Discuss postprocessing, everything from traditional darkroom techniques to the use of the latest computer software.

i think everything further than playing with the raw workflow must have a very good reason. when i was new to photoshop i had a lot of fun following tutorials and appliyng very strong filters, but i figured that it was more fun to focus on the quality of the photo itself because its pretty much the only thing that cannot be changed later on.
i do want to try black and white analogues and develop then myself when i have enough time, maybe even make my own pinhole camera, but so far i dont have any darkroom experience.

I'd like to see more tutorials with detailed and simple explanation. I know this site is not a school but for beginners like me it would be great.

I want to put out the question: how much post processing is acceptable when talking in the context of "photography" not "digital visual arts". I am new to photography and really want to learn how to make an impressive photo with the use of the camera alone. for me this is photography but i see many pictures on here and other sites with so much post processing that it is no longer photography, more digital arts. so where do we draw the line? and how can you compare pure camera photos with ones that are post processed to be almost perfect? its like a teenager getting his sex education from porn and then being disappointed with real life experiences where he doesnt get the perfect bodies. I understand the need for post processing when it comes to commercial photography but in the context of photo art it doesnt make sense to me. photos should capture life not create something that doesnt exist in life.

looking forward to getting some expert opinions about this.

Happy Snapping

It is a gigantic myth to assume that analog photos were made exclusively 'in camera' . In my analog days, I spent hours in the darkroom, making use of the various chemical and mechanical means to produce the final image. Further, digital cameras have shortcomings that need to be addressed during post processing (sharpness, contrast etc). There used to be a large industry of retouchers, which contributed towards the final image, something people tend to forget.Clearly there is a broad no-man's-land were photography and digital art intermingle, but it is for the imagemaker to decide the amount and extent of post processing. One area of the spectrum isn't necessarily better than the other.

I agree with kemp on all he said. I you really want to make a photograph "with the use of the camera alone", the closest there ever was to that is Poloriod!!

Hi Hassan,

I agree with kemp and Clyde

And why not explore what you like best yourself and try to do the best you can with the equipment you have.... ;-D

Me, too.



Amen.

Could I just point out that I am Ken P, not Kemp. I wondered why somebody was calling me Peter in another thread.

Sorry, I was just thinking of hemp and the m slipped in there somehow...come on over Ken and we'll share a ...

I know who you are. Never a doubt. I'll be happy to pass the J, but I don't inhale.

sorry kenp.... :-)