Quote:
Originally Posted by Cmike2780
I never said it ended in the field. I just don't agree with the whole "l'll fix it in post" attitude.....and let me make it perfectly clear since you are under the impression that I have something against shooting in RAW, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST IT! I just find it overkill in this thread about a guy just starting out. 9 times out of 10, someone who's just starting out in photography won't be able to use the extra data in a RAW file to their benefit. They'll spend hours adjusting every aspect and come up with an image that looks just as good as the jpeg. It would be like letting someone drive an F-1 car and expecting him to know what he's doing and achieve the results of a pro.
|
Yeah, that's where we disconnect. My belief is that editing one's images is every bit as valuable a photographic skill as shot composition and camera settings for anyone who is serious about their photography. The ability to do that easily and cheaply is one of the true advantages of digital photography and makes $180 for Nikon Capture or $100 for Photoshop Elements a worthwhile expenditure. Certainly one can tweak JPEGs, but if you're going to tweak, might as well do it in RAW where the data is more amenable. Post processing has been a key component of photography for over 100 years.
I simply don't share your view that it's some kind of crutch used as a means of correcting poor shooting technique. I don't buy the concept of turning over the final image quality to some Nikon engineer's algorithm that reflects his concept of what my images should look like. I understand your point of view...I just don't agree with it.