Depends. Can I point out this shot has a fairly significant blue color-cast? .Can I brag about that this is a superb, tacky sharp photo of my dog?
I am not going to pretend to know what is going on, or why your friends are telling you what they are telling you, but what I will tell you is this: That is unquestionably some of the stupidest "advice" I've ever heard. Full stop. All of that is illogical, and simply *wrong* on so many levels, I don't even know where to begin refuting it.The reason for my asking is this photo (not d750, sorry)
I need to know some things before I walk on my life with d750. The confusment is great now
Most of friends, if not all, have TWO commandments when it comes to photo;
1: Ye shall not touch the photo when coming out of camera
2; Ye shall not use post processing
SInce I converted from film to digital back in 2002, I have never complied to that, I have found my photos were unsharp and dull,
giving them a light touch up in Photoshop
Today, on of my friends an 80 year old very respected Nature Photographer and me had a bad discussion about this,
and he again repeated them two commandments.
What is going on ? Am I all wrong? Why are all my friends saying this do not touch them "negatives" ???
I would say a D600, roughly speaking. It's not easy to match Canon bodies to Nikon bodies perfectly...OK, so we agree! And I will continue my postprocessing
I am deeply into fashion, women haut couture! Today, I found a fashion blog I havent read before . She uses a Canon 5 d mk II -- might be comparable to d610/ d 750 -- what?
In short, I'd like to see the blog this woman posts. Her "No Photoshop" policy is based on the premise the camera gets an awful lot right without any help from post processing; things like exposure, white balance and color. And the simple fact of the matter is, the camera doesn't do that. It's a machine that captures light and that's a whole lot different than "seeing". A lot of people think if you use Photoshop you're doing it to deceive, or manipulate the photo in some way so as to fool the viewer when in fact what we're doing is correcting problems in order to make the final image appear more lifelike.She states on her blog -- NO postprocessing at all. No Photoshop at all!
So I asked her why not? She gave a kind of defensive wollen answer, concluding in saying "when I say no photoshop, no postprocessing my readers will know this IS me and nothing is added or subtracted". And finally she said;
"Even brands and magazines are under the same scrutiny; Modcloth signed a no-Photoshop Pledge"
This worries me a lot. IS there a consensus in the fashion blog arena NOT to fix any photos, being afraid readers will suspect this making them "being prettier" than they are in real world??
So I know that. And I know for sure my photos of Norwegian Nature WILL be postprocessed. As you see in that dog and snow photo. This one too;
My problem is I never went to any school learning how to do this, but I end up like this after cropping, doing some shadow/highlights adj, adding yellow boost and finally smart sharpen (0.4 px, 93% NR:6%)
I said it in PM and I'll say it again now...... A Clothes Horse ...
I said it in PM and I'll say it again now...
If you're being told all the photos on that website were posted SOOC (Straight Out Of Camera), with absolutely ZERO post-processing, I do NOT believe it. Period.
....
Maybe I'm getting confused because I was looking at this link provided by the OP:I went back and read her FAQ page. She just started using Lightroom for photo editing, and she doesn't use "Photoshop" (using the term as a verb) to edit her body or face. She is a fashion blogger who states she isn't a photography expert. I don't see a problem here as far as what she is representing photography-wise.
Many people use the term "Photoshop" incorrectly. Clarification is needed anytime the word isn't used as a proper noun.
[MENTION=41839]Borga Voffe[/MENTION]
True to my philosophy of researching what I read, I found this.
https://blog.modcloth.com/behind-the-scenes/contests/photo-editing-process/
They edit the photos, but what they don't do is completely change the body type and manipulate the clothing. In other words, a large model with some bulges, keeps them in the image. The clothes blogger was using "Photoshop" to mean no body/face correction to make her look thinner or more voluptuous or whatever.
I just think there was a vocabulary/language barrier at work here.
"No digital plastic surgery".
Those shots are, in my opinion, clearly post-processed.
Which seems very much at odds with what their FAQ states."when I say no photoshop, no postprocessing my readers will know this IS me and nothing is added or subtracted" ... And finally she said; "Even brands and magazines are under the same scrutiny; Modcloth signed a no-Photoshop Pledge"