Unsefullness of post processing

[KODAKovic]

What you think about the usefullness of post processing?

I mean, thinking not only about pictures but also video, for stock the best is to provide low contrast (not dull of course), low saturation and low overall sharpness files right?

These are the best items to provide to designers and advertisers, do you agree?

Then they'll have more space to re-use our files for their purposes.

So it seems you should pre-set a very minimal post processing from the initial RAW file and export it.

What am i missing?

[spacecadet]

You're missing how flat an unprocessed RAW would look as a thumbnail.

[KODAKovic]

Just now, spacecadet said:

You're misising how flat an unprocessed RAW would look as a thumbnail.

 

I said to create a pre-set with minimal settings, like giving a bit of contrast color and sharpness.

What i don't understand actually to post process every single file with its own settings

[Reimar]

Minimal to no post processing would not work for me.

A spray and pray approach does not appeal to me.  I'll take fewer images but optimize each one.  To be a photographer I've got to get some enjoyment out of seeing the scene as I envisioned.  I'm not in the business of producing raw material for designers - I produce finished products.

[KODAKovic]

28 minutes ago, Reimar said:

Minimal to no post processing would not work for me.

A spray and pray approach does not appeal to me.  I'll take fewer images but optimize each one.  To be a photographer I've got to get some enjoyment out of seeing the scene as I envisioned.  I'm not in the business of producing raw material for designers - I produce finished products.

 

What do you mean with "optimise"?

All the aspects i mentioned (contrast saturation and sharpness) may not be what the buyer has in mind.

The "vision" you had is probably not the same of the buyer.

[NYCat]

I think it might depend on your subject. Storefronts might be fine with a preset. Images that depend on beauty to sell might benefit from work. When I shoot wild animals the composition and lighting may not be ideal and I can improve with careful processing.

 

Paulette

[KODAKovic]

36 minutes ago, arterra said:

Just my two cents.

 

• Images: need to be a completely finished product (apart from adding additional sharpening). The end user will do little or no editing.
• video footage: the clips you sell will be part of a montage. I do a minimum of editing because the end user is responsible for the final product which consists of several independent clips which should make one consistent unity.

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

For images a lot of images i see on magazines has a lot of post processing.

My fear is buyer don't buy because they don't like it the way i've in mind.

[KODAKovic]

3 minutes ago, NYCat said:

I think it might depend on your subject. Storefronts might be fine with a preset. Images that depend on beauty to sell might benefit from work. When I shoot wild animals the composition and lighting may not be ideal and I can improve with careful processing.

 

Paulette

 

Composition you mean cropping?

[NYCat]

5 minutes ago, KODAKovic said:

 

Composition you mean cropping?

 

Yes, if I have not been able to get a pleasing composition in camera I will crop.

 

Paulette

[Craig Yates]

You may very occasionally get a request from an image buyer via Alamy to have access to the original RAW file so they can

apply their own style of post processing. But as others have said your images need to be the finished product and pop out as thumbnails to

attract enough interest to zoom in and have a closer look.

 

 

Craig

[Webby]

I use a different RAW preset for each of my cameras, 5D3 with 24-105, 7D with 100-400 and RX100V to do the basic work peculiar to each. But, every image is then individually tweaked before opening in PS.  Cropped, horizons/verticals straightened etc.

 

Webby

[MariaJ]

I also tend to work on my images individually to make them pleasing to the eye.  Most don't need that much work.  If I'm enhancing their visual appeal (without greatly distorting the original colours, contrast etc) then I figure the images will also be more appealing to the customers who are looking to buy them.

 

Maria

[Reimar]

22 minutes ago, KODAKovic said:

 

What do you mean with "optimise"?

All the aspects i mentioned (contrast saturation and sharpness) may not be what the buyer has in mind.

The "vision" you had is probably not the same of the buyer.

Yes, there are endless ways of processing an image.  I'm suggesting you think like a photo editor.  Produce a clean punchy image an editor would want.  A flat neutral image will more than likely get passed over. 

To get that clean punchy image, I may need to do some cloning or stitching.  Certainly contrast and color balance/saturation of every image will need to be tweaked.  I almost always do some selective sharpening.  I'm thinking of photography as a craft, not an assembly line.

[Bill Brooks]

My experience both as a direct seller of stock and as a photo editor is that buyers think in terms of looking for the exact image that they want. They will buy that first. If they have to do further post processing, they consider it a disadvantage.

They also have to sell the image to others on the editorial team who are word people and may have trouble visualizing a post processed image.

Here is an example of one version of only one file, and a second version of the same file flopped and rotated. I have had many arguments with editors over wether an image was cropable, rotatable or not.

Develop your own unique processing style that brings out your vision for the image and makes your images more useful to clients.

 

[KODAKovic]

1 hour ago, Craig Yates said:

You may very occasionally get a request from an image buyer via Alamy to have access to the original RAW file so they can

apply their own style of post processing. But as others have said your images need to be the finished product and pop out as thumbnails to

attract enough interest to zoom in and have a closer look.

 

 

Craig

 

If an image is well done (well composed, containing a message) doesn't need contrast or saturation to pop-up.

Especially as a thumbnail in my opinion

[Phil Robinson]

I believe in the past, when printing was different and most image sales were to papery magazines, low-contrast images were easier to print.

Now I think everyone wants to see and use saturated contrasty (not OVERcontrasty) images. 

[Colblimp]

As a pro photographer images never leave my desk until they've been processed - whether that's a 60 second or a 20 minute edit.  I don't see how anyone would sell an unprocessed picture, it makes no sense to me as if you upload an unprocessed picture, the client isn't getting the photographer's finished work. 

 

I also process news images, spending no more than 1-2 minutes, mainly to straighten horizons and do a basic colour, lens correction and contrast edit. (Waits for the horror and condemnation from other news contribs that I should actually dare to process news pics!)

[Jill Morgan]

Every image is processed on its own for me.  I have images that have 4 different exposure settings in them.  A flat image will get lost as a buyer scans a page.  This is especially important to vertical images, as they get less display space than horizontal images, so really need that extra time spent on them.

 

Jill

[Trevor Chriss]

I fail to see how any processing can be done in batch form. So much can change with the light, especially as you change position etc.

Even my studio shots vary sometimes in a batch, as I often reposition the lights.

My workflow is long. Sort and process in LR then into Photoshop for a final check over. Often I find that I tweak contrast in CC because after re-opening them they appear a little flat.

Slow, tedious, yes but at least I hope buyers feel some effort has been put into the result.

[spacecadet]

11 minutes ago, Trevor Chriss said:

I fail to see how any processing can be done in batch form.

All, no, but "any"?

I have import presets for all imports and use auto tone. Then I usually, but not always, need to adjust levels, particularly highlights, and saturation. Some images barely need touching. The batch processing may only save a few tens of seconds per image, but that's a good bit of time at the end of the week.

[dlmphotog]

The ideal of no post processing boggles my mind. I feel my job only half done after pressing the shutter button. A simple small crop can make a BIG difference to an image.  I also apply the color profile for camera sensor, set white balance, adjust exposure… Much of the process can be batched in ACR. I then individually tweak each image as needed.

I agree with what was posted earlier about delivering a finished product.

I guess there is an exception for news photos

[KODAKovic]

11 hours ago, arterra said:

 

Fine by me. Do it your way. The less competition, the better 

I have the impression, you just don't want to spend much time behind the computer. Conclusion, not only based on this topic, but also your keywords. Apparently done in a hurry in batch and without doing the trouble to remove the totally irrelevant ones (JBHK8X / J1M3J4 / JBHJT4 / J1M1KG / .........).

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

Thank you very much for spotting these images.

As you know from prev thread i'm re-editing all my port (also deleting similars and wrong pics) and especially Alamy Live News i've uploaded in a batch.

I need to avoid this behaviour so thank you for noticing it

[Phil Robinson]

12 hours ago, Colblimp said:

As a pro photographer images never leave my desk until they've been processed - whether that's a 60 second or a 20 minute edit.  I don't see how anyone would sell an unprocessed picture, it makes no sense to me as if you upload an unprocessed picture, the client isn't getting the photographer's finished work. 

 

I also process news images, spending no more than 1-2 minutes, mainly to straighten horizons and do a basic colour, lens correction and contrast edit. (Waits for the horror and condemnation from other news contribs that I should actually dare to process news pics!)

 

There's a fundamental difference between processing and manipulating - which is what you don't do with news. Occasionally a camera/photographer combination will get everything exactly right and produce a perfect result that records exactly what they were pointing at. More often than not the exposure / colour balance / horizon will need tweaking. Nothing wrong with that.

 

I've never sent a picture anywhere without at least looking at it in an editor and almost always doing something to it. And I've never done anything in batches except keywords and captions.

[Bill Kuta]

We would all like to do just the more easy/fun part of taking the picture. This thread should show you that most photographers feel that taking the picture is only the beginning.

[Trevor Chriss]

18 hours ago, spacecadet said:

All, no, but "any"?

I have import presets for all imports and use auto tone. Then I usually, but not always, need to adjust levels, particularly highlights, and saturation. Some images barely need touching. The batch processing may only save a few tens of seconds per image, but that's a good bit of time at the end of the week.

For some people maybe, for me, the only preset I use is lens corrections.

Bit of a luddite at times though.