I love this discussion about photography.
100% of the Professional photographers do edit their photo's. But that is not the editing where TEF, or other people here are talking about. That is manipulating and destroying your pictures.
[edit
asn't suppose to be that harsh and stupid]
The editing where i are talking about, is the after editing if you take pictures in RAW format. the word "raw" sais it all it's pure and non edited by the camera itself. It keeps the channels open.
[/edit]
RAW pictures have to be edited and have to be compressed afterwards. Because raw pictures are not supperted by site's nor color printers.
It's the part where you can get the colors straight and finish your photo how it was in reality. Because the range of an sensor is less than the eye.
Ofcourse you can edit some things in your photo's like disturbing things or the "hot" pixels your camera made because of the long exposure time.
But i agree with tef about the editing, hope we are talking about the same, the manipulating afterwards.
All i want to do is to capture the moment, set the colors as in reality and close/compress the picture to it's final stage.
That's why i don't like the suggest editing jordi did. It was really sunny that day and removing the shades would be not like the reality. But thanks for the suggestion jordi.
And what rien did with his picture is a whole different aspect of art. I somekind like it.
gr,
jerico