Nice write up Ash. I think it's one of those endless debates in photography (and AI is not helping in either). Dodging and burning has been around for some time, and that's editing too ;-)
It must have been in the '00s when I started editing (in Lightroom) my (raw) photos. I watched a fair bit of youtube video's about how to use the program, but this also meant that I tended to follow specific artistic styles to edit photos, instead of my own 'artistic vision'. I think if I re-edit some of my photos now, the result would be quite different (as in: less heavily edited, less saturated / less contrasty maybe).
One thing I learned is that, although I like to edit photo's, I don't like it as much as going out and actually 'do photography'. I just can't be bothered to spend hours on editing anymore. That said, I don't just slap on a preset / look and be done with it. I do like to use them as a starting point though.
One other thing that I don't do are things like sky replacements, composites, adding artificial fog or sunrays, making mountains in the background bigger than they are etc. Only some cloning/healing if there's something in the composition than bothers me that much :)
With shooting photos in raw format I guess you have to do *some* post processing. But with my Fuji X files, Capture One and PhotoLab already do a nice enough job when selecting the "Provia" or "Classic Chrome" film look as a first edit.
If you ask any photo editing developer using AI, I guess sky replacements is for noobs these days ;-) Anyway, apart from things like masking or selecting, I don't really care for AI in photo editing.
Nice write up Ash. I think it's one of those endless debates in photography (and AI is not helping in either). Dodging and burning has been around for some time, and that's editing too ;-)
It must have been in the '00s when I started editing (in Lightroom) my (raw) photos. I watched a fair bit of youtube video's about how to use the program, but this also meant that I tended to follow specific artistic styles to edit photos, instead of my own 'artistic vision'. I think if I re-edit some of my photos now, the result would be quite different (as in: less heavily edited, less saturated / less contrasty maybe).
One thing I learned is that, although I like to edit photo's, I don't like it as much as going out and actually 'do photography'. I just can't be bothered to spend hours on editing anymore. That said, I don't just slap on a preset / look and be done with it. I do like to use them as a starting point though.
One other thing that I don't do are things like sky replacements, composites, adding artificial fog or sunrays, making mountains in the background bigger than they are etc. Only some cloning/healing if there's something in the composition than bothers me that much :)
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Ronald.
I like that you consider editing as a starting point. I often consider it as an ending point and the final thing to be done in creating that photo.
Also, it feels like a long time ago when sky replacements were the trendy thing in photography😅
With shooting photos in raw format I guess you have to do *some* post processing. But with my Fuji X files, Capture One and PhotoLab already do a nice enough job when selecting the "Provia" or "Classic Chrome" film look as a first edit.
If you ask any photo editing developer using AI, I guess sky replacements is for noobs these days ;-) Anyway, apart from things like masking or selecting, I don't really care for AI in photo editing.