Home U.S. Coin Forum

Post-processing photos (with or without scotch)

messydeskmessydesk Posts: 20,004 ✭✭✭✭✭
I know how some people recoil at the thought of someone using Photoshop as an extension of the imaging chain found in their cameras to "finish" their coin photos. I stumbled across this while looking for something else:

The black-and-white photography masters (such as Ansel Adams, Minor White, and Gene Smith) also burned and dodged in very complicated ways. Someone once asked Gene Smith how he made a print and he replied, “I go into the darkroom in the morning with a gallon of Dektol in one hand, a package of 11x14 Polycontrast J under my arm, and a fifth of scotch in the other hand, and come out twelve hours later with a print.”

To them, the image hitting the film sheet was not the end of the process of photographing their subject, but merely the event that let them take their subject into the darkroom. Now, the fifth of scotch and 12 hours eludes to the fact that it's much easier to screw up a photo in the darkroom (i.e., post-processing) than it is to get it right, but the end result they were looking for required the effort.

The fact that the Dektol was in a gallon bottle and the scotch was in a fifth was probably a fortuitous coincidence that helped spare Mr. Smith from the fate of J. Sanford Saltus. The messydesk studios are currently scotch-free zones. I'm probably more likely to knock it on the floor than mistake my bottle of PlastX for it, though.

(Link to full article)

Comments

  • LindeDadLindeDad Posts: 18,766 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Usually doing most of the editing in the morning more likely to be coffee around here. Old eyes are fresher in the morning.
    Just got eight listings done this morning and the pot is now empty.

    BTW being one that learned back in the days of film. I have always thought of PhotoShop as like in the old days of going into the darkroom and printing my own prints on surplussed 33MM film I got from the tailing of the gun camera stocks in the Air force. It was just as much a part of the art of the hobby as the lighting and focus on the subject was. Remember having to use a light meter because it wasn't in the camera?

    image
  • lcoopielcoopie Posts: 8,873 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I think it would be extremely difficult to find a single modern professional photographer
    who doesn't do post processing.
    LCoopie = Les
  • OGDanOGDan Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The issue isn't the act of post processing, it's that some post processing can go "too far" so as to make the coin look more attractive than it is in reality. Of course "attractive" is a subjective term. I post process and am not ashamed of it because I post process to try and get the picture to look as close to possible to the actual coin, in hand, under normal light.
  • MikeInFLMikeInFL Posts: 10,188 ✭✭✭✭
    Virtually every digital photo is processed, whether in the camera or in something like photoshop. The key is not to overdo it, IMO.
    Collector of Large Cents, US Type, and modern pocket change.
  • mgoodm3mgoodm3 Posts: 17,497 ✭✭✭
    RAW image format is much like having a darkroom. Asabove, the key is not to push the processing too far that the image stops looking natural.
    coinimaging.com/my photography articles Check out the new macro lens testing section
  • lcoopielcoopie Posts: 8,873 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The only truly unprocessed image with a digital camera would be made of zeros and ones
    LCoopie = Les
  • lkeigwinlkeigwin Posts: 16,892 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Not only is it a good idea to post-process, it is often essential in the name of honest images.

    As Mike and Mark say, the trick is not overdoing it.
    Lance.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file