My editing is largely dependent on the work at hand. If it's for publication or my portfolio, it has to be perfect. If it's a PESO for the list, I will show something I find interesting even if it's lacking in some ways, but I'll delete it from my photo.net page after a day or two. My selectivity or lack of the same is also dependent on the subject matter. I'm fussier in editing my car photography than I am when I edit a nature shoot. Perhaps because I consider the latter to be "just for fun," while the former is more likely to be for profit. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Kenneth Waller wrote: > > Tom C wrote- > > > >> They've learned to largely relegate their emotions, prejudices, and > >> personal attachments to the back >seat when deciding which images are > >> worthy of display and may enjoy potential success. > > > > I call that critical editing, IMO one of the best ways to improve my > > photography. > > > > Kenneth Waller > > I'm my own worst critic and a pretty ruthless one at that. My editing > is pretty harsh and goes something like this: "crap, crap, crap, crap, > meh, crap, WHAT WAS I DOING?, good, crap, crap, good, good, crap..." > what I consider crap, others may consider "good enough." For example, > if something isn't perfectly sharp where I want it to be perfectly > sharp, it doesn't get a second chance, regardless of the subject (unless > it is a super rare species and I won't get another chance to photograph > it). > > -- > > Christian > http://photography.skofteland.net > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
