so which one of these two categories define you as a photographer?
if your shot is a bit underexposed/overexposed, do you retake your shot and correct it? or will you leave it to be fixed later in your laptop?
personally, i would retake my shots if possible. i would prefer not doing too much post-processing. some minor touch-ups and that's it. going to the extend of heavy editing is an arduous task and it would lose the authenticity of the original picture, which is something i want to preserve.
but that doesn't mean i don't like editing^^
it's like disneyland to me. anything's possible :D
tutorials coming up on the next post. leave me me a comment on what kind of tutorials you want me to do.
and remember, if you already know what i'm teaching, don't be a snob and say that you already know this stuff. there's no sin in learning.
3 comments:
A good photographer gets everything he wants done on camera. A good artist gets everything fixed according to what he wants in post process.
Photography is not exact science or art. A mixture both. So best case would be being a good photographer and a good artist.
Don't worry too much about editing or not. If you can make your photos better, a little dark room technique is harmless, digitally or not. People have been doing dodging/burning decades before computer existed, anyway.
subjective by technical means. that's my take on photography.
photography skill =)
Post a Comment