Is PS the tool of choice for enhancing Website Photo Images?

[bradesp]

OK,

Dumb question for this group I'm sure, but...

I'm about to contract to have someone build a very professional site from a pre-designed flash template. Problem is the template looks good in part, because of the high quality photo's used.

How come my "normal" digital photo's never look this good in real life? Is it because a skilled photoshop artist has "enhanced" the heck out of a normal photograph?

I'm asking because I need to know if I need to compliment my webdesign / template shop with a skilled PhotoShop expert for enhancing the photo's on my website.

Thanks,

bradesp

raleigh, nc usa

 

[Sean]

You can enhance quite a bit in Photoshop, but depending on the digital camera you have and the quality you take the pictures at, you can get perfect quality without having to use PS. Professional photographrs use film because film is better quality. Think of a home movie that is shot using a DV cam compared to studio quality film camera used to shoot a movie...big diff! I don't know that much about photography, but I think taking a good picture to begin with is better that shopping a crummy image to try and make it look good...for time and quality sake.

 

[peekingrabbit]

Re: Is PS the tool of choice for enhancing Website Photo Ima

How come my "normal" digital photo's never look this good in real life?

A logical question if you're a professional photographer for over 10 years, who has read all what needs to be read, who has quality equipment and who took more shots in 10 years than an amateur would take in 500 years and who uses a camera 6 to 7 days a week. I think you underestimate what it takes to become a good photographer and I think you overestimate Photoshop. Sure, Photoshop can improve any photograph, but... within limits.

 

[sPECtre]

If it is a flash template, shouldn't you use Macromedia Flash to modify it?

 

[bradesp]

good question, should the photo's be manipulated with flash in lieu of photoshop? What if I plan to have a non-flash / static html of the same basic site with the same pictures?

 

[sPECtre]

Sorry, I misread the original question.
Could you post some of your pictures? Most templates are done with stock pictures, shoot with professionnal photographers, with proper lighting, models, make-up artists, retouchers, etc. So if you are a photography beginner, it might not be easy to match that quality..

 

[Sark]

Patrick said

Professional photographrs use film because film is better quality.

Not true...Digital is capable of equalling, and even bettering 35mm film quality. It can't compete with larger medium format, or large format, but you wouldn't need either for images that will end up on the web.

Skill and knowledge is a big factor, but equipment does of course play a part. Optical resolution is a major factor that is too often ignored in reviews of digital SLR's. Many DSLR's come with cheaper, lower quality "Kit" lenses that do not offer the same resolution as a more expensive lens. Comparing a Canon 350D to a Nikon D70 for example, can only be acheived accurately if both are tested with the same lens, which is rarely the case.

Another important fact to understand is, no digital image will look great when viewed at 100% staight out of the camera. The image detail/pixels will be compressed when printed and appear finer than when displayed on screen. If displaying for the web, downsampling will be nessecary and give an improved appearence to sharpness. Maybe your judging your own images wrongly, ie, at 100% straight out of the camera. Even a reasonably decent compact should produce acceptable quality for web display, once downsampled.

Sark