Some thoughts about the recent photo challenge.
I think one always has to do some PP in order to bring the best out in the photo. Maybe lighten an area, darken etc.
I used to print photos in a photo lab, (here of course I could only alter the colour balance and contrast) and people would come in with their 35mm film and would want an hour develop and print. (D&P) Of course this would go through the printer and if the film was exposed correctly the film would go through the machine and prints would come out the other end mostly fine. (It depended on the photographer).
The situation would get a bit tricky if the film was water damaged, X-ray damaged, light damaged, over exposed, under exposed ... the customer would still want a great print!
Also I would print for some wedding photographers, newspaper photographers... and they can be picky about colour, skin colour and you know who you are! This is where printing knowledge would come in and knowing about colour theory! If a printer did not understand this, then he/she would not know what colour filters (CMY) to add or subtract in order to get correct skin tones, etc ,etc... (The machine would sometimes compensate the colour balance incorrectly).
The point here is at least something has to be done during the printing stage; it is the same with PP –as what has already been mentioned! To bring out the best in a photo it needs to be done. An image can still win though with minimal PP. Because it is more about the image than the skill in PP (at least in regard to the photo challenge, I think!). That brings me to my next point.
COMPOSITION
This was raised by a poster who wanted to improve his composition. I feel that many people take shots of nothing. Having a digital camera allows us to shoot a whole card of nothing - no cost incurred. It was different with film! I myself have been interested in photography for years, but had not the money or the equipment to develop my skills. Now with digital and a computer, I can experiment a lot more and try to ‘see’. (Don’t think I have been very successful to date though). I don’t think many people have ‘learnt to see’. With or without PP, an image is NOTHING without THOUGHT in my view. With PP, an image can be emphasised a little or a lot more, but the essence SHOULD already be there.
With regard to adding/subtracting elements from a photo, altering focal length, focusing on part rather than the whole may reveal something more than a shot of the whole! If that can’t be done then perhaps cloning out an element in photoshop or just mere cropping. Great skill is not required here, but great skill is required in ‘SEEING’.
I think one always has to do some PP in order to bring the best out in the photo. Maybe lighten an area, darken etc.
I used to print photos in a photo lab, (here of course I could only alter the colour balance and contrast) and people would come in with their 35mm film and would want an hour develop and print. (D&P) Of course this would go through the printer and if the film was exposed correctly the film would go through the machine and prints would come out the other end mostly fine. (It depended on the photographer).
The situation would get a bit tricky if the film was water damaged, X-ray damaged, light damaged, over exposed, under exposed ... the customer would still want a great print!
Also I would print for some wedding photographers, newspaper photographers... and they can be picky about colour, skin colour and you know who you are! This is where printing knowledge would come in and knowing about colour theory! If a printer did not understand this, then he/she would not know what colour filters (CMY) to add or subtract in order to get correct skin tones, etc ,etc... (The machine would sometimes compensate the colour balance incorrectly).
The point here is at least something has to be done during the printing stage; it is the same with PP –as what has already been mentioned! To bring out the best in a photo it needs to be done. An image can still win though with minimal PP. Because it is more about the image than the skill in PP (at least in regard to the photo challenge, I think!). That brings me to my next point.
COMPOSITION
This was raised by a poster who wanted to improve his composition. I feel that many people take shots of nothing. Having a digital camera allows us to shoot a whole card of nothing - no cost incurred. It was different with film! I myself have been interested in photography for years, but had not the money or the equipment to develop my skills. Now with digital and a computer, I can experiment a lot more and try to ‘see’. (Don’t think I have been very successful to date though). I don’t think many people have ‘learnt to see’. With or without PP, an image is NOTHING without THOUGHT in my view. With PP, an image can be emphasised a little or a lot more, but the essence SHOULD already be there.
With regard to adding/subtracting elements from a photo, altering focal length, focusing on part rather than the whole may reveal something more than a shot of the whole! If that can’t be done then perhaps cloning out an element in photoshop or just mere cropping. Great skill is not required here, but great skill is required in ‘SEEING’.
Comment