The beauty of Fujifilm: no need for post-processing

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Jim in Hudson
Senior MemberPosts: 1,214Gear list
Like?
Re: Ice cream and superchargers?
In reply to noyo, 5 months ago

noyo wrote:

Sal Baker wrote:

Les Lammers wrote:

Agreed. However, there are many who feel that they need to do extensive PP. I am not one of them.

We all have different needs. Good thing the cameras accommodatee both file formats.

You're so right Sal, but maybe it's like ice cream.

Some like it vanilla while others prefer to have a choice of flavours, extra toppings or textures mixed in. How do you like yours?

To me, RAW represents control.

Sure, you can adjust the camera settings, filters, lighting etc. and eat the jpeg SOOC. Or you can shoot RAW and pull out the fine details or subdue others to a level that a one-size-fits-all jpeg wont.

Certainly it is possible to overdo it or fiddle when it isn't required, but RAW also represents an opportunity for immediate enhancement that gets people going 'oh, wow' in a way that vanilla SOOC jpegs seldom do, unless you are shooting in 'picture postcard' or other 'standardised conditions', like a studio.

I reject the concept that PP is cheating (by default) or that somehow SOOC is more pure or 'true'.

I do agree that extensive PP could be millstones around some peoples' necks. And I do try not to rise to the bait in threads like this but I resent the inference of some, wherever I come across it (not just in this forum), that somehow shooting jpeg-only is aspirational or superior.

Maybe for holiday snaps, a school shoot or a wedding, minimising PP is desirable, but for any who aspire to be more creative, RAW is an invaluable tool to use.

A better analogy might be muscle-cars. Some folk are never going to switch on the turbo and I figure that is their choice. But for those of us who want a bit of grunt.....

I'm not that keen on ice cream anyway. Occasionally I can take a notion to it on a very hot day, but certainly not vanilla.

-- hide signature --

I don't see any statement in this thread about JPEG-only being "superior" or even "aspirational". Instead, it seems the assertion is that it's highly viable. What's the reason for attacking that particular viewpoint?

 Jim in Hudson's gear list:Jim in Hudson's gear list
Fujifilm X-E1 Pentax K-3 Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.4 AL +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow