Straight from the camera

[Tracy55]

Hi am new. I've been teaching myself photography for around 9 months now I have been noticing so much more since carrying a camera. I've had discussions with people on facebook about editing photos, i prefer to keep my pictures as they come out of the camera no adding fake birds, sun, moon, adding colour or anything else or what is the point of seeing something you like then taking a picture but when you upload it to your computer you start editing the photo which then makes it fake. A lot of people disagree saying the editing is the best part. What are your thoughts I know this is a no editing site but I would be interested to know. Thanks xx

 

[snowbear114 46]

You do realize that none of these things are new, that edits (major and minor) have been going on since photography was invented? That said, I will usually edit almost everything: tweak the exposure, crop, remove dust spots, straighten horizons, correct lens distortion, remove chromatic aberration, etc. it is very rare that I will remove or add an actual object.

I'm not sure where you heard this was a no-edit site.

 

[mjcmt]

I myself restrict to a subtle editing to tweak a photo from original exposure and contrast, or for converting to a B&W image. I'm personally not into HDR photos w/ super enhanced colors, but some are . I like a more natural presentation, but everyone has their own opinion what looks best. It's all about your artistic view.

 

[Derrel]

Whatever floats your boat. Maximum or minimal editing, or somewhere in- between, it's all good.

 

[JBPhotog1]

There really is no such thing as unedited photo. Every camera interprets the scene based on that brands secret sauce of picture controls to tweak colours, tone curves, contrast etc. etc. I believe in the individuals sovereign right as to what they wanted the final result to be so if they want to edit or make a composite, so be it.

 

[vStiles]

Photography is a personal talent, like playing an instrument. Many genres, many ways you can articulate your art.

You certainly don't have to do anything they way anyone else does it. With photography, it's fully encouraged to find your own path, and that means you can edit, or not edit your images all you like.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to edit your photos. You WILL find, however, the more you learn, the more you grow, the more you WILL want to edit your photos some. Even just some simple things like colour balance adjust / a little dodge and burn here and there / some exposure tweaks.

No great photo is unedited. Even top pros like Lee Frost / Helen Dixon / Ross Hoddinott edit their photos - even just a little.

 

[jcdeboever]

Do what you want. I personally try to get it right in camera to limit editing time.

 

[RVT1K]

I would rather take a good shot than make a good shot.
But, with that being said, every shot that I feel is a keeper gets some minor adjustments in PS Elements. Just small adjustments to shadows and highlights. And lets not forget cropping.

 

[Original katomi]

As others have said edit or not it’s your choice just watch out for
That will do I will fix that in edit/processing
Get you images as close to being what you want in camera
As for me I try to get it right in camera but I do some major editing esp on a 2metre panorama where I have to join 20 images.... making water /waves blend is a nightmare

 

[Tropicalmemories]

I sometimes edit portraits of my wife to slightly alter her body - this is partly self preservation ..... but mainly because I'm trying to capture how she looks to me, and in some photos this is not what I see on the screen.

I know some people get up-tight about creating artificial body images, as this can be unhelpful for the vast majority of people who don't starve themselves to look like fashion models, and the real proportions of her body suit me just fine, but in some photos she appears to have gained weight, or as in the example below, her legs looked shorter than they look in real life.

The image with car is unedited except for the black and white conversion, but in the image with bike I stretched her legs a little as the photo looked to have shorterned her legs somehow. But both the 'natural' legs and the edited legs look similar.

I used a 60mm lens on a crop sensor, so in theory this should not cause distortion, and tried to keep the camera square onto my subject, but her legs still looked shorter than in real life, so I adjusted the image back to 'reality'.

You can see that the front of the car looks normal, but the bike engine is slightly too tall and the wheels should not be round at this angle.

So my aim when editing is to move things back to what I saw when the 'SOOC' image does not look right to my eyes.

I sometimes need to do the same with skin tones, as the in-camera jpeg processor seems to lighten her skin. I've heard that this is because Fuji cameras are popular with Asian females, who crave white skin, whereas I like the 'dusky maiden' look. I blame this on the JH Lynch portraits I saw in my auntie's house during my formative years.

 

[Original katomi]

If you had not said I would not have know that you edited Mrs legs
Nice images
As I don’t do portraits I don’t have to worry
Straighten up horizon is a norm for me and of all things removing rubbish from images
On my panorama pics rubbish is a problem , sometime if the house building is old I remove modern add on’s like bright yellow gas pipe, the big flood/security light satellite dish
A lot of my photography is indoors and I shoot tethered so I see the image on the lap top screen so most of those have minimal editing

 

[vintagesnaps]

Well, I don't add birds, the sun and the moon, etc.! lol I don't do much editing. To me it's editing, an adjustment if needed. Unless you're doing photo illustrations or other creative work. And make it clear that's what was done.

I'd say that on social media etc. you'll more likely not find anything helpful. The best learning and critique to help me know how I was doing and what I needed to improve was taking classes or workshops. On social media it sounds like people like everything, I suppose in an effort to be nice, or to be a friend, etc. That's probably not going to give you a realistic idea of where you are with your photography. It sounds like you've found people on Facebook that are a bad match for what you're trying to accomplish.

And on a side note, look at the Terms before you post on a website, think about what you're putting 'out there' or on a specific site and why.

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I will admit that it fall into the "as shot" camp with minimal editing. Many times I have been fooled by a great landscape picture only to find the sky, rock color, and textures were added in post processing.

However, I also know that my favorite painters from the Hudson River school in the 19th century also did the same with brush and canvas.

I also read the Ansel Adams book trilogy on his black and white fine art. His great work starts when he envisions the landscape before him. He knew before he pressed the shutter, how much over or under he was going to make the exposure, what developer he would push or pull, that color filters were needed to capture the contrast and where he might have to burn or dodge the print etc.

All this has it equivalent in modern digital post processing and it brings great joy to those who like to do it. I have friends, who just like the 19th century painters, spend hours getting just the right picture.

However, my fun is in seeing and capturing the scene as it appears at the time. Yes, with digital I find at times, cropping and exposure are far too easy and I am a bit lazy. Still setting in front of a monitor for any length of time is not my cup of tea.

I will leave that pleasure others.

 

[limr29 2]

What are your thoughts I know this is a no editing site but I would be interested to know. Thanks xx

I'm also curious about where you got the idea that this is a 'no editing site.'

There is a wide spectrum of what is considered 'editing', ranging from minor tweaks to significant manipulations that add and/or subtract and/or alter major elements that were not in the original. Everyone has their preferences. Personally, I find most images that are significantly manipulated to be quite boring (exceptions - I am amused at giant cats photoshopped into city scapes https://www.boredpanda.com/giant-ca...oogle&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=organic) I try to create the image as much as possible in camera, not only because I shoot film and don't want to waste it, but also because I find digital editing to be incredibly tedious. I'll crop, adjust levels or tones (I prefer black and white. Color editing does my head in.) but then I'm done.

 

[Tropicalmemories]

What are your thoughts I know this is a no editing site but I would be interested to know. Thanks xx

I'm also curious about where you got the idea that this is a 'no editing site.'

There is a wide spectrum of what is considered 'editing', ranging from minor tweaks to significant manipulations that add and/or subtract and/or alter major elements that were not in the original. Everyone has their preferences. Personally, I find most images that are significantly manipulated to be quite boring (exceptions - I am amused at giant cats photoshopped into city scapes https://www.boredpanda.com/giant-ca...oogle&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=organic) I try to create the image as much as possible in camera, not only because I shoot film and don't want to waste it, but also because I find digital editing to be incredibly tedious. I'll crop, adjust levels or tones (I prefer black and white. Color editing does my head in.) but then I'm done.

Those giant cat photos are hilarious!