Skip to main content

What "post-processing" means to me (and you, if you're my client)

I usually put photos online for clients with only minimal processing. If you are a client reviewing your online gallery, what you should look for, as you decide which photo to order a print of, is the smile, the pose, the background — the look of the photo in a general way. And don't be troubled if the photo looks a bit flat. It usually does. When I shoot, I do only "raw capture," that is, I don't ask my camera to generate nice output, I take the raw data that the camera's sensor captures and then I go to work on it myself. And while I admit that sometimes I do process photos so they will look as good as possible online, most of the time — especially when I'm working on photos for clients — I'm working to produce a master file that will result in the best possible print.


Before and after


This photo of my daughter Catherine at the Dallas Arboretum is as close to an "original" as I get, but it has already been processed by Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.4 as part of the raw-to-jpeg conversion process.

Photo

Now, I go to work and five or ten minutes later, I end up with this:

The photo ready to print.

And now the photo is ready to send off to the lab (Mpix Pro) for printing.

Huh?


Don't see what's changed? Look more carefully. Okay, this isn't magic, so I'll tell you:

  1. Horizontal alignment has been adjusted and the photo has been cropped slightly.

  2. White balance (color tonality) has been corrected—well, modified. The original white balance wasn't technically wrong, but in the final photo, Catherine's skin is a little pinker and more pleasant looking.

  3. Increased overall contrast (using Lightroom's tonality curve), set black point (makes blacks really black), and enhanced "clarity" (mid-range contrast). These steps make the photo start to "pop."

  4. Removed a small blemish on Catherine's right cheek (left side of photo) and also a small mole just below her lip.

  5. Minor noise reduction (the photo was shot at ISO 800 but wasn't too noisy to start with) and modest "capture sharpening". These effects are almost impossible to see on a computer screen but will make a difference to the print.

  6. Added "vignetting", that is, darkened the outside edges of the photo to highlight the subject's face in the middle. As a complement to the vignetting, slightly desaturated (weakened the color) in the background and also added an almost imperceptible extra blur to the background, as well.

I don't do this with a preset or a template. I do it one photo at a time, one tweak at a time. If you want to see the changes as they are applied, click the link below for a slideshow that will show you the process in eight stages, including two final and more dramatic changes (black and white treatments). Be sure to read the captions that appear onscreen and use the navigational tools to jump back and forth to compare the changes. Some of them are fairly subtle.

http://photos.william-porter.net/p130088644/slideshow


Trust me: It makes a difference to your print


And if you still don't see all the changes, well, don't feel bad. It really is hard to see some of these differences on a computer screen. Even if you have a large, high-resolution, calibrated monitor, I'm generally not displaying large, high-res copies of photos. But trust me, these changes really do make a difference to the final print. That's why I don't usually make these changes until clients place their orders.

There is of course a great deal more than can be done with a photo — you can move the subject's eyes farther apart, remove the subject's former boyfriend from the photo, convert the photo so it looks like a crayon drawing, give the photo a "grunge" effect, merge several layers to create an HDR effect, etc. But that isn't post-processing, that's manipulation. I very seldom manipulate my photos in that way.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wireless control of Olympus OM-D E-M1 with OI.Share app

The Olympus Image Share or "OI.Share" app for smartphones allows you to do some very neat things with the Olympus OM-D E-M1 camera, like control focus, shutter and other settings, download photos to your phone, and geo-tag your photos. The only problem with this partnership between camera and phone — at least for me as a micro-four-thirds and Olympus novice — was getting it to work.

The documentation provided in the app and in the user manual for the camera is typically bad. I wrote this blog article from the notes I started making as I was trying to sort this out for myself. I hope I save somebody else an hour and some worry.

Ingredients To get started you'll need to have an EM-1 and a smart phone with the OI.Share app installed. I'm using an iPhone 5 running iOS 7 and version 2.1.1 of the OI.Share app. I downloaded the app from the App Store.

Addendum 7 January 2015: This article was first published a little over a year ago, in December 2013. I just went through the…

Why DxO Optics Pro 10 stays in my toolbox

You can read this post here, or read my reposted version over over at Medium.


I've used over a dozen apps in the last decade to convert my raw files and process my digital images. Today I rely on four main tools to process my images: Lightroom 5.7, the Nik suite of apps (now owned and published by Google), onOne Software's Perfect Photo Suite 9 — and DxO Optics Pro 10. I want to talk about Perfect Photo Suite some other time; it's my replacement for Photoshop and I really like it. But today, I want to say nice things about Optics Pro 10.

Might seem an odd thing to admit, but I don't really want to use Optics Pro. It can't hold a candle to Lightroom for browsing and managing images. And it doesn't support layers (like Perfect Photo Suite) or much in the way of selective editing (like Lightroom, Nik and Perfect Photo Suite do). I'm able to get what I want from most of my images using Lightroom, or Nik or Perfect Photo. So most of the time, I don't need Op…

Why I switched from Lightroom to Aperture

Read today an excellent article, "Why I use Aperture instead of Lightroom," by Mel Ashar; it's posted at the Aperture Expert blog edited by Joseph Linaschke. Ashar, a landscape and architectural photographer, provides a useful catalog of some of the reasons Aperture is a strong choice for photographers who use Macs. He focuses on the file-management advantages of Aperture that arise from the fact that Apple controls an entire file ecosystem, comprised not just of Aperture, but of iCloud and the file systems on both Macs and iOS devices (iPhone, iPad).

Now, notwithstanding the advantages Ashar enumerates, the consensus seems to be that, Aperture as a photo processing app lags way behind Lightroom. I disagree with the consensus. In fact, shortly after the public beta of Lightroom 5 became available, I started looking again at Aperture and this time I really gave it the old college try. To my surprise, I discovered that I liked it. I liked it a lot. So, instead of upgrading…