How far do you go

[marvpelkey]

Did a bit of macro, oil drops in water, stuff recently.

Did some processing, part of which was getting rid of "junk" - extremely small bubbles, dirt specks etc. As there were literally hundreds of small bubbles and specks, they gave the impression of muddiness to the casual viewer so I decided to remove the majority.

Started out at 100%, and for the most part, that was sufficient.

Some smaller bits required a further zoom in as they were adjacent to some stuff that was not being removed, and it required meticulous cloning. However, that started me down an endless rabbit hole as I then noticed smaller dots that I chased. And if I zoomed in farther, less noticeable became noticeable. I think I limited out at 300%.

Part of the problem was these blemishes were against a solid colour background.....and I'm a bit OCD.

So, I became curious, and wonder how meticulous others treat the removal of junk. Is 100% sufficient, or do some go beyond that on images that may be more important than the average personal stuff. And I realize if printed, some of the stuff I eliminated would not even show.

Marv

[Eric Brody]

We all suffer, at some point from the issue of how far to go, be it color correction, sharpening, spotting and on. I think you answered your own question.

The answer? Make a PRINT. Prints are the measure of all. I'd be rather surprised if you could see corrections made at 300% in any reasonable sized print. If you're not going to print it, stop right now.

The average person viewing your image on an iPhone screen will never see any of it. Remember what matters, content, composition, and light. The rest is ?

I've put up photos on Facebook from my old "inferior" iPhone, and from my hot shot Sony A7RIV with GM lenses and 1) no one EVER comments on the technical issues, eg sharpness, spotting and 2) no one EVER asks what kind of camera/lens was used. Even photographers, serious photographers judge by the three criteria I mentioned above.

Relax, have fun, worry less.