JCam Loc: MD Eastern Shore

But even computers need help, and when photos are involved, often a lot of help

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Kenny, I am not sure if it is just me, but when I see a photo that makes me say wow, the last thing that comes to my mind is whether it was a SOOC or a processed picture. I would say that almost all great shots have been processed. Subject matter, light, composition is what is going to make your shot a winner. Kenny, good luck with those competitions.

mr. u. n. owen

If your finial image is a print only a silver base paper , exposed to light is a photograph a ink jet print is ink and paper . To make a real photo you must use light and a sensitive emulision and chemicals to bring out the image.

Brucej67 Loc: Cary, NC

Oh aren't we smart. And I suppose you want to use contact negatives or an enlarger with your paper, do you dodge and burn and do other manipulations before the emulsion on the paper takes? I also suppose you had to load film in those cameras do you still load film in your DSLR (I tried it, but couldn't fit the battery and film together).

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

You do realize that your images straight out of the camera have sharpness, color tone, contrast, and other adjustments automatically made to them, don't you. A modern DSLR is a computer that performs a significant amount of post processing before you ever download a picture, just with less control by the end user. If you want full control of how your images end up you need to post process them. If you really want to see what a truly unprocessed image straight out of your camera looks like, then shot raw. Most post processing software will ignore the in camera settings when you shoot raw. The purpose of photography for me is to create an image which reflects your vision of what you intended. If you can get that straight out of the camera, that's great. If it takes considerable post processing effort to achieve that goal, that's great too.

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

So, following your logic, in the days before digital, a photo was film/enlarger/darkroom/chemcially generated. Or it was a Polaroid that came out of someone's armpit. Only the oldsters will understand this one.

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

I think most of the SOOC crowd needs to understand the distinction between documentary and artistic/creative photography. Documentary = SOOC, artistic/creative = anything goes to make a memorable image. One discipline is not better than the other. It's just a different set of standards. Most documentary photography would do poorly in artistic photography competitions, and vice versa.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

Have you ever heard of dye transfer prints? They are not made with light sensitive material, but are more akin to printing like lithography. I doubt many photographers would say they are not "real" photographs. What about photographs printed in books or magazines? Do they cease to be photographs? To be defined as a photograph, images must be originally created by exposing light sensitive material, either film or a digital sensor. They remain photographs regardless of how they are printed or reproduced.

Fotoartist Loc: Detroit, Michigan

Digital days vs. analog days.

tdekany Loc: Oregon

Right on Gene! I'm guessing the op was not asking about documentary photography.

macsmom Loc: S Carolina

The regional show I participate in has a category specifically for heavy PP called "anything goes".

blackest Loc: Ireland

"Shield your film. Unlike original Polaroid film, the Impossible Project film needs to be kept in the dark for a few minutes after exposure. (Impossible Project have recently released their new colour-protection film which is not as fussy about being shielded as soon as it comes out of the camera—but it doesn’t hurt to be careful anyway.) After messing around with cardboard boxes and envelopes I eventually bought a frog tongue for my 660 (which clips into place and cleverly unrolls to shield images as they emerge from the camera) and the dark slide for my SX-70 (a fixed flap which does the same thing). After a few minutes I take a peek at the image, and after 10 minutes or so I transfer it to a box or an envelope where it can continue to develop in the dark. Failing that, put it in an inside pocket, or face down on a table. After about 30 minutes the image will have finished developing. And remember the film tends to work better between 15-25 degrees Celsius (55-77 degrees Fahrenheit) so in the winter months the colder film will tend to underdevelop. Impossible sells a cold clip but the easiest solution is to use your body heat to warm up the freshly ejected image after exposure by tucking it into your armpit for a bit."

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

LOL! PS: Even in the "old days" many "real" photos were electronically assisted. We can nit pick this as far as we want. Do the "purists" use any AF or any AE in their film cameras? 😱 Oh, golly "computers!" Hell even a light meter is "artificial intelligence". I guess the only "real photographers" use glass plates in view cameras Or even better just stick to making Daguerreotypes! 😀

James Slick Loc: Pittsburgh,PA

I have a #193 Cold clip left over from my long gone 200 Series Polaroid.(forgot the exact model..) It ofcourse used the older filmpacks, no fancy SX-70 packs! 😉,

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

I was thinking the same thing. All photographs- film or digital, must be "manipulated". Digital with computers, film with chemicals.