bdk wrote:
Wasn't it only recently that you discovered RAW and stopped extolling the virtues of JPG, telling us that your images were SOOC .and they were !! because they were JPG.
IM glad you found the error of your ways and have come around to the RAW club.
RAW images should almost always be edited. I agree 100% BUT once in a while I do manage to capture an image and then say,
hey PERFECT . I wish it happened more often . That is why I am here to keep learning and keep getting better at my craft.
Wasn't it only recently that you discovered RAW an... (
show quote)
You have been asleep for years kiddo.
Surprise!!!Trump has been elected and Obama completed his first mandate and has been president for 7 more years!!!
For info thought, it does not matter what you use as format all need to edited but never-mind that, hey???
I have yet to encounter SOOC bullying. People who prefer to not shoot RAW output, or people who don't have RAW output option... sure. There are many who fall into those categories. But SOOC bullies? Does such a group actually exist?
oops
(Edit: Not generated by the post above...)
Not as a reply but because I tried to correct a previous post and instead hit reply. So... 'Ooops'.
billnikon
Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont
Rongnongno wrote:
The more I read about folks claiming that they produce perfect 'photographs' using their camera and this w/o doing anything to what comes out of their camera the more irritated I become. They like to call this SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera) and try to batter everyone and their families/friends with it as if SOOC was a club. The Neanderthal age is gone, folks.
SOOC fraudsters basically tell folks: "I am so good I do not need anything else and you, well, you suck, get on the SOOC bandwagon to be great." In reality SOOC 'stuff' can be anything from digital vomit to an exploitable capture that can be used to create a photograph.
SOOC 'users' are associated with folks who are misinformed or who deliberately refuse to understand that the creation of a photograph is not just 'pushing a button' at the 'right time'. This is bad because being capable to create a great SOOC capture is important.
To me and many others - while they use a different terminology - SOOC is only a capture, a baby that needs nurturing, coaxing, cajoling in order to create the final product... A photograph. SOOC 'stuff' is the result of planning, waiting and creating the right conditions so SOOC is just the end of a stage among many.
Anyone serious about photography knows his/her equipment first in order to extract the best out of it. They also plan for their event 'capture', selecting camera/lens combinations as well as lighting condition, natural or not*.
SOOC 'terminators' simply refuse to use the best format their camera offers, namely the raw format. Their idea of raw is that it is made for BGWAC (Bad Guys With A Camera - who do not know what they are doing and need a crutch). This claim is used in order to try to bully other folks who are not all that well informed to fall into the SOOC 'ranks'. It intimidates and influences beginners to forget post processing and prevent them to unleash their potential (in addition to the camera's). SOOC 'aficionados' stink.
While great captures are made in SOOC - and that is the goal we should all thrive for - they are always incomplete. Captures benefit from post processing and this is where I think the problem really lies...
In the 'silver era' post processing was not easy and really hazardous to your health. Many photographers relied on lab technicians to pull the last detail out of their negative (SOOC) if they were not able to do it themselves (I relied on lab tech). Now the lab sits on a desk, it is as clean as you are, meaning if there is a mess it is on your desk, not in the chemical used...
Digital processing made many folks rethink their post processing habits and correct their lack of skill there. SOOC bandits are immune to this last part for whatever reason and they claim that post processing is a fraud when in reality they are the fraud. Not many great photographers have claimed not to do lab work (or having it done) before. Masters were recognized as both photographers and post processing experts. Now SOOC 'pretenders' are saying: "We are better that the old masters. We do SOOC" as if they were doing Dallas (an old porn film).
Basically SOOC bullies are exposing their lack of curiosity if not skill. Their aggressiveness is really their fear at being uncovered as stunted weak photographers unable to progress beyond their self made boundaries.
SOOC 'photographers' are a fraud.
Do remember that this thread is a barrage of criticism and sarcasm against those who claim that a SOOC capture is an end instead of a critical part of a complex workflow. We must all thrive toward great SOOC captures in order to create what I want to call a photograph. In no case should we try to stop improving.
-----
* This is why I get irritated by threads where someone asks what to take in vacation and list a slew of lenses and camera - "You own all that and do not know what to use when???"
The more I read about folks claiming that they pro... (
show quote)
I see, SOOC must stand for So Often Offended Cad.
Soapbox or guy beating a dead horse...both are very deserving of this post. Why does it irk you so much? Just go out and shoot and edit (or don't edit) your own images. Worry less what others are doing and shoot more.
rmalarz wrote:
Well, Rong..... Here's an SOOC from me, just to illustrate your point. Processing is needed.
--Bob
Subject is good. Composition needs a bit of work. Might want to tweak the white balance a bit also. All in all, not bad for SOOC. I've certainly seen worse!
Reading your positive, insightful and educational postings remains the highlight of my reading UHH.
SOOC is a Myth. If you shoot JPEG, then the camera processes the image either to the algorithms built into the computer of the camera by the manufacturer or by any adjustments YOU made to the camera's settings. If you shoot RAW what you view on the camera's LCD is the JPEG settings. Also in LR in the Library module is the JPEG settings when you use LR develop module It is what contained in the RAW file data
Rongnongno wrote:
The more I read about folks claiming that they produce perfect 'photographs' using their camera and this w/o doing anything to what comes out of their camera the more irritated I become. They like to call this SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera) and try to batter everyone and their families/friends with it as if SOOC was a club. The Neanderthal age is gone, folks.
SOOC fraudsters basically tell folks: "I am so good I do not need anything else and you, well, you suck, get on the SOOC bandwagon to be great." In reality SOOC 'stuff' can be anything from digital vomit to an exploitable capture that can be used to create a photograph.
SOOC 'users' are associated with folks who are misinformed or who deliberately refuse to understand that the creation of a photograph is not just 'pushing a button' at the 'right time'. This is bad because being capable to create a great SOOC capture is important.
To me and many others - while they use a different terminology - SOOC is only a capture, a baby that needs nurturing, coaxing, cajoling in order to create the final product... A photograph. SOOC 'stuff' is the result of planning, waiting and creating the right conditions so SOOC is just the end of a stage among many.
Anyone serious about photography knows his/her equipment first in order to extract the best out of it. They also plan for their event 'capture', selecting camera/lens combinations as well as lighting condition, natural or not*.
SOOC 'terminators' simply refuse to use the best format their camera offers, namely the raw format. Their idea of raw is that it is made for BGWAC (Bad Guys With A Camera - who do not know what they are doing and need a crutch). This claim is used in order to try to bully other folks who are not all that well informed to fall into the SOOC 'ranks'. It intimidates and influences beginners to forget post processing and prevent them to unleash their potential (in addition to the camera's). SOOC 'aficionados' stink.
While great captures are made in SOOC - and that is the goal we should all thrive for - they are always incomplete. Captures benefit from post processing and this is where I think the problem really lies...
In the 'silver era' post processing was not easy and really hazardous to your health. Many photographers relied on lab technicians to pull the last detail out of their negative (SOOC) if they were not able to do it themselves (I relied on lab tech). Now the lab sits on a desk, it is as clean as you are, meaning if there is a mess it is on your desk, not in the chemical used...
Digital processing made many folks rethink their post processing habits and correct their lack of skill there. SOOC bandits are immune to this last part for whatever reason and they claim that post processing is a fraud when in reality they are the fraud. Not many great photographers have claimed not to do lab work (or having it done) before. Masters were recognized as both photographers and post processing experts. Now SOOC 'pretenders' are saying: "We are better that the old masters. We do SOOC" as if they were doing Dallas (an old porn film).
Basically SOOC bullies are exposing their lack of curiosity if not skill. Their aggressiveness is really their fear at being uncovered as stunted weak photographers unable to progress beyond their self made boundaries.
SOOC 'photographers' are a fraud.
Do remember that this thread is a barrage of criticism and sarcasm against those who claim that a SOOC capture is an end instead of a critical part of a complex workflow. We must all thrive toward great SOOC captures in order to create what I want to call a photograph. In no case should we try to stop improving.
-----
* This is why I get irritated by threads where someone asks what to take in vacation and list a slew of lenses and camera - "You own all that and do not know what to use when???"
The more I read about folks claiming that they pro... (
show quote)
Spot on!!!!!!!! Raw in film parlance is a negative. And just like the great Ansel, post processed the shit out of it.
Rongnongno wrote:
The more I read about folks claiming that they produce perfect 'photographs' using their camera and this w/o doing anything to what comes out of their camera the more irritated I become. They like to call this SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera) and try to batter everyone and their families/friends with it as if SOOC was a club. The Neanderthal age is gone, folks.
SOOC fraudsters basically tell folks: "I am so good I do not need anything else and you, well, you suck, get on the SOOC bandwagon to be great." In reality SOOC 'stuff' can be anything from digital vomit to an exploitable capture that can be used to create a photograph.
SOOC 'users' are associated with folks who are misinformed or who deliberately refuse to understand that the creation of a photograph is not just 'pushing a button' at the 'right time'. This is bad because being capable to create a great SOOC capture is important.
To me and many others - while they use a different terminology - SOOC is only a capture, a baby that needs nurturing, coaxing, cajoling in order to create the final product... A photograph. SOOC 'stuff' is the result of planning, waiting and creating the right conditions so SOOC is just the end of a stage among many.
Anyone serious about photography knows his/her equipment first in order to extract the best out of it. They also plan for their event 'capture', selecting camera/lens combinations as well as lighting condition, natural or not*.
SOOC 'terminators' simply refuse to use the best format their camera offers, namely the raw format. Their idea of raw is that it is made for BGWAC (Bad Guys With A Camera - who do not know what they are doing and need a crutch). This claim is used in order to try to bully other folks who are not all that well informed to fall into the SOOC 'ranks'. It intimidates and influences beginners to forget post processing and prevent them to unleash their potential (in addition to the camera's). SOOC 'aficionados' stink.
While great captures are made in SOOC - and that is the goal we should all thrive for - they are always incomplete. Captures benefit from post processing and this is where I think the problem really lies...
In the 'silver era' post processing was not easy and really hazardous to your health. Many photographers relied on lab technicians to pull the last detail out of their negative (SOOC) if they were not able to do it themselves (I relied on lab tech). Now the lab sits on a desk, it is as clean as you are, meaning if there is a mess it is on your desk, not in the chemical used...
Digital processing made many folks rethink their post processing habits and correct their lack of skill there. SOOC bandits are immune to this last part for whatever reason and they claim that post processing is a fraud when in reality they are the fraud. Not many great photographers have claimed not to do lab work (or having it done) before. Masters were recognized as both photographers and post processing experts. Now SOOC 'pretenders' are saying: "We are better that the old masters. We do SOOC" as if they were doing Dallas (an old porn film).
Basically SOOC bullies are exposing their lack of curiosity if not skill. Their aggressiveness is really their fear at being uncovered as stunted weak photographers unable to progress beyond their self made boundaries.
SOOC 'photographers' are a fraud.
Do remember that this thread is a barrage of criticism and sarcasm against those who claim that a SOOC capture is an end instead of a critical part of a complex workflow. We must all thrive toward great SOOC captures in order to create what I want to call a photograph. In no case should we try to stop improving.
-----
* This is why I get irritated by threads where someone asks what to take in vacation and list a slew of lenses and camera - "You own all that and do not know what to use when???"
The more I read about folks claiming that they pro... (
show quote)
Hey Ronnie Congo, tell us how you really feel !
Cdouthitt wrote:
Soapbox or guy beating a dead horse...both are very deserving of this post. Why does it irk you so much? Just go out and shoot and edit (or don't edit) your own images. Worry less what others are doing and shoot more.
Exactly! Telling someone that what they are happy doing is wrong and calling them names is bullying.
Cdouthitt wrote:
Soapbox or guy beating a dead horse...both are very deserving of this post. Why does it irk you so much? Just go out and shoot and edit (or don't edit) your own images. Worry less what others are doing and shoot more.
Yep. The OP could have removed 95% of the text and 99% of his attitude and had a legitimate post. But, he chose to go to the dark side as usual.
Rongnongno wrote:
The more I read about folks claiming that they produce perfect 'photographs' using their camera and this w/o doing anything to what comes out of their camera the more irritated I become. They like to call this SOOC (Straight Out Of the Camera) and try to batter everyone and their families/friends with it as if SOOC was a club. The Neanderthal age is gone, folks.
SOOC fraudsters basically tell folks: "I am so good I do not need anything else and you, well, you suck, get on the SOOC bandwagon to be great." In reality SOOC 'stuff' can be anything from digital vomit to an exploitable capture that can be used to create a photograph.
SOOC 'users' are associated with folks who are misinformed or who deliberately refuse to understand that the creation of a photograph is not just 'pushing a button' at the 'right time'. This is bad because being capable to create a great SOOC capture is important.
To me and many others - while they use a different terminology - SOOC is only a capture, a baby that needs nurturing, coaxing, cajoling in order to create the final product... A photograph. SOOC 'stuff' is the result of planning, waiting and creating the right conditions so SOOC is just the end of a stage among many.
Anyone serious about photography knows his/her equipment first in order to extract the best out of it. They also plan for their event 'capture', selecting camera/lens combinations as well as lighting condition, natural or not*.
SOOC 'terminators' simply refuse to use the best format their camera offers, namely the raw format. Their idea of raw is that it is made for BGWAC (Bad Guys With A Camera - who do not know what they are doing and need a crutch). This claim is used in order to try to bully other folks who are not all that well informed to fall into the SOOC 'ranks'. It intimidates and influences beginners to forget post processing and prevent them to unleash their potential (in addition to the camera's). SOOC 'aficionados' stink.
While great captures are made in SOOC - and that is the goal we should all thrive for - they are always incomplete. Captures benefit from post processing and this is where I think the problem really lies...
In the 'silver era' post processing was not easy and really hazardous to your health. Many photographers relied on lab technicians to pull the last detail out of their negative (SOOC) if they were not able to do it themselves (I relied on lab tech). Now the lab sits on a desk, it is as clean as you are, meaning if there is a mess it is on your desk, not in the chemical used...
Digital processing made many folks rethink their post processing habits and correct their lack of skill there. SOOC bandits are immune to this last part for whatever reason and they claim that post processing is a fraud when in reality they are the fraud. Not many great photographers have claimed not to do lab work (or having it done) before. Masters were recognized as both photographers and post processing experts. Now SOOC 'pretenders' are saying: "We are better that the old masters. We do SOOC" as if they were doing Dallas (an old porn film).
Basically SOOC bullies are exposing their lack of curiosity if not skill. Their aggressiveness is really their fear at being uncovered as stunted weak photographers unable to progress beyond their self made boundaries.
SOOC 'photographers' are a fraud.
Do remember that this thread is a barrage of criticism and sarcasm against those who claim that a SOOC capture is an end instead of a critical part of a complex workflow. We must all thrive toward great SOOC captures in order to create what I want to call a photograph. In no case should we try to stop improving.
-----
* This is why I get irritated by threads where someone asks what to take in vacation and list a slew of lenses and camera - "You own all that and do not know what to use when???"
The more I read about folks claiming that they pro... (
show quote)
Great Post!
Even Ansel Adams never SOOC'd, he dodged and burned the hell out of his nearly impossible to print negatives. If he were living today in the digital age (with the same personality and mind set he had), his digital work flow would be so complicated that probably few of us could understand or follow it. Have you seen how many pages he wrote about just creating a negative and printing it? Note, he even wrote two series of instructional books. Yes, I have both, all volumes!
PS. I especially agree with the last line: "
* This is why I get irritated by threads where someone asks what to take on vacation and list a slew of lenses and camera - "You own all that and do not know what to use when???"" This put it mildly, what I usually think when I read about "photographers" who seem to have no understanding of their equipment, I can't put in print. Especially when they start the post with "I've been shooting for the last 6 years with my Canon 5D..." We have language rules on the UHH. Look, I am not referring to those just beginning. I've been a science teacher and have instructed friends with photography issues. Is it just me, but when I first learned film photography with in a year I was able to shoot various cameras from 35mm to 6x6cm to 6x7cm to 4x5". And soon 8x10". Yes, digital can be a bit more complex and confusing. I'm still learning arcane settings on my digital cameras. But I don't have to ask anyone how to shoot the Grand Canyon. You might try Infrared for haze penetration on that though.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
.......Rongnongno said Ooops! 
