I was interested to read Ian Mason's post concerning colour issues, the problems he was having with his postings and Nick's reply giving advice on colour space etc.
It started me thinking (always a dangerous thing ) ; when will we start to see professional 'printers' (for want of a better word) being used to process images posted on this and other sites? It's nothing new of course. Back when film was King. . . well lets be honest, it was the only option!. . . it was not unusual for top photographers to put their negs (B/W) in the hands of professional printers.
The late, great Larry Bartlett springs to mind as being one of the geniuses of the darkroom and the difference he could make to a standard print had to be seen to be believed.
Now I know that in this wonderful age of digital imagery it is considered to be dead easy to manipulate images but is it really? I will freely admit that when it comes to computers and all things technical I am a proper muppet. Yes, I can use a computer. I have taught myself, making countless errors on the way and I probably still take twice as long to do something that can be done a lot quicker and easier. Yes, I can process my images, but . . . and this is the biggy . . can I do it properly? Having seen some of the wonderful images posted here and elsewhere I often doubt my ability to present my own images to their very best potential. From experience with film and darkroom work I believe I can tell when a picture is 'overcooked', or when burning in has been overdone etc but am I doing my images a disservice with my 'digital processing'?
Perhaps, if I ever manage to capture an image worthy of a competition, I should pay someone to get the best out of it on a computer for me? If I did would I be considered a cheat? Would I be considered as less of a photographer?
Any thoughts?
Posted by Bob Johnson on January 25, 2012 at 4:52 PM
As someone who is rubbish on the computer I do not think twice about enlisting the help of people better than I. Phil Ellard helped me with my black cheeked woodpecker post and my pal Dave Newton sorted out my fighting tawney eagles.
I will be going for my RPS Fellowship later this year and I will certainly seek help with the processing and I will also use the services of a pro printer. This leaves me free to do what I think I am good at, which is taking the shots in the first place and running my business
Bob
Posted by Phil Ellard on January 25, 2012 at 5:10 PM
I have not been taking pictures too long, in fact just about 3 years. However seriously a lot smaller period of time. When i returned from Kenya (Oct 2010) i didnt know how to process a raw and i mean at all. I started posting here about Dec of that year and for teh first few months every shot was slatted for the processing (and most other things in fairness). Since then i have invested a lot of time and money learning photoshop and lightroom. I cannot recommend Andy Astbury (wildlifeinpixels) enough. I am still learning and if anyone is familiar with the stages of learning I would put myself at conciously incompetent with moments of concious competence I firmly believe knowing how to get the most out of your raws is a vital tool in unlocking your creativity as a photographer.
As someone relatively new to wildlife photography and definately still learning I would say there are three areas you need (I am trying) to perfect
1) taking a picture (getting in camera right, composition etc...)
2) finding \ getting close to a subject fieldcraft
3) processing your pictures to realise your creative vision
My advice Robert don't pay someone to do it for you, pay someone to teach you how (I am not on commision honestly), it is a harder road but when you crack it....
Discussion
2 repliesIt started me thinking (always a dangerous thing
The late, great Larry Bartlett springs to mind as being one of the geniuses of the darkroom and the difference he could make to a standard print had to be seen to be believed.
Now I know that in this wonderful age of digital imagery it is considered to be dead easy to manipulate images but is it really? I will freely admit that when it comes to computers and all things technical I am a proper muppet. Yes, I can use a computer. I have taught myself, making countless errors on the way and I probably still take twice as long to do something that can be done a lot quicker and easier. Yes, I can process my images, but . . . and this is the biggy . . can I do it properly? Having seen some of the wonderful images posted here and elsewhere I often doubt my ability to present my own images to their very best potential. From experience with film and darkroom work I believe I can tell when a picture is 'overcooked', or when burning in has been overdone etc but am I doing my images a disservice with my 'digital processing'?
Perhaps, if I ever manage to capture an image worthy of a competition, I should pay someone to get the best out of it on a computer for me? If I did would I be considered a cheat? Would I be considered as less of a photographer?
Any thoughts?
I will be going for my RPS Fellowship later this year and I will certainly seek help with the processing and I will also use the services of a pro printer. This leaves me free to do what I think I am good at, which is taking the shots in the first place and running my business
Bob
As someone relatively new to wildlife photography and definately still learning I would say there are three areas you need (I am trying) to perfect
1) taking a picture (getting in camera right, composition etc...)
2) finding \ getting close to a subject fieldcraft
3) processing your pictures to realise your creative vision
My advice Robert don't pay someone to do it for you, pay someone to teach you how (I am not on commision honestly), it is a harder road but when you crack it....