How much post-dive processing do you do?

[jiveturkey]

I've been using the mandrake process since it was first posted here. I also use photoshop to adjust the brightness and contrast and for cropping.

I'm curious, how much photoshop/other software processing do you routinely do to your photos? What are the features you use regularly to enhance your photos?

 

[Mike Newman]

I use a C-5050 and a UR Pro filter - and I always white balance once I've reached the working depth. But I still find that there's scope for improvement most of the time.

I've been a long time user of JASC Software's Paint Shop Pro (a less pricey, but very capable Photo Editor). The latest version - 8.1 has a 'photo enhance' button right on the toolbar that produces excellent results without tweaking. It's basically the Mandrake process without the heartache of all the steps.

Jasc permit you to download the full programme for a trial period (though anyone in dial-up is not likely to want to try this route!)

Check out the JASC Website for details.

 

[Dee]

As little as possible. I'll remove the really bad backscatter if any, adjust the brightness and contrast, use the unsharp mask. I do not mess with the colors at all. They are what they are for a reason. Too far away, no strobe, out of focus, etc. None of that can be fixed with program tricks. They may be covered up to some degree but at what price?

The photos that have all the intensive 'work' done to them are no longer photos, they are art projects...IMHO. At some point you just have to admit it's a bad shot and vow to try to do better next time.

I've thought of this alot lately. Our local Jr. College has photoshop classes and I was considering taking them. First I would have to upgrade my PC's version of Windows, even at a student discount the Photoshop CS program would cost me $300. Why? I don't believe in a lot of manipulation of photos so I've saved myself some time and money. I'm a photographer, not a computer program expert and I wouldn't have it any other way. Some people enjoy it and that's fine, it's just not for me.

 

[onbelaydave]

Since I shoot film, your milage may vary. Scan slide (or neg.), cleanup dust/backscatter,"Save As", " .........Master.tiff." That way I still have the "true" master. Layers >>New>>Adjustment Layer, Levels,curves, (color adjustment only if neccessary); Save As "........Adusted.psp". Using adjustment layers rather than making the adjusments to the image itself allows going back and tweaking/deleting etc. without having to start all over. Finally, depending on were the image is going to be displayed, I adjust the image size (DPI (72 or 340) then adjust the output size depending on web vs. what print size I want. Then I use the "Sharpen>Unsharp mask for a quick fix or use a much more complicated technique for those real wallhangers and then maybe a final levels/curve adjustment. And you thought this was easy ! :~) Dave

 

[onbelaydave]

Here's the link to the "complicated" sharpening process I like to use for those real trophies. It's rather complicated but works wonders. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/smart_sharp.shtml

 

[fergyjohn]

I agree with you Dee, if it's a bad photo so be it, aim to do better next time. The only thing I do is crop the odd photo.

 

[mandrake]

As little as possible. I'll remove the really bad backscatter if any, adjust the brightness and contrast, use the unsharp mask. I do not mess with the colors at all. They are what they are for a reason. Too far away, no strobe, out of focus, etc. None of that can be fixed with program tricks. They may be covered up to some degree but at what price?

The photos that have all the intensive 'work' done to them are no longer photos, they are art projects...IMHO. At some point you just have to admit it's a bad shot and vow to try to do better next time.

Every photo is an art project. It's an artificial distinction to make a thousand manipulations to get the best possible photo before you snap the shutter, but make none afterwards. To say nothing of all the algorithms the camera runs. And if you don't have a camera that takes RAW images, the camera will run it's own horrible white-balancing algorithm. Sometimes you have to try to edit some of this away just to try to get back to some semblance of reality. No photo is capturing reality, it's all art.

I agree that there is a price to be paid most of the time. The worse the picture is at the start, the worse it will look at the end in the vast majority of cases. But if you have to wait months to do it over again, editing can take out some of the sting.

'As little as possible' editing is usually the best way to go only because it's so easy to make a picture worse. But that's really the only reason.

I've thought of this alot lately. Our local Jr. College has photoshop classes and I was considering taking them. First I would have to upgrade my PC's version of Windows, even at a student discount the Photoshop CS program would cost me $300. Why? I don't believe in a lot of manipulation of photos so I've saved myself some time and money. I'm a photographer, not a computer program expert and I wouldn't have it any other way. Some people enjoy it and that's fine, it's just not for me.

If you don't enjoy doing it, it's not worth it. Most people regard it as a royal PITA. But there are enough who don't to justify several shelves in the bookstore.

 

[Eli]

Every photo is an art project.

Well said, Mandrake.
Its up to your own personal preference, but I see nothing wrong with using photoshop. I think it would be unethical to alter images taken for photojournalism or scientific purposes. For any other use Photoshop is OK. It depends on your purpose in taking the photos. I personally agree with Mandrake, that every photo is an art project. My goal in taking underwater photos is to show the beauty of the undersea world, and try to capture the feeling of diving. Photoshop is a great help in doing so. Those classic topside images by Ed Weston and Ansel Adams were as much produced in the darkroom, as they were in the camera. Now that we have the digital darkroom, you might as well take advantage of it. I do use every photoshop tool that helps the image. I will clone out scattered debris, adjust the color, sharpen the subject, blur the background, alter the color of the background, anything to augment the feeling that I am trying to convey.
I recently had the opportunity to discuss whether photoshop manipulation was allowed in an International (microscope) Photography contest, with the judges of the event. It wasnt mentioned in the contest rules. The judges were professional photographers, scientists, and photoeditors for major magazines. Of course photoshop manipulation is allowed!, was the answer. They did downgrade entries where the manipulation was too obvious or heavyhanded. The final effect should be visually compelling, but not seem contrived. Its sort of like a woman putting on make-up, a little can work wonders but too much just looks bad.

 

[ssra30]

Basically, just about every photo that I decided to keep went through manual level adjustment (still trying to figure out curve and still play with that instead sometimes), contrast/brightness and hue/saturation and finally sharpen unmask. I shoot everything in RAW and import the picture into photoshop without most of the camera's automatic adjustment. I think this is appropriate, you can do most everything yourself. If you should in JPEG format, what you get is not what the camera actually see since your picture still has to go through similar process, but with the camera automatic adjustment rather than your own. At least this way, I get the picture the way I mostly want it to be and not the way some engineer at Olympus assume what my picture should look like. I don't know which is more accurate, my probably not very neutral perception of what the picture should be or someone else's vision of what the picture ought to look like who has never even seen the actual subjects being photograph.
When you shoot film, similar process is also taken at the developing center so it is not really anything out of the ordinary, the only difference being that you are in control rather than someone else.

 

[Niko714]

It depends for me some shots come out fairly well and need little adjustment and some are just totally hosed and of course those are the ones I want to keep so it takes a while. But I would estimate about an hour or so after a good dive trip.