Im really new to this whole photography thing and I definitely use the term loosely in my case. However, I am very inspired by all of the photos on this site, to do my best and learn to take great pictures. That said, it seems as if so many of the great images are "edited", cropped, color, definition, etc. Is this the norm? And if so, what do those pictures look like to start? So far, most of my pictures have come right out of the camera with maybe a little cropping here and there. I have also tried to play with some editing on a few, but really only what I can quickly do in iphoto, with one or two exceptions using piknic.
I feel as though so many of my pictures are just ok at best but with some editing help do they have potential to be better? If you wouldnt mind, would you please post some of the before edit and after edit shots you've taken?
The only photo of mine that made it onto the popular page has been unedited. There are a lot of things that you can do in camera to make photos better, such as being aware of the composition, depth of field and your focus points etc. I don't often do much editing, if at all - most of my project is completely unedited!
The new age of digital is upon us Katie. Personally I still like the look of film camera photos as the eye of the camera sees them. But if not overdone editing with photoshop, elements, lightroom, iphoto and piknic are amazing tools. There are great tutorials available for us amateur photographers but just remember to be subtle when applying certain applications. Personally I take my time to take the best shot that I can so I don't have to edit and crop, my personal challenge... take lots and lots of photos and remember to always have fun... cheers
I actually edit a lot. Mainly because I think it's fun. :) There is actually not a single picture unedited in my gallery. On most I only adjusted saturation, brightness and contrast to make it look better though. But I'm really getting into hdr at the moment so I edit my pictures a lot by now. Also sometimes it's just fun to me to see what you can do with a picture and how much you can change it (and still make it look good). :)
You don't really have to do a lot, but photos straight out of the camera (at least from DSLRs) can often be a bit dull and "lifeless" and will benefit from a touch of levels adjustments and saturating the colours a little
my rule of thumb is that if a photo takes more than 5 minutes to edit - it's too long. Now that's not to say I don't think it should - I just don't have time (but when I do I like to try out different stuff that can take hours to edit!) My album is a mix of non edits or slight crops and HDR processed stuff. It's all about personal choice I guess and as msartsy says most important bit is to have fun with whatever you decide to do!
Just finished going through your photos and I will say you don't have have to much editing, they are really, really good, keep doing what you are doing... I once was told that even professional photographers edit almost all of their photos, they just know how to do it properly.
it depends on the photo, you wouldn't apply lipstick and eyeliner to the mona lisa (although I am sure someone has or will edit a pic to show just that) and the same is true of photos sometimes over editing a good photo can quite often make it a bad photo, the real trick is knowing what editing your photo can take and when to say whoa, it all comes with practice. I usually edit photos as it does tend to bring out stuff that the camera does not pick up but if I start editing and it doesn't look right I will leave the image as it is.
Editing a photo, in my humble opinion, brings out its true potential. But what others have said is correct - subtlety is often key (except if you're going for a very particular style/effect) and you should try to do it properly, which to me means keeping the basic elements of the photo, but just adding more zest and life to them, adding your signature touch.
I've been using photoshop for 7 years now in a vast variety of contexts, so I consider myself a fairly well-versed editor. And it's fun! I love it :)
I fully agree with @helstor . Most pictures can and should have some level of color adjustments and contrast applied to them to make them come alive. This is true especially when the light is flat.
There is nothing wrong with editing or not. It's really a matter of how you want the picture to look. It's all up to you. If you ask a hundred people for their opinion you will get a variety of answers because editing can go in so many different directions today. We can control more things than ever with digital photography.
Whether you agree with editing or not it's a skill that all photographers need to know. I suggest that you take some time and play around with picnik to see what you can do with some of your pictures. If anything, you will learn basic editing.
I think your album shows a number of photos that need nothing edited. A couple could use a bit of light adjustment and the one with lots of background people I might try something on but for the most part they are great as is!
For me it depends on the picture. But I do usually edit my photos, even if it is a crop, color adjustments and contrast as many have stated above. On some, I just like to have fun and edit the crap out of them. For me, this porject has really pushed my editing boundries which I believe is an integral part of digital photography. I know some will disagree with me nit it is all about what you are interested in learning and getting out of your project.
@katiebrenkert None of the images in my main album are edited. I took the decision to concentrate on lighting and composition and creating the image in the camera as I am very much a beginner. I've nothing against editing, in fact a lot of the images in my second album are edited, I just wanted to do the best I could with the camera without relying on editing whilst I still learning.
Love your photos. Agree with @jannkc and a few others above - looks like some could use slight adjustments of light or saturation (the kind of thing that's easy to achieve with iPhoto). I'm going to follow you - your photos are really nice.
There was a great thread about this but I can't seem to find it. Even photos that are SOOC will not show exactly what the scene really looked like due to all the changes and everything that happen inside the camera before exporting even takes place. With that being said some editing will be needed just to get the image to look like it did in real life.
My photos are only cropped. Not because I'm a purist, I just don't have access to any photo editing software besides Picasa and the free stuff on Picnik. I did download GIMP, but will need a year just to understand everything. It seems quite complex, and my knowledge of layers, exposure, etc is sorely lacking.
For now I'm going to focus on learning how to take the best pictures I can with the camera, then go back and learn the skills needed for editing. My theory is learning how to take the best picture you can will likely make editing that much easier. Looking forward to testing that theory.
My main project is sooc [straight out of camera]. BUT, I do edit in my other two albums. Sometimes editing means adjusting the levels to make things pop a bit more, to working on a photo for hours cloning, adding, or removing things. It's all a matter of taste. Sometimes I feel a photo doesn't need any editing, but sometimes it just screams for it. That may just be me, but I'm fine with either way.
I always make sure my histogram is correct, contrast has been tweaked, exposure is correct and the composition works. Everything else depends on the photo and the message I am trying to send.
I'm sooo new to photography that I'll try to take the best picture I can and I'll run it through Photoshop auto-correction and see what it thinks. Sometimes I disagree but sometimes I think it looks better. If I do that, I'll try to take a similar shot but tweek the settings to match what Photoshop suggested. It's helping me take a few better shots. Some of mine I just edit for fun, though. There is a picture of a headstone on my page that was editted so much to get it how I wanted though. I like how it came out but it looks NOTHING like the original.
I tend to see pics that come out of my camera as a first draft. As such, most of the time they need to be polished a little before they can be presented to the world. I reckon no one would enjoy a half-finished product.
Occasionally, though, I get it right first time around. In this case no editing is required. But this is very rare.
So, I guess I edit because the camera is not perfect... and neither am I.
Some are, some aren't, when I used to shoot with film, I would edit the picture in the darkroom if it needed adjusting, so do the same now in the 'lightroom' if needed. Mostly it's cropping or desaturating and again only when needed to turn a good shot into a great shot.
Before
After, changed it to sepia type tone as it suited the look of the watch better, I felt anyway
Phogtography is an art for me... and in my opinion to EDIT or not to EDIT is a matter of personal preference. It also depends on the genre or kind of photography you want to get in to. Say for example, photo journalism requires zero or very less EDITING since they must show the readers/viewers of the actual event that transpires with an event. While in the field of advertisements it is highly recommended to edit or enhance their photos to make it more appealing for the consumers. In landscape photography, there are such things that the camera would not be able to capture as our eyes can see,hence, needs editing in which case, the most through HDR processing. I am not an expert and still a newbie but so far this is what ive learned. I tend to let my imagination run wild at times and let digital enhancement satisfy me , sometimes I just want it as it is. What ever makes me happy then I'll go for it.
I have seen your photos and most of them were from your day to day activities of your life which in my opinion requires less editing since the natural look of your photos straight out of the camera is ideal for your subject.
for me it really depends on the mood i am trying to convey in the photo...i always sharpen and often use vintage type processes, as i am a big time lover of child photography....follow your inner artist and do what you love- it will come out in your work:)
Thanks everybody for your feedback. I appreciate the chiming in to help me! Im doing my best to compose the image as best as I can and then I can edit accordingly to help make it better- but it is very encouraging to know that DSLR's require some editing to match what it is that we actually see and that I'm not "cheating" by manipulating things slightly or significantly if I so choose ;) That was a great "rant" Teresa! Thanks for finding it. And John- definitely a difference in the photo after changing to sepia. More defined.
For those that critiqued some of my photos- THANK YOU for that too! It helps me to learn what kinds of things I should focus on to improve and I would love it if you would keep those critiques coming. :) I'll be stalking all your pictures over the next few days trying to catch up, but thanks again for your input!!!
Sorry for being "late" to this. Editing is a tool, neither good not bad in itself. What you see in galleries from the old masters was often edited/manipulated in the darkroom. Our digital darkrooms simply add more tools than they had.
The key, IMO, is to not let processing replace process
I shoot raw files, so I have to edit. Raw files look like mush. If you shoot JPEG, your camera is adding a curves adjustment, saturation, and sharpening, all before you even see your image - though these are all quite generic, and global edits, so you can do better manually should you wish to dabble. Essentially, your camera makes decisions for you, which is a great time-saver but not especially brilliant.
Here's one of mine, that I did specifically for a before/after illustration:
I don't crop my pictures but I do a lot of editing. I'm a "color saturation freak" so I pump-up the colors a lot. Either that or I go sepia or black & white. It really depends on my mood and the subject matter. Sometimes I tinker with Photoshop and Lightroom just for the fun of it. I learn and discover things better by trial and error. =>
Most of my editing is just to get the photo back to how I saw it on the day, mainly by adjusting the 'curves' to boost the contrast and colour. I do like playing around with other things though - selective colouring or B&W with a colour hue being my favourite. Oddly, I don't always consider cropping to be an edit - if it's because I haven't framed the pic correctly then yes, it is, but if it's simply because I want a different aspect ratio to what my camera takes, then no! I comment under my photos if I've edited them, and also upload the unedited version to a second album if you're interested in seeing what I've done.
Generally speaking, I just adjust the brightness and contrast as needed. Once in a while I have a lot of fun playing with curves, but those usually just end up on Facebook. I very, very rarely crop.
@jinximages thanks for the before and after. Im relieved to know that its my camera that sometimes makes the pictures a little "flat" and not necessarily something Im doing wrong or forgetting to do. At least that's my new story! :) From what Im getting from this discussion some images just need the pick me up and I shouldnt be disappointed that I have to edit a photo. The before and after comparisons show me how much a small edit can impact a photo and that mine arent necessarily doomed if I dont like them from the start!
Personally to date I have done very little editing, but I've only just got Photoshop and so have yet to learn how to use most of its features (I am going on a course in November). I struggle to find time keep up to date with sorting my photos (hence in September I've yet to start uploading shots from August) and dread to think how much time it would take if I edited every image.
My only photo that made it to Popular was edited. I don't mind editing if it serves some particular purpose,for examples, creating old effect or bring out a particular colour or simply to get rid of that pimple on my nose!;-D lol
@katiebrenkert You're welcome! If you have composed well, exposed correctly, and made the most of the available light (or added light suitably), your image can still look quite "flat" (especially with digital images, which are quite bland and soft compared to film image proofs), so don't let it discourage you! :)
Edit, edit, and edit again, every time ... leave no stone unturned until you are sure you have not overlooked anything. No professional would lay his reputation on the line by publishing a snapshot straight from the camera, however skilled he may be.
I love the art of photography....AND I love the art of editing. So, I do edit most of my pictures. Sometimes it is only a crop...but usually I play with saturation and clarity to give the pictures a little more of a style.
I usually edit the basics (colour and contrast) with Picnik and Picasa but sometimes I start playing and get lost in it. Often this makes the picture worse but I can't help myself, I'm a little addicted ;). Sometimes I also produce obviously edited shots for the fun of it, like this one:
I edit way to much but it is because I am learning. I think as I get better I will strive to take the right photo to begin with. Unless of course I just want to play.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
I've been using photoshop for 7 years now in a vast variety of contexts, so I consider myself a fairly well-versed editor. And it's fun! I love it :)
There is nothing wrong with editing or not. It's really a matter of how you want the picture to look. It's all up to you. If you ask a hundred people for their opinion you will get a variety of answers because editing can go in so many different directions today. We can control more things than ever with digital photography.
Whether you agree with editing or not it's a skill that all photographers need to know. I suggest that you take some time and play around with picnik to see what you can do with some of your pictures. If anything, you will learn basic editing.
For now I'm going to focus on learning how to take the best pictures I can with the camera, then go back and learn the skills needed for editing. My theory is learning how to take the best picture you can will likely make editing that much easier. Looking forward to testing that theory.
i called it " ARTography" ......... =)
Occasionally, though, I get it right first time around. In this case no editing is required. But this is very rare.
So, I guess I edit because the camera is not perfect... and neither am I.
Before
After, changed it to sepia type tone as it suited the look of the watch better, I felt anyway
I have seen your photos and most of them were from your day to day activities of your life which in my opinion requires less editing since the natural look of your photos straight out of the camera is ideal for your subject.
Thanks everybody for your feedback. I appreciate the chiming in to help me! Im doing my best to compose the image as best as I can and then I can edit accordingly to help make it better- but it is very encouraging to know that DSLR's require some editing to match what it is that we actually see and that I'm not "cheating" by manipulating things slightly or significantly if I so choose ;) That was a great "rant" Teresa! Thanks for finding it. And John- definitely a difference in the photo after changing to sepia. More defined.
For those that critiqued some of my photos- THANK YOU for that too! It helps me to learn what kinds of things I should focus on to improve and I would love it if you would keep those critiques coming. :) I'll be stalking all your pictures over the next few days trying to catch up, but thanks again for your input!!!
Sorry for being "late" to this. Editing is a tool, neither good not bad in itself. What you see in galleries from the old masters was often edited/manipulated in the darkroom. Our digital darkrooms simply add more tools than they had.
The key, IMO, is to not let processing replace process
Here's one of mine, that I did specifically for a before/after illustration: