5 Things You Should Never Do in Post-Processing

Or: don't use AI tricks. You do pay for them at Adobe. So why still use that very expensive Lr and Ps? There are lots of tools that do the same for a one-time fee.

What you shouldn't do in post-processing is blur the background afterwards. That really stands out. You'd be better off choosing a small aperture value or increasing the distance between the subject and the background.

Speaking of Ai, it will take up an increasingly larger place in post-processing. Whether we should be happy about that? To a certain extent, I think. I mainly use Ai for noise reduction, because I feel that works very well.
But using Ai to generate something in the image that is or isn't there, goes too far in my eyes.

mousquito wrote on Tuesday 8 July 2025 at 11:05  | reply

number 4 is definitely true, I always photograph in color, and afterwards I convert them to black and white in post-processing, much easier than the other way around. although I don't convert many to black and white. maybe I should look into it more. But number 1, removing the people, I do sometimes because you want to have a certain building or scene and it's difficult to close off the whole street. But I usually use a longer exposure so the people fade, also not always that easy.

I generally leave the composition and content untouched. I do straighten the horizon and any other lines if necessary. The latter causes some of the image at the edges to disappear. I have had Photoshop Generative AI fill those empty spaces a number of times. Each time, a very mediocre result when it comes to sharpness. Too diffuse. The "classic" Content-Aware Fill works a lot better.

I can only wholeheartedly agree with this. Photographing is something different from painting pictures in a coloring book. I limit my post-processing to things I also did in the darkroom. Everything else you fiddle with or perhaps even ruin in a photo means that the photo is no longer a photo. The result is usually so unnatural that I fail to see what added value it has. Greetings from an "old school" photographer.

Due to digital technology, the possibilities for image editing have become enormously greater compared to analog photography. In my opinion, all tools can be used, although this may stretch the boundaries of photography toward image creation. But it does no harm to use tools sensibly. Use the tool and do not let the tool use you.

Many experienced photographers strive for a photo that is already good “straight out of the camera”. Post-processing is sometimes seen as a form of manipulation that detracts from the original intent. For young photographers, post-processing is often an essential part of their style. They use Lightroom, Photoshop and AI tools to enhance or even transform images. Young people often use post-processing to enhance emotions, remove distracting elements or create a certain atmosphere. The end result matters more than the “authenticity” of the moment.
So yes, to each their own.


-

Completely agree Nando, adding to that: in the analog era, means were also used in the darkroom to enhance emotions. That is not something from recent years.

If you want to photograph more widely, make a panorama of it. With two photos you already have enough for a wider photo. I've been doing it that way for years. Look for tutorials on YouTube, for example.

jahiba wrote on Wednesday 9 July 2025 at 19:04  | reply

For photography I call it 'developing' if you seek out or try the extreme it falls into the category 'digital art. I can appreciate both but you have to see them as two forms. Furthermore, I am of the opinion that you should delve into it and know what it can and does. Furthermore, I am of the opinion that you can better embrace it and delve into it, because it really isn't going away anymore but keeps developing further. Regardless of what we all think of it??