ecube: I'd rather take time taking pictures than trying to fix the pictures with computer software. I maybe the only one in 100,000 photo-hobbyist who stay away from shooting raw and spend countless hours manipulating the photos with software.
Other than crop, straighten, and reduce size (for posting here in DPR) I don't have use to sophisticated software. VewNX2 and Picasa is more than enough for my need.
Well we kind of agree then, but I'm not talking about PP to make my photo's perfect, just to make them look like do with a Mk.I eyeball. Yes some pictures I do make look better, but some I just want them to look like they should.
Doctor is the wrong word for what I'm talking about and getting photo's published doesn't mean anything other than you can take good photos - they could be better with a little PP or maybe they don't need any - we all take photo's that don't really need any PP (other than the basics) but quite often they can be improved a small amount and the same image from different cameras does not always look the same. It doesn't mean that someone that does PP isn't as good a photograph as one that doesn't.
ecube, working on photos PP isn't just about making them look better than they were, a lot of the time it's about making them look as good as they did when you saw them in the flesh. Quite often the photo's we take don't quite look like they should do and that's where some good PP work can improve them. It's not all about making colours more vibrant and smoothing over people's skin. Sometimes it can just be about improving the DR in the photo, as no camera has DR as high as our eyes, or doing a better job with NR.
Obviously you can do what you like with your pictures, but spend ing more time taking pictures doesn't mean that you can make it look just like it did to you when you were standing there.
So if you like taking the time to take good pictures, isn't it worth taking a bit of time with them in PP? OK not all pictures need much work, it's not always about "manipulating" them, I take plenty of pictures that don't need much and I just run them through Photo Ninja and it's very quick to have a photo from raw looking better than an OOC jpeg.
the jimmy: Anyone using PhotoNija? I believe it has Noise Nija incorporated into it. It may be considered more of a RAW converter, although it is not limited to just that.
I'm using Photo Ninja, it's a great Raw converter and the Noise Ninja 3 it uses is completely different to the previous versions. At the moment the tools are limited as it's very new so I usually finish off photos in PSE if I need to play with layers or cloning. I believe there is a clone tool and lots more coming to Photo Ninja.