What does SOOC really mean anymore?
Oct 24, 2019 09:59:56 #
AndyGarcia wrote:
I don't give a thought to this. All Jpegs, SOOC are already processed to make them Jpegs and to apply whatever film sim you have chosen (in the case of Fuji).
RAW files are, sort of, digital negatives which have to be processed.
It's outmoded purist B/S as far as I'm concerned. I take photos for me. I don't take photos for the pixel peepers or the SOOC "purists". Over and out on this one.
RAW files are, sort of, digital negatives which have to be processed.
It's outmoded purist B/S as far as I'm concerned. I take photos for me. I don't take photos for the pixel peepers or the SOOC "purists". Over and out on this one.
Oct 24, 2019 10:00:18 #
Oct 24, 2019 10:00:23 #
Haha haha at last humour - so cool. Now I know what to say in the future to answer this question!!
Oct 24, 2019 10:17:48 #
MrMophoto
Loc: Rhode Island "The biggest little"
Linda From Maine wrote:
On UHH it means there will be 15 pages of meaningless arguments within 24 hours and nobody will be a better photographer when it's over. On UHH it means there will be 15 pages of meaningless arguments within 24 hours and nobody will be a better photographer when it's over. Sorry, Phil 🤗
It's your image, do what you like to it:
https://digital-photography-school.com/its-your-image-do-what-you-like-to-it/
What's important in a photograph and what isn't:
https://photographylife.com/whats-important-in-a-photograph-and-what-isnt
.
It's your image, do what you like to it:
https://digital-photography-school.com/its-your-image-do-what-you-like-to-it/
What's important in a photograph and what isn't:
https://photographylife.com/whats-important-in-a-photograph-and-what-isnt
.
I'm glad someone else recognizes the insipid minutia that sometimes happens
Oct 24, 2019 10:21:00 #
bpulv wrote:
SOOC is and always was a myth; even in the film da... (show quote)
No difference from film and digital raw. Both need "developed" to see the resulting photo. When you view the raw file in camera, you are looking at the developed, jpg, even when shooting raw only. You can not see the results until developed. You can save as either jpg or raw or both.
Film is sooc, no debate, but it is a negative, and can e developed with or without adjustments when developing.
Digital is sooc also.....sooc means no adjustments out side of camera....each camera manufacturer has its own alogrithems to "develop" their raw image...if you do not like their developing process, you do your own in post processing.
All digital photos "have to be developed". We all know this....so when we say SOOC, we are saying "developed in camera with no post". Maybe we need to confuse people even more and call it SOOCWNP..just kidding, I'm happy with SOOC.
Oct 24, 2019 10:26:30 #
MrMophoto wrote:
I have no idea what "insipid minutia" means. And you forgot my hugging emoji; that makes all the difference."On UHH it means there will be 15 pages of meaningless arguments within 24 hours and nobody will be a better photographer when it's over."
I'm glad someone else recognizes the insipid minutia that sometimes happens
I'm glad someone else recognizes the insipid minutia that sometimes happens
ca·ma·ra·de·rie
/ˌkäməˈrädərē,ˌkaməˈrädərē/
noun
mutual trust and friendship among people who spend a lot of time together.
Oct 24, 2019 10:28:06 #
rmalarz wrote:
The camera captures the initial file in RAW. Anything past that is processed, whether in-camera or some application.
--Bob
--Bob
How can anybody possibly argue with that statement...? Oh, wait, this is UHH, someone will find a way! 😢Oct 24, 2019 10:31:22 #
jerryc41 wrote:
Obviously, it means straight out of the camera. Take the picture, upload it to a computer, and there it is - straight out of the camera. No mystery. It doesn't matter what the camera does to it. If the camera did no processing, you'd have nothing but thousands of 1s and 0s.
By George, methinks you have it! Well done Jerry.
Oct 24, 2019 10:32:30 #
David Martin wrote:
True, given that the raw data is not really an image until processed. Yet, there are certainly differences between making "adjustments" -- whether in-camera or by post-processing software -- that simply re-create what was actually seen (yes, it is subjective), versus introducing unrealistic exaggeration of hue/saturation/sharpening, etc., versus replacing skies, removing objects/people, plopping in sun rays or full moons, etc.
to me, an amateur, looking at some photos and thinking they are so awesome and what it took for the photographer to be "there" at the right time to get the photo, only to find out all about post processing and that the moon, clouds, animals, Aurora borealis, changing the color of things, etc, were added into the photo, I was getting discouraged that I was not trying hard enough to be "there" at the right time, now I can relax and have fun shooting knowing that I am "there" at the right time, any time is the right time!!
one case in particular, there is a barn near where I live and I have taken photos of it, then a local professional went there for one day and produced an awesome photo, with some nice pink clouds above the barn, another person has all these "cool" photos of old buildings with the sun burst through an opening (door, window, broken walls), only for me to figure out these things were photoshopped in!!
Is there a different term used for the more aggressive post processing, verses small post processing adjustments, (like cropping, lightening or darkening, fixing a small spot, etc.)?
Oct 24, 2019 10:34:16 #
crazycarol wrote:
Artistic vision. Simply thinking of photography as art rather than strictly documentary. And deriving great joy from the process 🤗...Is there a different term used for the more aggressive post processing, verses small post processing adjustments, (like cropping, lightening or darkening, fixing a small spot, etc.)?
Oct 24, 2019 10:38:49 #
David Martin wrote:
True, given that the raw data is not really an image until processed. Yet, there are certainly differences between making "adjustments" -- whether in-camera or by post-processing software -- that simply re-create what was actually seen (yes, it is subjective), versus introducing unrealistic exaggeration of hue/saturation/sharpening, etc., versus replacing skies, removing objects/people, plopping in sun rays or full moons, etc.
Well said! The problem comes in and the issue gets murky when we try to make value judgements on the type and degree of processing.Oct 24, 2019 10:39:00 #
bpulv
Loc: Buena Park, CA
JBruce wrote:
By George, methinks you have it! Well done Jerry.
I hate to bust your bubble, but take the same file straight out of the camera and display it on two different uncalibrated computer monitors. Do they look the same? Almost Everything you do with an electronic file will alter what you see in some way.
Oct 24, 2019 10:42:53 #
Retina wrote:
All this time I thought SOOC meant Straight Out Of a Computer.
But, but...the camera is a computer!? 😕
Oct 24, 2019 10:42:58 #
frankraney wrote:
...
...
... Maybe we need to confuse people even more and call it SOOCWNP..just kidding, I'm happy with SOOC.
...
... Maybe we need to confuse people even more and call it SOOCWNP..just kidding, I'm happy with SOOC.
How about ICPO?
In Camera Processing Only.
Oct 24, 2019 10:44:16 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.