seems to me that the pp is as big a learning curve as the camera

[JBW]

[davidedric]

Probably bigger - but not as big as learning to take good photos, whatever the camera.

[JBW]

Probably bigger - but not as big as learning to take good photos, whatever the camera.

i'm working on that learning curve too.

[Donald]

As big as you want to make it.

The one certain thing is that you will never know it all. It's about striving to find out what the things are that you could learn and then identifying what you want to learn. There are lots and lots of things I know that I could be learning, but don't feel the need/don't have the motivation. I'd rather be very good at what I need to know in order to make the sort of images I enjoy and hope others enjoy. I know nothing, for example, about HDR software. I've never stacked images. And so on.

But, for me, being competent in PP is vital. Clicking the shutter is only the end of the first part of making an image.

[DanK]

I agree with Dave and Donald. PP is a much bigger sandbox, IMHO. However, one key to making it manageable is that you don't have to master every way of doing something. For example, there are countless ways of sharpening. Every time I think I have at least a vague knowledge of most, I chance on another. When i started, I often responded by worrying: "OMG, should I be doing it that way instead?" I learned not to worry so much. If you have a method that works, fine. if you encounter new ones and one seems like it might to better for what YOU want, then try it. If not, ignore it.

[Downrigger]

I agree with the wisdom above, but have to watch myself that I am not relying on my growth in PP to absolve me of making the correct image with my camera in the first place. I think that could be a big mistake and stunt the evolution from picture-taker to photographer that I am working on. To be a great cook you can't rely on tasty frosting - you still have to bake a great cake.

[Mike Buckley]

I'm convinced that fewer than 5% of people who regularly take pictures with cameras as opposed to cell phones and tablets these days have a reasonable command of post-processing software. Include all of the people using cell phones and tablets to capture their images and it's surely less than 1%.

Considering the amount of time required to gain command of post-processing software and that so much of it is spent in frustration, that's understandable.

Add to that that almost all photographers are rather casual in their approach and have not developed a strong sense of the characteristics that they want included in their photos; without knowing how we want our photos to look, we can't reliably and effectively post-process them. Arriving at that awareness also takes time.

[Donald]

...but have to watch myself that I am not relying on my growth in PP to absolve me of making the correct image with my camera in the first place. I think that could be a big mistake and stunt the evolution from picture-taker to photographer that I am working on. To be a great cook you can't rely on tasty frosting - you still have to bake a great cake.

Beautifully and very, very accurately put. That old axiom of 'rubbish in, rubbish out' applies to the raw data you put onto the computer. The greatest post processor in the world is not going to malke a great image out of something pretty hopeless out of the camera. Get that bit right and you've got the best possible material to then work on.

[ajohnw]

Personally I have been trying to get Brian to gain some basics in PP. There will always be needs for these at times due to either the capabilities of PC screens or in some cases the camera itself so I have pointed him at a few and suggested he uses a certain package. It can drive a number of things via curves of one sort or another. The reason for that is I feel people must get an understanding of how the image in the camera can be displayed well on a PC screen and curve type adjustments are essential for understanding that. As an aside the main tone curve can also be used for correcting marginal problems with taking the actual photo's. Scope is limited but rather a lot can be done with them with practice.

I also mentioned a package he could use for local retouching but frankly feel he needs to get the other aspects under control first.

As to taking photo's he actually seems to have that aspect well under control so with the type of subjects he chooses can't really go any further without PP. He could go out and buy a Canon DX105 mk999 but in essence many of the problems would remain the same and often he would be wondering just how other people do it.

John
-

[nimitzbenedicto]

There are lots and lots of things I know that I could be learning, but don't feel the need/don't have the motivation. I'd rather be very good at what I need to know in order to make the sort of images I enjoy and hope others enjoy. I know nothing, for example, about HDR software. I've never stacked images. And so on.

Yes. Exactly. Just enough to enjoy my pictures. No HDR, stacking, etc. and so on.

[travis4567]

This is a great thread and a lot of help to me. Since I just started with lightroom about 2 weeks ago, I really appreciate all of the input here. I found myself over processing everything the first few days I worked with my new software, in some cases ruining some really good shots. As a photographer, I have a vision whenever I shoot of what I want the finished product to look like. I now have to use the software to help me realize that vision and nothing else. Thanks for all the great input.

[JBW]

This is a great thread and a lot of help to me. Since I just started with lightroom about 2 weeks ago, I really appreciate all of the input here. I found myself over processing everything the first few days I worked with my new software, in some cases ruining some really good shots. As a photographer, I have a vision whenever I shoot of what I want the finished product to look like. I now have to use the software to help me realize that vision and nothing else. Thanks for all the great input.

it has been great help to me too. I used the curves and cut way back on the pp options with this one and I think it is getting to where i am happy.

[Donald]

I found myself over processing everything the first few days I worked with my new software, in some cases ruining some really good shots.

I'd put next month's salary cheque on that this is a something we've all gone through. I look back to some of the things I made when I started about 4 years ago .....! Uuuggh!

[rpcrowe]

Quote Originally Posted by travis4567 View Post
I found myself over processing everything the first few days I worked with my new software, in some cases ruining some really good shots.

That is the great advantage of shooting in RAW. I always have my unedited RAW image to fall back to.

PP is vital to ending up with good images. Fortunately, I enjoy post processing. I look forward to doing it. The only time I don't enjoy PP is when I am rushed - which is frequently the case with my rescue dog images...

[Colin Southern]

I'm convinced that fewer than 5% of people who regularly take pictures with cameras as opposed to cell phones and tablets these days have a reasonable command of post-processing software.

True - but 95% think they belong to the 5%!

[Colin Southern]

I agree with the wisdom above, but have to watch myself that I am not relying on my growth in PP to absolve me of making the correct image with my camera in the first place. I think that could be a big mistake and stunt the evolution from picture-taker to photographer that I am working on. To be a great cook you can't rely on tasty frosting - you still have to bake a great cake.

I always see all aspects of photography (planning, capture, post-production) as being separate opportunities to stuff things up. The least stuff-ups that I make in each of these areas, the better the photo with the least amount of work. Want a good photo? DON'T STUFF IT UP!