No, they said to not rely on full Auto mode.
I really like the one in the Hong Kong street, I like the processing on that, you can tell the area is pretty vibrant and the processing fits that.
Nicely done adding Bruce too
Camera RAW -> Post-Processed Image Thread
- Thread starter Shining
- Start date
No, they said to not rely on full Auto mode.
I really like the one in the Hong Kong street, I like the processing on that, you can tell the area is pretty vibrant and the processing fits that.
Nicely done adding Bruce too
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 9,967
- Location
- London UK
I'll try and stick a couple up this evening, I like the idea of the thread.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,949
- Location
- South East
I put a few up later when I'm at home.
Here's one of my examples.
Once taken, looking at it on the camera screen, and indeed with no adjustments made, I thought it was a "thrower".
However, a few minutes playing when loading it into Photoshop, and it's made quite a difference - has made it a "keeper" instead I think.
Once taken, looking at it on the camera screen, and indeed with no adjustments made, I thought it was a "thrower".
However, a few minutes playing when loading it into Photoshop, and it's made quite a difference - has made it a "keeper" instead I think.
As has been said before. Raw will always need processing.
I used to use RAW all the time. However now I shoot in JPG as well. JPG adds more processing and makes as shot images look a lot better - I find this easier for judging the shot on the fly and determining if I have captured what I wanted.
However the bonus with RAW is that you can pretty much do what you want with the image.
Handy link:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm
I used to use RAW all the time. However now I shoot in JPG as well. JPG adds more processing and makes as shot images look a lot better - I find this easier for judging the shot on the fly and determining if I have captured what I wanted.
However the bonus with RAW is that you can pretty much do what you want with the image.
Handy link:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/raw.htm
I pretty much only shoot RAW. Imo processing a photo is essential, taking a photo is only half the process.
Like said RAW images give maximum opportunity for change and seeing as I like to mess around with photoshop it suits me. It's Also a massive help recovering a poorly shot picture.
Like said RAW images give maximum opportunity for change and seeing as I like to mess around with photoshop it suits me. It's Also a massive help recovering a poorly shot picture.
I really like this improvement.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,949
- Location
- South East
A few from me:
Before (and massively under exposed)
After - Colour
After - B&W
Before
After
Before
After
Before (and massively under exposed)
After - Colour
After - B&W
Before
After
Before
After
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,949
- Location
- South East
And another
Before
After
Before
After
Absolutely stunning processing.
Just makes me realise how much more could be extracted from flat-looking shots.
I had a quick look through my raw and processed images. None were a massive improvement in comparison.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 23,949
- Location
- South East
It's hard to say exactly, I just build up a load of adjustment layers until I get what I want, these usually consist of adjusting curves, colour tones, etc. Then I also duplicate layers in order to do cloning, bringing out the colours in eyes, dodging, burning. Every image requires something different.
A good thing for that is using the dodge tool. It lightens them and makes them look a lot more vibrant. Especially awesome for blue eyes
