I sometimes spend a lot of time on a single image, but others require
only a few minutes of work. Some female portraits require extensive
work, and I've agonized over flesh tones and shadow tonality on nudes,
but for well lit subjects that don't present technical problems I can
reach a point that satisfies me completely quite rapidly. One session
that threw me was the backlit shots from my wakeboarding series. i had
to go back a few times to the RAW before I got something that pleased
me the next day. It also required some careful work with
shadows/highlights using all the optional sliders. But for run of the
mill table-top studio work, landscapes, flowers, street shooting and
the like, I bang them out quickly. I don't cut corners. I just find I
can arrive at a happy result without a lot of work.
Paul
On Oct 14, 2004, at 7:44 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Gee, Herb, I've spent hours, days, getting a photo just right. Mind
you,
not the stuff for the web, but those that I plan to do something more
with.
Maybe I'm just slow (not unlikely) ... although I can spend hours just
spotting a neg. Heck, just deciding on a final crop may take a couple
of
sessions.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
if you have to spend a lot of time hand tweaking each photo, you are
spending too much time. i figure at most 20 minutes is all a photo i
take
is
worth unless it's extraordinary.
