Is It Just As Important To Be A Good Editor Of Your Images As It Is A Photographer?

A few years ago this image would not be possible.  From a grossly underexposed
too far away snapshot just to try to identify the bird to a fully usable image.
(click to enlarge)

Except for illustrating some sort of test I have conducted, I never post images that have not been edited in some manner.  Since I mainly use the RAW format, typically, the resulting image files don't look like the scene as I found it or as I had envisioned how I want my final image to look.  RAW files only capture data.  They are processed in-camera nor in your editing software.  There is a JPEG image embedded within the RAW file by the camera so you can view it.  That is what you see on your camera's LCD.  But when you import that RAW file into your editing software, the programmers of that software have written code to interpret that RAW data and create different JPEG rendering for viewing.  That is why when you import your file it looks like it did on your camera's LCD screen, then when the editing software generates a preview, it almost always changes a bit.  Different interpretations of the same data.  In any case, typically RAW files don't look very good straight out of the camera.  Even my JPEGs need a little editing if only to darken or brighten slightly, burn, dodge, add some texture or clarity, etc. 

Couple this with my recent experiment where I set out to find out for myself how critical it is to optimize exposure in-camera (you can read that post here)  and I've come to the conclusion that it is almost as important to be a good editor as it is to be a good photographer.  After all, as a photographer you do have to find something that will make a good image, compose it in a manner where it is pleasing then capture it with enough file data to be able to edit it satisfactorily.  You can't make something from nothing.

The is the RAW file straight out of the camera.  Total loss?  Evidently not with judicious use of
today's amazing digital sensors, image processors and editing software. (click to enlarge)

There is so much leeway in exposure in today's digital cameras, no matter what size sensor, that in my view it is a shame to just accept whatever is recorded in the camera and not take advantage of all of that captured data to enhance and optimize your images after looking at them in your image editor of choice.  Image files are very adaptive today and can easily be edited and cropped to improve them.  Add to that the unbelievable capabilities of primary editing software and plug-ins, that it is almost magical!

I have two images here today to illustrate what I mean.  None of the two images showed much out of the camera, but after editing them, they were improved to the point where they are good enough to show.  In other words, I took what I thought were hopeless images, throwaways, and by the magic of editing, improved them to the point where I feel comfortable posting them to illustrate my points here.

The first image is more or less a "snapshot" I made at the end of the day when I was on my short road trip to Virginia's Eastern Shore last month.  The image was made in the Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge.  I was on my way out and spotted a far away bird of some sort at the top of a dead tree.  It appeared that there may be a nest there and the bird was tending to the nest.  The bird was too far away but I stopped my vehicle, swung my Nikon Z7 with the 200-500mm f/5.6 lens out of the window, back-button focused and made a couple of exposures.  My intent was just to try to see what type of bird, a suspected hawk, was there.  I didn't set any exposure in the camera, it was set for whatever I photographed before it.

Back in my hotel room later that evening, I moved the Exposure slider in Lightroom Classic to the right to brighten the image just to try to identify the bird.  Once I did and I saw the image was relatively sharp (not tack sharp, after all, the image was only intended to identify the hawk so my vehicle's motor was running, my body was twisted to my left and I was handholding a large and heavy lens while sitting in an awkward position), I thought the image would be a good exercise for me to challenge myself to see what I could do with it using the software tools I have in my computer.  I used Lightroom Classic, Photoshop, Topaz Sharpen AI and Topaz Gigapixel AI to first edit and crop it to a vertical, sharpen it, then enlarge the file sufficiently to be able to make it a usable size.  In fact, I then cropped it tighter once more.  The second image is the result.  Finally, just for fun and to try out the relatively new feature in Photoshop, I added a nice sky.  The image is okay, not great and I'm not taking credit for it as I have to give the credit to the technology built into the Nikon camera as well as the Adobe and Topaz software.  Frankly, as an old film shooter, the result is amazing to me.

After spotting this pair, I stopped my vehicle, swiveled to the left and made a couple of images of these ospreys in their nest.  I was handholding my Olympus E-M1 Mark III with the Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO plus the Olympus MC-14 1.4x tele-converter attached.  I've been photographing this pair for years even though their nest is too far away for any focal length shy of about 2000mm.  The nest is just outside of Historic Jamestown, Virginia.  (click to enlarge)

The second image is another bird image.  Two ospreys in a nest at an even longer distance than the first image.  For this exposure, I used my Olympus E-M1 Mark III (a micro 4/3 sensor that some so-called 'experts' say is too small to be any good and the format should go away) coupled to my Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO lens with the Olympus MC-14 1.4x tele-converter mounted in between.  That gave me an equivalent field of view of 840mm if I had been using a full frame camera.  The image was shot handheld, again with my vehicle stopped in a roadway, body twisted to the left with the camera set on manual exposure.  Thank goodness for Olympus' amazing IBIS coupled with the image stabilization built into the lens.

Even with the equivalent field of view of 840mm, the two ospreys in the nest were too far away for a good composition but I made a few exposures anyway.  Another file I thought would be a challenge to see if I could make a new image out of the original, improving the composition and detail of the ospreys and the overall scene.  From Lightroom Classic I invoked Topaz Gigapixel AI and enlarged the file, then cropped heavily.  Gigapixel not only enlarges your files but applies a bit of sharpening to keep them looking pretty good.

After upsizing the file by 4X, I was able to crop much more tightly than before so the ospreys
can be seen more clearly. (click to enlarge)

Again, a usable image was made from one that was not really close enough to be a good composition.

Personally, I think it is almost as important to learn to be a good editor as it is to be a good photographer.  You don't have to learn all the hundreds of things you can do with Photoshop or other programs, but I think it is essential to have a good working knowledge of your basic editing software as well as strategic plug-ins.  If you don't, I think you are doing yourself and your art a disservice. 

Join me over at my website, https://www.dennismook.com. 

Thanks for looking. Enjoy!  

Dennis A. Mook  

All content on this blog is © 2013-2021 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.