Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
What SOOC proponents don't seem to understand
Page <<first <prev 6 of 14 next> last>>
Apr 22, 2017 11:02:07   #
Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
 
kymarto wrote:
I am totally puzzled by the many people here who are proud of never doing any post processing of their images. They hold up "straight out of camera" as a badge of honor, as though this somehow indicates their excellence as photographers.

I see it quite differently. For me, excellent photographers, or at least good photographic technicians, are those who can turn out an image that most clearly achieves the vision of the person who made it, and which uses the technology available to maximize its presentation.

SOOC is like a stock car. if you keep your stock car tuned and serviced, you can certainly win a race against a similar car that has been neglected and is not firing on all cylinders, but you will never stand a chance against a similar car in which engine, transmission, drive train, suspension, wheels and tires have been modified or replaced with the most technologically advanced custom components, carefully considered and installed.

Today at work we had a little informal basketball game, and I took some pix. It's a pretty high contrast situation, and I was careful to find the best possible exposure. I shot in raw, of course, because I knew that I wanted the maximum potential to play with afterward.

Image #1 is a jpg created automatically from the raw (by Adobe Camera Raw). It's pretty similar to what I would get with a neutral setting in the camera (Nikon D800E). That's about the best you could hope for SOOC.

Image #2 is my personal choice of how I wanted the image to look. I wanted more saturation in the sky and some detail in the darker parts of the image. You may think it overcooked, and maybe you personally would have kept a bit more of the contrast between dark and light. Well, of course it would have been easy to back off a little. That's the beauty of post: YOU get to choose how you want the image to look--you are not at the mercy of the camera's algorithms.

Image #3 is pushed even further than #2. I include it to show just how much latitude one has working with a raw. In fact I could have pushed it even further, but this situation is not particularly high contrast and so it is not needed--but a couple more stops of dynamic range are waiting in the wings to be called upon if necessary.

I'm not saying here that one should not try to achieve the best exposure possible when taking the image--the better the exposure, the more latitude one has later for correction and fine tuning, but within a stop (or even two) either way, a very presentable image can be made, even in a fairly high contrast situation like this one.

Any by the way, such corrections take at most a couple of minutes. Open the image in an editor, make adjustments to three or four parameters, and save. Typically takes me about 30 seconds.

Discussion?
I am totally puzzled by the many people here who a... (show quote)


I have no quarrel with the SOOC crowd but I could do without their attitude. Ansel Adams with not an SOOC guy and spend hours in the darkroom perfecting his prints.

I belong to a "Portfolio Critique and Review" group and a couple members are SOOC types. It is almost impossible to give then constructive feedback on their images because their almost automatic knee-jerk response to any feed back is some variation of the SOOC argument. Although their images are often quite good, I feel that they are limiting themselves in terms of making their images better.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 11:17:19   #
Meemz
 
I think that if you start w/a great picture sooc its fine. And then Lightroom and photoshop and here's where folks really get bent it's just a matter of taste and how much fun you want to have... topaz labs ... one1. More filters and Jim piks add some text use some brushes. Maybe even Watercolor... coral paint. I just have fun !! But for those clients that want it sooc you gotta know how to get them ... so then is it digital art or what ... I paint with real oil paint and water color and I'm slowly using my Mac more ... no brushes to wash out ..and now I've discovered photographs an encostic wax ... so fun

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 11:19:11   #
John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN
 
#3 is clearly superior. By mentioning Adobe Camera Raw, which is a Photoshop Plug-In, you must have done your work in Photoshop. My Q: what PS tools did you use. Detail, if you please.

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 11:26:52   #
RRS Loc: Not sure
 
I couldn't agree more! Very well said and your example says it all.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 11:30:48   #
OneEasyRider Loc: Mount Airy, NC
 
You are "right-on" Toby. I totally agree!!!

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 11:36:36   #
Retired fat guy with a camera Loc: Colorado
 
For me, it kind of depends on the picture. Some need help, some don't. I am OCD as hell. So I love being able to straighten up shots. I wish more people felt the same way. All I ask is, that when you are doing any post production, use the the saturation wisely. I see so many over saturated pictures, it is just wrong.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 11:39:15   #
Hbuk66 Loc: Oswego, NY
 
I am an amateur, and the way I see it a photographer takes photographs. Any improvements after the fact is art, or photographic art whatever suits you. I actually feel a little guilty when I enhance my photos. But I sometimes think they look better(more guilt).

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 12:08:49   #
Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb
 
Try HDR to expand the light range of the picture.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:40:11   #
jct842
 
No amount of processing will fix a bad picture. Get a decent shot first.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:48:16   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
WessoJPEG wrote:
When you die, your children will trash all your great bug,bird,dog,frog ,duck etc. Photos.


Very true, but mostly I take photos for me, not posterity. If I decide I like an image but believe I can improve it in post, I do it for me, and only for me. Most of the time, the tweaks take only a couple of minutes, or even less, assuming the images were well exposed. I usually throw away any poorly exposed or poorly composed images. The difference between before and after PP can be striking, so for me its worth the effort. It's simply a personal choice.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:51:02   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
jct842 wrote:
No amount of processing will fix a bad picture. Get a decent shot first.


Well of course. You can't turn manure into gold. But how successful post processing will be partially depends on how one defines a bad picture.

Reply
 
 
Apr 22, 2017 12:53:23   #
Delderby Loc: Derby UK
 
There seems to be a lot of very silly talk on this subject. By both camps. For those who seek to impose their methodology on others, please do it by example - in other words, put up or shut up.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:54:13   #
CPR Loc: Nature Coast of Florida
 
Being basically a photojournalist from the get-go my focus is always to GET THE SHOT. Consequently it's often necessary to delve into post-processing and that to me is as much fun as the initial capture.
Skill, experience and raw all are needed to get the best shot possible but frequently circumstances are such that you can't set up the tripod, review the Histogram, add lighting and reflectors and wait for the perfect "sun" to all come together.
If folks are happy to settle for the shot they can get without PP then I'm happy for them.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 12:54:20   #
mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey
 
Hbuk66 wrote:
I am an amateur, and the way I see it a photographer takes photographs. Any improvements after the fact is art, or photographic art whatever suits you. I actually feel a little guilty when I enhance my photos. But I sometimes think they look better(more guilt).


Yep, you're definitely an amateur.

Reply
Apr 22, 2017 13:03:39   #
BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
 
jct842 wrote:
No amount of processing will fix a bad picture. Get a decent shot first.

Or, there is no such thing as a "bad" picture, only "bad" post processing.

I once took a photo of my son in a pool tournament. The place was packed shoulder to shoulder, no flash could be used, lighting was not good etc etc. I took a "bad" picture of my son down on a shot, but I liked the composition, about everything else was bad, really bad. I did a bunch of post on it and when finished, I liked it so much it is one of about 20 pictures hanging in my pool room. It can be truly surprising how many "bad" pictures can turn into something special with post processing. This particular picture after turning into a old looking sepia effect, editing out a bunch of people that should not be in the picture, it looked like something out of the Hustler movie, except with my son shooting the shot. With out post, this was a throwaway, with post, a place of honor on my wall...

Reply
Page <<first <prev 6 of 14 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.