The meaning of Basic PP?

[iworkwood]

what does "Basic PP" mean in regards to the processing rules?

 

[Alvatrus]

I guess it depends on the challenge host.
For me, basic processing is:
a) done on the image as a whole,
b) roughly includes the following:

• exposure
• whitebalance
• contrast
• cropping
• sharpening
• vignetting (although this is a border case)

Of course, it's very hard to tell sometimes what exactly has been done in post, especially if it's done subtly.

 

[doady]

Basic PP is term used by people who don't know much about PP, and there is really no single definition of "basic" PP. Some hosts don't even allow saturation adjustment or sharpening, and allow "light, contrast, and cropping only." It is best to ignore the anti-PP restrictions because they don't make sense anyways.

 

[007peter]

Hello everyone here. I'm a newbie photo challenger and is also confused by the definition of basic PP.

I discovered the technique of Vignetting just recently having participated in the Lomography challenge. Now I'm addicted to vignetting , I found it does wonders calling attention to my subjects. Its ironic that I criticized a lens for vignetting, now I'm finding myself applying the vignetting to every photo that I submitted.

Why is vignetting so controversial? It only darken the corners so you can call attention to the main subject in the photograph. Yet, many consider this as "too much" post-processing? Is there a consensus on this technique?

Thanks for any insight?

I guess it depends on the challenge host.
For me, basic processing is:
a) done on the image as a whole,
b) roughly includes the following:

• exposure
• whitebalance
• contrast
• cropping
• sharpening
• vignetting (although this is a border case)

Of course, it's very hard to tell sometimes what exactly has been done in post, especially if it's done subtly.

 

[Ed at Ridersite]

To me, it means anything that can be manipulated using camera settings:
contrast
saturation
sharpness
exposure
red eye removal
fill flash
white balance

and possibly:
hdr/dro

I also think cloning out dust spots is acceptable. And, cropping is pretty basic and many folks probably don't even consider cropping as post processing.
--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!

 

[Alvatrus]

I don't think vignetting (or any other form of pp) is controversial.

It's your image, and if you think you can improve it by applying an effect or a technique then please do so. Don't hold yourself back because someone thinks it's not done to do so.

However, in the challenges I want some way to level the playing field. Heavily post-processed images are (for me) are a completely different game compared to "out-of-the-box" images.

Regards,
Alvatrus

 

[DarylK]

I would also consider photo rotation to make things level and/or plumb as a Basic PP item. I haven't seen that mentioned yet.
--
DarylK

 

[doady]

To me, it means anything that can be manipulated using camera settings:
contrast
saturation
sharpness
exposure
red eye removal
fill flash
white balance

and possibly:
hdr/dro

I also think cloning out dust spots is acceptable. And, cropping is pretty basic and many folks probably don't even consider cropping as post processing.
--

No resizing, curves, NR, CA/lens correction, hue/tint? I do these a lot, except the hue adjustment. I also do a lot of masking, occasional dodging/burning, and in rare cases the cloning out of extraneous elements. These are all very easy to do despite having no training whatsoever in PS, and therefore they are all "basic" techniques to me.

The "art filters" for certain cameras makes your definition of "basic" PP more complicated as it shows in-camera processing can be any number of things and the possibilities are almost limitless.

And of course in the film days, photographers could composite photos in-camera very easily though multiple exposure, so that would mean that compositing photos should be considered part of "basic" PP as well, according to your definition.

 

[bhoegh]

what does "Basic PP" mean in regards to the processing rules?

That is an excellent question that I have asked my self as well ... and I am pretty certain that there is no definite answer to it. I'll have a go at it anyway...

To me "basic PP" means that the significant part of the work is done before shutterrelease and not afterwards. That certainly doesn't mean that no PP should be done - no PP is a artificial kind of purism that doesn't capture the true nature of photography in the digital age: a "raw" image is useless in it self and whether it is "developed" in or out of the camera is not important.

But I am still of the opinion that "development" it should be unobtrusive and "in the spirit" of the capture. An example: my raw-converter is capable of HDR-ish feats and that is fine by me, but I would definitely not say it is "basic PP" if it is done to a degree where it shows.

So in a way what I am saying is, that you can do it if you don't over-do it...

And why do we have such a rule anyway? I think it is to help us focus on capture technique. My late grandfather was a enthusiastic photographer and pricewinning too; I clearly remember one of his pictures: it was a A3-ish B/W-print that had a contactprint of the negative as well. Why the contactprint, you may ask? To show that the picture was captured that way.

So a challenge with "basic PP" processing rules to me is a challenge to show off our skills in capturing images - and not our photoshopping capabilities. And yes, it is to a large degree a gentlemens sport .

 

[Ed at Ridersite]

But I am still of the opinion that "development" it should be unobtrusive and "in the spirit" of the capture. An example: my raw-converter is capable of HDR-ish feats and that is fine by me, but I would definitely not say it is "basic PP" if it is done to a degree where it shows.

The Sony A-550 does HDR in camera. The results are pretty subdued compared to some of the stuff posted here, but IMO, if it can be done in camera, it should be considered basic.
--
AEH
http://aehass.zenfolio.com/
Question: What do you do all week?
Answer: Mon to Fri. Nothing, Sat & Sun I rest!

 

[Alvatrus]

Ok, let me elaborate.

For me, the post processing must not become a key feature of the image.

I could take a photograph, turn it to back and white, max out contrast and sharpening, and increase the exposure until 50% of the image is all blown out.

These steps some would all consider "basic pp", but the end result is that the pp has become a key-feature of the image. When the pp is considered to become a key feature is very subjective. But it's a much better definition than defining which operations are allowed in respect to the challenge.

Regards,
Alvatrus

 

[doady]

Ok, let me elaborate.

For me, the post processing must not become a key feature of the image.

I could take a photograph, turn it to back and white, max out contrast and sharpening, and increase the exposure until 50% of the image is all blown out.

These steps some would all consider "basic pp", but the end result is that the pp has become a key-feature of the image.

How would you know? Are all images the same? The PP you describe might become the "key feature" for many images but not all. It depends on the image, the subject of that image.

The quality of an image is a factor as well. If it is a poor image, if it is uninteresting, than the same amount of PP is more likely to dominate and overpower the image. A good, interesting image can often have more latitude for PP. But again it depends on the scene.

I don't see how it is possible make a blanket statement the effect of PP. Personally, some of my own images are moderately PPed, others are barely PPed at all. The effect of PP is not always the same.

 

[RBFresno]

RB

http://www.pbase.com/rbfresno/profile