I have now been (seriously) playing with digital
post-processing for around a year and have started to be able to create
the sort of images that I want. I can never see myself going back to
film, even though I'm sure it still gives superior rendition in tones and
colour compared to digital. The freedom to just keep ones finger on
the button when taking pictures of people and children is just great -
most are then thrown away, but with luck (which we need to get that
special shot) one will have captured just the right moment.
My main gripe is the flat tone curve with easily blown highlights,
although using raw or taking 3 pictures (at different exposures) helps to
bring them back. I am
amazed that people, and even professionals, will accept shots with blown
highlights. You see them all the time in face shorts. I've even see
white grass! This to me is the main area where film beats digital hands
down. I think it will take sometime for this to be corrected, as it is
dependent on standards and colour spaces and at the moment there is no
commercial incentive to do so.
However, having struggled to enhance an image using the different
facilities of Photoshop, I'm now in the position of building an arsenal of
techniques and methods which I have recorded either as Actions or
'tips'. Some of what I can now do I actually understand! - but for
the more complex ones I am still really a parrot! 'Fixing' most
images can now be quite quick by just following the workflow and applying
the appropriate action and changing the layer properties to suit.
However the really big bonus with post-processing is that I can now create
photo enhancement/effects, which is almost like artistic creation.
So now I can enjoy photography twice - once taking and then creating the
scene I want to convey. I now feel as excited having 'improved' an
image as I do when I initially see and capture it. Some of the
things one can do just give one the WOW factor and tingles down the
back. I shall, in a way, feel sorry when the digital world comes of
age and one will be back to (just) taking a picture.
Where is the digital camera going? It will probably level out at around
20meg - but why do we need so much? When you think about it, the vast
majority of photos are only ever seen on the screen and most that are printed
are at 6 x 4; probably less than one in several million ever get printed larger
than 8 x 10. But Mega-pixels sell!
In the near future, what we need are cameras that will have no ...
- Lens distortion - this will be a thing of the past, certainly for fixed lens
camera - the software I use can automatically correct for it now.
- Chromatic aberration introduced by sensors or banding. I think of
the old cameras as having waves of light gently lapping on the film emulsion,
whereas today's we have little sensor cells being bombarded with photon/balls of
light. The results are completely different and do not give the 'natural'
look we are use to from film.
I would love to have...
- a 'digital' polarising filter, as at the moment you can not get the colour
saturation that one use to get with film - and simulating it in Photoshop is not
quite as effective as the real thing.
- The thing I am most looking forward to, especially in my close-up/macro
work, is controlled predictive focus - so that you can have as much, or as
little, of the picture in focus as you want. I can do it today, but it is
slow and laborious, but well worth the results - all done in software.
Tomorrow the camera will be able to do it, automatically adding multiple
predictive focus sub-shots together to produce a single picture and at fast
shutter speeds.
