CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Moreover, there are subtle defaults in the initial LR RAW import that are 'fine' as a general approach, but are rather inferior to a more customized approach. So, it's easy to set-up a comparison that tilts the initial results to the camera manufacturer's software vs the LR defaults. A deeper understanding of LR (beyond defaults) and use of your own personalized defaults, either via import presets or develop presets, and you can quickly tilt the comparison back toward LR's favor.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

One more thought here, about getting it "right" in camera.

There is a school of thought that insists a real photographer creates the whole image in camera. While there is always some advantage to getting a correct exposure, correct white balance, good lighting, composition, moment, and other attributes, (especially when learning your craft) there should be no shame in improving an image after the fact.

Photography is a form of communications. Just as with speech, we have infinite ways to express the same thought, some of which are more effective than others. With imaging, we have infinite ways to record and process a scene for visual consumption.

Raw file recording is like exposing negative film. There is wide exposure latitude when using negative films. You have at least some choice of development methods (lots with B&W, very limited with color). Raw files have a bit narrower latitude than film, but it's an order of magnitude better than JPEG capture allows.

JPEG file capture at the camera is like exposing slide/transparency film. There is very little exposure latitude. You can't overexpose without blowing the highlight details. You can't underexpose much without losing the shadow details.

That is why professionals say, "Raw is for rookies." It's more forgiving.

If you want "prime quality" JPEGs OR slides, you have to control everything accurately at the camera. That means controlling the scene brightness with lighting or light modifiers, making custom white balance with a reference tool of some sort, and metering a reference tool to get the scene balance just right. It may also mean altering the camera's menu settings to take advantage of subtle control over picture style, contrast, sharpness, noise reduction, saturation, color tone, hue, highlight/shadow compensation, and any other controls available.

All that work at the camera is what we used to do with slide films in the studio or on location. It is all about control. For slides, we had to use filters over the lens and sometimes over lights in the scene to get the color balance right. We had to meter very carefully. We had to use fill cards, scrims, diffusers, light modifiers... whatever it took to create a natural look within the brightness limits of the final display. We could slack-off on some of that when using negative films.

Nickaroo

I know that. I usually spend approximately 6 hours a week in Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom Classic. I might shoot about 800 shots when I'am shooting Michigan Football. I know which ones to keep, so I only have to edit about 150 shots. Now, there have been times when I have shot in JPEG Fine and I just turn those into our staff to decide which ones to send to the Outside Media. I actually take more shots than I have stated here as I do a lot of Nature and Wildlife Photography, so that takes an awful lot of time, which I usually spend my time at my BenQ monitor at night. I always cull my keepers so I'm not bleeding from my eyes, but I still have to PP a lot. Oh, by the way, I was joking about sending my images to the Lady that builds wood products and other things. I would actually say that I take more than 1200 shots a week, it's more like 1500. I try to follow the 5-10% rule of saying this shot deserves editing or not. I have even pitched edited photos to the trash bin.

Nickaroo

No, I really do fire off that many clicks and I do not believe in spraying and praying. When I'am shooting Michigan Football or Basketball I actually do take that many shots. That is why I always have fully charged batteries and extra CF Express cards and SD cards as well. I shoot for all of the Major Sports Teams here in Michigan and since I work for The University of Michigan's athletic department, let's just say that I along with the press Photogs, we really can fill up Cards quickly. I have 2 or maybe 3 Cameras with lenses attached to each and that is why I shoot so many shots. I do a lot of Wildlife and BIF shooting as well. I really don't use the term of "Commercial Photographer" as I just happen to do what I love. But, I will say that when I happen to be shooting Wildlife, then yes at times I have sprayed and prayed to get a keeper out of the many bursts that I take.

Nickaroo

I did forget one thing to reply to you. I'am up at 4AM and I hit the trails everyday 1 hour before Sunrise until 1 hour after Sunset. As you can tell I stay very busy. When you have a passion for something, you don't consider it work. Also, I have done Commercial product Photography for Pepsi and Coke a Cola. If you watched the Super Bowl this past weekend and saw the ad for GM that is coming out with their EV Truck, my friend actually shot that commercial and invited me to work with his team. Now that was a hoot. I have read some of your statements here on UHH and I really agree with you. At least you have a love for all things Photography, at least that is the way that I see it.

reverand

I worked for years with traditional b&w film, using both 35mm, and, when I wasn't traveling, a 4 x 5. The goal was large b&w photographs. In short, I'm accustomed to darkroom work.

Post-processing is the modern equivalent of darkroom work. Yes, there's a learning curve, but it's not impossible. I consider taking the picture to be only the starting point. You're not done until you've processed it.

Having said that, I'd add that post-processing digital is much, much faster than the old technology. With 4x5 films, I had to spend a session in the darkroom developing the film, another session making contact prints, another session in the wet lab making prints--with burning and dodging, it took as much as 3 hours to get a finished print--and yet another session washing and drying.

With digital, even if you have to do a lot of work on Adobe Lightroom (and Photoshop), you can get a decent finished print in an hour. Actually, most prints don't even take that long. It sometimes takes me longer to get the computer started, and Adobe loaded, than it does making the first print.

GWBELL345 Loc: Allentown PA

I find both the taking of the photo and post to be equally interesting and challenging. Each requires different skills. It is similar in the film days of the taking of the photo and the printing skills learned in the darkroom. Post can save a problematic photo. I spend more time on post processing even though I do not post a lot of photos. I use Photoshop and have spent hundreds of hours learning how to use it and its capabilities, which are amazing. The problem I have is using a feature infrequently, such as photo or focus stacking. I generally have to relearn the technique. In addition, post allows for true color balance. The problem I see with some post processing is when viewing a photo someone has taken the question is "is it real or how much has it been modified". There are the purists and the artists. I am somewhere in the middle.

jimopho Loc: Maine

I have a little different take on this. Because I am unable to use computers due to an arm condition, I am completely unable to post process yet I make my living as a digital photographer. Any little thing I need done to the image I have to get somebody else to do for me. So I definitely try to get it right in the camera. I'm quite envious of anyone who can just open up Photoshop and work away.

GWBELL345 Loc: Allentown PA

I am only, at best, an intermediate level user of Photoshop. I find it quite challenging and can usually find a tutorial on YouTube to help be understand a technique for improving a photo. For example, "Don't like the sky? Change it" see https://www.photoshopessentials.com/photo-editing/replace-sky/

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I do not enjoy post processing and will do so only as needed thru Apple Photos auto enhancement. I try to get it as right in the camera as best I could before making any adjustments.

anotherview Loc: California

This text needs clarification: "One thing he said was that I have never heard before: downloading RAW images in Lightroom and Photoshop will immediately delete data from your RAW file."

Which data? How much data? Has Adobe addressed this matter? When did the data loss start? Etc.

delder Loc: Maryland

As others have said, I started with B&W [Tri-X Pan] shooting available light and push processing in the School Darkroom.
"PP" tools I had available included croping, dodging, spotting and tilting the paper.
While a whole new world of digital PP tools are now available, I stick to some basic tools for cropping, light & color control.
It does amaze me how many DIFFERENT pictures I can find in some photographs!

srt101fan

Great point about different pictures to be found in a photo! That's one aspect of post-processing that's not talked about much in the UHH forum.

delder Loc: Maryland

Thank you for that comment!

I ENJOY salvaging good scenes from general photographs and finding multiple viewpoints within the original photo.

Alaskangiant

To be a true artist you should take the time to learn how to shoot raw and learn to post edit as does any artist in any media they choice