im sick of people saying they dont edit their pictures like that makes them a better photographer then everyone else ….honestly if you dont edit it then anyone could have done it
i feel like if you dont do something to it then that’s the cameras photo and you might as well shoot on auto….where…
^This is a very interesting part of photography, but is also the photographer’s dilemma. Photography can’t escape from reproducing the light that lays in front of the lens. That is what photography is. But, the use of the light and how it is recorded, as well as how that image is used - this makes all the difference. Sometimes an image requires little to no post production. The decisions made while taking the picture (exposure, subject, time of day, artificial or existing light, format, shutter speed, depth of field) are enough to make a statement and to make it useful. Sometimes you can edit the hell out of something and it still doesn’t quite do what you need it to do.
I don’t understand why people draw a line in editing when it comes to the overall process. Sure, you may want to make the decision to not do very much post production on a certain project to get a more documentational or trustworthy look. But, to never leave that box is insane. As photographers, we are limited in the impact we can have on an image. We are limited to recording light. Why the hell wouldn’t we use every tool we have access to in order to get the image we need.
And, I’ve heard the people criticizing people about too much post- production. But, the argument never makes much sense, especially if the post-production produces a kick ass image. Even if you’re pushing the film you shot through your Leica IIIf, you’re practicing post-production. So, just go with it and stop limiting yourself.
I don’t think that the world really needs another Bresson at this point.