Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by vjvjvjvjghv 61 days ago
Give us a tutorial please. Otherwise this statement makes no sense.
1 comments

What is confusing? A well exposed shot shouldn’t need any editing really.
And a real programmer doesn't need a debugger because he gets his code right from the start...

I don't think too many people manage to get a wildlife, landscape, astro, macro or night shot so well exposed that no editing is needed.

Landscape, macro, and night are very much composition and the right equipment. I agree wildlife, action, and astro photography may need some editing to some extent although I took photos of skateboarding for years and never found much need to edit. For me the tool to create the photo is the camera, past minimal editing it becomes a different medium of art, not a bad one as I love some photos that people have edited but it is a different form of art.
This is so wrong, on so many levels, that I don't even know where to start.

There are plenty of potential photographs that even modern sensor (or film) technology just can't do, like with questions of dynamic range. There are opportunities for cleaning up noise and sharpening to create a technically-better image. There are reasons beyond count for compositing of different kinds.

But most importantly, supporting the artist's efforts to achieve their vision is the whole point. If someone vision can't be achieved either with their physical toolset, or with their suite of tools, why should they limit themselves?