Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2014 · Why 'push' files?

  
 
Chrissearle
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Why 'push' files?


On this and other forums I read a lot about 'pushing' files and how robust ( or not) files from various cameras are when 'pushed'. It seems like something very important to quite a few people and certainly files from some manufacturers cameras get heavily criticised for 'falling apart' when pushed with issues like shadow banding ( Canon especially) and artefacts.
My question is, why do people want to push to the extent that the files degrade? Is it so that they can hand- hold in low light? Is it to extract maximum detail from shadows? I find that I can 'push' my files when needed sufficiently to give me the desired result without any sign of banding or artifacts but then my sense of what is acceptable may well be different to others. I guess my real question would be is this issue simply something only discussed by hard core pixel peepers who simply want to use it as a parameter to bash certain manufacturers products or is this a real concern to the majority of enthusiast photographers?



Jun 17, 2014 at 02:52 AM
JakeB17
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Why 'push' files?


Chrissearle wrote:
Is it to extract maximum detail from shadows?


Mostly that.

It's nice to be able to expose for the highlights and bring back the shadows in post when there is no time or way to light the scene and get it right in camera. This is especially true in landscape photography where lighting such a massive wide shot would be next to impossible. Of course exposure blending and hdr are options, but wouldn't you rather be able to get it right in a single exposure?



Jun 17, 2014 at 03:03 AM
John Caldwell
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Why 'push' files?


Much as JakeB17b has said already.

I often have to shoot in high contrast light, but want to retain highlight detail. This leads to a need for what is at times very aggressive recovery of shadow content, which is also import in the topics being photographed. Because the subject matter is dynamic and full of action, there would be no possibility for blended exposures.

Although Canon may be behind other makers, I have generally been more pleased with the 1Dx files' ability to be pushed, more than I've ever been able to stretch any prior file.

John Caldwell



Jun 17, 2014 at 09:41 AM
Dave_EP
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Why 'push' files?


Sometimes you're in a fast moving situation and for some reason a shot may get under exposed by a couple of stops (or more). This could be because you're relying on in-camera metering that for what ever reason got it wrong, or it could be that you're running in full manual and didn't get time to change (or change enough) before an unmissable shot comes up, or perhaps a flash miss fired on an unmissable shot etc.

Not everyone in every situation has the time to get every shot exposed perfectly. My D800 certainly stood up to pushing a lot better than my 5D3s do, or any Canon I've ever owned for that matter. Note the past tense on the D800 and present tense on the 5D3. I'm happy working with both so don't feel the need to be tribal about it.



Jun 17, 2014 at 09:48 AM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Why 'push' files?


There are a bunch of reasons, and I'll no doubt repeat a few things already said.

1. There is a myth among some photo enthusiasts, encouraged by some photographers, that good photographers always make perfectly calculated, perfectly exposed, ideal images that are perfect in the camera. The truth is far from that and it is far more complex. In fact, quite often we are making what amount to educated guesses and/or going with hunches, and sometimes we simply have to respond too quickly to get a shot that would be gone if we took the time to carefully calculate. So in these cases we often find ourselves using the post-processing phase to improve or make the best of the technical quality of photographs that are aesthetically good.

2. In many cases, even with ideal exposures, we know that elements of the scene will require work in post. This is nothing new—it was the case with film photographers who regularly burned and dodged in order to create effective photographs. Again, the idea that we simply "capture" what is there in the camera and "it is good," doesn't work, and for a whole range of reasons. So we need to darken elements in order to bring attention to others, unblock shadows, tone down highlights, even out tonalities, and all the rest.

3. In classic photography and still today in digital photography, the "right" exposure is often the one that the photographer knows will hold the most scene data for final work in post. In other words, the conception of the photograph from the very beginning relies on the potential of the darkroom (optical or digital) to realize the potential of the image.

Dan



Jun 17, 2014 at 10:20 AM





FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.