Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

For those few old enough to have been old enough to remember the introduction of Kodacolor, 76 years ago (1942) SOOC is not an issue unless you choose to make it one.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Mary Hopkin's words were and are totally appropriate.

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

Times change. Film is trying to make a comeback, but the environmental costs are not insignificant especially for do-it-yourselfers who don't have all the proper equipment to corral the used chemistry - they just dump it down the drain.

SOOC for digital is still processed. If you shoot jpeg the camera is doing the processing after you tell it which "look" you want. If you shoot RAW you must post-process.

So for me the talk of SOOC in this day and age is specious at best and drivel at the worst. My $0.02

Spirit Vision Photography Loc: Behind a Camera.

I still shoot film exclusively and do no post processing. But how others make their images is up to them.

dreamon

And "Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away..."

dreamon

Robertl594 Loc: Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and Nantucket

Loved that movie Kodachrome.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Or Eastern NC vs. Lexington, NC, barbecue or Columbia, SC, barbecue... great analogy!

It’s all good.

Hbuk66 Loc: Oswego, NY

How is that possible? I come home after a shoot, remove my memory card, plug it into the computer, download to photos, then I go to photos and keep what I like and trash the rest. Then I go to my fb page and post 5-12 photos. It's easy.

SteveR Loc: Michigan

Why did my photos come back from the lab with numbers on the back showing adjustments which had been made?

SOOC may be fine for you, but I've saved many a photo with just a few adjustments. I've also seen others take a photo of mine of a significant site and do wonders with it. I'll take p/p any day. I wish that I were more proficient at it. Yes, I remember those film days when perhaps 2 out of a roll of 24 were acceptable. Don't tell me how great those days were. They were expensive.

Kuzano

In these days of "Big Pharma", we're shitting and pissing more harmful chemicals and pollutants into our sewer systems than "wet chemistry" photography will ever add to the assault on the environment. Your point is specious at best and drivel at worst.

And talk of SOOC is only one piece of the formula for one variety of photography-shooting jpeg in P or A mode. Works well for many and avoids the whole mental masturbation provided by Adobe and other software in post processing. More capture, less time in front of the computer. Slower more studied photography.

And then there is GIRIC, which stands for Get It Right In Camera. This consists of really knowing how your digital camera's Image Processor and functions such as Custom Profiles allow you to create and save custom profiles to PreProcess your images in-camera. SOOC is use A & P for camera specific jpegs. GIRIC is using PreProcessing custom profiles for various shooting styles.

Drivel and Specious to some (which defines your attitude about other peoples thinking) and very important to others.

BTW, film is making huge comeback changes and will be around long after the Iranians, Kim Jong, and the unlocatable Pakistani nuclear stock pile have decimated digital cameras and computers with the EMP's they are likely to discharge in the future.

Steve DeMott Loc: St. Louis, Missouri (Oakville area)

Straight out of Camera (SOOC), Post Processing (PP)?? This subject has been brought up several times and to me the only true, undeniable fact is this. SOOC is the roll of film you take out of the Camera. Everything else IS PP.
So, where is this fussy dividing line between SOOC & PP? When you sent you roll of film to a lab, they processed it into slides or prints. The digital RAW file would be equivalent to the roll of film. Viewing them on a computer would be the processed version of slides or prints. I feel this is the fuzzy dividing line everyone refers to.
As BobHartung been with UHH longer my opinion is only worth $0.01

PhotogHobbyist Loc: Bradford, PA

Another old song, by Paul Simon, "Kodachrome, gives us the nice bright colors, gives us the greens of summer..."

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

I try to nail my shots sooc but sometimes do resort to very basic pp to make them pop just a little more

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Quite right.

SOOC in the film days was slides... transparency film. All negative film required some form of post-processing (processing negatives and making prints). Film processing in commercial labs was all standardized. In custom labs, it COULD affect the look of both slides and negatives, but that approach was a special case of pushing or pulling ISO, or cross-processing deliberately in the wrong developer.

Many think SOOC means no post-processing. With digital, it means YOU do no processing after the camera does ITS post-processing. Really, when saving JPEGs from the camera, we can say we do "pre-processing." That means we make a conscious effort to NAIL exposure, set a custom white balance in reference to a target, set all the menus to process the color, hue, contrast, sharpness, etc. just the way we like it... That approach works GREAT when you're in a studio, or other tightly controlled lighting environment, when the brightness range is limited to five f/stops, and you really need immediate access to usable images. Once you press the shutter, the processing is automated according to all your pre-set options.

SOOC also means "unaltered" as in, "No one took out part of the scene, added anything to the scene, or retouched a subject to look different from what it was in reality." That's important in photojournalism and forensic photography, and/or if the client says so. In such cases, they want the files as your camera created them, with no adjustment. They want you to attempt to duplicate reality in the camera. You can simulate it pretty well, if you know what you are doing.