In digital photography, some people believe that post-processing would void the definition of good image, and therefore would have never been done. Some also believe that straight-from-camera result would be the definition of the real photography itself.
Not many of them know, however, that by taking straight-from-camera image, they are not avoiding post-processing. They just leave all the post-processing to the camera itself, in which, it has limited possibilities whatsoever.
Straight-from-the-camera images or JPEG, are in fact NOT the real image. It has been edited by a processing software INSIDE the camera, and thus leaving everything to camera to do whatever they are capable of doing.
It is sad, when some people justified a VERY stunning image to be failed, just because it is being post-processed or photoshopped. They actually do not have any knowledge that inside their camera, it has their own tiny “photoshop” software. To compress the image, to fix the saturation, to manipulate the contrast or even to add some fancy effect and hence….displaying the final image in your camera’s LCD screen for you to see.
Post processing, has been around in photography since the day FILM photography was invented. Some very well-known photographer such as Ansell Adam, had been famous for spending a lot of time in darkroom, dodging, burning and making the final print to meet his subjective requirement.
RAW file on the other hand, literally means raw data. By shooting RAW, you’re actually taking the real image because it contains everything as it is, without being manipulated, processed, or changed. The RAW file is acting like a digital negative film.
An overly processed image, in the contrary, is always inappropriate. There is a fine line between a overly-processed and necessarily-processed.
Wise men once said ” the end always justifies the means”
A bomb is a bomb. No matter how it made from the highly explosive material, or household detergent, or animal’s feces or even natural fertilizer….if it explodes, then it IS a bomb.
A good image is a good image. No matter what camera you used, what software processing, what technique, how experience you are, how expensive/cheap is your camera, whatever things you exploit to create the image…………if it looks good, then it IS a good image.
I am not opposing someone who shoot jpeg and comforting someone who shoot raw ( by all mean, all I care is just how the final image looks) I am just trying to give a clear definition of what is a good image regardless our personal justification that enables us to say otherwise. The end result always justifies how we achieve it.
Just a thought. Cheers
Visit Anton Candra Flickr page for more image