 |
|
|
UER Store
|
|
sweet UER decals:
|
|
|
 BOX
   
box1
 |  | post processing?
< on 12/14/2005 7:22 PM >
|  | | | 
does something like that even need post processing? is it even a good photo? 
are there any good postprocessing guides that wont "ruin" an image?
|
|
seicer
   
Location: New York
Gender: Male
| |  | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 1 on 12/14/2005 8:31 PM >
| | | | Posted by blackomegax
does something like that even need post processing? is it even a good photo?
are there any good postprocessing guides that wont "ruin" an image?
|
What do you mean by post-processing? I am shooting in RAW format, and post-processing can significantly alter an image for the better if it is slightly underexposed or overexposed, and without the need to go back out and retake the shot.
This is done without a loss of quality.
Now if it is JPEG and you do all that, as I have done in the past for some washed-out sky images (because I was too lazy to use my ND filter and all that crap), then you can "ruin" it if you overdo it.
Abandoned |
|
Explorer Zero
| | | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 2 on 12/14/2005 11:09 PM >
| | | | Posted by blackomegax
is it even a good photo?
|
I dont know is it right side up??
|
|
what
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
RE - Rural Exploration
| | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 3 on 12/15/2005 1:11 AM >
| | | | i think it's a decent enough photo, interesting perspective, i don't think any post work is really necessary..
|
|
angeloks
Location: Montreal, QC
Gender: Male
"To me, a camera is a license to explore."– Jerry Uelsmann
| | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 4 on 1/20/2006 5:51 PM >
| | | | Well, I think this is right side up... for there's a little ladder that looks rather stupid behing horizontal in the air and that grey brick wall would have been rather difficult to build... Anyway, I'm not really fan of putting photos upside down or rotating them to give weird perspective...
The only post processing that would be required (in my opinion), is to put the photo perfectly vertical with frame... slight adjustment. Otherwise, it's a pretty decent picture.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pekdeche/ |
|
desmet
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.
| |  | | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 5 on 1/20/2006 7:19 PM >
| | | | Good photo, and it doesn't need as much post processing as some however...
-USM - Virtually every photo you take needs USM, especially if you're going to print it. This one is definitely no exception.
- Releveling? - Seems a bit cocked to me. Maybe try releveling using one of the vertical lines as a reference.
- Lens distortion - Doesn't look bad in this, but worth a shot.
- Burning - I would create an adjustment layer for the blue stuff and darken it up a tad for more detail. I would also burn in the edges around the white spot a touch.
- Crop - Might pay to crop a bit of the floor out. I like the effect, so I wouldn't get rid of it all by any means, but it might look better with a little more focus on what's in focus. I'd have to see it to say though.
- Exposure - I might bump up the exposure on the inside stuff a bit, but this monitor sucks so maybe, maybe not. There's great detail on the wall and the floor and I feel like a little brighter image *might* help that stand out more.
|
|
cringe
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Gender: Male
RAINBOW PARTY. MORBID AS F#!K.
| | | | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 6 on 1/23/2006 12:12 AM >
| | | | Posted by angeloks
Well, I think this is right side up...
|
It's definitely not .. :\
1) The peeling paint wouldn't be on the floor.
2) The cinderblock structure in the background is floating...
NAY, sir! |
|
WySiWyG
Account Closed
Location: Welland Canal Southern Terminus
Gender: Male
Hey, like take off eh? Hoser.
| | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 7 on 1/23/2006 12:47 AM >
| | | | I think it is a great picture. Good depth of field and composition. Anything that makes people ask which way is up is interesting and gets our curiosity. As for post-production, I don't believe that most pictures should have any post-production. With the use of some filters, you can enhance what you see in the field or adjustments to shutter speed will also do the trick. But then again ... I'm an not the digital type yet. Again, great picture.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own" - Adam Savage [Mythbusters]
My inspiration: www.invisiblethreads.com/potd/ Niagara Photos: www.mhinccanada.com |
|
Detroit
Moderator
Location: Ottawa /Gatineau /Montreal
Gender: Male
4-aminophenol and 2-5% potassium hydroxide
| |  | | Re: post processing?
<Reply # 8 on 1/26/2006 7:39 AM >
|  | | | First of all, while I think this is an interesting picture, it would work better right away if it was rotated to the "correct" portrait orientation. It gives me a sore neck looking at it this way :)
The other problem as I see it is that as it stands now is that the image has no real "subject". There is nothing specific that the viewer is supposed to be looking at in the scene. The wall is neat but not really in focus... so that can't be the subject, and if the window in the distance is the subject... well the wall sure does a good job distracting the eye away from it.
While I am far from a rule follower myself when it comes to image composition, you can usually really improve your photos if you ask yourself these three questions when you shoot.
1) What is the subject of the shot? (what do you want the viewer to "focus" on?)
2) How can I draw the viewer's attention to the subject? (using lighting, focus, colour, contrast, depth of field.)
3) What can I do to minimise distractions from the subject in the frame of view? (eliminate background clutter or unwanted backlighting etc, by choosing a good angle for the shot.)
As for post processing... well isn't that where all the fun is?
Many photographers shy away from digital post processing but I don't really understand why. Why not use all of the tools at your disposal?
Certainly if the photo in question is a "real to life" portrait or a commercial shot then the least amount of post shot adjustment possible is preferable, but for artistic work, why not?
Often I look at my "inital" exposure as a sketch and the definitive image as the finished canvas. Of course sometimes images don't need any adjustments, but I just love to tweak until I get the result I intended when I shot the scene. In fact more and more I find myself trying to compose and expose my shots to be tweaked.
As for this image, while there is nothing that can be done to change the composition of the shot, post processing can help clarify a subject (such as the windows).
This is what I was able to do in a couple minutes.
I rotated and cropped the image, corrected a bit of perspective and lens distortion, and selectively adjusted the curves of different areas in the image to try to draw the viewer's attention to the windows. Notice that I darkened the wall area and increased the contrast of the windows. I also took some of the red away from the wall because our eyes are drawn to red and it can distract from the subject.
Now please don't get me wrong, I am not trying to suggest to anyone that my way is the right way, or even a good way. I just thought it would be nice to share what I would have done.
Anyways, keep up the good work. I'm sure that if you try to be a bit more "subject" specific in your shots you will be taking some outstanding pictures in no time at all.
The end of the beginning is the beginning of the end. |
|
|
|
All content and images copyright © 2002-2024 UER.CA and respective creators. Graphical Design by Crossfire.
To contact webmaster, or click to email with problems or other questions about this site:
UER CONTACT
View Terms of Service |
View Privacy Policy |
Server colocation provided by Beanfield
This page was generated for you in 117 milliseconds. Since June 23, 2002, a total of 739704070 pages have been generated.
|
|
