vininnj2u Loc: Whiting, New Jersey, USA

Hi Everyone. I just recently took a bunch of photos (19) and posted them to my Camera Club FB page. I didn't use any Post Processing and uploaded them right out of the camera. (reduced to JPG as I shoot RAW). It didn't seem to go over well with one of the members because I didn't Post Process before uploading. I thought they were acceptable or else I wouldn't have posted them.

It is just like when we have a guest JUDGE in for our photo contests and the judge says "could have used a little more a little Photoshop Work" and knocks the photo down. Are we photographers OR "PhotoShoppers" That is the question????????

jmizera Loc: Austin Texas

I use Lightroom on a pretty large percentage of my shots, but not all. Doing post work in digital is equivalent to what used to be known as photo finishing in the analog world. If you are happy the out of camera shot, then the work is done. Nothing at all wrong with that. It's the result that counts.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

I think we can be both in moderation without betraying the precepts of photography. Kudos to you for having the honest courage to post a large batch of SOOC images. Judges often establish their 'credentials' by knocking the perfectly acceptable efforts of others - they do so because they can, not because the work is flawed.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The answer is YES (both). If you ever used black-and-white film and did your own darkroom work, that was essentially the same thing. You had to make a print, but you had many choices about how to make that print. You could pull it, push it, dodge it, burn it, vignette it, add soft focus filters over the enlarger lens... That was "post processing".

Of course, you could (and still can) always do a lot of PRE-processing, by using light modifiers, putting filters over the lens, using the Zone System for metering to capture just the right tones, rating the film at a different ASA/ISO, and choosing the right developer for the contrast range or need for speed.

You could also take the film to a lab and let them develop it and machine print it. You relied entirely on their printer's algorithm (or simple sensor) for judging exposure. That's MUCH worse than working in JPEG mode.

At least in JPEG mode, you can set the camera menus to achieve literally millions of different results. (Besides ISO, shutter, and aperture, you have many variations each, of white balance, hue, contrast, saturation, sharpness, color tone, picture style or film simulation, custom downloadable response curves (some models), highlight compensation, and dynamic range compensation to retain shadow detail.

Of course, in raw mode, you have much greater/finer control over those same things, and a lot more. And once you are in post-processing software, you have oodles of tools to play with! There are far more controls, and far more PRECISE controls, in Photoshop and Lightroom than we ever had in the film era.

So yes, we are photographers with choices! Not to decide is to decide. The judge was probably saying it would not have taken much more effort to do something better.

JimBart Loc: Western Michigan

To each his own.....Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
To me post processing is like being a kid in school always erasing his answer .... keeps doing it until he can get it right the first time (SOOC)

JimBart Loc: Western Michigan

To each his own.....Beauty is in the eye of the beholder
To me post processing is like being a kid in school always erasing his answer .... keeps doing it until he can get it right the first time (SOOC)

Mike D. Loc: Crowley County, CO.

Make yourself happy first and foremost. PP is an option not a prerequisite.

You will find some of those types here too but at the end of the day it is your art. What you do with it (or not) is completely up to you.

JPL

The more I take pics and work with them I tend to think that usually the most important things in photography are in this order:
1. Composition
2. Post processing
3. Camera settings.
4. Camera and lens.

Of course there are some corners of this hobby where this order is different, like in BIF and sports photography where reverse order of those points is more correct.

Kuzano

"Judge"--- The word speaks for itself. One "judges" your work to justify one's own, often arrogant, existence. Internal politics in camera clubs and the "judging" you speak of are the reasons to avoid Camera Clubs for some of us.

Post Processing can sometimes be replaced by Pre Processing. Full awareness of your camera settings and the pre processing you can do with your "image processor", before the image goes to the memory chip is one form of SOOC. If you are using such settings and filling your custom profile areas with your own modes of storing the JPEG image on the memory card can give you latitude for similar results. Furthermore, it will forego the inevitable capital outlay for acquisition of the "next better rendition" of your camera.

There was a post a week ago where the OP attacked what he called the "software brigade".

What a Maroon. He doesn't even know what many of us mean when we says SOOC. Not at all aware of the pre processing we can do with the settings programmed into the camera that we can use to minimize or altogether alleviate Post Processing.

No, we do not HAVE TO BE graphic illustrators or artists. We can process the image somewhat before it hits the memory card, provided we are committed enough to our choice of gear to learn all the features of our camera's and pre process before clicking the shutter, in the field or with custom profiles.

My Olympus's and My Fuji X's have 4 and 7 custom profiles, and that's how I get processed images when I say SOOC.

My images are tweaked, but not often in front of my computer. And I avoid the people at Camera Clubs with great disdain if they grouse about my images. They have no right to do so. I entered what I thought was appropriate.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

I don't care if a posted image is SOOC or been PP'd. If it merits getting a wow, it does.
Sometimes PP can make a good image better. But to be chastised for not doing it???
If you like the image, that's what counts. It's your image.

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

You shoot RAW ... .., SO .., yes .., even JPEG .. PP ..., as technology advances with the post processing programs which allow you to get the Most out of your photo .., then PP ... I used to post straight out of the camera ..., and get my doors blown off by others who had a lesser shot .., but used PP ... that doesn't happen anymore .. You can't bring a car to the car show unpainted and compete with those that put a $10,000 paint job on their car ...(the exception PATINA)
Well you can't expect to post non PP photography with the 99% who do ..........

If they had a forum site that was for NON PP shots only ... that would be different ...

Yes .. you are the photographer ..., it's still your shot ... a unique one of a kind shot that you took ... at this point.. It would be like so many photographers that refused to go to color when color film came out .... finally they moved on to color ... as they needed to keep up and compete or at least join the mainstream of the rest of the world ...I still love a black and white and believe they have their place in the photo world and always will ...

We are all photographers ..., who should be fotoshoppers ..., PP should bring out the best look in your shot .., and help correct some camera settings that were not so correct .. as you know .., the RAW contains all the elements of your shot ...PP allows you to explore RAW data of that shot ... and bring it up to its full potential ..

That is the the key .."FULL POTENTIAL" ..., PP brings your shot up to Full Potential ... and that's what digital photography is all about ... ever increasing sensor size and pixels .., better lenses ... using ALL the tools at your disposal .. be it the # of pixels ..sensor size .. lens quality .. etc.. use it if it's available and you can afford it ..

Heck .. even in the dark room you could play with your black and white shot to achieve a desired look ... well .., that was PP at its infancy .... we have grown leaps and bounds since then ... so get on the train and enjoy the ride .. you are stil the photographer who is in charge and using PP to achieve the look you are after .. and it is still your shot ....

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

One of the most intelligent people on the HOG ..., I always like your answers ....

Toby

The way I see it there are basically 3 reasons photos are taken. First, is when you want to capture something that is legally accurate and not altered. A crime scene for example or a photographic record of something. Second, might be when you want to tell a story or capture what I’ll can "soft" proof of something and it doesn’t need to be exactly the same as the original. For example, your family standing in front of the sign at the Grand Canyon. The third, which is where most of us are at, is to create something pleasing to the eye that evokes a memory or an emotion.
The first cannot/should not be altered other than perhaps cropped. The others are various degrees of art and open for PP. If you are too proud to try PP, I feel sorry for you. There is a great big world out there. Take your SOOC handcuffs off.

Lightcatcher333 Loc: Alabama, USA

RAW is not a file format (though some manufacturers do use .RAW as their file extension). RAW is a collection of file formats. Nikon uses .NEF, Canon uses .CR2, etc. Each one is proprietary and each one has a separate software package you can use to import your images. This software package is also proprietary. The vast majority of us however use third party software, such as Lightroom, to import our images. These third party solutions do not import camera settings like sharpness, contrast, etc that you set in the camera's menu. This is a fundamental misunderstanding about RAW files I see quite frequently.

To give an analogy, If you shoot film, there are two parts on the path to a finished image. The negative which is what the camera captured but still needs to be processed into an image and the print which is the final result of processing the negative.

A RAW file was never intended to be a final image file. The RAW file is your negative that needs to be processed into an image. Remember, the data you are transferring to the camera is just the raw data captured by the sensor (that's why they are called RAW) it does not contain your camera adjustments like sharpness or your modes like Portrait, Landscape, etc.

If you want to demonstrate this to yourself, take a few photos in RAW using some in-camera settings like sharpness, contrast, etc. Now watch carefully as you import them into Lightroom. At first, the image will look like you imagine, sharp, contrasty and vibrant. But then suddenly after a second or even less, the image changes and is less sharp, less contrasty and less vibrant. The reason is, Lightroom (and other packages) load a JPEG preview first and then load the RAW file. The JPEG preview does contain your camera settings. The RAW file does not. Once the RAW file is loaded, the preview changes to the RAW image. It doesn't contain your camera settings so it's probably not as impressive looking as that initial preview was.

Long story short, RAW files need to be processed and indeed were designed to be processed.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

If the judge didn't follow up with a why, then I'd certainly dismiss his/her opinion as worthless.

But if there was a why, is it something you could have dealt with when taking the shot, such as exposure? Are your images strong in the areas of composition, mood, creativity, understanding of light? Do they look like you gave careful thought to the subject or scene?

A super article:

http://photographylife.com/whats-important-in-a-photograph-and-what-isnt

sooc vs pp isn't the the only discussion - nor the most important IMO - when it comes to impact, originality and memorable images.