That is quite a challenge, since there is no "untouched" for a RAW image, and you still have to do a conversion to web-suitable sizes and possibly color space.

But if the rules were such as:

1) all RAW adjustments set to neutral (no noise reduction or sharpening either)
2) white balance as measured by the camera
3) straight conversion to sRGB without any tweaking
4) high quality JPEG or PNG web output, ca. 600x600 pixels
5) 100% crop of one to three representative details as selected by the photographer

Then I guess we could see something. I'm not sure what, though.

And I may have forgotten something here.

I think it would be a fascinating and extremely useful exercise if members might post 'before and after' shots of their favourite photographs; including (if possible) the histograms and details of all the pp that was undertaken to create the effects that made the shot so appealing.

Before - Showing the photograph completely untouched, as it was when it left the camera.

After - Showing the photograph in all it's glory as a finished work.

Hi Jani

The rules you set out sound good. I guess it is a strange thing to suggest and you may be right in asking what there is to be gained from doing this as I'm not sure myself.

My rational comes from many years studying art, trying to analyse and decipher the work of artists I admire. What makes it difficult is the intangibility, especially when studying alone but even in the classroom with an experienced teacher one is still dealing with an interpretation. To be able to watch an experienced hand working can fill in so many of the gaps, to see the nuts and bolts of the process is an essential part of learning.

Although the outcome of a digital image may share a great number of similarities with other forms of visual Art (the need for interpretation and decision still exists), there is one crucial difference and for those attempting to make sense of the process it is its greatest asset, and that is that it can be broken down into absolutes. What you then do with those absolutes is what creates the Art but there’s no need to wonder about what colour paint the artist used or what kind of paper, there need no longer be the mystery which causes people to obsess over technique.

This is just an opinion, and admittedly I do not have the experience that others have with computers and digital cameras but if the work of Titian, Michelangelo, or Ansel Adams can be analysed for its technique I’m sure our own work can. I hope this makes sense and isn’t invasive in any way, I really would enjoy hearing how people approach their work, even if the changes they make are minute. This is after all not about showing technical acrobatics rather a clarity of judgement, knowing when to say enough.