Philosophical question: style and taste in image processing

Hello all,
Sorry if I pose a stupid question here in the midst of technical considerations, but I am really keen on hearing from professional users about: approach.

In a nutshell: technique and the proper use of image processing is a matter of time and training and experimentation. EVERYONE can do that if they spend the time and energy to learn it. I think all would agree with me on that point.

However, what is most intriguing to me is how to correctly, or better said, artistically/professionally KNOW that what you are doing is the right thing...To draw a parallel, as as writer I know when to stop editing a text, to leave something alone, or the opposite: when I need to continue reworking.

How do all of you pro's KNOW when to leave well enough alone? To stop fiddling with image processing? There are so many parameters that can be adjusted, isn't there a fear among you that photography is becoming too post-production/computer orientated?

I'd love to know the tricks you use to work properly in processing. Leave a picture alone for 3 days, then look at it fresh and see if it 'hits you' the right way?

I think this is the part of processing that we can't get books on and read about- yet it seems for me to be the essence of truly successful post production...

All comments welcome!
Ciao tutti,
Theodore

Good evening, Theodore

you rise a good question
it's not stupid at all ;-)

as there might be different answers:

- if you' ve to upload all the files within the next 5 hours - yes this happens - then there's not a lot to think about it.

But your question rather calls a other response:

When shooting, as a architecture photographer, I tend to focus on one precise aspect of the subject; talking about a staircase - it might be shot as a object, which means by itself, or maybe in context of the space/room..... one has to decide, as you can't show all the 4 sides of a house in one shot ;-)

I think this focusing on one aspect is very important, and coming out of experience. So if you talk about style, my style would be the way I interprete space and objects within.

Later on in post, I try to emphasis the °one aspect°, as much as I can, by trying not to overwork it. Still my job has some documentary character, so it's different than a add photographer.

Once this is done, already half of the rent is payed, so a little bit of retouching is added.
Takes me usually about an hour in post, but if the shots were done in bad conditions, it can take very easely much longer.

A quite important thing is to relate the images together. Because it's printed side by side, the green of the staircase should be plus+minus the same; even when the light is completly different.
This bounds the entire serie nicely together.

If the images are printed as posters, in big scale, the edits have to be done much more carefully, that's for sure.

And off course, having a look at it next day is a very good idea, especially after 10 hrs on-screen.

Theodore Diehl said:

... what is most intriguing to me is how to correctly, or better said, artistically/professionally KNOW that what you are doing is the right thing...To draw a parallel, as as writer I know when to stop editing a text, to leave something alone, or the opposite: when I need to continue reworking.

How do all of you pro's KNOW when to leave well enough alone? To stop fiddling with image processing? There are so many parameters that can be adjusted, isn't there a fear among you that photography is becoming too post-production/computer orientated?

Click to expand...

I think it very similar to writing, which you mention you do. In other words, you get to a point where working longer on the image, or the text, will result in doing more harm than good. You can work longer, but you won't get a better result. You have reached the point of diminishing return, where further work will hurt the piece rather than improve it.

How do you know when you have reached that point of diminishing return? Through experience (having pushed an image, or a text, too far and seeing go from good to not so good) or by comparison with other works that have reached a level of excellence, either yours or those of artists you respect and whose work has been acknowledged to be of the highest caliber.

I always say that one needs to have a collection of fine art photographs in order to compare one's work with the work of other masterful photographers. Similarly, most writers have a collection of books featuring the work of writers that they respect and that have influenced them. I have a personal collection of fine art photographs that I look at and study regularly, with amongst them original works by Adams, Weston and many others. One must be humble in comparing his work with their work. From this humility comes understanding, then progress.

For myself - after I upload to my computer I choose an image that I can see the potential in. I will do as little or as much work that feels right to me. sometimes it's only one or two clicks in photoshop, other images can take days to finish. It's all about the feeling/vibe that I get from my work. I do the same thing with other work I do as well, such as pottery, jewelry and such. It's all about how it speaks to me and what just feels right.

A possible answer from Scott Adams (Creator of Dilbert)

Hi,

As a coincidence, I have just read an interview with Scott Adams (the creator of Dilbert) by Mindjet.com (a mind mapping software producer).

In a part of this interview, when asked to provide the secret to his creativity, Mr. Adams answers that he does something about 80 percent right. The result should then be good enough to either work completely or not. If not, he thinks that one probably shouldn't have been putting in the effort in the first place, let alone spend even more and more time on it.

This applies beautifully to the world of photography. If you keep on fiddling with an image and you are not yet satisfied, then it usually is not a good enough image to start with ;-).

Just a thought....


Cheers,

Cem

Thanks everyone for the reactions!
It seems that there are many similarities about work with photos and writing, art, and software

What I found interesting is the idea of having the 'basics' in place. If it takes too much re-working, then it can be a sign of being too far away from the concept or expression one is attempting to convey. Holding on to that during all the processing seems to be the fundamental. Maybe if I approach 'digital workflow' in the same way as writing, I'll be on the right track
Ciao,
Theodore

I think it's also important to revisit old images occasionally.

With the price of digital storage today I tend to keep most of my pictures except the ones that have gone seriously wrong. Every so often I'll have a look back at images that failed to catch my eye first time through.

I find it suprising the number of times I'll look at an old image, crop it differently or process it differently and suddenly find something worthwhile.

As for when to stop, well that can be tricky. Personally, for me an image is complete when it recaptures the feeling I had when I took it, when it conveys the mood of the moment and the essence of the landscape.


Cheers,

Very good point about the need to revisit images. Besides being able to create a better or different version, you may also find images that you previously overlooked. Sometimes subtle images, or images that need a lot of post-processing, don't jump at you during a first edit.

I regularly do several edits to remedy this problem. I also use the star rankings in Lightroom, or the ranking system offered by other raw converters, to reduce the number of images I am looking at and to create a hierarchy among all the images from a given shoot.