I Edit-- So Deal with It!

Lobstah....versus dungeness crab.... Pacific salmon versus God-awful codfish...giant razor clams versus dinky little buttah clams... runnah...buttah clams....lobstah....ahhhhh.I get it now!

Ahem, they are called steamers.

Cod is terrible!
 
One wonders why anyone would show anyone SOOC shots.
 
One wonders why anyone would show anyone SOOC shots.

For the same reason people brag about what mode they use.

I think the correct answer is "no good reason"

A more correct answer is: no reason at all. It's just measurebating, an attempt to show off. Other examples:


  • SOOC vs Edited - "Check out my leet Photoshop skillz"
  • Handheld - "I'm a Ken Rockwell prodigy"
  • Manual mode - "I read a book on photography once"
  • Shot in studio - "Found a use for my garage"
  • Photowalk - "I can chew gum and walk at the same time"
 
I market myself as an Image Creator. I'm not interested in the SOOC stuff. I'm only interested in creating an image the sells the product.
 
One wonders why anyone would show anyone SOOC shots.

For the same reason people brag about what mode they use.
Because they're new to Photography and think that shooting in Manual mode is an achievement *LOL*
for them, I offer a slow clap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it depends on the level of editing you're doing. No one ever sees my SOOC images either. I edit. I clone out a stray hair here, a blemish there. I re-crop, adjust contrast, saturation, WB if needed, sharpening, etc. I always try to get it "right" in camera, but in reality it just doesn't happen all the time, for anyone, ever. Besides, what is "right?" It's all subjective, and depends on ones creative vision. To some - the only "right" is technically correct exposure, true to life colors, etc. To others, "right" would be whatever creativity they want to employ. Especially with those who market themselves as "fine art photographers" - I think there's a lot more creative liberties taken.

In images I want to feel more "artistic," I take more liberties. I enhance a haze or a flare, I manipulate the colors and saturation to give a more ethereal look than one would see naturally. And especially with the fairy series I've done with a few little girls - obviously I am photoshopping in wings and pixie dust. That stuff does not exist in reality.

I have to draw the line somewhere, though. There's some very specific examples in my head where seeing the SOOC vs the final edit seriously devalued my opinion of the photographer in question. It's very hard to describe why, too. The final edit was awe-inspiring, because of the overall feel, color - everything was completely life like, I would have believed it was possible to see that in real life, and while maybe not capture it in camera as you saw it... the finished product looked to be an exceptionally done (potentially very lucky due to the placement of some elements), realistic capture and edit of what was a beautiful subject in a beautiful setting.

Then I saw the SOOC. The light, colors, contrast, composition - nothing was at all close to what was actually captured in camera. In some cases, whole objects were cloned in. Not obvious fantasty objects like wings either - like normal every day things you'd expect to see in a setting like that, that you were given the impression were parts of the original image. So at what point does it become "photography" versus "photoshopography?" Where's the line between capturing and editing an image to give it a certain "feel" to yourself and the audience, and becoming so talented at photoshop that you can make stuff up to make people swoon over you?

All of that said - this is just my opinion, and I'm sure others will differ.
 
I'll say this:

I don't care what lens you use. What camera you use. What ISO, shutter speed, aperture, WB, etc. you use. I don't care if you crank up the saturation, or the sharpness, or the vividness. I don't care if you shoot raw or JPEG or both. I don't care if you crop, clone, heal, copy & paste, rotate, use layers with transparency, use lens correction presets...... even if you lather rinse and repeat.


As long as you get the results YOU want, that's all that matters.


Period.
 
saying processing raw is "cheating" is like saying developing film is dishonest.

regardless who's doing the processing, all images must be processed. it's an unavoidable step, whether digital or chemical.
 
Cod is terrible!

My dad is the picture of stereotypical "cod braised in cream and potatoes" Mainah. Nice and mild.

Cod can be made good though with buttah, peppah, and cream. heavy cream ofcourse, with the peas cooked in the same white, porcelain dish.

idk if cream is just an Appalachia Maine thing, but they seem to put it on EVERYTHING in that part of the state.
 
Cod is terrible!

My dad is the picture of stereotypical "cod braised in cream and potatoes" Mainah. Nice and mild.

Cod can be made good though with buttah, peppah, and cream. heavy cream ofcourse, with the peas cooked in the same white, porcelain dish.

idk if cream is just an Appalachia Maine thing, but they seem to put it on EVERYTHING in that part of the state.

So, it sounds like you have some Mainer experience, so maybe you can answer the question, why does runnah keep talking about, "His cod piece being filled with cream"? I mean, wouldn't that be a good thing to a Mainer?
 
Cod is terrible!

My dad is the picture of stereotypical "cod braised in cream and potatoes" Mainah. Nice and mild.

Cod can be made good though with buttah, peppah, and cream. heavy cream ofcourse, with the peas cooked in the same white, porcelain dish.

idk if cream is just an Appalachia Maine thing, but they seem to put it on EVERYTHING in that part of the state.

So, it sounds like you have some Mainer experience, so maybe you can answer the question, why does runnah keep talking about, "His cod piece being filled with cream"? I mean, wouldn't that be a good thing to a Mainer?


These types of questions are best held in conversations behind closed doors...
 

Most reactions

Back
Top