Jump to content

Welcome to NikonForums.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Editing Photos... and Receiving Comments


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1
Snorky

Snorky

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationDeep Space 9

Before I bought my Nikon DSLR, I used my smartphone to take pictures (still do, actually). There was a basic photo editing app on my phone but I eventually downloaded Snapseed, which is an excellent tool. I highly recommend  it!

 

Anyway, most people shared positive comments about the pictures I'd post but one or two would say, "that's edited."

 

Yes.... and?

 

It amazes me that people don't realize how many photographs we see every day in magazines, online, or elsewhere have been edited in some way to improve color, exposure, sharpness, etc... whether in PhotoShop, Lightroom or elsewhere. That's reality. Even back in the ancient days of film, we used varius darkroom techniques to process and print photos. 

 

When people say, "that's edited," you'd think we're doing something horrible. :rolleyes:

 

Just out of curiosity, how many here on the forum use PhotoShop, Lightroom or other software?



#2
Bengan

Bengan

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationStockholm

Site Supporter

I think most people that use a DSLR also use some form of editing program, and why not. Editing is a part of photography. When producing a picture several tools can be used. This is regardless of type of picture. It can be a photo or an oil panting or basically anything. People produce pictures and the tools used can be a brush, pen or a camera but they are just tools as is a computer software.



#3
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe


Bengan's got the right thing.

 

Recording data has not yet much to do with the final products;
that's why the is film editing, sound track editing and photo too.



#4
Snorky

Snorky

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationDeep Space 9

Yes I agree. I just find the negative comments I mentioned in my original post to be somewhat illogical.



#5
mikew

mikew

    Forum Veteran

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 798 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationNorth East Lincs

Obviously the naysayers never did any darkroom work, editing didnt start with digital.



#6
Malice

Malice

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

There are no unedited/unprocessed images. Every digital camera uses built in algorithms to turn the recorded data into an image. Especially the smart phone cameras do that. A lot of the perceived image quality is based on the software used to create these images.

 

Even the human eye uses things like light sensitivity adjustments and processing algorithms to turn the light falling on the retina into an actual image. And that's before the brain kicks in and performs its own picture enhancements.

 

So, saying a picture is edited is like saying, "hey, you used light to take that picture".



#7
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe

Even the human eye uses things like light sensitivity adjustments and processing algorithms to turn the light falling on the retina into an actual image. And that's before the brain kicks in and performs its own picture enhancements.


That is not what you wanted to say, maybe?  <_<



#8
Malice

Malice

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 212 posts
  • Country Flag

Site Supporter

Why not?

 

The nerve cells in the retina have their own methods to perform signal processing, this "raw" image is sent to the brain, which then works with the data to create the image we "see".



#9
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe


Ok, thanks for that.



#10
Tony

Tony

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,241 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationBeaverton, Oregon

Site Supporter

Yes I agree. I just find the negative comments I mentioned in my original post to be somewhat illogical.

I totally agree with you Snorky.  In my experiences with digital photography, I have found that Post Photo Editing is inevitable.  I will go so far as to say that 

 

with regards to all of my gear, I often times have very little or no need for editing when using my Nikon gear.  Also, there are many times when using my Nikon and no editing was necessary, there were those who accused me of editing.  So these people need to think about growing up someplace else and hopefully then they will learn to be more tactful and courteous.  Kudos to you for raising a very important point.

 

Thnx for reading, Tony



#11
Snorky

Snorky

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationDeep Space 9

On a side note:  Have you seen some people's smartphone lock screen and home page pictures? Overexposed and slanted... those pics really need to be edited!

 

:D  :D  :D  



#12
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe

In my experiences with digital photography, I have found that Post Photo Editing is inevitable.


There is first a mineral chip recording a scene. NOTHING is
more important than recording the very best data possible.

Then, there will be organic eyes and brain evaluating that re-
cording and give it an "organic" natural rendition compatible
with references held in the brain and a twist of artistic intent.

Inevitable is the correct choice of word.



#13
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

There are too many folks who don't edit but should edit.  On the flip side there are lots of folks who over edit.  We have all likely been guilty of both ends of the spectrum at times.  Neither end is a good place to be.  

 

The people who make those comments in many cases are just proud of themselves because they were able to notice that editing had been done.  REAL editing should be subtle enough that it isn't noticed.  But like I said, we have all been there.


  • Ron likes this

#14
Snorky

Snorky

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationDeep Space 9

I'll often sharpen an image if necessary and/or give it a "Kodachrome" look. Memories from the good old film days.... more warmth. :)

 

There are also times when HDR will add a new dimension, along with the various "Vintage" filters from Snapseed. I wish there was a version of that app for Windows.



#15
Bengan

Bengan

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationStockholm

Site Supporter

 REAL editing should be subtle enough that it isn't noticed.

 

Here I have to disagree. I don't see editing as real or not. In my opinion it doesn't matter if is noticeable or not. Editing in some form is a part of photography and picture production. Plane and simple.



#16
Nikon Shooter

Nikon Shooter

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,776 posts
  • Country Flag
  • Location: French Canadian living in Central Europe

I don't see editing as real or not. In my opinion it doesn't matter if is noticeable or not. Editing in some form is a part of photography and picture production. Plane and simple.

Here I have to disagree… it is not so plain and simple
and 
it does matter if it is noticeable or not.

 

Neither end is a good place to be.

I agree with that!
 

 

REAL editing should be subtle enough that it isn't noticed.

Interpreting raw data may well be rough, tough… violent
but the end result should always be visually pleasing, sto-

ry telling and look interesting — description or inspiration.
 



#17
Bengan

Bengan

    Forum Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationStockholm

Site Supporter

Here I have to disagree… it is not so plain and simple
and it does matter if it is noticeable or not.

 

It doesn't matter to me (not one bit actually) and I didn't mean that the editing is plain and simple. That expression was referring to my opinion



#18
Snorky

Snorky

    Loyal Member

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 267 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationDeep Space 9

In my opinion it doesn't matter if is noticeable or not. Editing in some form is a part of photography and picture production. Plane and simple.

 

I agree. Photography is art.

 

I'm not saying we should always exaggerate colors, over-sharpen, or posterize all of our photos, but there is room for many different styles and techniques here, We have individual tastes... I prefer to appreciate them all.



#19
TBonz

TBonz

    Sportz Guy

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,573 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationOn A Field Somewhere...

Site Supporter

I agree. Photography is art.

 

Photography can be an art.  Photography can provide a record  which is not art.  If I am creating a piece of art then editing is my choice and I don't care if someone likes it as long as the customer or I do.

 

Photojournalism is not art.  There may be some artistic techniques used to capture an image but the image needs to remain true to the event.  That is what I was speaking of.  



#20
Ron

Ron

    Nikonian

  • Forum Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,635 posts
  • Country Flag
  • LocationMagic City

Photojournalism is not art.  There may be some artistic techniques used to capture an image but the image needs to remain true to the event.  That is what I was speaking of.  

 

W. Eugene Smith would, if he were alive today, probably argue that point with you. All of his photos were heavily manipulated in the darkoom... and displayed an artistic quality seldom seen in photojournalism. Even his war photographs. But then, he probably also took ten years off his life because of all the time he spent over the years messing with chemicals in his darkroom. The creative freedom we all take for granted when we (and I mean ALL of us) use post processing software to bend an image to our personal vision of an event would have been nirvana for him. 

 

But yeah, back on track... I totally agree with you about subtlety in editing. Far too many images are, in my opinion, over manipulated in post and easy to spot. Thankfully, it's not quite as bad as it was a few years ago when HDR was all the rage. Many photographers (myself included) have learned to pull back from the edge a bit in regards to post processing. To not go quite so far in filling in foreground shadows and darkening skies, etc. The best photographs will, I believe, always be the ones that don't look like they were "fixed" in Photoshop.

 

--Ron