Check out Video for DSLR and Point and Shoot Cameras section of our forum.
Get it right vs fix it in post...
Apr 23, 2021 20:14:44 #
Longshadow wrote:
Why do SOOC proponents own editors?
Pointless, isn't it?
They strive to get the image they want SOOC, why do they need an editor?
Pointless, isn't it?
They strive to get the image they want SOOC, why do they need an editor?
I try my best to get it SOOC. Sometimes it’s great other times not. Usually add a little bit of enhancement to suit my tastes. Not too much needed after SOOC. Don’t like to spend a lot of time dwelling on recreating an image in PP. And if still not to my taste “delete.”
Apr 23, 2021 20:40:02 #
photoman022
Loc: Manchester CT USA
I like getting it right in camera meaning composition and exposure are correct and I get all the details I want. I also know the limitations of my equipment and I consistently, intentionally underexpose in order to preserve the details in the highlights. I will exposure blend (HDR) in order to produce a photograph that reasonably represents what I saw and wanted to capture. My goal is always to capture the image I see.
Apr 23, 2021 20:48:16 #
I just do what ever it takes to get the image I, or my "client" wants.
Check out The Dynamics of Photographic Lighting section of our forum.
Apr 23, 2021 20:49:31 #
if you are shooting RAW then the take SOOC is not worth viewing. If you are shooting JPG then you are post processing with the little computer in the camera choosing your enhancement values. SOOC is a myth in digital, and I have adjusted timing and color levels on enough color film printers to know that there is a wide range of possible results with film, too. So either you choose or a machine chooses.
Apr 23, 2021 21:20:32 #
User ID wrote:
But thaz hardly worth posting. Reading his essay, he pretty much says that his stuff is that way. And it’s implied in his posted material that he is nevertheless one happy camper.
That’s all well and good if he’s happy with mediocrity. But there’s no need to cast aspersions about those that are willing to put the time and effort to improve their work.
Apr 23, 2021 21:22:45 #
Josephakraig wrote:
Post is where the magic happens. People that talk... (show quote)
I’ll agree on most, but not cropping. The image dictates the crop, not some artificial construct based on standard print sizes.
Apr 23, 2021 22:06:59 #
The OP is trying to be provocative by resurrecting an ancient non-issue that for some unfathomable reason is considered controversial.
There's nothing controversial.....
> If you don't want to post-process, you try to get the best JPEG you can (SOOC).
> If you shoot RAW, post-processing is part of your shooting plan. You expose for max flexibility in the PP phase. You also might be less concerned about some "imperfections" in the captured image if you know you can "fix" them in post.
What is the controversy, the "can of worms" the OP claims to have opened?
I just don't understand.....😕
There's nothing controversial.....
> If you don't want to post-process, you try to get the best JPEG you can (SOOC).
> If you shoot RAW, post-processing is part of your shooting plan. You expose for max flexibility in the PP phase. You also might be less concerned about some "imperfections" in the captured image if you know you can "fix" them in post.
What is the controversy, the "can of worms" the OP claims to have opened?
I just don't understand.....😕
Check out Bridge Camera Show Case section of our forum.
Apr 23, 2021 22:10:05 #
ronpier wrote:
I try my best to get it SOOC. Sometimes it’s great other times not. Usually add a little bit of enhancement to suit my tastes. Not too much needed after SOOC. Don’t like to spend a lot of time dwelling on recreating an image in PP. And if still not to my taste “delete.”
I don't spend a ton of time in editors either.
I only edit images I'm going to use, as I need them.
Interesting that all my images come straight out of the camera.
If they didn't, I could not use them.
They don't go anyplace else first.
I like to also, but if it doesn't work out, so what. Not a big deal to me.
Not something I worry about when shooting.
Apr 23, 2021 22:55:49 #
aggeorge wrote:
Paul,
I just want to say that your responses to posts are always respectful and framed with the goal of increasing knowledge. Every time I read one of your responses I am just a little bit (sometimes a bunch) better amature
photographer than I was before. Thank you!!!
Alan
I just want to say that your responses to posts are always respectful and framed with the goal of increasing knowledge. Every time I read one of your responses I am just a little bit (sometimes a bunch) better amature
photographer than I was before. Thank you!!!
Alan
Thank you Alan! Glad to help.
Apr 24, 2021 01:05:03 #
SuperflyTNT wrote:
I’ll agree on most, but not cropping. The image dictates the crop, not some artificial construct based on standard print sizes.
Hmmm, you got me thinking... Makes sense as sometimes a small print is displayed in a large frame.
Apr 24, 2021 01:36:33 #
srt101fan wrote:
The OP is trying to be provocative by resurrecting... (show quote)
True, you just don’t :-(
You’re a tough audience. You simply refuse to be entertained. But don’t give up. Take a break, and check back in, somewhere around page 19. Should be on a roll by then !!!
Check out Panorama section of our forum.
Apr 24, 2021 01:50:45 #
I take a lot of shots at family gatherings. I've trained my extended family to ignore my camera (not a cell phone). That way I get people as they are and I've been told that I'm documenting the family. It takes me about 1.5 minutes per image to do post processing in most cases. I do composition on the fly and I trash a lot of images that the family never sees. I share the ones I've processed with my extended family with Google Drive. They can keep the ones that they want and discard the rest.
Apr 24, 2021 02:10:11 #
Jeffers wrote:
I take a lot of shots at family gatherings. I've trained my extended family to ignore my camera (not a cell phone). That way I get people as they are and I've been told that I'm documenting the family. It takes me about 1.5 minutes per image to do post processing in most cases. I do composition on the fly and I trash a lot of images that the family never sees. I share the ones I've processed with my extended family with Google Drive. They can keep the ones that they want and discard the rest.
Please tell me you’re in at least a few photos. But seriously, that sounds perfectly right for what you’re doing. And that extra touch must make a noticeable improvement whether jpg or raw.
Apr 24, 2021 03:12:40 #
Craigdca wrote:
Please tell me you’re in at least a few photos. But seriously, that sounds perfectly right for what you’re doing. And that extra touch must make a noticeable improvement whether jpg or raw.
Oh, he’s “in” the photos, even if his face is never seen.
One CAN insert one’s face into the family record by handing off the camera. Thaz my sister there, strangling “our” dog .....
.
Apr 24, 2021 06:07:04 #
Jeffcs
Loc: Myrtle Beach South Carolina
Longshadow wrote:
So do you delete the ones that require "fixing" or don't you obtain any.
When I think of “fix” I think the capture could have been better
There isn’t an image that doesn’t need PP
For me I’d rather enhance my images than “fix” them
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Check out Astronomical Photography Forum section of our forum.