papaluv4gd Loc: durham,ct

when I view some of the posts that are put up on the hog, many of them are very nice,some are outstanding, and some are just too over prossessed.

Now this is just my humble opinion.

Some of the posts are just too evenly lit,every shadow detail is available, trees and mountains are all just picture post card perfect. Now I have been around enough to know that scenic opportunities are rarely ,if ever perfectly illuminated. So...my thought is, am I the only one who is satisfied with capturing a given scene SOOC ?

I often shoot my scenics with both eyes open with the thought of capturing in camera exactly what is before me, or as close as I can get it given the broad spectrum of light falling on a given vista.

I'm afraid that there is so much PP of everything ,that what we all are exposed to now are all just personal renditions of what is or was actually there. Some post are so perfectly PP'd, that they take on the apperance of a lithograph rather than a photograph.

Example: taking a picture of the sun will always render the rest of the scene whofully under exposed, yet I see shots with the sun as evenly lit as the surrounding landscape. Yes, there are times when it is possible to shoot a sun scene and have some forground or backround lit. But not evenly. I have tried. something has to give.

I feel like a lone wolf trying to capture what I see as it is, while many are manipulating their shots to render them more perfect or "pleasing" to the eye.

With so much pp going on, it's very hard to know what is real anymore.

Just my observations and ramblings.

IsoBob Loc: Hamilton, NJ

Rongnongno Loc: FL

What ever other do or do not do, right or wrong is none of your concern.

Your opinion is yours and yours alone. Sorry but there have been countless discussion as to what SOOC means. You are happy with it? So be it.

Just do not criticize what you do not appreciate for whatever reason. If you do, you will always be wrong.

Bill_de Loc: US

Your observations are pretty accurate. So, since you are comfortable that you can pick out SOOC images from post processed images you can decide for yourself what path to take.

When it comes to SOOC images, some are great, some stink, and most fall somewhere in between.
When it comes to processed images, some are great, some stink, and most fall somewhere in between.

Such is life, so enjoy what you do.

--

papaluv4gd Loc: durham,ct

Not realy a critcism,just an observation. never said I thought any of it was wrong. just thinking that our world is manipulated visually, so that we really don't know for sure what is real and what is either PP'd , or even computer generated imaging.
Do whatever the heck you want. Doesn't really bother me, I got my own thing going. Again, just an observation.

papaluv4gd Loc: durham,ct

Photography is an art form like any other. Art is individualistic, therefore,there is no right or wrong.
There are just observers choosing what apeals to us to enjoy. Things we don't enjoy,we just move beyond them. Doesn't make them wrong.

papaluv4gd Loc: durham,ct

Bill D. I don't realy try to pick out sooc shots from pp shots. some posts are just more obvious than others. Didn't say that i didn't pp posts, just that some are so overdone as to be more surrealistic than others.

papaluv4gd Loc: durham,ct

should have read, Didn't say that I didn't like pp posts.

wdross Loc: Castle Rock, Colorado

Anyone's observations are valid if they acturate expressed. And if someone does or does not care about ramblings, they are still yours to speak. But I understand your "ramblings".

My teacher a long time ago pointed out that film did its best a capturing colors correctly. But the film dyes were never truly perfect in the capturing the original scene. Even in the digital age, the sensors will capture a scene as acturately as possible and probably more acturately than the film days. But there will be differences in number of color pixels and the algorithms to balance out their inequalities. There is the first "flaw" of photography perfection. It will not be big or noticeable, but it will always exist.

Exposure becomes a next "flaw". We see things differently at night than the camera sees. We have a chemical that forms in our eyes called "vision purple" and tints what we see at night slightly magenta. But the camera has no "vision purple" unless we add it. And in very dark, our vision is more monochromatic B&W, not color, due to the eye's cone inabilities to collect enough photons to operate properly. The camera will still color in the very dark, more so than the human eye.

And then there is the "flaw" of our own brains and their perceptions! Food, outdoor, and commercial photographers kept telling Kodak and Fuji that they wanted even more neutral color in their films. So Kodak kept trying to make their films even more neutral if even possible. But Fuji was puzzled by this. How could these photographers see that much difference in the colors from the original scene? So they ran a test. They shot scenes and kept the colors "neutral" but changed the saturation both up and down. Well almost all tended to like just one type of shot - the very saturated shot because it had more "pop" to it. Hence, Fuji went on to produce Velvia and started killing Kodak in the film market.

The above is only a start of the many "flaws" that we, as photographers, must overcome to show the world what we see as our vision of it. And we haven't even looked at the many more "flaws" the we produce or deal with in the post processing. I, like you, try to capture the scene relatively "as is" since I have very little PP software and it is only the "best" that is free. But if I think my photo will be better by some enhancement, I will try to make match my "vision" of the scene as best I can. Yes, I have seen some shots that were overprocessed in some way. But that may have actually been what they envisioned when they shot it in the first place. And if anyone wants to see manipulation of a "so-so" picture to a masters view, go to the section on this site that shows what Ansel Adams did to get "Moonrise over Hernandez". That is some serious manipulation.

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

I guess it depends if you take photo's to hang in a museum or take photo's just to show other people. Myself...I don't post process, I shoot a scene as it is in front of me. There's no such thing as photography perfection. Most Nikon and Canon cameras are known to get the color of a scene correct, better than most other brands. Fujifilm cameras are known to get skin tones almost perfect.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

"Some post are so perfectly PP'd,..."

Yeah, I know what you mean. Too much perfection in the world!

DAN Phillips Loc: Graysville, GA

Always, always go for reality. If you are pleasing a client, do so; but reality is always best. I cannot trust most of the pictures shown here because of so much "cooking". If you say it is hand held @ 600mmm, it should be handheld @ 600mm; sooc. NO POST PROCESSING, NONE! I encourage you to look at old B/W movies. Look at what they did and consider the equipment they had to use.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

If artists followed your advice, they would surely starve.

DAN Phillips Loc: Graysville, GA

Most of them probably need to!

tcthome Loc: NJ

Digital & PP has change photography. Gives one the chance to make things more artsy & so on. Also add remove subjects, change skys etc. For some , that's half the fun. You want to see a good SOOC landscape pic, ask someone with a D850 to take a couple pics on full auto with a correct meter setting.

Have fun.