gyoung143 wrote:
So yes I enjoy it, but done quickly with the basic controls, no fiddling for hours with layers etc etc. If you don't grasp that opportunity you are losing one of the major advantages of digital workflow, and not doing you or your work justice. And while you are outwith the camera you could spend the same time taking more great photos, or exploring the visual aspects of the subject instead of fiddling with menus and function buttons. Back to basics, manual control of shutter and aperture, and focus too if its relevant, you can have auto iso as it doesn't affect IQ much unless you get to silly figures, with modern sensors anything from base to 640 iso will be indistinguishable. You don't need to take the camera away from your eye to change these important parameters, concentrate on the picture in the viewfinder....Show more →
I agree that most images don’t require”hours with layers” or much else. Several things can usually make this relatively quick.
One is to develop presets that correspond to your favored starting points. I have them for lots of stuff — different kinds of NR, initial color and contrast settings, and so forth in ACR, and then others in Photoshop, including output sharpening, adding curves and dodge/burn layers, and. more.
These things get me very close to what I want very quickly in many cases, and a bit of additional tweaking for creative purposes or to deal with particular image issues usually gets me there.
It also helps to develop over time a good sense of how you interpret images and how to get there. I think that leads to far less trial and error and guesswork.
I’d guess that on average the basics could take as little as 10 minutes or so. It rarely takes as much as, much less longer than, 30 minutes.
Occasionally three is a photograph that takes a lot longer. That could be because I struggle over exactly how to interpret it — sometimes not an easy decision. It could be that the image poses unusual challenges that require more sophisticated post-processing.
gdanmitchell wrote:
I agree that most images don’t require”hours with layers” or much else. Several things can usually make this relatively quick.
One is to develop presets that correspond to your favored starting points. I have them for lots of stuff — different kinds of NR, initial color and contrast settings, and so forth in ACR, and then others in Photoshop, including output sharpening, adding curves and dodge/burn layers, and. more.
These things get me very close to what I want very quickly in many cases, and a bit of additional tweaking for creative purposes or to deal with particular image issues usually gets me there.
It also helps to develop over time a good sense of how you interpret images and how to get there. I think that leads to far less trial and error and guesswork.
I’d guess that on average the basics could take as little as 10 minutes or so. It rarely takes as much as, much less longer than, 30 minutes.
Occasionally three is a photograph that takes a lot longer. That could be because I struggle over exactly how to interpret it — sometimes not an easy decision. It could be that the image poses unusual challenges that require more sophisticated post-processing.
Dan ...Show more →
I think I need to have a look at some of your work, to see what it is that warrants so much post processing! Sadly the finer points will be lost on a website browser but I need to get some idea why you need to go to those lengths.
For my landscape, travel etc I don't feel the need to use more than tweaks with Exposure, Contrast, Highlights, Shadows etc. The top panel of sliders. Plus crop and straighten, including 'perspective' 'correction'. Certainly for ISO less than 800 or even a bit higher I've not found a need for NR. Defaults for sharpening on import are those worked out ages ago st the height of the Worms paranoia, I haven't had the Xt5 long enough yet to try any changes for the 40mpx sensor.
I wouldn't want those we are trying to convince to do some post processing on RAW files to think that 10-30 mins is 'normal' or routine.
gyoung143 wrote:
I think I need to have a look at some of your work, to see what it is that warrants so much post processing! Sadly the finer points will be lost on a website browser but I need to get some idea why you need to go to those lengths.
For my landscape, travel etc I don't feel the need to use more than tweaks with Exposure, Contrast, Highlights, Shadows etc. The top panel of sliders. Plus crop and straighten, including 'perspective' 'correction'. Certainly for ISO less than 800 or even a bit higher I've not found a need for NR. Defaults for sharpening on import are those worked out ages ago st the height of the Worms paranoia, I haven't had the Xt5 long enough yet to try any changes for the 40mpx sensor.
I wouldn't want those we are trying to convince to do some post processing on RAW files to think that 10-30 mins is 'normal' or routine.
It depends on a lot of things. Do you want to crank out scores of photographs quickly? (Sometimes that is important!) Then you can mass-process them minimally and they will be good enough. Do you accept some slightly blocked shadows or slightly blown highlights?Again, that’s fine, and you can shorten the process by exposing in old-school transparency fashion rather than maximum capture of a wide range of image data.
There’s no right answer here, and if yo prefer to minimize your work in post that is fine with me. I’m with those whose preference is to regard the post-processing stage as being an equal partner in the process of producing photographs.
I rarely work in layers anymore. I can if I need to, but most of my raw images get a style (preset) applied literally as they’re imported into C1, then a few simple shadow/highlight adjustments, contrast and maybe saturation tweaks, then final crop and probably a light vignette. Then I add a border and signature, done, simple.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Each to his or her own, but I do it because I believe that the final result is more powerful and expressive.
Many things in photography are not objectively “enjoyable”their own. on I don’t “enjoy” carrying a big tripod and a pack full of lenses. I don’t enjoy getting up three hours before dawn. I don’t enjoy days when I search for images don’t find a great one.
But that’s part of the work, in my view. And in the end, the rewards are worth it.
YMMV.
That’s funny, I enjoy getting up three hours before dawn, and I’m not bothered coming home with no photos. Going out with only my own agenda is reward enough for me. I’m with you on the heavy gear, however!
Interesting perspectives, thanks for sharing, everyone. It’s interesting how many of us are ostensibly in the same hobby, but for very different reasons, and with very different goals and methods.
CKrueger wrote:
That’s funny, I enjoy getting up three hours before dawn, and I’m not bothered coming home with no photos. Going out with only my own agenda is reward enough for me. I’m with you on the heavy gear, however!
Interesting perspectives, thanks for sharing, everyone. It’s interesting how many of us are ostensibly in the same hobby, but for very different reasons, and with very different goals and methods.
Usually two goals evident in photography
1 Take pictures
2 Collect equipment
Usually mutually exclusive 😁
If 1, then the ways of getting there differ widely!
