I reckon the old adage 'the image is everything' fits well enough, so like other posts, esp the cooking analogy, it matters little how you get to the finished product.
Myself, I do try and get it right in camera and spend a lot of time post processing -they are not mutually exclusive, and it doesn't mean to say that I swap skies etc, just spend some time gently tweaking until I'm happy with the end result.
I'm pretty much the same, I have swapped a sky once in my five years relationship with photoshop and I'd do it again if the need reared it's head.
As I mentioned in the first post, I always strive to get everything right in camera, spend all the available or necessary time to so so but there are times when that is not possible or time is limited by either circumstance or the client themselves.
Now I have been having a tug of war with myself and whether I should post this example, I do fear that most will not read the story of how these images came to be and pull out the stick of judgement before taking the conditions into consideration.
I was a second shooter during a wedding last summer, when I got home and my other half asked me how it went, I replied with, 'It was the wedding shoot from hell!'
The job was a portrait plus reception booking, a mate of mine was the hired gun and he asked if I wanted to assist.
He helps me out and lends me stuff (Lastolite BG's, diffusers, Elinchrom FX400's and a studio ere and there) all the time I offered to help for free, he said to bring my camera as I was more then welcome to grab some shots.
The clients, a Greek couple getting married in Helsinki, were 2 hours late to start, we baked in the July sun waiting it out, they were supposed to arrive at Senate square for 16:00 and they turned up around 18:00, the reception was at a nearby hotel 18:45, that gave us 45 minutes to do the portraits in the two separate locations requested by the bride, both with 4KM of each other and inside the city centre, on a
Saturday.
The first location was the meeting place so we rushed to get those done, I didn't even bother to try a shot, I just held a 3x6ft lastolite skylite panel to diffuse the suns rays while my buddy was shooting it out.
Next we had to jump in a car and drive to Kaivopuisto, a sea park with a lovely Baltic sea background, only their car pulls in to a car park on route and the groom disappears, we also pull up and park and ask 'Where did he go?'
'He went for an ice cream' replied the bride.
...and he didn't return for 20 minutes.
Meanwhile I shot one hideous picture:
I wasn't asked to help out at the reception and I'm quite glad of it, my mate told me there were even more oddities later that evening.
I sat home, sipped an nice cold one and had a wee play aboot.
Yes, it's over PP'd, yes it's a lie, yes it's not real, no I'm not proud of it.
But it's the brides fave pick of the day, (no groom!
speaks volumes doesn't it)
NOTE: I never, ever rely on extreme PP on my shoots, paid or otherwise, I never say 'I'll sort that in post' unless it saves serious time and serious money or there are serious restrictions that I have to consider.
What does make me groan is when I see a sentence along the lines 'straight from camera-no post processing', as though it's some badge of honour, when the accompanying image is usually crying out for a bit of post processing, horizons straightening, shadows lifting, USM etc.
I hear you brother! 'Straight from camera, no PP!' my brain translates these words to 'I'm lazy and I don't know how!'
Good thread, and some well thought out responses.
Cheers Les, much appreciated.
.
, if you believe its real then of course it shows skill. 
