5 Beginner Mistakes When Editing Photos

[@cliftonwhittaker260]

My philosophy of processing images is this: any manipulation is OK as long as no can tell it was manipulated. Once it is noticeable to anyone the image needs to be deleted and start over. When I go out to photograph birds (several times a week) my goal is to create art. RAW images don't do that unless you edit them. Edited images won't do that either unless they are done skillfully and tastefully. Scott, your video demonstrates and explains this concept exceptionally well. Thank you.

[@michaelwhalen7154]

Great video, and timely for me! Thanks Scott!

[@keithdavis9476]

Scott, a very helpful video! I'm enjoying your videos, so I just joined your Patreon!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Awesome, thank you!

[@jjmummert]

This was extremely interesting and helpful. Also, explained very well. Thank you.

[@Kellysher]

The purist conversation will be heated very soon with the advancements of AI. I can only barely imagine us 5 years down the road. I do understand the concerns of professional photographers. As a serious amateur I appreciate and use all the tools that I can use to make my photos “all that they can be”. Personally I draw the line on what looks fake to me. I’ve learned editing can’t save a bad photo, but it can make a good image better. I don’t have a pro prime F4. Golden hour and blue hour are a struggle with low light. Editing is needed to clean up those images. These tools allow me to create some fairly nice images with my budget! How lucky we are to have them! My work is just for me. Being in nature, experiencing these moments, respecting the subject, freezing a moment in time, and processing the file to my liking is all part of this wonderful endeavor! Off to the wetlands now! Happy shooting everyone!

[@sarahbatsford4791]

Super video with informative content. I'm not a pro & guilty of stuffing up. You have taught me alot, many thanks😁

[@nwcs2]

I think many people try to edit their pics to look like the pros out there but the problem is the source image isn’t starting at the same quality point. What took me a while to accept is to look at the image I caught and enhance it as it is rather than trying to make it look like something someone else did.

[@seanadowling3]

Such a great point!

[@uaebifvideo5472]

Thank you for the information, Scott!!.

[@christopherleecowan]

I think the hardest thing when I started to edit was going too far too fast. Now I take images in two different directions if it's wild life it's more of a natural edit if I do a different genre I might isolate my subject with tone and imply a color grade at the end for artistic expression. Your points are valid and something I still need to keep in the front of my mind when I go to edit an image. Thank you.

[@The_CGA]

Popping the subject isn’t a crime But the way to do it right is in camera, finding a hotspot in the shade, or…using a strobe (which at high ish iso isn’t going to bother the wildlife a great deal) Learning to use the masking slider with sharpening so that you’re only sharpening the areas with proper detail, well, it’s a whole topic unto itself . A well-chosen caution to put into a more top level overview kind of video

[@StephenHOutdoors]

My workaround for brightening a subject that is backlit is to increase exposure but also increase contrst and using curves or dodging and burning rather than a blanket exposure adjustment.

[@mirkoputignano7734]

Very interesting, Thank you👍

[@cguerrieri4866]

Great video. Thought provoking

[@LtDeadeye]

Thanks for this video. I think I'm finally getting over the 'pop' masking trend. Looking back, they appear unnatural to my eyes.

[@kalinmir]

5:44 sadly one of those extremely painting like images won the last year's Czech Wikipedia's best nature photography award...completely ridiculous when you read that actual photographers sat as judges...not only that but didn't really comply with stipulations about it being unusual and encyclopedically useful (a kingfisher rising from water which is not an uncommon subject by any means)

[@flightographist]

It's all part of the journey as an artist, figuring out what works and what doesn't.

[@mathieucaron4957]

Editing to get what was seen and editing to fake something are 2 very different things. For me, removing a dark spot because your forgot to clean your sensor is perfectly fine. Removing a small branch is "ok", but things like changing the sky is very not acceptable 😅 Or using AI to change the shape of a face... Can't respect those who do it if their goal is to hide the truth.

[@vzshadow1]

I've made 3 out of 5 of those mistakes. I hope that I don't make those mistakes anymore. RAW files are 0s and 1s, binary data. They have to be edited. JPEGs are all edited based on choices you make.

[@TheWildlifeGallery388]

well, I certainly don't feel I'm a "purist" - there are times I feel like creating something out of what my camera saw - plus I'm only out to please myself with what I create -

[@ardeladimwit]

that as nice. something that makes me a bit uncomfortable (other than the extreme blue/red toning) is the overuse of flash that also creates very artificial images. As a field photographer that did a serious amount of macro photography for high end RM agencies, the purpose of good editorial photography is to represent the subject in honest way and true to its environment which is very demanding on camera skills rather than post-processing skills. It also generally requires minimal interference with small adjustments. It's not "artistic", but it is good editorial photography and I am repulsed by overly sharpened, over saturated, purple-toned images with glaring use of flash. It's not necessary-- just learn to use basic control of shutter, aperture, iso and know where the light is and be mindful of your subject. Sometimes seeing the corners of the lens is much harder than the actual subject. Not everybody shoots the same way and I personally never want to join the club of purple grass and skies. Maybe it's artistic, but it makes me queasy.

[@TimSeraphiel]

Another slider to add to mistake 2 is Saturation.

[@WildlifeInspired]

100%. And when combined with too much contrast it a bad look

[@evenhandedcommentor6102]

What I noticed in the first image is a different photography mistake besides not being close enough for the lens used. Too much toneh. For those who don’t know what toneh is, try looking it up. There certainly are times when you want to separate the subject from its environment, but that’s not common in wildlife photography. We don’t want shots that look like they came from a zoo. That’s why zoos strive to look as natural as possible. Animals in their typical environment. Loose the environment and the animal loses some of its interest.

[@GUILLERMOJALDANALOPEZ]

Wondeful Video

[@yspegel]

There are these groups that are (pretend to be) "purists" posting with the text "not edited" but they forget they post a jpg file, already edited by their camera. Very annoying.

[@downsouth2158]

Current software is helping create a generation of graphic artist, not photographers. I’m so sick of seeing viewers slobbering over blown out saturation, washed out highlights and poorly cloned subjects, among many other issues.

[@robertfriedman4611]

What's your experience with Gigapixel when cropping an image?

[@WildlifeInspired]

It's good when you start with lots of pixels and make make it huge. It's. It good to OVERCROP and use it as a tool to recover resolution. If that makes sense

[@robertfriedman4611]

@@WildlifeInspired It does. Thanks.

[@kovyfra5987]

My two cents on your last point : The "raw image" that is displayed by camera raw (or any raw developing software) is not even the real raw image encoded in the file. All those softwares always display a raw image with at least 5 basic processings based on the exif data of the file: 1 - Basic Demosaicing 2- 8 bits encoding (from the 14 bits of the file) 3- White balance (as shot) 5- offset correction and Tone curve (the real raw file is linear) 5- Basic Color rendering So, the preview image of camera raw is already an interpretation of what the sensor actually recorded... And honestly you don't want to see that real raw image, even if you call yourself a "purist". The real raw is extremely dark because each pixels shows only its own channel (green, red or blue) and the overall color cast is green due to the bayer matrix pattern having twice more green photosites than red or blue one. To be clear, the Image recorded by the sensor is crap and you need a lot of processing steps (either in camera or in post) to correct it so that it looks like what a human would have seen in the first place. As you explained extremely well, what a human see is not just only what the retina of his eye recorded, but most importantly all the extremely powerful processes applied in real time by his brain to extract as much information as possible from the scene. Modern cameras ISP get closer and closer to what our brain can do, but they are not there yet, especially in very tricky lighting conditions. Yet, we can expect huge improvements in the near future with machine learning and AI)

[@MrCat-rk9ir]

I think any photo with a good composition can turn out great by just following your first four editing advices. I dont believe purist. I think that will waste the great potential of an image.

[@colintraveller]

Do you rhink every beginner uses LR/PS ???? Also you ignore the fundumental fact ... You take and edit pics that makes you happy ... You never take pics and edit them to make others happy ... Furthermore You don't know the budgets of beginners and of WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD !!!! . It's easy to to criticise ...

[@WildlifeInspired]

Budget is irrelevant to the concept. Free software employs the same basic sliders as pro level editing software. I assumed you knew that.

[@colintraveller]

@@WildlifeInspired Name any free editing software that is mentioned and has been used by at least 9 youtube toggers when they starting out !!!?? All i have seen them use is LR/PS ... I looked at the prices for LR//PS . Tooo expensive for a hobbyist like myself thst isn't making any money at all .I don't have deeep pockets . . I used the microsoft program before buying Affinity2 which is cheaper overall !! . At least it's not costing me a monthly fee . Yet you have failed to mention any credible free editing software for beginners , Yet you'll make a video slating beginners pic editing skills . Practice makes perfect ... it does not come instantly !!

[@WildlifeInspired]

google gimp