Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Correct, the RAW data remains unchanged. The settings used in the camera (EDIT: and stored WITH the RAW DATA) only affect the image displayed in your RAW editor, using those settings set in the camera. And of course if you are saving JPEG also, the JPEG will be created using those settings.

srt101fan

Thank you!

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

But that is exactly how the post process edit works as well. So the camera adjustment edits end up being handled exactly the same as post processing edits. Anything that you get closer to "right" by making camera adjustments just serve to move you farther down the list of things to edit. I find it much easier to accomplish this in the camera, saving work and time later.

I had prepared a longer post before my internet dropped for a while suggesting that it is easy to simply go outside, take a couple of exposures with very different setups saved as raw, and demonstrate to yourself that the camera adjustments do make a difference. This been the case with every NEF image I have ever loaded into LightRoom. Having said that...it is certainly possible that some raw formats might be handled differently. If that can be demonstrated to be the case, I'd like to know, so that I can promptly adjust my position on this subject.

But based on my objective experience, saying that camera adjustments don't matter (at least as applied to NEF files) just is not correct. And the same is the case whether I am saving JPEG images or not.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Yes, having the "sliders" pre-set in the camera definitely speeds up the process as some sliders may not have to be adjusted in the editor.

There are different "configurations" available for my camera, and the sliders show up in the RAW editor as they are set for each configuration.

Camera adjustments (configurations) do matter, as evident in the way they show up in the editor.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Yes. And especially for those with a strong editing style, having a fixed starting point (or multiple ones, for different types of photography) set up may be very beneficial. But as a documentarian, my process does not call for my output to always be the same, or even similar.

I personally know photographers, though, whose processed images almost always look the same. One does nightscapes. His highlights are always orange, and his shadows are always purple. That is very repetitive and boring to me, even though his images individually look very nice. Another does wildlife photography. His final saturation is always so low that every image looks like it is set on the edge of a desert somewhere, even if the content tells you that it's somewhere very different. When he does a presentation, the sameness eventually is very sleep-inducing, even though he has collected remarkable images of hard to find animals.

Having a style is fine. But just producing the same image over and over becomes difficult for me to acknowledge as art. So maybe that is why the capture is so important to me.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Everything is art. It's just a matter of whether it's good art or not so good art. And no, that last statement is not totally subjective. An Ansel Adams is objectively better than your uncle's vacation snapshot.[quote=srt101fan]

GreenReaper

Here's my take FWIW. When I first got into digital imaging, we were in it at the beginning, I wasn't
very enthusiastic. Slow computers, try a 286, some of the first Kodak DCS cameras that were converted Nikons. Things left a lot to be desired. Then we got better cameras, faster computers and transitioned from Aldus Photosyler II to Adobe Photoshop. Still wasn't happy. One day out of frustration I sat down with the manual, you remember those, and went through it. What I discovered was that now I could do all the different "things" I've always wanted to do in the dark room, but didn't have the assets to do them. It was great to say the least. I love doing documentary work, but it still needs some post processing. Even shooting film PP was needed at times. It did not take me long to trade my darkroom for a desk. I still miss being in the dark, processing film or making prints, the smell of the hypo and stop bath, the fingers stained brown from hand processing cut film.Would I go back, not with our current mobile lifestyle, we are semi-full time RV'ers. So in the end, let us each do our own thing, enjoy photography and the self expression, in our own way. This is where nothing is wrong, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Namaste

BigDaddy Loc: Pittsburgh, PA

Actually, you would need to set the camera to auto, then the camera would be doing all the processing. Raw not an issue. If you manually set shutter speed or aperture you are processing the photo, not the camera. What difference does it make if you do it in pre or post? None, other than post takes additional skills...

srt101fan

Larry - My objection was to your comment that camera controls (picture controls) affect the RAW data. They do not, and saying they do as emphatically as you did could lead to serious confusion for digital photo learners.

Do the camera controls saved alongside the RAW file affect the initial processing of the RAW file? I might buy that, but that's not the same as affecting the RAW file itself.

BTW, I have my Nikon D5300 set to save RAW + JPEG, with the JPEG set to monochrome. When I open an image in Affinity it shows up in color, not monochrome....

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Wendy2 Loc: California

Remember Ansel Adams? He arrived at those phenomenal photos by manipulating in the dark room.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

How can anyone judge whether art is good or bad? You’re interpretion my be different but good or bad yikes

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Yes, and you are correct that they do not affect the data. But they do affect the images. And that is the same as at least most post processing software. The raw data is always there. But we really don't care about the data...we care about the image. So I think your statement about the words is correct. I still think it's best to use the camera's capabilites to capture the best starting image possible.

O2Ra

In our increasingly liberal world we cannot judge . Lol don’t get crazy folks it’s kind of a joke . Maybe maybe not don’t judge . Like a gym I go to . A sign says “judgement free zone “ then another says “ don’t be a lunk “ or something like that but judging people for how they lift or exercise by making grunting noises.
We all judge and make assessments of what we think is good or bad or right or wrong .
But art is a way of expressing oneself. It is a way of creating. There is many ways to create many ways to express ones self . Let people be people and create what they see or feel .
I’m around the music and art industry the people are mostly very liberal and judging and praise not being judgmental.
We need to all look into the eyes and hearts of others . Walk a step or two in their shoes and look at their perspectives on things. Doesn’t mean we have to like what they create , say or do. But let’s not put a box around our creative souls . Do it how you see it of feel it and share it with the world . Happy creating fellow snappers

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Yes. But his equipment only offered limited options for preprocessing. He was pretty progressive. I can't believe that he would not use newer capabilities to reduce what he had to do later, if it had been available at the time. Remember...we barely had TTL match needle metering when he died.
EDIT**And after he proved to himself that they worked for him. Remember...he was making a living at this. He didn't have time for unnecessary work.