Is a lot of post-processing bad?

[markubig]

Does the more post-processing you have to do to correct a picture mean that you are a bad photographer?

I find myself correcting a lot (if not all) of my photos. White Balance is usually way off, regardless of what i try, and I always have to adjust exposure, shadows and contrast.

Good thing for PSE3.0 otherwise my photos would REALLY look like crap.

later,

~mark

[Belmondo]

No, I think you'll find that most people do a lot of post processing.

Don't confuse that statement to mean that people don't over-process their pictures because some do. You'll often see over-saturrated, over-sharpened images. The ultimate truth is that it's all a matter of individual taste, so there is no clear right or wrong answer.

[Hellashot]

I post process 99% of my images. Digital cameras take dark pictures. Compact digital cameras had a lot of added corrections applied to their images to make them look good when printed directly from cameras/cards - which seems to have become VERY popular based on TV ads. High end cameras give you the option of giving you the unedited image which most of the time is dark and sometimes poor white-balancing.

I've found the autofix cranked all the way to the right is incredible in Adobe Photoshop Elements 3.0

[evilenglishman]

I generally don't do any. I just open them and depending on the purpose, resize, sharpen adjust saturation.
Nothing more.

[tofuboy]

I post process all of my images too. Which usually consists of adjusting the white balance, exposure, contrast, sharpness, and a bit of saturation. I usually use auto wb, and adjust in post processing.

If your exposure or white balance is way off, then you might want to put more thought into the settings you are using for each photo you take. Also if you aren't using the manual mode, you'll want to be away of where you are metering...

So pretty much, if you are spending more time 'saving' an image rather than 'touching up' an image, spend a bit more time thinking about each photo and how the settings will affect it before you take the photo.

[PhotosGuy]

tofuboy said it. If you want to switch from being a snapshooter to being a photographer, you need to try to "see" the image before you take it. Know what you're trying to get & know how to get that result. The more you learn how to shoot on manual & force the cam to give you what you "see", the less you'll have to "fix it in post". Doesn't mean that some fixing is bad, but accepting some programming nerds "advice" on pre-set cam settings is not the way to becoming a better photographer!

[markubig]

Thanks all for your responses.

Right now, I'm using a G3. Does a dslr help make a shot more "accurate"? By accurate, I mean, will it make the image look more like the scene that I am capturing (assuming I set up the shot/camera correctly)?

Right now, I guess my biggest problem is white balancing . . . Should I be using the Custom White Balancing option? If so, can someone explain the best way to do it with the G3? because I've tried using the custom setting and the colors are WAAAYYYY off. This question is for any shot, whether indoors or outdoors.

Thanks again!

[aam1234]

I'm with evilenglishman:

generally don't do any.

To be honest, statements like "I PP 99% of my photos" makes me scratch my head. I'm a big time noob, yet it's rare that I take a pic that needs a serious post processing. I'd say 99% of my pics are exposed right, not all perfect, but most are more than adequate. And that 1% is usually my fault, like forgetting to change the WB.