Ronsh Loc: Floresville,Tx.

I like what you did!

fourlocks Loc: Londonderry, NH

"...what I felt" is a great way to describe the difference between how the camera processed the incoming light versus how your mind processed the incoming light. Neither the camera's nor the mental image truly represents reality so why not use whatever tool necessary to create an emotionally pleasing image? Or at least try to recreate what your mind thought it saw? For me, it's the second picture that does both. That being said, I've always believed it best to capture the best possible image with the camera so as to minimize after-capture processing.

JCullman

Our minds do the post processing before the photo is taken. We simply use lightroom to catch up to our altered reality. Sometimes we can trick the camera into recording it the way we see or remember it.

Nice job of catching up.

jaymatt Loc: Alexandria, Indiana

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Capture the best possible data with the camera to allow post processing to maximize acheiving the desired image. That is true regardless of how much processing is required because processing amount is never important. Only getting the desired result counts.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

I looked at it again and cannot see how you come up with two light sources. The sunset was to the left and there is no indication of any source on the right.

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

You are correct. I repaired it.

Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho

Cliff, your processing really improved that shot. Take care & ...

mikedidi46 Loc: WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA

the bottom one jumps out at me

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

I was having trouble with the comment about two opposing light sources. Didn't see it. Thanks for the confirmation its one. Guess why they say photography is more than simply a record keeping media, but rather can be an form of art. Great creativity here and having a working knowledge of the tools necessary to creat your vision. Wonderful image.

Jimmy T Loc: Virginia

I second that "Wow!"

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Perfect example of turning an otherwise snapshot into a piece of art with emotional impact. Love it.

digitalexplr Loc: Central Missouri

The difference between a point-and-shoot picture taker and a photographic artist is the ability to produce an image that captures the scene, and emotion thereof as the photographer saw it, before clicking the shutter.

No camera has the ability to "see" the way the human eye does. It is the ability of the photographer knowing how to use the camera settings to best record what they are seeing in the scene. It is indeed a rare image that cannot be made better with a little out-of-the camera tweaking.

Back in the negative/transparency days you may have had to shoot a whole roll of film to get the "keeper" you wanted. Now with digital you have the ability to load an image into your favorite "digital darkroom" andtake a passable image and make it great, or completely change the mood of the image.

jenny Loc: in hiding:)

* * * * *
Quite simply then, if the sunset was to the left then that's where the lightest part of the sky would be.
Also, you lightened the rocks.
You manipulated the picture into what you wished it could be, which is not camera work but processing
into something that couldn't be possible.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

SOOC does not have to be "on autopilot... solely by computer with no one at the controls."

There is a concept that professionals often use called "pre-processing." It involves mentally analyzing a scene, making careful light readings, then setting all of the camera's menu settings to process a JPEG as best as it can be processed with the tools available in the camera, and with white balance tools used with the camera white balance and exposure tools.

There may be an infinite range of control with raw image processing software, but there are quite a lot of controls in the camera, many with fine adjustments:

Exposure:

ISO
Shutter Speed
Aperture
Auto Bracket
Auto HDR on some models
Metering Modes and Metering Sensor Location Selection
Exposure Compensation

White Balance:

Custom White Balance (using a reference target or filter)
Kelvin Temperature setting
Pre-sets (Daylight, Flash, Fluorescent, Cloudy, Shade, Incandescent...)

ICC Profile (sRGB or Adobe RGB (1998)

Picture Style or Photo Style (Standard, Vivid, Neutral or Natural, Landscape or Scenery, Portrait, Monochrome, Cinelike V, Cinelike D, Custom...)

Sharpness
Noise Reduction
Saturation
Contrast
Color Tone
Hue
Filter Effect (for B&W or monochrome only — simulates red, yellow, orange, green filters...)

Knowledgeable professionals and advanced amateurs know how to use these controls to match scene conditions fairly accurately. Some photojournalists have to rely on them, because they submit their work to agencies that do not allow the use of raw image capture (to ensure a LACK of image retouching or manipulation, i.e.; to ensure authenticity). Law enforcement officers documenting crime scenes generally work in JPEG mode for the same reasons. School portrait photographers and many other professional studio photographers use JPEG mode because their huge labs have nearly 100% JPEG workflows, and they are using precisely controlled studio lighting, exposure, and white balance.

The reality is that both raw and JPEG workflows are perfectly valid and perfectly acceptable — in different scenarios. There is a time and a place for each. Each may be inferior to the other (or impractical or infeasible) in certain circumstances. JPEG capture DOES NOT have to imply "surrender to the computer," as so many sheep have been led to believe by the YouTube pied pipers of raw.

All that said, given a scene such as the OP displayed, I'd certainly use raw capture. It makes manipulations like he displayed MUCH easier.