Is post-processing a 'must' in the 'digital world'?

Sim was recounting to me a conversation he had with an ‘award-winning’ photographer (here in ‘uniquely singapore’).  His discussing with her centred on the virtues of capturing a good shot so as to minimise the need for ‘post-processing’ via, say, Photoshop.  To this, she retorted defensively, (as is the case with most i've encountered here) “In the Digital World, post-processing is a must!”.

Personally, I found this statement quite interesting since, if it were true, then one could go on to make inferences logically following from it such as,

1.  Digital photography delivers results of less quality than film and thus requires post-processing to enhance it.

2.  Digital photography delivers results of equal quality to film and thus requires post-processing to increase its quality beyond film.

3.  Digital photographers, due to the convenience of shooting-n-viewing, may thus be encouraged to be less thoughtful whilst peering through the backs of their cameras and hence pay less attention to lighting, composition, etc, and make up for it later via ‘post-processing’ in Photoshop, etc.

4.  Digital photographers, who are also artists or, say, photo journalists/candid shot artists, may require ‘post-processing’ to ‘add on’ to or subtract from pictures that which cannot be effected via camera, lens or filters, or due to the unavailability of time to do so.

 
If one was to look at the above possible reasons why ‘post-processing’ is a must in the ‘digital world’, it is only (4) that argues for ‘post-processing’ not being a means via which one makes up for one’s own deficiencies as a photographer. In this sense, photography being 'digital' has nothing to do with it.   Photography is photography, digital or film.  The photographer is the only constant that is pertinent here.

It is only upon a firm foundation that one mightst possibly construct a stairway to heaven.  When we spend less time clearing up our mistakes, we would be able to more easily be inspired to do more with that which aren’t fraught with it.  If not, we might view a ‘post’ experience as one where we clear up mistakes.  To such photographers, 'post-processing' moves from being a boon to being a tool via which one learns to live with ones deficiencies as a photographer.  If leisure is the midwife of imagination, then such photographers will never evolve into artists as the leisure of post-processing becomes little more than a time for refuse-removal.

In sum,

 
There is a world of difference between the final product of a post-complacenist as opposed to a post-perfectionist.  The former uses post-processing to compensate, whilst the latter uses it to post-process beyond perfection.  To the former, ‘post-processing’ becomes a refuge, and to the latter, ‘post-processing’ becomes a springboard.   The former spends much time cleaning lenses, whilst the latter spends time using it. 

Interesting isn’t it.

ed

singapore malaysia hong kong thailand india taiwan japan asia uk australia philosophy photography cameras dslr