This won’t be an extensive technical dissertation, but I thought I’d revisit the last essay I posted and look at the processing behind the images. Because this topic remains at the forefront of most questions I get. In this case, there were a couple of questions regarding the very prominent greens in the series—namely if they’d been altered through some sort of secret incantation.
The first point I need to reiterate is that nothing I post is SOOC (straight out of camera). Ever. Unless I’m trying to make a point about a certain simulation (which I’ve done on a few occasions) every single image I output has gone through some level of post-processing. Not because the cameras I use can’t produce satisfactory results—they can in fact be quite jaw-dropping, especially when settings are customized—but because I believe the processing portion of the workflow allows for three very important stages:
1. Personalization of tone—which leads to subtle shifts in the overall character of an image.
2. Localized adjustments—which alters or corrects the balance of various areas and how they’ll impact the viewer.
3. Distance from the moment.
This last one should actually be #1 because, in my book, it is by far the most important aspect of post-processing work: the ability to step back and see an image as a standalone object, on its own or within the context of a connected series. This is the moment of reflection where we give meaning to whatever impulse triggered an image’s capture—what Ansel Adams famously called the "performance" to the negative’s "score". But I’d go even further: with the tools at our disposal today, that initial photograph isn’t even a score anymore—hell, it’s not even a negative is it? Because a score implies a slow, painstaking amount of mostly abstract work, which was part of Adams’ reality but isn’t at all true for us in the digital age. Ours is a symbiotic relationship, part reactive and part deliberate but always a partnership with machines that have been highly perfected to assist us in every way. We’re guides now, much more than engineers, pushing our cameras in this or that way...and the speed at which it all happens would’ve made Ansel Adam’s head spin.
Today’s negative—the file—is much more of a jazz improvisation than a score. In most cases—even with photographic work that’s extremely cerebral and prepared—our tools bring us way beyond musical notation. We’re hearing the sounds and reacting in real time.
For me the file is the jam, the output is the album. What stands in between is mixing and mastering—which is all about the careful positioning of every element to make the whole stronger and more effective. Sometimes it’s just about EQ and reverb.
Exposure and its effect on colour
When we think about colour, about modifying it in some way, the reflex is to hit the Saturation or Vibrancy sliders or White Balance or...various dedicated colour tools. But colour reacts very dramatically to exposure and contrast. Namely, any S-curve applied to RGB channels (as opposed to Luminance which is also available in Capture One*) will immediately push saturation like crazy, usually forcing to compensate the other way. So my very first step with any image is to define exposure: meaning everything in Lightroom’s Basic panel. In the following before and after example, you can see the effect of this panel has already changed the overall look of the image.