Think I'm down the path to becoming a Photoshopographer.

[contributor_M]

Thought triggered by this:

(paraphrased)

"Nothing concerns me more than “photographers” who delve into photoshop around the same time they delve into photography.
If you jump into photoshop (or any other editing software for that matter) too soon, you run the risk of not mastering your technique as a photographer."

From an article at DPS


I've been thinking about this a lot. New to photography and post processing, and my gut is telling me that I'm trying to do too much too soon, too fast.

Lots of stuff to learn.

May have to sit down and actually prioritize a bit. Question I have though, is when would the time be "right" to transition from building photography skills, and moving on to the post processing and vice versa, or do you think it's best to try and figure out both skills simultaneously?

Anyone care to share any of their experience/advice?

[JohnT]

If you really want to know where you are in your photography skills, shoot in JPEG for one week, do not review the images on the LCD (put gaffer's tape or something over it), then download and view the images at the end of the week, and don't edit them. Sort of like shooting film.

[ChrisTX]

As I'm doing my post work, I look for repetitive tasks that I'm doing. When I see that my photos need work in certain areas, I go out and see what I can do to fix it through settings in the camera to save me from having to make those adjustments on the computer. That's by far been the best way for me to learn. I didn't know squat about cameras when this year started.

Had I known then how much money I would spend up to this point, I would have reconsidered this hobby.

[janikphoto]

Half of the winning photo has always been done in post processing. I'm not saying you should not try to make the strongest image possible before you head back home... no, the actual shutter snap is still VERY important. I'm just saying that people like Ansel Adams did half their work in the darkroom with precise techniques and actions.

Or, think about someone like Jerry Uelsmann:

Jerry Uelsmann - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, he was a master of the camera, which set him up with a solid foundation to work with in the darkroom. However, I'm just pointing out that heavy "post processing" existed long before Photoshop did.

[contributor_M]

Humm. Well, maybe I should continue learning about post processing along with also learning how to make great exposures then.

[venchka]

Perhaps you could limit yourself to using the software that came with the camera. Maybe a year from now you might be ready to "kick it up a notch." Or you may realize that Photoshop may not be required. Or you may figure out that a program like Lightroom is all you really need.

[damibru]

I think your quote hit the nail on the head. First five years I took photos I had never even heard of software like PS. Up until this day it has (luckily) prevented me from overprocessing photos. Last thing I want is to become the photographic equivilant of Jocelyn Wildenstein's plastic surgeon.
Having said that I am very happy with my copy of PS CS4. Digital cameras don't always render colour values, sharpness and contrast the way I saw it so inevitably some PP is needed and there's nothing wrong with that. IMHO there is also a difference beween genuine creativity and just plain overprocessing a photo. Where the line lies between the two is open for debate.
In general, just try to expose your frame as if no PS exist, keeping in mind all the wonderful values needed to create a well exposed frame.

[Jeff_Green]

Originally Posted by ChrisTX

When I see that my photos need work in certain areas, I go out and see what I can do to fix it through settings in the camera to save me from having to make those adjustments on the computer.

This is a big issue. "I can fix that in post." "I won't worry about the exposure as much because I'm shooting in RAW." Look at what you come away with and ask yourself "how can I fix this in the camera so I don't have to fix it in post?"

[MRCPix]

you can only make a great image in post processing IF you have a really good image in the camera. so learn photography first

[hue-e]

personally, while I think it's important to know how to use your camera and you should try to shoot it right instead of post process it to look right... photoshop/lightroom/etc is not going anywhere and it's a vital part of digital photography so why not make it a part of how you shoot?

you can be a purist in either direction... doesn't matter what you use to get where you're going... as long as you get there, right?

[TxTowman]

That all sounds like good advice.

Thanks to the OP for posting this question.

Thanks to the responders as well.

Sid

[dmarty78]

Originally Posted by hue-e

personally, while I think it's important to know how to use your camera and you should try to shoot it right instead of post process it to look right... photoshop/lightroom/etc is not going anywhere and it's a vital part of digital photography so why not make it a part of how you shoot?

you can be a purist in either direction... doesn't matter what you use to get where you're going... as long as you get there, right?

I agree with Hue-e. If you shoot garbage you'll get garbage out of any editing tools you choose to use. Composition and lighting are the keys of photography. Learn those first.

[venchka]

...but some folk's garbage seems to be in vogue these days.

[hue-e]

yeah but is it garbage? or artistic style?

I know some of it is garbage, but some of it actually looks pretty cool. just depends on it's use, etc.

[dmarty78]

Didn't mean garbage in a bad way. :)