You and I have crossed swords before on image capture technique vs software processing. Both are equally important, not that the later is more important than the former or can fix failures in the former. This community spends so much time talking about better cameras (and recently software) rather learning how to create better images.

In the continuum between capturing a better image through the processing of those images to perfection, one much assess where to spend their limited time. Spending a bunch of time trying to polish a failed image, to achieve nothing more than a failed image, is a complete waste of one's extremely valuable and limited time. Assessing why the image failed from the camera and fixing those issue(s) is the best and most impactful place to spend one's valuable time.

The master has deleted more images than the beginner has ever taken.

You and I have crossed swords before on image capture technique vs software processing. Both are equally important, not that the later is more important than the former or can fix failures in the former. This community spends so much time talking about better cameras (and recently software) rather learning how to create better images.

In the continuum between capturing a better image through the processing of those images to perfection, one much assess where to spend their limited time. Spending a bunch of time trying to polish a failed image, to achieve nothing more than a failed image, is a complete waste of one's extremely valuable and limited time. Assessing why the image failed from the camera and fixing those issue(s) is the best and most impactful place to spend one's valuable time.

The master has deleted more images than the beginner has ever taken.

Would you agree that image capture techniques vary depending on the subject you are shooting? Shooting in studio for portraits, still life etc., time is not serious consideration. When shooting action timing is everything. I was taught the first rule is get the shot. A lot of beginners, I believe, try too hard to get the perfect shot and miss the shot completely.

My philosophy, which we differ on, is to get the best shot of the subject regardless of background or composition. Those can be fixed later, that's what used to be called" Dark Room Manipulation" now called Post Processing is all about.

As far as "The master has deleted more images than the beginner has ever taken" is a meaningless generalization. It depends on the master and the beginner. In today's world of cameras that have frame rates higher than motion picture rates it's not hard to believe that statement. In view camera days, perhaps not.

I think that some of our members forget how long it took them to reach their current level of of expertise. In my case when I first started with my Argus C3 well over half of my Kodachrome slides went directly from the light table to the trash can. Most of them I can never replace. I envy people who can start their photography with digital cameras and home computer post processing.

Using PP to salvage what "our experts" would delete need not inhibit the learning process. We get better through repetition if we learn from our mistakes. Some of the shots we take today with our digital cameras fit the "can't be replaced" category and now, through PP, we can at least save them in a form that allows us to recreate the memory. Occasionally we actually, through PP, create photos that challenge the best the experts display.

The issue of whether or not to post pictures, here or elsewhere, that don't meet the quality criteria of "the experts" is an entirely different issue. I think all of us post the best we have to offer and if the reviewers are willing to make honest comments in a manner that is not degrading or snarky, I at least, evaluate the comments and use them where applicable to improve both my picture taking and Post Processing techniques.

"Processing" has been part and parcel of photography long before digital imaging was invented. In terms of high-quality photography in most fields of specialization or style, films and prints had to be PROCESSED to convert the latent image on the film to a visible silver image on a negative. Prints had to be made where required. Nothing, withte the exception of Polaroid prints, came straight out of the camera and if you want t pick a nit, there was a chemical process involved in that as well. I'm sure that most folks around here understand all of this but it is worth mentioning.

Other than working with transparency films that were intended for "slides" or lithographic reproduction, no matter what kind of style of work was done, good darkroom manipulation skills in negative production and print-making were always an intrinsic part of traditional film photography. With the advent of digital photography, it seems to me that terminology has been borrowed for the motion picture industry so darkroom works were replaced by "editing and post-production a.k.a.post processing. Some folks seem to have adopted the notion that post-processing is optional after though or a patch-up job for faulty images- perhaps is for sloppy shooters or folks who have no background in good old custom printing. Custom printing, in my opinion, was not a process to resurrect poorly crafted negative from the garbage can but a method of maximizing the information on a good negative. And so it is with a good digital file. You shot as accurately and artistically as you can and bring your images to fruition on your computer by means of your software and most importanlyt your skills in applying it.

A bit of dodging or burning-in, cropping, and making some fine adjustment to composition is not cheating or fooling anyone. Years ago you had to stock many kinds of film and paper to achieve the contrast, colour palette or saturation and range that you wanted to achieve. Now you can do all that with a few convenient slider controls and your skills.

I can assure y'all that I have had ample and long experience with SOOTC shooting. Back in the early 1960s, 3-D (Stereo) slide became popular in the New York City metropolitan area for wedding coverages. I had to learn to shoo 35mm Kodachrome 25 with electronic flash on candid and formal shots- no bracketing, no reshoots and no TTL or auto exposure. Later in life, I shot thousands of large format transparencies for commercial layouts. I had to make readings, use all kinds of filter packs, run polaroid tests, do bracketing so the pre-press colour separation guys wod have a choice of densities. Frankly- a giant pain in the backside- no fun! It was ok for static subjects, products, still life shots, architectural work- not great data a baseball game, a prizefighter, or a fast-moving event.

When you do photography for a living, you learn very quickly that at the end of the day, it is indeed the FINAL RESULTS that count and not how you got there. If the client is a photography enthusiast they may ask you about your equipment or your software, etc., but most folks that I deal with, even art directors, advertising account executives, purchasing agents, and small business operators are just interested in good images on time.

So, whether is am shooting for clients or just for myself, I simply do what I need to do to get the final image I set out to make. from a business and production efficiency point of view, I never wanted to "re-Shoot" every image in the darkroom, nor did I want to reshoot ever fil on the computer. Sloppy shooting and gross overprocessing will usually yield poorly crafted work. Ain't nobody perfect and I am far from perfect so I try not to mess up and bugger up shots, but when I do, it's good to know I can clean things up in post. When that happens I do lots of cussing, lots of remedial work, and learn my lessons!

I think that some of our members forget how long it took them to reach their current level of of expertise. In my case when I first started with my Argus C3 well over half of my Kodachrome slides went directly from the light table to the trash can. Most of them I can never replace. I envy people who can start their photography with digital cameras and home computer post processing.

Using PP to salvage what "our experts" would delete need not inhibit the learning process. We get better through repetition if we learn from our mistakes. Some of the shots we take today with our digital cameras fit the "can't be replaced" category and now, through PP, we can at least save them in a form that allows us to recreate the memory. Occasionally we actually, through PP, create photos that challenge the best the experts display.

The issue of whether or not to post pictures, here or elsewhere, that don't meet the quality criteria of "the experts" is an entirely different issue. I think all of us post the best we have to offer and if the reviewers are willing to make honest comments in a manner that is not degrading or snarky, I at least, evaluate the comments and use them where applicable to improve both my picture taking and Post Processing techniques.

I think that some of our members forget how long it took them to reach their current level of of expertise. In my case when I first started with my Argus C3 well over half of my Kodachrome slides went directly from the light table to the trash can. Most of them I can never replace. I envy people who can start their photography with digital cameras and home computer post processing.

Using PP to salvage what "our experts" would delete need not inhibit the learning process. We get better through repetition if we learn from our mistakes. Some of the shots we take today with our digital cameras fit the "can't be replaced" category and now, through PP, we can at least save them in a form that allows us to recreate the memory. Occasionally we actually, through PP, create photos that challenge the best the experts display.

The issue of whether or not to post pictures, here or elsewhere, that don't meet the quality criteria of "the experts" is an entirely different issue. I think all of us post the best we have to offer and if the reviewers are willing to make honest comments in a manner that is not degrading or snarky, I at least, evaluate the comments and use them where applicable to improve both my picture taking and Post Processing techniques.