Hi!

Good photography is good photography.
Period.
Bad photography is fixing it later, whether through large amounts of
darkroom manipulation, or massive amounts of Photoshopping (Sorry Tony, I
know it isn't a verb).
Don't know if this helps or not, and I am sure that some will disagree, but
they are probably adept at salvaging junk via Photoshop.
Strive to do as little post processing as possible, accept that this stuff is work, and be thankful that with digital, all it costs is your time (the most precious commodity you have).

Mister Robb, you're absolutely right.

Tim, excellent write up... So you have The Eye - good for you... Do show us some more birds...

Boris


I'm not quite sure what Bill was trying to say.  I agree, I think.

However, Photoshop and other image editors are often used with the exact same goals as wet darkroom techniques. Junk is junk of course, but I'm not sure he meant to imply that post-capture processing is to be avoided. I rather tend to to think it is to be embraced as a means to getting the most out of the good exposures that were made.

In fact in the digital age, shooting RAW, it's almost necessary, IMO.

Tom, the way I understood Bill is that clicking away in hope that PhotoShop will save the day is wrong, very wrong.

Also, indeed shooting RAW requires it to be processed on the computer, however, if that's all that is apparently necessary then photographer is doing his or her job right... Again, this is how I see what Bill's saying. And this is what I am trying to achieve...

Recently, I had to process a bunch of photos from my daughter Open Russian Language Lesson in her kindergarten... I should say that 77 Ltd is beauty of a lens... Most of the work I've done was merely in RAW converter... I processed half dozen photos in less than half an hour... By processed I mean that I have files ready to be printed and files ready to be shown on the web. I am not trying to boast here, because obviously shooting one's own child for family album is rather easy. I am merely trying to illustrate my point.

Boris

Reply via email to