Rongnongno Loc: FL

I received a PM that worries me.

For some reason folks are starting to doubt that 'getting it right in camera' is not all that important anymore.

THIS IS NOT TRUE. Getting it right in camera is more important than ever.

Post Processing is not a crutch to repair a bad or so-so capture.

Digital cameras have come a long way since their inception in the late 90s. While this is true they still have a long road ahead before becoming all that they can be (recruiting for the Marines now).

Getting it right in camera also means getting it right when saving the picture/data IN CAMERA. A sensor is capable or capturing trillions of colors and uses a dynamic range from 6 to 14. Knowing this the choice of format is as important as 'getting it right'. To save in JPG when you can save in raw you limit your camera output to a few millions instead of trillions and the dynamic range from 2 to 14. Add the compression artifact and you have basically emasculated your camera potential.

I am always puzzled and irritated when I see folks capable of taking great - and I mean great - pictures then destroy their potential because JPG is 'more convenient' and claim 'Hell raw is for sissies and wannabes'. These folks are the first to say 'Get it right' and do everything else wrong. This is plain stupid.

Going back to digital capture. .. Sensors regardless of how good they are have limitations that are easily corrected if you plan for it. This is what one calls 'Shooting for PP'. This is not about correcting the SOOC but correcting/improving the digital output. This is really different than fiddling with sharpness, composition, leveling that all must be done in camera, being part of getting it right.

Good PP is light, subtle and does not include adding or removing stuff that should not be there in the first place, retouching portraits is not included in this statement.

In conclusion:
- Get it right in camera
- Select the right format to maximize your camera capture
- Shoot for PP
- Enjoy your hobby.

This will be considered as rant from an incompetent idiot with no credentials by a few. I don't care.

Folks who do want to improve must take heed as there is no magic recipe for good photography other than planning, know what you are dealing with and take the necessary measures to deal with it.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

I think you meant to say ..... and I mean great - pictures then destroy their potential because jpg is 'more convenient'.....

I largely agree with what you say rongningnong.
Get it right in camera, shoot for PP, shoot to the conditions.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Go back to shooting color reversal film and I bet most will take the time and effort to get it right in camera, digital has made some people lazy.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Right, thank you. Caught your post in time to 'save the error'. So thanks again.

romanticf16 Loc: Commerce Twp, MI

I agree. This is the reason beginning photography is taught with adjustable film cameras. to learn the basics and the discipline of the craft. People who argue with this just don't know how much they don't know, so they think they know it all - IMHO.

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

Oh what a load of misinformative crap, digital has allowed people to learn so fast in comparison to film that it is ridiculous.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Not according to many Photography schools it's not a load of crap, you just don't know what you are talking about.

Kuzano

You worded that wrong. You meant to say, "Now, let me give you a load of mis-informative crap. Digital throws too much information at the new photographer, while learning on film focuses on the basics of exposure, lighting, and procedures of composition. Digital them introduces doing it all with the exceptional confusion of using a computerized capture device and computerized graphic arts mechanism.

So happy to help you correct your misinformation.

That could be why I am making so much money selling film camera's to those who have been overwhelmed by doing everything from A - Z with digital. Sold $2000 worth of used film equipment in the last two week. Bought it for pennies on the dollar because of people who listen to people like you. :mrgreen:

TheDman Loc: USA

I couldn't get pictures as right with color reversal film as I can get them today with digital.

TheDman Loc: USA

You can do all the same stuff with a digital camera. What difference does the capture method make?

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

I did just fine with color reversal film, always had beautiful colors especially with Fuji velvia 50. Which film were you using at that time?

lighthouse Loc: No Fixed Abode

I'm quite happy to go against the flow on this.

I have asked before and no one could answer me, so I will ask again.


"There is absolutely nothing that I know of, that goes with shooting film, that will make you a better photographer, that you cannot do with digital."
......
Can you tell me something that will improve your photography, that you can do with film, that you can't do with digital?

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

I get the sense that for many, post processing is as much, or more, of a hobby than making the exposure.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

NOBODY ever claimed that you could not improve your photography with digital like you can with film, nobody made that claim. The point is that shooting with film FORCES you to slow down and forces you to think, digital does NOT force you to do likewise, you have to force yourself to shoot slower and carefully with digital.