is there a possibility of a unprocessed section here?

[bribrius]

where only photos can be posted that have seen zero processing so people can concentrate on learning to shoot separate from post work?

 

[Designer]

Interesting

Prollem is; you're going to get all kinds of "helpful hints" such as; needs straightening, WB is off, crop it better, etc, etc.

Which you probably already knew.

 

[bribrius]

Interesting

Prollem is; you're going to get all kinds of "helpful hints" such as; needs straightening, WB is off, crop it better, etc, etc.

Which you probably already knew.

good. I don't expect it to be pretty. But a more traditional approach and easier to understand the shooting aspect before the post programs get to the photos. when you view your own photo or have it ccd post process it really limits the truth in the feedback as it relates to our in camera and shooting. And viewing others for cc on shooting becomes difficult because you cant see everything done in post process.

 

[pixmedic]

the real problem is....
if you shoot raw, there is always processing done, even if its minimal.
that section would only apply to people that shoot in jpeg and want to post an unprocessed picture. which I imagine would be very few.
your best bet is to just post your picture and state that it is a SOOC jpeg.

 

[bribrius]

the real problem is....
if you shoot raw, there is always processing done, even if its minimal.
that section would only apply to people that shoot in jpeg and want to post an unprocessed picture. which I imagine would be very few.
your best bet is to just post your picture and state that it is a SOOC jpeg.

well. im not trying to be a ninny here. But along the same lines as I started asking people for lens and camera settings a couple weeks back. trying to improve your shooting and looking at post processed photos probably isn't the best method. And it goes for work being critiqued as well. I don't know if I have someone critiquing my photo that does the same or worse in their photo but fixes it post. For starting out with fundamentals, shooting the photo. It becomes a issue, (least for me) separating the shooting from the post process.
I really don't see a large difference in raw vs. jpeg in image except in the amount of data that can be manipulated (but these would go straight out of camera to post).

Helping people learn to shoot better too, I can see why it would help those critiquing to have a example of a unprocessed photo from them to really get down to their fundamental problems with shooting. (This is probably where all beginners should start.)

I plead my case. sounded like a good idea. up to you all.

 

[SCraig]

How about just starting your posts with something along the lines of, "This is straight out of the camera because I want to focus on the fundamentals before I concentrate on post processing."

 

[BrickHouse]

The trouble is, even JPG has processing done, just in camera vs out, and some of the JPG processing can get pretty wild in camera.

 

[Ysarex]

The trouble is, even JPG has processing done, just in camera vs out, and some of the JPG processing can get pretty wild in camera.

Agreed. SOOC doesn't mean unprocessed it means processed by the camera.

So the conflict cropping up here is just about understanding what the OP intends with the term unprocessed. There is no unprocessed. There is however a camera generated JPEG and it's certainly possible to examine all that goes into trying to make the best one of those by leaning to manipulate all of the camera's adjsutment controls.

Joe

 

[bribrius]

The trouble is, even JPG has processing done, just in camera vs out, and some of the JPG processing can get pretty wild in camera.

Agreed. SOOC doesn't mean unprocessed it means processed by the camera.

So the conflict cropping up here is just about understanding what the OP intends with the term unprocessed. There is no unprocessed. There is however a camera generated JPEG and it's certainly possible to examine all that goes into trying to make the best one of those by leaning to manipulate all of the camera's adjsutment controls.

Joe

does pre-post processed work?

 

[JacaRanda]

How about just starting your posts with something along the lines of, "This is straight out of the camera because I want to focus on the fundamentals before I concentrate on post processing."

Because that is not complicated enough.

 

[bribrius]

How about just starting your posts with something along the lines of, "This is straight out of the camera because I want to focus on the fundamentals before I concentrate on post processing."

Because that is not complicated enough.

wouldn't be the same thing. You wouldnt be seeing other peoples unprocessed photos with settings, and people would be critiquing photos that rely heavily on post processing themselves. The idea of the section would be for anyone concentrating just on shooting at that time. Novice or experienced really. would be a great learning tool imo. (I could be wrong).
Other thing is, anyone looking through the section critiquing would know right away these are out of camera so it would be a different type of critique than critiquing a post processed photo.

 

[robbins.photo]

How about just starting your posts with something along the lines of, "This is straight out of the camera because I want to focus on the fundamentals before I concentrate on post processing."

Because that is not complicated enough.

Well my dad always used to say if you ever need to take a simple straightforward process and turn it into something ridiculous and unworkable all you need is a committee.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

 

[Overread]

Honestly such a section would only breed confusion:

1) For any film there isn't such a thing as unprocessed. Unless all you want are photos of film canisters. At least far as I'm aware you simply can't show anything that isn't processed by some form so any film photography would be out.

2) Digital - RAW shooting. You've got to process these in order to have anything meaningful to show.

3) Digital - JPEG shooting. Technically these are also processed, its just done automatically by the camera internally. As such they are no different to if you shot RAW and used "auto" settings in that; furthermore they are still open to levels of manipulation since not every camera has the same default "base" values for editing (and many users will adapt the settings to further get more pleasing straight of camera JPEGs).



Also there's a fundamental point that you really can't hide much in basic editing when one has faults with the core photo. Sure a pro at photoshop with a lot of time can hide a lot and resizing for the net hides more; but the investment there is so much that chances are you'd not be the same sort of user who'd be wanting basic feedback on faults.


Honestly if you personally (or anyone) wants to focus on the techinical side of the camera that's great; simply post such desires and use very limited editing tools to show your work. You can get the feedback you want and progress from there. It's a much simpler approach and means you can also use the galleries which makes it far more likely that those experienced in the field of interest you're shooting in are going to notice and comment on you work.

 

[bribrius]

How about just starting your posts with something along the lines of, "This is straight out of the camera because I want to focus on the fundamentals before I concentrate on post processing."

Because that is not complicated enough.

Well my dad always used to say if you ever need to take a simple straightforward process and turn it into something ridiculous and unworkable all you need is a committee.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

hey now. it would be handy imo. Those from the film era would probably love it. Those that never quite learned to use a camera and rely heavily on post processing probably not so much, but they could use it to better their shooting (and the newbies and everyone really).
post processing does cover a lot of sin sometimes. which isn't beneficial in learning to shoot.

 

[robbins.photo]

Because that is not complicated enough.

Well my dad always used to say if you ever need to take a simple straightforward process and turn it into something ridiculous and unworkable all you need is a committee.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk

hey now. it would be handy imo. Those from the film era would probably love it. Those that never quite learned to use a camera and rely heavily on post processing probably not so much, but they could use it to better their shooting (and the newbies and everyone really).
post processing does cover a lot of sin sometimes. which isn't beneficial in learning to shoot.

Not that I disagree in principle but I think folks are going to get better feedback and help if they post in a forum specific to the subject matter.

I've got a lot more advice to offer folks taking zoo or wildlife type pics than I do for say someone taking landscapes.

Sent from my LG-LG730 using Tapatalk