Now, I've never been scared to admit that I have help along the way from software. All this getting it right in camera is fair and well and those photographers who attain what many see as 'photographic nirvana' have to be applauded for capturing something so pure it can be shown straight-out-of-camera. However, for the vast majority of us we see something and in many cases, we have to shoot it there and then. There's no waiting for better light or that decisive moment - we shoot and then assess where we're going with the shot to take it to its final destination (if there actually is one).
Take this shot for example:
This was shot for for a magazine and actually ended up on the cover. However, as you can tell straight away, it's nothing special in its basic format; the shadows are a bit 'blah', the lighting is okay but not ground-breaking, and overall, it looks a bit like a duffer. It looked too contrasty and just naff on my camera's LCD. Not a good start for any image.
However, I knew A) it fitted the cover and had room for straps and associated cover 'furniture', and B) it was an interesting angle that we'd not done for quite some time. Plus Neil McKinnon, the angler in the shot, was hot property at the time after a big switch of sponsors (from Shakespeare to Preston Innovations) and he had just scooped a massive festival win of several thousand quid that had cemented him as one of the best carp match anglers around. So that was going to be a big selling point.
Anyway, I do have a habit of shooting a bit dark anyway so I knew I could do something with it in Lightroom and me knowing its potential from my magazine editing days, I couldn't leave it be. There are a whole host of tweaks going on; black point increase, fill adjustment, sharpening, a bit of noise reduction, some WB increase thrown in.... you name it, it probably has it and it ended up like this:
So, already you can see a massive change in how it looks. Add in the title, masthead, barcode and other stuff we whack on the cover and it ends up like this:
The editor was happy, I was happy, even the punters were happy. Best of all, the big boss was happy... phew!!
Shooting raw is obviously giving me extra room to breath but also, the 'original' raw file (as seen through Lightroom without settings applied) looks as flat as a fart so even with minimal adjustments you can't really fail. But that aside, is it wrong to rely so heavily on the software at my disposal? I think not, although others are sure to disagree. The point is that the end result was achieved and the brief met. Knowing where the shot came from may not be of consequence to some people but to me, I feel it's part of learning about your own photography to see how you can push your images that one step further.
Whether this makes me lazy or sloppy, that's for others to pass that judgement - I just realise that what you see isn't always what you get with photography and what you get isn't always what you expected to see at the end when you first pressed the shutter.
No comments:
Post a Comment