winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

If you shoot RAW and you can save a shot by making large adjustments in Post Processing then you are a good editor but a lousy photographer.

If you shoot Jpeg and you can't save a shot by making only small adjustments in Post Processing then you're just a lousy photographer.

Rob.

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Fergus Loc: Westfield,IN

What possessed you to make such a smug statement?

Oh, and by the way, you need to make a correction in your signature statement. I believe the word my should be me.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Smug, no, truthful, yes.

And thanks for pointing out my boo boo, it's now fixed. Cheers, Rob.

Rip Tragle Loc: Estes Park, CO

People got post processing all wrong.... it not a crutch to make a poor
picture into a good picture.... then all you have is a poor picture again.

TNmike Loc: NW TN

I shoot RAW and JPEG does that mean I'm twice as lousy? :) TNmike

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

I'm not sure Mike....Hang on, I'll just go and read my thread again......

cthahn

Good statement. Too many amateur photographers purchase a expensive camera, and still stay point and shooters. They have no clue abut the relationship between ISO, lens speed, shutter speed, and light. Each photograph should have a subject, good composition, and technical quality. If they do not understand the basics, they will never become photographers.

oldmalky Loc: West Midlands,England.

Those amateur photographers who have the point and shoot cameras join the hog ready to learn and one of the first things they see is topics like "need a new camera" or "what would you suggest"and they see that every day without fail, so, they buy a new camera without a clue how to use it and until they can pick up a few tips on what is needed settings wise they do indeed shoot as though they are Point & Shooters with their newly acquired toys. So next time a new member asks for help step in and share your knowledge.

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Rongnongno Loc: FL

lmao at thread. Hilarious really.

The OP was rebuked quite a few times in other threads for this very statement.

Pressing the shutter button is part of a process, not an end and when told that is many words by many competent folks (Other than I, he will tell you that I am an idiot) he comes out somewhere else to promote his "Good enough for me, good enough for you'.

Well folks, the best recognized photographers were using labs to bring out the last shade out of their negatives so why would it be different now? Because one individual says so?

The trouble lies when folks who have cameras [that have the capability to produce incredible pictures] are not using them to their fullest because of their philosophy.

Those who have point shoot cameras can do only what is offered, they have good reasons to want to know more so that they get the best out of a camera that is average.

"Get something better" or "purchase something" is never a good support or advice. What is, I am paraphrasing EstherP from another thread, "Learn your camera to get the last pixel out of it". Once that is done, if you can afford it, go to something else because you will have a need but not before and certainly not because of inane advice.

The OP, namely winterose, tries to discourage folks from learning what they should from cameras that are capable of more than mere JPGs. Post processing is BAD, or so he says.

Think for yourself and you will realize how wrong this statement is. What will never change that is not format related it is the photographer's vision. That is something you can more or less train yourself to learn but like leadership, a good photographer or artist is not 'made' but is a quality one is born with: A capability to think and to create. Pressing a button a quadrillion time ain't it, there I agree with winterose: Take a good picture in the first place.

Learning photography should be relatively structured:
Learn the basics (ISO/Aperture/Speed) and their interaction
Learn light (Quality, direction, influence)
Learn the 'Vision' (Hardest but very personal, cannot be taught, self experiment)
Learn the camera
Learn Post processing
THEN and only then, if you are still here and are not satisfied with what you produce, consider alternatives, better camera, lens, software and start again with the:
Learn the camera
Learn Post processing

File format? It lies under 'learn your camera' then Learn Post Processing.

Sooo learn you cameras, learn bout this OP maligned format: RAW and check out the advantages of it vs JPG (Greater dynamic range, greater color depth and no destructive compression).

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

"Mere JPG's" ??
JPG is the ONLY format that ALL cameras and ALL programs recognize! RAW is highly camera specific and keeps changing so how can ANYONE say that RAW is better?

Nightski

But...Rob....:shock:

Rongnongno Loc: FL

JPG = slide at worse polaroid
RAW = exposed film

Standard? JPG is a WEB standard made for convenience sake's. At the time a great novelty, now aged. PNG is a better replacement, same compatibility, different compression)

Standard?
Old days Films were either:
Black and white
Color
Both could produce (depending on films) slides or negative, not both.
ISO was a standard, now it is not despite all the claims.
Film manufacturer had different take on the chemical process resulting in different bath depending on the films
Film had different chemical structure making their printed appearance really different.
Print? Don't get me started on that.

RAW is not a standard? Compared to the previous era, man, it's a great progress: It stays the same for your camera and does not change over time (and use) of your camera.

Format difference?
Compression:
JPG: Destructive
PNG: Non destructive
RAW: Non destructive
TIFF: Non destructive
Color depth
JPG: 8 (Millions of color shades)
PNG: 8 (Millions of color shades)
RAW: Up to 14 at the moment (Trillions of color shades)
TIFF: Up to 32 (I cannot even think of the possibilities there) Draw back: cameras produce only 8 bit.
Dynamic range (eye dynamic ranges depend form person to person. Human eye is more sensitive to the green that anything else It's range varies from 12 to 16 according to latest research)
JPG: 2
PNG: I do not know, never looked it up, 2 I assume
RAW: 4 to 6, count seems to still be moving higher (8 in research labs at the moment)
TIFF: I do not know, depends of it's use I would guess.
Standard:
JPG: Yes
DNG: Yes
RAW: No
TIFF: Yes
Ease of use:
JPG: Yes
PNG: Yes
RAW: No
TIFF: No
WEB Sharing:
JPG: Yes
PNG: Yes
RAW: No
TIFF: yes, 8 bit only

Notice any pattern here?
If you want the best, you need to learn. Is this not what UHH is about? Learning?
If you want average? Stick to the OP 'vision': "good enough for me good enough for you. use JPG and for god sake do not post process!!!".

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

Note I said SAVE a photo, meaning to rescue....Is it not to be desired that a photographer gets it pretty well right at the time of exposure then carries out minimal fine tuning in post rather than being sloppy or lazy and relying on PP to produce something mediocre?

Nightski

I agree. It makes you feel a little better for a short time to fix it. But ultimately, you know you have to have another go at it.

And, it's good to try to fix it, because in fixing, you see all your mistakes.