In camera PP, for discussion.

Include PP in cameras.

  • Yes.

    Votes: 2 18.2%

  • No.

    Votes: 9 81.8%
  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .
Dave in Wales

Dave in Wales

Messages
3,390
Edit My Images
Yes
Does anyone actually use it?

I never have, nor anyone I know, if this is generally the case why bother to include it.
 
Not sure what you mean. To convert a bunch of photons into electrons and then into something your eyes can assimilate as a picture requires a fair bit of wizardry in any case. A camera can take you so far, with pre-sets for sharpening, saturation, contrast and the rest, along with focus, shutter speed and ISO etc, but judging the result on a tiny screen won't allow you to see some errors.

The aim is always to produce the best final image of which you are capable. And this will be using a decent screen in conjunction with post-production skills. Learning to use a camera is just one part of photography. Learning PP is essential if you want the best results.

I'm shooting a lot of show jumping at the moment, which is pretty tricky, and as it's mostly for immediate printing there is little time for any post work. So it has to be as good as I am capable of making it, or I starve. But this doesn't mean that pretty much all of the shots couldn't be improved if there was time for leisured editing. Pretty much any shot can be improved in post, just as pretty much any shot can be improved by using a better lens. When shooting jumpers I add extra in-camera settings that I don't use when I know I have time to edit. In other words, I set the camera according to the job in hand.

The mistake is thinking that lazy shooting can be fixed with software, either in camera or in post. Without software there can be no digital photography (and without chemistry there can be no analogue photography - same principal).

The wider your skill set, the better your photography will be. In camera PP is one of many tools you need to learn to use if you want to become a decent snapper.

If you get satisfaction from your photography without any post production, fine.

But you'll end up with better pictures if you learn to edit.
 
I wouldn't necessarily consider using camera settings as post production.
Camera settings are there for you to fine tune at point of capture.
And considering the resolution, colour rendering and size of most camera lcd screens then trying any sort of editing within camera is utterly pointless, even more so if you shoot raw! As you never view an actual raw file in camera, its only ever a jpeg thumbnail.
Shooting tethered is slightly different i guess but I've never tried it so can't comment.
Its like saying, by altering the shutter speed, aperture or iso on a film camera is part of the processing stage, its not, its the point of capture.
 
I guess altering the shutter speed is done before the point of capture. But I won't say that as it's a bit pedantic. :D

The point I was making is that photography encompasses lots of different skills, and the best results come from learning as many of them as you can. Not doing something that can improve your work strikes me as...odd.

Trying to come up with the best possible result in camera is something we should do anyway.
 
I think the question could do with more explanation really.
Are you asking if people use the in camera pp features as in looking at a shot on the lcd then using the image editing features of the camera to pp the shot or are you asking if people use the settings in camera to set how the camera pp's every shot it takes? (only applies to JPEG's I think)
If it's the latter wouldn't everyone who shoots JPEG be using those features by default? I thought all camera's did some pp when shooting JPEG, I may be wrong though, it's been known before :)

I generally shoot in RAW so don't use any in camera editing features, do it all on a pc with a big screen - my eyes aren't as good as they once were and that little lcd screen just isn't really big enough!
 
If you mean something like producing a B+W JPEG with a few settings applied then yes as I only use JPEG and I like the way my camera produces them so it saves me having to mess around with it later.
If you mean editing the photo on the camera after it is taken then no as there is little point if I am loading the images to a computer with full access to editing anyway.
 
Musicman said:
I think the OP is on about things like in-camera b/w conversion (some of which offer virtual colour filters) or Olympus' Art Filters

http://www.olympusamerica.com/crm/oneoffpages/crm_artfilters.asp

e2a: and, no, I don't use them.*

* though I do use b/w to get monochrome previews if I'm out shooting for b/w output from a RAW file in mind.
Click to expand...

i wouldnt call using features like that editing either? thats just choices and decisions made when you take an image, like shall i use mono film today or colour, will it be fomapan or tri x, all different options that provide differing results but not editing.
 
Its not new, apart from argiung about how a digital camera ALWAYS processes the light in a certain way, things like in camera black&white or jpeg picture profiles have been around for ages and then the stuff like Nikon's "Active-d lighting" (in Canon speak this is "highlight tone priority") is basically a HDR or shadows/highlights type effect in camera.

I think some of the newer Nikon kit actually does have an in camera full on HDR function and things like the Nikon-1's "takes a picture before you push the button" is more jiggery-pokery.

Anything wrong with any of these? Not really, if you can predictably get the result you want, use whatever workflow that makes you happy and effecient.

The control-freakery of doing everything by hand is for those without copy deadlines :)
 
There's a system to process RAW files in my 60D and my 5D3 and a host of other processing tools and filters on the 60D and so far I've never used any of them. I much prefer to do any PP on a computer later as I have a bigger screen and constant lighting to do it in.
I've only used the HDR function on the 5D3 a couple of times so far, but I'm sure I will use this and the multiple exposures function when I need it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top