Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you remove flaws in your non-human subject in post-processing. I'm not talking about a flawed photograph but a flawed subject. Example: a small hole in a flower or leaf, a white patch on an animal, a spot of rust on a bench, a butterfly with a chunk out of its wing, etc.
I see a lot of pristine flowers in photos but I know the reality is holes and spots on petals. I'm wondering if the photographer just seeks out the perfect flower or the perfect butterfly or just doctors it in post processing. Anyone here leave their photos "natural" or do you have to get rid if the imperfection?
I try too remove what I can in the foreground before taking the photo. As in waving grass , hanging limbs, or items in background that are a distraction if possible. Before clicking the shutter.. I have limited processing.
I think it goes too the eye of the beholder taking the photo for best representation
Do you remove flaws in your non-human subject in post-processing. I'm not talking about a flawed photograph but a flawed subject. Example: a small hole in a flower or leaf, a white patch on an animal, a spot of rust on a bench, a butterfly with a chunk out of its wing, etc.
I see a lot of pristine flowers in photos but I know the reality is holes and spots on petals. I'm wondering if the photographer just seeks out the perfect flower or the perfect butterfly or just doctors it in post processing. Anyone here leave their photos "natural" or do you have to get rid if the imperfection?
I prefer getting the output as close to natural as I can get to it. While occasionally I will go "unnatural", usually I feel less satisfied doing so but that is my personal choice.
Right along those lines, I rarely try to fix blemishes. And on occasions that I do, it is usually if I intend on printing. Most pictures I post here, for example, aren't re-touched to eliminate flaws. In fact, I even try not to have to crop the picture, which usually is a difficult proposition (windy conditions, impossible view or even limited reach, however get in the way). I start with framing 100% of the shot as is.
Here is an example of a rose I'd posted a few days ago... taken in RAW, and converted in LR4 without minor adjustment to highlight and shadows:
Note the black spots for "blemish". I chose to let it be. But it is usually insects, spider web etc that are greater nuisance. Since I shoot mostly manual focus, I zoom into the object about 7X and will occasionally not notice a little insect or spider just outside the focusing frame... until I download and take a look at the picture. Even then, they usually end up being a part of it. But if I were selling, and when I do print, they are usually edited out.
I prefer getting the output as close to natural as I can get to it. While occasionally I will go "unnatural", usually I feel less satisfied doing so but that is my personal choice.
Right along those lines, I rarely try to fix blemishes. And on occasions that I do, it is usually if I intend on printing. Most pictures I post here, for example, aren't re-touched to eliminate flaws. In fact, I even try not to have to crop the picture, which usually is a difficult proposition (windy conditions, impossible view or even limited reach, however get in the way). I start with framing 100% of the shot as is.
Here is an example of a rose I'd posted a few days ago... taken in RAW, and converted in LR4 without minor adjustment to highlight and shadows:
Note the black spots for "blemish". I chose to let it be. But it is usually insects, spider web etc that are greater nuisance. Since I shoot mostly manual focus, I zoom into the object about 7X and will occasionally not notice a little insect or spider just outside the focusing frame... until I download and take a look at the picture. Even then, they usually end up being a part of it. But if I were selling, and when I do print, they are usually edited out.
Yes, this is what I meant. Like the dark spot on the leaf in the foreground. It looks perfectly fine to me "as is" but I don't usually see it in displayed photos. Everything is always perfect. I just wondered if people would have kept looking for a more perfect flower or edited out the spot.
And Fuzz, I believe the holes/spots I sometimes see in flowers, lily pads, leaves are there because of insects, birds, fish, reptiles and animals so in the wild or in the garden wouldn't make a difference...I don't know what munches on butterfly wings. I like the imperfections but I don't think other people do, so I try to remove them.
I also don't usually notice imperfections until I get home and look at my photos.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
