someone scanned some Cartier-Bresson images and submitted them to Flickr where they were slammed. Not because they had ripped someone off but because weren't the razor-sharp super-saturated images we see all over the web.

And to kinda bring this back to DPC: For myself I find that images where I get carried away with processing tend to do a LOT worse than the ones where I stick to the basics. Its actually quite rare for me to go beyond the basic ruleset even in advanced. Now, of course, I haven't ribboned but what my observation has lead me to believe is that post-processing can enhance an image or destroy it.

edit to add: hmm...I got a little rambly there. *shrug* oh well. Someone will understand a few of the things in that :)

Message edited by author 2008-09-12 00:00:55.
09/11/2008 11:56:52 PM · #8
Regarding the zone system... I'm casually aware of it, but have no real knowledge. Is the application of it still used in photography today? I see books at the library about the zone system, but most are 10 yrs old or older. I haven't seen much mention of it in newer publications.
09/11/2008 11:37:28 PM · #9
Originally posted by Citadel:

Its funny I came back to this thread. I just read an article about adjusting contrast in different ways including dodging and burning. The really interesting thing was they mentioned that Ansel Adams did a lot of dodging and burning and in fact, prints made from his original negative without the dodging and burning look nothing like what his prints. (The article btw, was in this months Nature Photographer).

And another funny thing? A great quote from him: "Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships."

So while I agree, a certain amount of over processing does occur there is also level of necessity for it.


Since I notice that your Forum Signature quotes Cartier-Bresson (one of my heroes), let me add as an aside that C-B is often (and erroneously) held up as an example of a purist photographer who did it all with the camera and felt that the darkroom was incidental. But this simply isn't true.

In fact, he had no patience for the darkroom, and admitted he had no skills in it; he relied on close associates to bring his images to perfection, and often marveled at what they had wrought. I have taped a fascinating show on him: "The Impassioned Eye" I think it's called, where he touches on this several times.

R.
09/11/2008 11:32:09 PM · #10
Its funny I came back to this thread. I just read an article about adjusting contrast in different ways including dodging and burning. The really interesting thing was they mentioned that Ansel Adams did a lot of dodging and burning and in fact, prints made from his original negative without the dodging and burning look nothing like what his prints. (The article btw, was in this months Nature Photographer).

And another funny thing? A great quote from him: "Dodging and burning are steps to take care of mistakes God made in establishing tonal relationships."

So while I agree, a certain amount of over processing does occur there is also level of necessity for it.

Message edited by author 2008-09-11 23:32:26.
09/11/2008 11:16:14 PM · #11
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by fldave:

I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Source?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music was an assistant to Mr Adams, and has stated this opinion here several Times.

Independently, I got an extensive tour of Mr. Adams' house/studio in Carmel a few years ago, and one of his other assistants said essentially the same thing. Of course, Mr. Adams states it himself in several of his books, notably The Print, the opening of which I've quoted in another thread.

Yeah. I remember Bear talking about it. I'd like to find the post. I was under the impression that Ansel would have used PP tools, but the "use any tool" part doesn't feel right. Thought he might use some restraint.

I'll look for Robert's postings on this later tomorrow if it's not already been sought out.

ETA - I have a recently acquired Ansel Adams book myself, written just before his passing...I'll have to reread the intro part. :-)


"Use any tool"? I wouldn't go that far. There were MANY "tools" Ansel could have used in the analog darkroom that he did not utilize. For example, Ansel never did anything like what Jerry Uelsmann did with prints from multiple negatives to produce fantasy scenes, though I know for a fact that he admired Jerry's work.

Ansel was all about "previsualization" looking at the scene and seeing with the mind's eye how he wanted the print to look, and then using his "tools" (primarily Zone System and darkroom wizardry) to accomplish that result. Within those limits, he'd have embraced the digital darkroom. For digital photography, HDRI is the equivalent of Zone System, and I'm sure he'd have loved it. Not the "exaggerated" tone mappings some of us play with, but HDRI as a tool to expand the tonal range of the medium, because that is what is what Zone System is all about.

R.
09/11/2008 10:44:55 PM · #12
Originally posted by MelonMusketeer:

Van, Maybe you should consider starting a "Straight from the camera" thread, where DPC'ers can post and comment on photos that you would enjoy seeing and talking about.
Perhaps that would be a win/win thing for you and all of us that like to try to get the best that the camera can offer without so much knob twisting afterward.
I tried learning some processing skills, but could not keep away from the "suck" slider, so I didn't stick with it. I just do basic now.


That is a great idea, maybe after I get back into DPC. I have little time to learn the skills of post-processing like many talented folks here, so I will just plug along shooting my natural history shots, and when a basic challenge subject has one that fits my interest, I will enter. As I have always said "adapt, migrate, or die", so I will migrate a bit. If you are interested, I am posting my nature shots here.

//www.flickr.com/photos/21747466@N03/][thumb][/thumb
09/08/2008 11:06:59 PM · #13
Originally posted by GeneralE:

Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by fldave:

I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Source?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music was an assistant to Mr Adams, and has stated this opinion here several Times.

Independently, I got an extensive tour of Mr. Adams' house/studio in Carmel a few years ago, and one of his other assistants said essentially the same thing. Of course, Mr. Adams states it himself in several of his books, notably The Print, the opening of which I've quoted in another thread.

Yeah. I remember Bear talking about it. I'd like to find the post. I was under the impression that Ansel would have used PP tools, but the "use any tool" part doesn't feel right. Thought he might use some restraint.

I'll look for Robert's postings on this later tomorrow if it's not already been sought out.

ETA - I have a recently acquired Ansel Adams book myself, written just before his passing...I'll have to reread the intro part. :-)

Message edited by author 2008-09-08 23:08:06.
09/08/2008 11:01:43 PM · #14
Originally posted by glad2badad:

Originally posted by fldave:

I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Source?

' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Bear_Music was an assistant to Mr Adams, and has stated this opinion here several Times.

Independently, I got an extensive tour of Mr. Adams' house/studio in Carmel a few years ago, and one of his other assistants said essentially the same thing. Of course, Mr. Adams states it himself in several of his books, notably The Print, the opening of which I've quoted in another thread.
09/08/2008 10:55:18 PM · #15
Van, Maybe you should consider starting a "Straight from the camera" thread, where DPC'ers can post and comment on photos that you would enjoy seeing and talking about.
Perhaps that would be a win/win thing for you and all of us that like to try to get the best that the camera can offer without so much knob twisting afterward.
I tried learning some processing skills, but could not keep away from the "suck" slider, so I didn't stick with it. I just do basic now.
09/08/2008 10:39:34 PM · #16
Originally posted by fldave:

I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Source?
09/08/2008 10:29:45 PM · #17
I've read that Adams (or his assistant) spent considerably more time in the darkroom perfecting the print than setting up for the shot.... also that (if alive today) he would likely jump into CS3 and use any tool that could improve his art. edited for clarification

Message edited by author 2008-09-08 22:31:22.
09/08/2008 10:07:25 PM · #18
"You don't take a photograph, you make it." -Ansel Adams
09/08/2008 08:39:16 PM · #19
Originally posted by mpeters:

Truly deserving Blue Ribbon Winners; according to Simms.

:)


LOL

Too funny!

bazz.
09/08/2008 08:25:41 PM · #20
The best two things I've ever heard on this subject:
1) Every digital camera processes. It's just a matter of whether you leave it to the manufacturer's defaults or your preferences.
2) Some people want only to take photos. Others want to make images. I'm usually in the second group, and clicking the shutter is usually only the first (very important) step.
09/08/2008 05:32:00 PM · #21
Yeah, actually, I just received a book titled "Ansel Adams: Examples" where Adams takes 40 of his photographs and annotates with some detail how he achieved them. I was really surprised at how complicated the process was, especially in post-processing. He likened the negative to the "score", and the print to the "performance", and talks about all the different possible outcomes of the 'performance' and of all the different variations one can envision.

Photoshop is just the digital darkroom, which is an absolute necessity in refining your "negative" into what your 'mind's eye' saw at the time of exposure. Digital images are very imperfect when it comes to colors and contrast, and (depending on the model of camera you have) you always need a certain amount of post-processing to get the image to look good and/or realistic. On the continuum of post-processing taste, I enjoy my images to be on the verge of unrealistic, I like a sort of 'comic-book' look, but that's just me.

I tend to down-vote images that look like they're straight out of the camera simply because they look unprofessional, unpolished, and I think the purpose of this site is to make people stronger photographers. Mastering post-processing (in accordance with whatever your tastes may be) is paramount to achieving that goal.
09/08/2008 04:54:58 PM · #22
If you really hate post-processing of photographs, perhaps you should leave DPC. Most of us have secret (or open) desires to be professional. Check as many professional photographers as you can and you will find that most of them know post-processing. Start with Ansel Adams. if you were a client would you prefer a retouched photograph, or one straight from the camera as you advocate. I would like to refer you to another site, but I do not know of another that specializes in snapshots.
09/08/2008 01:47:20 PM · #23
Van, I respect your decision but may think your perspective is a bit rigid. Look at it this way: Is it possible to be a digital photography "purist" in the first place? I believe the answer is no. Digital cameras are nothing more than compact and sophisticated computers housed in small boxes. With each generation of new cameras, the computers become more advanced and integrate more processes which further refine the "raw" image prior to output. I suspect in several years, we will have Photoshop capabilities built into the camera thus eliminating much of the tedium endured in PP anyhow.

With regards to the "Over-Processing" on this site, look at in a way that many have simply extended the ability of one computer, the camera, through the use of another. Some do it better than others but that is the way it is with everything. For the time being, and from a voter's perspective, greater emphasis is seems to be placed on results derived from Post Processing rather than on composition, subject matter, theme etc. This is not always true but here it seems to trend toward that. We've all known that for a long time.

Your images are very unique. You have a wonderful perspective and that perspective is yours and only yours. You may find greater satisfaction in the honesty of film as it will somewhat level the criteria of what you judge to be a sincere image. I'm not sure. Film is more constrained than digital which is advancing far faster than many of us can. Film is still seen by many as the realm of the masters partially due to these constraints. In digital, it is much easier for the intermediate to create the facade of being a "master" through manipulation. It has less to do with what we have traditionally thought to be "photography" and more to do with computer prowess whether it be in the camera or extended outwards. I can understand that.

09/08/2008 01:18:17 PM · #24
Originally posted by Koriyama:

Can someone give me the URL of that absolutely wonderful post-processing challenge site that was started by some folks here?


PPChallenge but it is down and has been for some time now.
09/08/2008 01:04:06 PM · #25
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

I gotta tell ya....I do get tired of this same whine. That whole "Purist Photography" BS.

You don't have much credbility squawking about "Real" photography, especially here, at dpchallenge, a digital photography contest, especially when you're behind a digital camera.

What do you expect? It's not like you're going to have straight-out-of-the-camera-onto-the-film anyway.......it's DIGITAL!!!! You're digitizing whatever you see anyway.

Oh, and......

Boy, did this ever do badly!!!!' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/620/120/455890.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/620/120/455890.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And this: ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/419/120/267110.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/419/120/267110.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

And this: ' . substr('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/812/120/642962.jpg', strrpos('//images.dpchallenge.com/images_challenge/0-999/812/120/642962.jpg', '/') + 1) . '

Get what YOU want and need out of this place, and don't worry about what the people are doing that doesn't work for you.

Personally, I *WANT* to broaden my horizons......that means becoming better with both my camera AND my PP skills.

I've actually stumbled onto a technique that I can do pretty easily that resonates better with the voters than it does to me.

Is that bad? I don't think so, but it was certainly a surprise.

But participating, and not supporting the site just because you don't see eye to eye with everyone just sounds like sour grapes.

Do you really feel that you don't get $25 worth of input and enjoyment from DPC in a year?


No comment...
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 05:25:00 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 05/27/2020 05:25:00 AM EDT.