ESSENTIAL PSHP for newbies

[I Simonius]

I wish that there was a sticky with explanations of expectations and essential photoshop for newbies, because I didn't realise when I got the 20D that it really is assumed that some post processing will be done in PSHP, and it must be the same for thousand of others, if not hundreds! :-)

I didn't realise that it was normal that shots look soft in RAW and needed sharpening(how many times have I seen posts about that!)

But nowhere does Canon - or anyone else - explain this: that you will take these shots but to make them look good you must do such and such and then such and such
e.g. How much sharpening to apply and basic histogram use etc.

I know there are PSHP links but that's not the same as stating - 'here, you will need to do this to get yoour pics working, not expert or intermediate stuff but basic level.

[rammy]

I don't think that is entirely true IMHO.

I have taken many many shots with DSLR and they did not require any post processing because I managed to set the camera to the right settings for the current environment to capture what I perceived in my mind/imagination.

Is it true then to say that if you have to do a lot of post processing, you didn't actually capture the image the best way you could if you did understand EVERYTHING about your camera?

Hmmm.

BTW - I used to do a lot of post processing when I did get my DSLR. Now I do hardly any cause I am capturing the image at the time of pressing the shutter, as I want to. i.e. I have learnt infintely more in the last 1.5 years about my camera and technical aspects of photography and hardly anything more about post processing.

[I Simonius]

That's my point
You have been doing it 1.5 years - I'm talking about for beginners

[PhotosGuy]

Is it true then to say that if you have to do a lot of post processing, you didn't actually capture the image the best way you could if you did understand EVERYTHING about your camera? In my mind, that is so wrong, rammy! Some of us capture the image knowing what processing we need to do to get the final effect we want. Similar to what Ansel Adams used to do in his darkroom.
And if you shoot RAW, you will always have to sharpen in post.

[12345Michael54321]

Is it true then to say that if you have to do a lot of post processing, you didn't actually capture the image the best way you could if you did understand EVERYTHING about your camera?

No, it's not true to say that.

Even if one has an extraordinarily full understanding of every nuance of one's camera, an image may still benefit from burning in some elements, or dodging others. From cropping to something other than the camera's 3:2 format. From adjusting color saturation (either up or down) to achieve a specific effect. From adjusting contrast and dynamic range in various ways. And so on.

Manipulating a picture in Photoshop is not inherently any better or worse than manipulating a picture in a "wet" darkroom. In either case, it can be overdone and badly done. Or it can enhance a picture so as to more closely resemble what the photographer had in mind when she tripped the shutter. It can be used as a band-aid by a photographer who didn't bother doing things right in the camera, or it can be used as a valuable tool by a photographer who understood that some things simply cannot be adjusted and readily controlled in the camera.

So the idea that everything should be done in the camera, or the process is somehow lacking in purity, didn't hold true when Tri-X sheet film was cutting edge photographic technology, and it isn't true today. Spending 14 hours processing some 4x5" format film, and offering multiple prints to the gods of the zone system before getting it right, wasn't any less pure than snapping a Polaroid, waiting 45 seconds, and having a finished print. And today, spending 2 hours in Photoshop working on an image isn't fundamentally any less pure a form of photography than is printing a JPEG direct from CF card to printer.

So by all means, visualize what you're after before taking the picture. Go for proper exposure, optimal focus, desired depth of field, appropriate framing, etc. All of that's important, sure. But much of the time, masterpieces are still made or ruined in the darkroom, whether that's a wet darkroom or a computer darkroom.

[I Simonius]

No, it's not true to say that.

huge snip>So by all means, visualize what you're after before taking the picture. Go for proper exposure, optimal focus, desired depth of field, appropriate framing, etc. All of that's important, sure. But much of the time, masterpieces are still made or ruined in the darkroom, whether that's a wet darkroom or a computer darkroom.


Well put. Which is why I was asking about the possibility of 'essential' or 'beginners' pshp sticky rather than just links