I have come to the conclusion, at least for now, I will leave my photos as they are. The only thing I will do to them , if possible I will crop, but not for the sake of cropping. So here now are some photos taken today, as they are just minimally cropped. See, what you think?
(taken with a fully extended 400mm lens, shutterspeed 1/500 sec, from a distance of 3-5m, handheld on Auto, only cropped slightly, and nothing modified)
here now is a sharpened version, is it better or not?
M-L
I think the unsharpened wren has colours more true to life.
I like the first pics best. Cropping pics just right brings out the best in pics, I think. Also, these little birds are totally adorable, both the lady wren and the red browed finch.
Karen
Brisbane southside.
Well M-L, its looks like you've kicked off the "Photography Forum" we discussed without me!
What a great subject. I have taken photos that, with no adjustment, should have just been deleted. My daughter insists that adjusting anything at all, makes the picture 'fake'.
The problem, at its core, is that a camera cannot see what we can. It can't reproduce the contrast extremes that we can see and cannot capture anywhere near as big a colour pallette. On top of all this is that we can interperet what we see with our brain and can 'see' through things (such as branches and foliage) and 'see' a single image in our mind that is a composite of images received over time through two eyes. Cameras of today can't quite do that, (although people like NASA have come close).
The simplest example is a bird photographed against a bright sky, our eyes can see details of the bird and a blue sky with clouds behind, however the camera does not have the dynamic range to cope, so we can reduce the range with fill in flash (not something I am usually in favour of with birds, but OK for weddings), or we can make adjustments on our computers or in the old dark room to compensate.
The best way at the moment is to choose a time and place where the light source is soft and difused, but not too dark, and not behind the subject. Sadly, birds don't always seem to want to cooperate with my photographic wishes. ........then there's sharpening, colour correction, etc. etc. etc.
The bottom line is that I think all adjustments that Photoshop etc. can offer are OK, if the photographer uses them to alter the captured image in a way that presents the picture as close as possible to what it looked like to the human eye in real life. I don't like supersaturated colours or 'special effects' but, for example, adjusting colour balance or reducing contrast or increasing brightness, can 'enhance' an image to make it more faithfully represent what the photographer could see with his or her eye must be OK?
This leads onto a discussion for another day, who among you take their photos in RAW format? RAW images consume a lot of space on your memory card but do allow for a lot of adjustment/correction when you get home.
Roger.
PS. Let's know if this is boring you and I will quit.
PPS. Your photos are sensational M-L!
It is not boring to me and I agree M-L's photos are wonderful.
In my opinion, there are at least two ways to view a photo - one is as a record of an event and the other is as the creation of an art form. No-one wants to look at crappy photos so, unless it is a competition where rules prevent adjustments or where the authenticity of the event is paramount, processing a photo to make it better should be allowed but also it should not be a requirement.
Processing a photo successfully can take as much skill as taking a great photo, where it should be acknowledged that cropping and resizing are also forms of processing as are the more complex photo processing tools available in many software packages including Photoshop.
Alison
~~~~~~
"the earth is not only for humans, but for all animals and living things."
Spot on RogerM, that to post process to achieve closer to what the photograher saw should be the regular aim for post processing, I have read a number of times that photos taken via digital media need to be sharpened and as I don't remember the technicalities behind this reasoning I do remember that it made some sense, but having said that I am sure we all have some photos that are good out of the box. I do take all my photos as Raw and Jpeg, the Raws i keep as an archived version and sometimes I play around with the Raw version to try and fix something that didn't look right in the Jpeg. It is good to see info from M-L with the camera settings etc.
Regards Shane
Regards
Shane
Hi M-L
The unsharpened version has better definition and colour, but the sharpened one seems like the brightness level has been raised as well, washing the colour out more and a little contrast perhaps, i'm not sure why this happened as when I sharpen a photo I haven't noticed any great deal of colour change. Does your camera sharpen your photos from within or do you turn that feature off. All the same I would be happy with any of these in my collection.
Regards Shane
Regards
Shane
I have a photo shop program but no clue how to use it. I also have a simple program that just crops, lightens, darkens, sharpens, blurs, and adds limited borders and frames. Anything else is beyond me. My camera is just an aim and fire. It has some settings, but I can't see them to use them.
Karen
Brisbane southside.
Hmm, all very interesting. Coming from an Artist background , I might be seeing things in a different way? The composition of a photo is not my problem, to me it is the lack of understanding most technical details, and the wonderful things camera technology can do escapes me. So, when I looked for a camera, I went to numerous stores, when asked can we help you ,presenting my line: I’m looking for a camera that can give me a photo that looks just the way I see things. Most looked at me as if I was from a different planet, I got reactions from: O, you have never used a camera before, to: O, you are a professional photographer.? But mostly they couldn’t give me answers. I innocently thought, that should be possible, and not too much to ask for?
Some answered: I’ll get someone else to talk to you. Suddenly they all agreed, you won’t find that (as they were looking at me judging how much money I could afford), unless you spend a LOT of money. Some of the stores even stated, we haven’t got anything that expensive. Well, after weeks of using Google to search, I decided the Sony SLT-A55, and Sony lenses were producing the best results for me on Auto, my artist brain just has the parts that understands technology, missing.
I now have photoshop elements, but haven't used it. I use the Sony program that came with the camera, but only to sharpen, crop and using the Tone curve to brighten.
I find this discussion very interesting though, hope to learn a few things.
,
M-L
Araminta, I'm the same. Technology is so way beyond me, I can't even use a cell phone. My brain is wired for other things I'm afraid. Point and shoot is the camera I got. I don't plan to go professional with my pics. It is great that I can share what I take here with like minded people.
Karen
Brisbane southside.
Hi M-L
Your photos and your interpretation of these has shown me that you are doing a very fine job indeed, I believe the A55 even got a camera of the year award so your camera is ideal for you and I have read that some Sony lenses may not be as good as some other brands for the same money, but I would have to disagree with that analogy because your photos look sharp and the contrast looks good. Sony was affiliated with Zeiss lenses and if yours has that connection you are fortunate. There are people out there who strongly disagree about in-camera sharpening mainly because it could be too agressive, as heavy handed sharpening can be detrimental to your cherished photo, ( small amounts seem more pleasing ) but i think most modern cameras have settings to change the level of effect you like. As stated earlier that a number of people in the industry believe, because of the way sensors read exposure etc. that some amount of sharpening is required. I have the setting on my camera set to low for Jpegs and the Raw file is untouched. There are so many articles out there about sharpening images that it boggles the mind and some are definately better than others ( non-destructive ) and the bottom line is if the photos are what you like out of the camera than you are saving a lot of time and can simply compose and focus, the saying "keep it simple" does apply and works for a lot of situations. You are happy with what you are doing and most people I believe on this Forum are happy seeing your splendid photos, so why change?
Regards Shane
p.s. playing around with that Tone Curve has baffled me and in the right hands is brilliant.
Regards
Shane