Say NO to Post processing!

[gah1]

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??

Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my PC so do I still need PPS or not?

If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

 

[Rudiman]

Well you have a couple options then. Shell out another 2 or 3 grand for some great "L" lenses.....or set your own parameters and use the dummy modes, but you still wont get nearly anywhere near the picture you will get with alittle post processing. It is addicting once you get the hang of it.

Rudi

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

--
Rudi
http://www.pbase.com/rudiman

 

[DannyV]

If you want the quality of images that many people post on this forum, then yes, you do need to post process at least a little bit.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

No, it doesn't always look great. Slide film has limited dynamic range and blows highlights like they are going out of style. People who shoot slide film all the time typically bracket like crazy to insure a good exposure. The other reason slide film looks good is because much of the stuff done in PS is done by the film. You don't actually think the world really looks like a Velvia slide do you?

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?

When you resize an image you will need to do some sharpening, to restore the sharpness of the original image, that is all.

If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

There will be just as many that will be happy that they finally have control of their photography.

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

The S2 is not a no-PS camera, despite what the S2 champions might say. It just seems a little better in this regard than the others.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

What it comes down to is, if you turn up the in-camera settings, nail the exposure and white balance you will need very little post processing. If you want the quality of photos that people post on these forums they you are going to have to put some work into it, just like they did.

gah1

--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
300D tips http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html

 

[David Waelder]

No, not again!

Another "Postprocessing" holy war incoming...

There is a common misconception about phtography: that postprocessing is an option for "photofreaks". There is ALWAYS postprocessing of some sort.

When you do film based photography, there is postprocessing on the lab, they do adjust color, brightness...

When you do digital photography witha P&S, the camera does the postprocess for you, adjust sharpness, WB...

The only difference with DSLR is they leave the PP part to you, so you are more in control of the final output. You don't want to PP, fine; adjust the settings so the suit you and shoot in the "dumb" (auto) modes. You will get fine pics, but not the finest you could if you PP (or maybe not...)

Happy shooting!

Regards,

David.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

--
there was a SIG here.
It is gone now

 

[Michael972]

Another "Postprocessing" holy war incoming...

There is a common misconception about phtography: that
postprocessing is an option for "photofreaks". There is ALWAYS
postprocessing of some sort.

When you do film based photography, there is postprocessing on the
lab, they do adjust color, brightness...
When you do digital photography witha P&S, the camera does the
postprocess for you, adjust sharpness, WB...

The only difference with DSLR is they leave the PP part to you, so
you are more in control of the final output. You don't want to PP,
fine; adjust the settings so the suit you and shoot in the "dumb"
(auto) modes. You will get fine pics, but not the finest you could
if you PP (or maybe not...)

Happy shooting!

Regards,

David.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

--
there was a SIG here.
It is gone now

--
My images:
http://michael972.smugmug.com

 

[Alansworld]

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?

At the VERY least you are going to have to develop your RAWs. Most of us here will agree that it's RAW for 95% of your work, and JPEG for the last 5% quick-grab-shot not-so-important stuff. Personally I really enjoy sitting down for an hour or two with C1 Pro after a day's shooting.

--
Alan, Newbury, UK

 

[Aby]

Are you sure about what you're saying....??

"Slide film has limited dynamic range"

IMO good slide film has 2 stops more!

K> R> ,
Aby

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

No, it doesn't always look great. Slide film has limited dynamic
range and blows highlights like they are going out of style. People
who shoot slide film all the time typically bracket like crazy to
insure a good exposure. The other reason slide film looks good is
because much of the stuff done in PS is done by the film. You don't
actually think the world really looks like a Velvia slide do you?

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?

When you resize an image you will need to do some sharpening, to
restore the sharpness of the original image, that is all.

If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

There will be just as many that will be happy that they finally
have control of their photography.

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

The S2 is not a no-PS camera, despite what the S2 champions might
say. It just seems a little better in this regard than the others.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

What it comes down to is, if you turn up the in-camera settings,
nail the exposure and white balance you will need very little post
processing. If you want the quality of photos that people post on
these forums they you are going to have to put some work into it,
just like they did.

gah1

--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
300D tips
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html

 

[David Waelder]

Nice pic! Nice belly!

but...

Sorry, I don't get your reply...

--
there was a SIG here.
It is gone now

 

[DannyV]

Are you sure about what you're saying....??

"Slide film has limited dynamic range"

IMO good slide film has 2 stops more!

Put some slide film in your camera and then bracket in manual about 4 stops in each direction, then do the same with your digital camera. In my experience the digital actually has a little more range than slides, but close enough to call the same. What film does have, is a more graceful clipping behavior, where as digital tends to just "cut off" when it reaches some point.

K> R> ,
Aby

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

No, it doesn't always look great. Slide film has limited dynamic
range and blows highlights like they are going out of style. People
who shoot slide film all the time typically bracket like crazy to
insure a good exposure. The other reason slide film looks good is
because much of the stuff done in PS is done by the film. You don't
actually think the world really looks like a Velvia slide do you?

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?

When you resize an image you will need to do some sharpening, to
restore the sharpness of the original image, that is all.

If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

There will be just as many that will be happy that they finally
have control of their photography.

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

The S2 is not a no-PS camera, despite what the S2 champions might
say. It just seems a little better in this regard than the others.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

What it comes down to is, if you turn up the in-camera settings,
nail the exposure and white balance you will need very little post
processing. If you want the quality of photos that people post on
these forums they you are going to have to put some work into it,
just like they did.

gah1

--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
300D tips
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html

--
Daniel
http://www.pbase.com/dvogel11
300D tips http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digital-rebel-tricks.html
300D FAQ at http://www.marius.org/fom-serve/cache/3.html

 

[Kenny126764]

It's even more fun when you post process RAW files. I always do post processing(99%). I wouldn't show a picture to anyone without doing so. If you just want to take snap shots, go for point and shoot. If you ever do post processing, you should know the power of it. It makes significant difference. Anyway, let people enjoy their post processing and keep the NO to yourself. =)

 

[Dropi]

Does a purdy belly like that need to make sense ?

--
Have at thee !!

 

[Neil H]

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??

No, It means that your money would probably be most wisely spent on a point n shoot which is designed to give "good" results straight from the box at a low price (when compared to DSLRs).

If you want high quality, go DSLR + post processing. If you dont, stick with a happy snapping point n shoot.

--
Pau a tots

 

[Bobby Timonera]

It all depends on you if you want post processing or not. If you're happy with your shots right out of the camera, then by all means don't post process. But that means you should shoot JPEG all the time, coz you reallly want to post process when you shoot RAW, or you'll regret you ever bought an expensive dSLR in the first place.

With negative film, yes the lab technician decides for you how to print your images. With slides, you can almost do nothing about it during processing, except pushing or pulling (extending or reducing developing time). But if you want your images printed or scanned for the web, you will likely still post process.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

--
BOBBY TIMONERA, Iligan City, Philippines
http://www.pbase.com/timonera / http://www.photos.ph/timonera

 

[Karl R. Josker]

You got my attention; now what were we talking about?

 

[Adrian E227460]

You obviously don't get the purposes of a dSLR. It is a pro(sumer) tool. You have to do more, but in return you get exactly what you want. With P&S the camera does in-camera-processing (sharpening etc.) to make the image appear better. However, this is irreversible. Someone who works professionally for printing etc. doesn't want that, he wants to be able to sharpen/level/saturate etc. exactly as he wants.

These are just basic complaints of P&S users switching to dSLR. If you want the sharpness and all that corrected for you, stay with P&S.

--
Warning: photographs steal your soul!

 

[caterpillar]

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

No, it is not.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1,

I am with you! No postprocessing! Yes!

Ok. to get that tack sharp picture with high contrast, with no post processing, I suggest you only buy L lenses. Or if you can't afford it, like me, I got a Tamron 28-75 XR Di w/c is at par in image quality with the L equivalent at 1/3 the price. I notice that in many pictures, there is no need to sharpen or do curves with Di lenses especially with good exposure. I use parameter 2 with my 300D.

As for exposure, well, You better be good at reading the scene with your eyes and not get fooled by your meter. Because the burden now of getting the exposure "right" is with YOU. Since you don't want to PP, then when you shoot, you better get it right the first time because you don't want to fix it in PS.

Or if you have more money to spare, get yourself an incident light meter and use the reading there instead while you go with manual mode with the 300d. A light meter would be a better way to help you get the exposure "right."

So there you have it! Not 100% fool proof, but about 90-95% sure way of getting your shots sharp and properly exposed WITHOUT POSTPROCESSING.

You can always set your camera to parameter 1, but you will find that it is too contrasty with some scenes and too sharp in others making the pictures you took worse than parameter 2.

I am with you! No postprocessing!!!!

--
---------------------

• Caterpillar

'Always in the process of changing, growing, and transforming.'

 

[gah1]

Its very interesting. I have posted this thread about No post processing on both the Canon 300D and the Nikon D70 sites. Invariably canon users all seem to think PPS is virtually compulsory whilst D70 users are a bit more - only if you want to - is this cos the Canon NEEDS it whilst the D70 doesnt quite as much?Or is it that Canon users are more Techies and love playing with PPS?

I still think that sales will suffer. Most people out there want to take pics NOT to spend ages in front of a PC. As for 'its fun', it may be but only if I feel like it - which is different from having to do it. I think that this is the essential difference here.

There is a site that sadly I cannot find right now that shows pics out of a Canon 300D on a Before and AFTER post processing basis.It is NOT a good advert! If you took the Before pictures you would be very disappointed. Canon must know this. Yes maybe some DSLR uses would welcome the control over the pics but others will fill these posts with stories of softness and blame bad lenses etc. Frankly it is not a good sales pitch.

As for P & S - well although on the face of it there are a lot out there in reality if you want one with a long zoom say 200mm there are not that many and they all have problems according to these pages!

Maybe the answer is that if you want a good all round camera with a good lens of up to 200mm or more and dont want to spend your life in front of a PC tweaking them for ever that you have to wait a few years for technology to catch up? I dont think so. I think that when sales suffer at beacause of this issue the manufacturers will do something about it.

My friend with the Fuji S2 is adamant that PPS is NOT required.
thanks for all the replies
gah1

 

[LMitch]

There has always been some form of post-processing, whether it be film or digital. The bigger issue/question I think, is how much time is put into getting the shot right the first time to save yourself time later.

IMO, You'll see a lot more discussion around here about post processing than you will about things like exposure metering, composition, and bracketing. Now this maybe because I'm an old film guy, but these things are more important than ones skill at post-processing.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

 

[David Barker91965]

So why do dSLR cameras have the ability to carry out in-camera-processing, with a variety of user-selectable parameters then?

And are we looking for sharp images or sharpened ones?

You obviously don't get the purposes of a dSLR. It is a pro(sumer)
tool. You have to do more, but in return you get exactly what you
want. With P&S the camera does in-camera-processing (sharpening
etc.) to make the image appear better. However, this is
irreversible. Someone who works professionally for printing etc.
doesn't want that, he wants to be able to sharpen/level/saturate
etc. exactly as he wants.

These are just basic complaints of P&S users switching to dSLR. If
you want the sharpness and all that corrected for you, stay with
P&S.

--
Warning: photographs steal your soul!

--
DB

 

[David Barker91965]

IMO, You'll see a lot more discussion around here about post
processing than you will about things like exposure metering,
composition, and bracketing. Now this maybe because I'm an old film
guy, but these things are more important than ones skill at
post-processing.

Ok. OK. I have decided that I dont want to spend hours on post
processing. I work in front of a PC all day, Why do I want to spend
my down time in front of one as well?
So, does this mean I shouldnt have an DSLR??
Some people tell me that PPS MUST be done, others say no. I
understand that in film cameras its done by the developers but
what about slide film? That isnt PPS is it? Surely not and that
always looked great.

I will only print say 5% of my shots - the rest I will view on my
PC so do I still need PPS or not?
If so I think that DSLRs sales will be limited in the mass market
unless this is sorted out. I just cannot see that most people are
gonna want to spend ages on this and if they buy a DSLR and then
find they have to there are gonna be a hell of a lot of
disappointed people out there!!

Or is this just a Canon/Nikon issue. Someone has told me that the
Fuji S2 doesnt need PPS at all.

I need to get this clear in my mind BEFORE I shell out £1000!!!

gah1

--
DB