Sorry silly question but since I've changed taking my photos to RAW I have noticed I'm editing every single one. Before in jPEG I got away with not editing at all (but only the few that is) so I could tag it as a SOOC. Now I'm using RAW I'm uploading to LR then making little tweaks. Some of my images I change the colours dramatically but some I keep it to a minimal but I don't label it as sooc as I've edited. I have found I have to edit now in RAW as I feel there's more noise created than before.
I just want to make sure then that a SOOC is definitley no editing at all, not even a tweak, or is it?
'Straight Out Of Camera' means just that - not sure how you could interpret it otherwise. If you shoot in RAW, it means all you've done it convert it to JPEG.
By the way, there's more noise because when you shoot in JPEG the camera adds its own noise reduction to it.
@vikdaddy Thanks, it's good to know. I'm swithering over going back to JPEG again. I like RAW and don't mind the tweaking, still do it in JPEG anyway, but it is a bit more hassle if I do want to a little bit more editing. Can't make up my mind what's for the best.
I've also noticed I'm getting lazy using RAW, I'm not trying as hard to get it right first time knowing I can just tweak it anyway.
I was just going to say what Emma said - shoot RAW and JPEG. You can still call you RAW SOOC if you do not edit it but convert it to JPEG. I have found that some of my JPEG's are too dark or not processed in my camera the way I would like so I would have to do some editing to my RAW file.
JPG are not really SOOC... what they are are is the camera loads 'default' or 'user-defined' options onto the the JPG, you must happen to like your cameras defaults.
RAW images are just the data, no white balance, no exposure correction, they tend to be flat on the colour side, because they are RAW data.
The nice thing is there is more latitude in RAW vs JPG. The camera always shoots in RAW, than the in-camera computer converts it to JPG. Any time you change a file at all you destroy it a little. Thus there is far less data in the file once it is one your computer, so if you ever really under exposed a RAW file you could still develop out the detail in post.
To relate it to film:
RAW image means you select ISO film speed, ap and shutter speed and converting to JPG means you select the paper and how it is printed.
Some people like walmart so they shoot jpg, some people are control freaks so they have they own darkrooms. Neither makes you better in any way.
PS you do want to consistent results more than anything, so you can at least apply the same edit to every photo. If I had a shoot with 350 photos and each one need completely different tweaks... well that would suck... if light room, I tweak the first one and apply those settings to the other 349... done in mins not hours... means more money....
@vikdaddy Nothing at all, I just haven't done a SOOC shot in a while and was hoping there were rules that could be broken, lol. It's ok, I love editing anyway, especially when I'm being creative with it. It was a silly question anyway as I already knew the answer. I've decided to stick to RAW as editing is actually easier (Well I feel it is), I just need to be a bit more strict and less lazy with my shots. I might try the RAW & JPEG but sometimes it just takes up so much memory doing that. I'll need to play and see how I go with it.
@icywarm thanks for that, I'm starting to understand Raw more and what you said at the start makes sense. Ok. I now definitely know what I'm doing, I'm sticking to RAW, I love the tweaks ans am happy with my end results and I'm glad I changed to RAW and now I understand about JPEG and SOOC then I feel it's better to do it yourself, at least you get what you want. I found myself taking loads of shots in jpeg to get it to look close to what I see but couldn't get it quite right but with tweaks in RAW I could get that so I'm sticking to RAW
@kirsty1975 I used to shoot JPEG, but when I started shooting RAW+JPEG there was no turning back. Eventually I omitted shooting in JPEG and now just shoot in RAW. There's nothing wrong with a little editing, even in the days of film post-processing was done (dodging and burning, for example).
@soybon yepp no trouble... now it depends on your camera... but as a rule of thumb more entry level cameras heap loads of noise reduction and really bend the contrast curves to make the image pop. You lose tons of detail, but on the screen or a 4x7 print look ok. So in general users are happier with SOOC.
There is a huge debate as too how much a camera does to a RAW file. Would you believe in some circles people are upset because their cameras make their RAW photos look too good... ie the camera does a little noise reduction and colour correction... they want a sensor that captures no noise, not in camera software that removes noise... big difference there...
@icywarm wow there is so much to this than I thought. I always thought the camera took the picture once you set it up right and that was your end result. I didn't realise the camera worked on the image too to help you. There is so much to learn.
I'm so glad I started this thread, sometimes the silliest of questions get the best answers, lol.
@vikdaddy I have developed film but didn't do burn and dodge. to me it seems quite complicated. I'm hoping I may get to try it in March when I do my taster course.
@kirsty1975 the camera helping you out is a large part of why pictures from Rebels and such look so 'professional'. Even P&S are getting better at 'know' how the consumer wants their photos to look. The trouble becomes the fine fine fine details can be lost with this digital make-up. Often people 'prefer' when a rebel or P&S in camera noise reduction smooths out someones skin by averaging out the detail to remove noise, where a Mark 1 or D645 will resolve at 45mp+ every wrinkle, pore and blemish. I need to find a photo... hold up...
This picture has had heaps of noise reduction done to it... I don't like it... I find my wife sexy... but the picture is weak technically:
This picture taken at a High ISO has lots of noise, but I left the noise in it so you can see the fine detail in the eye:
By shooting in RAW the choice is mine... I would hate the second image if the 'strong' noise reduction of the first one removed the noise from the second...
To answer your original question, SOOC is exactly that: straight out of the camera. No editing, no cropping, no nothing. It's also a sign of a pure amateur. While I attempt to get it as close to what I want in the camera as possible by using filters and framing responsibly, I still do minor corrections on almost every photo I take.
As for the noise, noise is a by-product of shooting in high-ISO's or severe under exposure. If you are seeing noise, you need to reduce your ISO or take a longer exposure. It has nothing to do with shooting JPG as opposed to RAW. You can still have noise in RAW.
I know my cameras have an option for turning "Noise Reduction" off. I am not sure what the default is on different camera models, but you definitely want this turned off. As I'd said, there never should be noise. If you are shooting at 1600 ISO, then you need to lower your ISO to reduce noise, not rely on software to do it for you.
@jasonbarnette Do you have any tips for noise reduction. I never used t use a high iso but I seem to be doing it more and more these days especially on dull days and indoors so I can prevent using my flash. Normally to get the brightness I need I have my iso at 800 or 1600 (tut tut) and my f number at it's lowest it can go and I've noticed I use my tripod more so I can keep the shutter open longer but sometimes it isn't always possible to use a tripod. I do try and keep my iso down but my images come out dark unless I keep it dark and just brighten them up in LR?
@icywarm those images are fab!!! I see your wife is softened, is that due to the noise reduction? It looks on purpose though and your baby is gorgeous, in that image though you don't see a lot of noise. Is there a lot more when blown up?
I went to town with noise reduction... I like how it softens vs say turning down clarity. See how there is still detail in the print on the scarf... that would/could/may be lost as it is green on green.
The face is taken at ISO 1000 and there is noise in the shadows... I gave it a very muted colour treatment so that the noise would jump out... but it is there... if I really wanted to I could apply selective noise reduction to the shadows and leave the eyes... but the room was almost black with one lamp about 6 feet away... not the best conditions for any sort of good shot... but it works...
I still need a lot of practice, thought I was getting there until something goes wrong.
Thanks for all the advice, you have all been so helpful, I much appreciate it. I'm so glad I joined this site as I've been really nervous about joining others and chickened out. Thanks again.
@kirsty1975 Well, the first thing I can tell you is that an under exposed image is a ruined image. No amount of work in Lightroom or Photoshop or even an Act of God can save an underexposed image. I'm sure you've noticed as you brighten a dark photo you get weird color casts, which are usually yellow with my Nikon cameras, and you start to lose color saturation and detail. You have to think about it this way: if light bouncing off a particular detail in a scene doesn't hit your camera's sensor, how is Lightroom or Photoshop supposed to know what it looks like when you crank the brightness in the programs?
I'm guessing you might still have a kit lens for you camera? Something with a variable aperture around an f/3.5-4.5? One thing you can do is get the Nikon (if you have a Nikon body) 50mm f/1.8. I never, never shoot at the widest aperture indoors, but shooting at an f/2.8 makes a huge difference. I can shoot a landscape photo at 200 ISO, f/1.8 @ 1/80 exposure, handheld, 30 minutes after sunset. It's an amazing lens.
You're on the right track using a tripod and slower shutter speeds already. The rule of thumb is that you should use a shutter speed faster than "one over the focal length". So, if you are using a zoom lens at, say, 50mm then you can use a shutter speed as slow as 1/50. Keep in mind to properly freeze human movements you need a shutter speed of at least 1/125. However, the slower shutter speeds work fine for landscapes.
Try taking your shutter sped as slow as you can go depending on the action and focal length. Shooting wide at or around 18-35mm is best. Then, use the widest aperture your lens allows. Finally, set your ISO to get a proper exposure. See what you can get.
Ok...shew...that's it. Should I be charging you for this? I think I'll charge a good photo for the day. Yep...that's my bill. Get at it!
@jasonbarnette but a RAW file can come back MUCH better than a jpg
at least 4 stops under exposed... the lack of detail has more to do with the 500mm mirror lens than from the exposure correction... could you make it an 20x30, no but if it was your one picture of a lockness monster... you'd be in luck...original is top left...
@icywarm Shooting RAW is only better than JPG if you screw up. Honestly, that's what it comes down to. If I shoot a properly exposed photo in JPG, RAW cannot do better.
And yes...where are the heads??? That photo is kinda freaking me out now.
@jasonbarnette yeah... I wish I never screwed up and I had the time to set my camera everytime, and I wouldn't shoot in RAW... but until than... I need the crutch/safety net...
It was still winterish and the heads are under their wings.... but it does bother me now...
@jasonbarnette thanks, I have noticed pictures are worse when trying to fix an underexposed image but I remember it was worse when I shot jpeg. I used to just bin jpegs when underexposed. With RAW I try and attempt something and see what happens but usually I do have at least one good picture when I finally realise I went wrong, lol.
My camera is a Canon 450D and I use the kit lens but I also have a 70-300mml lens which only works on the lowest aperture (now does that mean widest and at say f/4.0? - hate f numbers, lol still confuses me). It's not completely compatible with my camera which I found out after buying it but with the price I paid for it I ain't complaining. Lesson learned that day, research before buy.
I have read numerous times on here about setting shutter speed to focal length but every time I get the camera out that goes out my head. What I have been doing is looking more at my histogram and if the shot isn't right I'll fix and retake. I know that can't be done on moving objects though which is why I'm scared to take those shots and portraits but I need to over come them.
And finally one thing I have noticed I do a lot is set my focus at 55mm all the time. I really don't know why I do that, I move myself rather than zoom in and out so I'll try and remember to take shots 18-35mm. I'll need to write all this down now, lol
Awww thank you so much for all your help. I'm afraid I've already taken my shot today, just need to upload it (portrait too, got over the nerves today) But I promise tomorrow, I'll take heed in everything you have said and I'll pay more attention and I'll get you a good shot tomorrow. Just a pity we're in the middle of a storm right now and it's supposed to rain through the weekend too. Will need to get a poly bag to cover the camera.
@icywarm those birds are creepy, lol. They must have known you were coming so they hid.
@kirsty1975 , hi Kirsty,
well from my point of view when it comes to sooc, there is only one way a picture can genuinely have this tag. That is once the photo is taken and downloaded to your computer or how ever else that you do it, once there in a file to preview, if you are happy that it can be uploaded then it is sooc.
If you feel it needs cropping or colour alteration or anything else then it shouldn't in my view have sooc as it's tag.
If you read my profile you would see that I use a primitive digital camera.
If one wants to learn to take better photo's then they need to learn how to get depth of feild, sharpness and contrast when the picture is taken, that to me is the difference between a everyday holiday photo to one that's interesting because the photographer has taken the time to actually view what they are seeing in the lense.
365 actually compresses all of my jpegs, which makes them look different to the ones I have on my computer, that's out of my control so sooc still applies.
If you change from one format to another before uploading and the formatting programme alters the new formatted picture from the previous original without you doing any changes yourself, then it is still sooc as long as you are still happy with how it now looks.
If you as a photographer spent an extra few seconds and look @ all of what you see in your viewfinder, not just the centre where your main focus is, I'm certain that you would spend less time post altering of any picture that you take.
If for example the light is bad then you need to change where you are taking the photo from or if able to find another time in the day where the light complements the picture.
A tripod is very useful for a beginner to a professional, to free your hands and let you really concentrate on imaging rather than part of your mind thinking about what you are doing with the actual camera.
I hope my comments are helpful and constructive for you.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
By the way, there's more noise because when you shoot in JPEG the camera adds its own noise reduction to it.
I've also noticed I'm getting lazy using RAW, I'm not trying as hard to get it right first time knowing I can just tweak it anyway.
RAW images are just the data, no white balance, no exposure correction, they tend to be flat on the colour side, because they are RAW data.
The nice thing is there is more latitude in RAW vs JPG. The camera always shoots in RAW, than the in-camera computer converts it to JPG. Any time you change a file at all you destroy it a little. Thus there is far less data in the file once it is one your computer, so if you ever really under exposed a RAW file you could still develop out the detail in post.
To relate it to film:
RAW image means you select ISO film speed, ap and shutter speed and converting to JPG means you select the paper and how it is printed.
Some people like walmart so they shoot jpg, some people are control freaks so they have they own darkrooms. Neither makes you better in any way.
PS you do want to consistent results more than anything, so you can at least apply the same edit to every photo. If I had a shoot with 350 photos and each one need completely different tweaks... well that would suck... if light room, I tweak the first one and apply those settings to the other 349... done in mins not hours... means more money....
Thanks again @icywarm
If I do anything to colour balance and/or levels (or anything more dramatic) then I wouldn't call it SOOC. Just me own little personal rule of thumb.
i am somehow enlightened. Thank you!
There is a huge debate as too how much a camera does to a RAW file. Would you believe in some circles people are upset because their cameras make their RAW photos look too good... ie the camera does a little noise reduction and colour correction... they want a sensor that captures no noise, not in camera software that removes noise... big difference there...
I'm so glad I started this thread, sometimes the silliest of questions get the best answers, lol.
@vikdaddy I have developed film but didn't do burn and dodge. to me it seems quite complicated. I'm hoping I may get to try it in March when I do my taster course.
This picture taken at a High ISO has lots of noise, but I left the noise in it so you can see the fine detail in the eye:
By shooting in RAW the choice is mine... I would hate the second image if the 'strong' noise reduction of the first one removed the noise from the second...
As for the noise, noise is a by-product of shooting in high-ISO's or severe under exposure. If you are seeing noise, you need to reduce your ISO or take a longer exposure. It has nothing to do with shooting JPG as opposed to RAW. You can still have noise in RAW.
I know my cameras have an option for turning "Noise Reduction" off. I am not sure what the default is on different camera models, but you definitely want this turned off. As I'd said, there never should be noise. If you are shooting at 1600 ISO, then you need to lower your ISO to reduce noise, not rely on software to do it for you.
And yes, an untouched JPG is SOOC.
yeah SOOC means no anything at all.... just plain picture u have captured not even a ingle tweak to levels or brightness.. =)
The face is taken at ISO 1000 and there is noise in the shadows... I gave it a very muted colour treatment so that the noise would jump out... but it is there... if I really wanted to I could apply selective noise reduction to the shadows and leave the eyes... but the room was almost black with one lamp about 6 feet away... not the best conditions for any sort of good shot... but it works...
I still need a lot of practice, thought I was getting there until something goes wrong.
Thanks for all the advice, you have all been so helpful, I much appreciate it. I'm so glad I joined this site as I've been really nervous about joining others and chickened out. Thanks again.
I'm guessing you might still have a kit lens for you camera? Something with a variable aperture around an f/3.5-4.5? One thing you can do is get the Nikon (if you have a Nikon body) 50mm f/1.8. I never, never shoot at the widest aperture indoors, but shooting at an f/2.8 makes a huge difference. I can shoot a landscape photo at 200 ISO, f/1.8 @ 1/80 exposure, handheld, 30 minutes after sunset. It's an amazing lens.
You're on the right track using a tripod and slower shutter speeds already. The rule of thumb is that you should use a shutter speed faster than "one over the focal length". So, if you are using a zoom lens at, say, 50mm then you can use a shutter speed as slow as 1/50. Keep in mind to properly freeze human movements you need a shutter speed of at least 1/125. However, the slower shutter speeds work fine for landscapes.
Try taking your shutter sped as slow as you can go depending on the action and focal length. Shooting wide at or around 18-35mm is best. Then, use the widest aperture your lens allows. Finally, set your ISO to get a proper exposure. See what you can get.
Ok...shew...that's it. Should I be charging you for this? I think I'll charge a good photo for the day. Yep...that's my bill. Get at it!
at least 4 stops under exposed... the lack of detail has more to do with the 500mm mirror lens than from the exposure correction... could you make it an 20x30, no but if it was your one picture of a lockness monster... you'd be in luck...original is top left...
but yes like Jason said get out and shoot... I have a sunny day and +4 weather to go test out... why are we all sitting at our computers???
And yes...where are the heads??? That photo is kinda freaking me out now.
It was still winterish and the heads are under their wings.... but it does bother me now...
My camera is a Canon 450D and I use the kit lens but I also have a 70-300mml lens which only works on the lowest aperture (now does that mean widest and at say f/4.0? - hate f numbers, lol still confuses me). It's not completely compatible with my camera which I found out after buying it but with the price I paid for it I ain't complaining. Lesson learned that day, research before buy.
I have read numerous times on here about setting shutter speed to focal length but every time I get the camera out that goes out my head. What I have been doing is looking more at my histogram and if the shot isn't right I'll fix and retake. I know that can't be done on moving objects though which is why I'm scared to take those shots and portraits but I need to over come them.
And finally one thing I have noticed I do a lot is set my focus at 55mm all the time. I really don't know why I do that, I move myself rather than zoom in and out so I'll try and remember to take shots 18-35mm. I'll need to write all this down now, lol
Awww thank you so much for all your help. I'm afraid I've already taken my shot today, just need to upload it (portrait too, got over the nerves today) But I promise tomorrow, I'll take heed in everything you have said and I'll pay more attention and I'll get you a good shot tomorrow. Just a pity we're in the middle of a storm right now and it's supposed to rain through the weekend too. Will need to get a poly bag to cover the camera.
@icywarm those birds are creepy, lol. They must have known you were coming so they hid.
Thank you everyone so much for all your help
well from my point of view when it comes to sooc, there is only one way a picture can genuinely have this tag. That is once the photo is taken and downloaded to your computer or how ever else that you do it, once there in a file to preview, if you are happy that it can be uploaded then it is sooc.
If you feel it needs cropping or colour alteration or anything else then it shouldn't in my view have sooc as it's tag.
If you read my profile you would see that I use a primitive digital camera.
If one wants to learn to take better photo's then they need to learn how to get depth of feild, sharpness and contrast when the picture is taken, that to me is the difference between a everyday holiday photo to one that's interesting because the photographer has taken the time to actually view what they are seeing in the lense.
365 actually compresses all of my jpegs, which makes them look different to the ones I have on my computer, that's out of my control so sooc still applies.
If you change from one format to another before uploading and the formatting programme alters the new formatted picture from the previous original without you doing any changes yourself, then it is still sooc as long as you are still happy with how it now looks.
If you as a photographer spent an extra few seconds and look @ all of what you see in your viewfinder, not just the centre where your main focus is, I'm certain that you would spend less time post altering of any picture that you take.
If for example the light is bad then you need to change where you are taking the photo from or if able to find another time in the day where the light complements the picture.
A tripod is very useful for a beginner to a professional, to free your hands and let you really concentrate on imaging rather than part of your mind thinking about what you are doing with the actual camera.
I hope my comments are helpful and constructive for you.