In my four decades-plus professional career and also as a university professor teaching photojournalism, digital photography and 35mm film photography, I have taught "getting it right in the camera" to mean something different than your premise.

For me teaching "getting it right in the camera" means helping my hundreds of student photographers and those I have also mentored to know their craft and their vision to get their composition, shutter speed, aperture, lens focal length, camera angle, white balance, depth of field and use of lighting right the FIRST time, whenever possible.

IMHO, learning that discipline means less work in post for any photographer. I believe it does no good to be a lazy photographer and leave everything to be adjusted and "fixed" in post. Of course it isn't always possible to get it all right in the camera with changing conditions and breaking action.

Yes I do work in post when it is warranted, and that includes the mandatory processing of my raw captures. And I do crop for impact if I couldn't shoot with a long enough lens. From years of experience photographing around the world in all situations and conditions, I "get it right in the camera" about 95% of the time. Cheers

I always shoot raw+jpeg in my cameras. I use the jpegs for quick review and sharing (those jpegs are processed by the camera's internal processor and algorithms, and every post processing decision is "baked" in) But I use the raw files for my final images.

Here an image that was chosen as a Worldwide Photo of the Week by Sony Alpha Photographers in 2020. From the raw file, Brooke, an Environmental Scientist in a slot canyon near Antelope Canyon, Navajo lands, Page, Arizona, USA. Sony A9 camera, Sony 24-105mm f4 G lens. 24mm f4, 1/60 sec., ambient daylight. I had my exposure ready as we moved through the canyon (which I had never been in before) , but only had a split second to make a single frame before other hikers came through and into the frame. The image isn't cropped, and the only post processing move was to hit auto develop button for the raw image in Lightroom. The jpeg was totally acceptable also and I have posted that online also. (click on the image to see the full quality) Cheers

https://www.facebook.com/GSWilliamsPhotography

There have been several posts lately in which the term "get it right in the camera" has been expressed. This seems to be expressed mostly by those who abhor processing.

Photography is and always will be a two-step process. The first being capturing the exposure. The second is processing that exposure to make a "print".

Those who rely on the 'in-camera' applications to produce a "print" are the equivalent of sending your film to a lab and having someone else do the work. These are the snapshot fans. Their main goal seems to be operating a shutter button.

The photographers, on the other hand, have an understanding of the mechanics of capturing the scene with the final "print" in mind and what it will take to achieve that "print". They understand the placement of tonal values and the process to achieve their visualization of the scene. Their "getting it right" is quite different.

So, here are a couple of examples of my "get it right in the camera". Each was taken with a different camera but the goal was the same, the final "print".
--Bob

I got sick and tired of working, so took some time out for some art. No brilliant ideas came, so I got my camera out and..... oops... lockdown... can't go out and take pictures. So, I rummaged around on Pixabay.com (non-copyrighted pictures) to find any picture that was interesting, and came onto a picture of an observatory. I took that picture and cut out the observatory to use it as a foreground. I then got a picture of Saturn (also free to use) to use as a background. Then, I brought up 3D graphics program called Bryce and made a mountainous terrain to put between them, adjusted the lighting, hues, contrasts, and other features to make them all mesh together well. Then, in post processing, I used Gimp to hand-dabble the obviously 3D generated terrain to make it look hand-painted. It is a small amount of work, but it beats standing in Titan's noxious atmosphere with a camera trying to get a good shot, and besides - it got my mind off work and off-world for a while. I may start looking back through photos of my own to see what I can do with them, as well. Felt good to be creative for a while.

Hi one & all. A few pics from a joy flight my wife & I were treated to the other weekend. Note the perspex windows weren't all that clean or clear and it was impossible to reduce all reflections so please make allowances for those things. Three of the aerial shots are of South Bruny Island - south of Hobart Tasmania.

The flowers were all in an Open Garden we visited the next day - all hand held with little PP. Note here I'm not a macro enthusiast so no attempts to improve/remove backgrounds have been made. Hand held as I said - no tripod.

All with the same compact camera - a Lumix TZ220 with the 1" sensor.

Please enjoy the Downloads and please please have a wonderful and safe Christmas. Best Wishes from Aus.

Below is a shot of the Jupiter Saturn conjunction at its closest point (Dec 21st ~ 5:45pm PST). This image was made by taking 4K video of the event at different exposures and stacking the images to help remove atmospheric turbulence. Different exposures where used to correct for the large difference in brightness of Jupiter, Saturn and their respective moons. These different images where then composited together for the final image. Note: this is the same technique I used on the images I downloaded the other day when the planets where farther apart, however since the planets where closer together, the image has been cropped to enlarge the planets. Note: Jupiter's moon Ganymede was in front of the planet at the time these images where taken (download to more easily see the moons).

All questions, comments and suggestions are welcome.

The previous day there was an amazing colorful sunrise, and I didn't go anywhere to photograph it. :-(
So the next day I decided to drive to a remote section of Florida beach to avoid people and to try for a sunrise photo. I hit the road at 3:30 a.m. for the hour drive to my selected location. After parking at a location where I would not have my car towed or ticketed and started my 2.5 mile walk to the beach. The clouds were dark and thick and I had a sinking feeling I would not have a gorgeous sunrise with colorful clouds. When I arrived at my location there was no hint of a rising sun and the surf was crashing against the rocky shore line. As if on cue, the moon found a break in the thick clouds and lit the rocks just off shore. I managed 3 quick shots before the clouds once again blocked the moon light. The first shot was too dark, the second was interrupted by a wave spraying me, my tripod and camera (my camera was wearing its raincoat--I was not) and the third----well, you decide how well Luna touched the scene.

PLEASE USE THE DOWNLOAD AND VIEW ON A DARK BACKGROUND.

Thanks for looking.

Its rather obvious to all readers what his point is, don't you see/understand it?

I'll make it simple for you. The OP asked if he might be the minority, not using a DSLR's video capability. In some circles, he is very much the minority. In other circle, he is the majority. It all depends what you do with your equipment, regardless of what it is. Some people drive their cars fast, some slowly and some driving it on very winding roads and enjoy all the things the car is capable of. For those living in the a state like Kansas, where there are few winding roads and no mountains to drive up, a car owner would not be utilizing their car for anything other than driving on long straight boring roads. Some drive fast and others drive more slowly.

Their car is capable of so much more but they do not need or use that feature of their cars. These drivers are in the minority compared to drivers who live in mountainous areas that have winding roads. However, if these Kansas drivers were living in these mountainous areas, they would be the ones in the minority. So the response to the OP, that you did not seem to understand, is that a camera has great capabilities today and just because someone does not use all those features, does not necessarily mean they are in the minority of anyone, they are simply someone who does not use that feature.

Most cameras have a back button focus, many use that feature and many do not. It's a nice feature and it is the users choice to utilize that feature/function or not to use it. The video feature is used by many and ignored by many more. It is there as and when anyone wishes to use it and on some cameras, it is an extremely good video feature. However, it is only good if you need it, if you don't use it, it just lays there dormant in your camera and that's fine too. I don't understand how you could not have seen the point of the response to the OP's question.