@iandec . Not to sound rude or mean... but it shouldnt matter what other people think. and therefore if you want to tag your photos Micky mouse you could do so.. :)
but seriously some people are pure at heart and would say that its not SOOC , and then others will disagree. Its subjective to you.. and like I mentioned as long as the photo is your own.. you can do what ever you want to it and tag/name it the same.
Whenever I have an "SOOC" photo, I'll point out that it's SOOC aside from cropping/straightening if I've done so, but only if it's a slight crop. I don't usually tag them with it mainly because I have the memory of a fish and always forget.
@iandec Elibank, SOOC is still in camera processing tho. Some cameras let you choose types of films it mimics like low/high contrast B&W, Velvia, Provia, Astia, desaturated, standard, portraits, saturated vivid... all are in camera processing for certain styles. There is also white balance setting which can turn your photos from cold tone to warm tone if not done correctly. So don't quite get the SOOC thing!
@viranod that, is a great point. My camera only does a fraction of the things you've mentioned (probably) but I have fiddled with a few settings, so I Itotally get your point...
I agree with @viranod , the camera does some processing (although if you choose the settings before taking the picture rather than changing your mind later... it's subtly different)
Personally I think SOOC is a bit bogus as an artistic merit - because photography has always been about processing. Also a lot of creative work starts with a RAW file which by definition will need some processing to make a final image. I imagine SOOC came about as a reaction against the availability and over-use of digital processing techniques...
I came up with my own acronym for cases like this : PMSOOC (=Pretty Much SOOC) :-) Watermarks, croppings, straightenings ... all of the things that would make you say "It's SOOC except for the slight ..." fit in the PMSOOC category. Feel free to use it :-)
I would tag as SOOC if there had been no adjustment to levels etc. Cropping/straightening is all fine, in my book.
But, like @nikkers said, you can tag whatever you want.
I disagree with @viranod. SOOC stands for Straight Out Of the Camera.. right? So whatever your camera did to your photos.. and whatever you did to them in the camera using the features your camera has.. surely with no post-processing it is still straight outta there?
What you are saying is that no photos are non-processed.
Processing goes on in the camera.. after that you take your photo 'Straight Out Of the Camera' and post on here.. and you are saying that isn't SOOC?
most of mine are sooc, if i have to crop them i'll still mark it as sooc as its only additional zoom that i've not used at the time.
if i do anything more to it - which is rare then i wont mark them sooc
@katiegc24
Yes you can call that too. And during films day, what you get from camera are rolls of films, no pic. They too need processing in a lab, whether professional or 1-hour.
Professional lab will give you professional quality prints while 1-hour lab will give you the 1-hour quality.
I've never understood the whole SOOC nonesense. It's a pseudo merit badge that supposedly indicates a better photographic technique because, in theory, you're "not letting software make decisions on the image". That is bogus in the digital realm, as all cameras make decisions between the sensor and the memory card that the photographer has limited control over. Don't believe it? Set any number of cameras to "factory setting", then dial in the exact same aperture, shutter speed and ISO and shoot the same scene at the same time with each of them. The results will vary greatly in terms of light, colour, saturation, white balance. Because of that, no serious professional photographer would ever publish an image "SOOC": at a minimum, he or she will adjust levels/curves and saturation to ensure that the image reflects reality (if going for photorealism).
Think of it this way: using "SOOC" as a source of pride in the digital world is like a film photographer taking pride in saying "processed at the local 1-hour photo lab" (instead of developing the film him/herself and controlling the final outcome through the chemicals used, developing time, etc -the "photoshop" of old-). Post-processing is part of the photographic workflow, and taking pride in skipping that step makes no sense to me...
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
but seriously some people are pure at heart and would say that its not SOOC , and then others will disagree. Its subjective to you.. and like I mentioned as long as the photo is your own.. you can do what ever you want to it and tag/name it the same.
The flickr group http://www.flickr.com/groups/sooc/ has a fairly strict definition.
Personally I think SOOC is a bit bogus as an artistic merit - because photography has always been about processing. Also a lot of creative work starts with a RAW file which by definition will need some processing to make a final image. I imagine SOOC came about as a reaction against the availability and over-use of digital processing techniques...
But, like @nikkers said, you can tag whatever you want.
I disagree with @viranod. SOOC stands for Straight Out Of the Camera.. right? So whatever your camera did to your photos.. and whatever you did to them in the camera using the features your camera has.. surely with no post-processing it is still straight outta there?
What you are saying is that no photos are non-processed.
Processing goes on in the camera.. after that you take your photo 'Straight Out Of the Camera' and post on here.. and you are saying that isn't SOOC?
:/
if i do anything more to it - which is rare then i wont mark them sooc
Yes you can call that too. And during films day, what you get from camera are rolls of films, no pic. They too need processing in a lab, whether professional or 1-hour.
Professional lab will give you professional quality prints while 1-hour lab will give you the 1-hour quality.
I've never understood the whole SOOC nonesense. It's a pseudo merit badge that supposedly indicates a better photographic technique because, in theory, you're "not letting software make decisions on the image". That is bogus in the digital realm, as all cameras make decisions between the sensor and the memory card that the photographer has limited control over. Don't believe it? Set any number of cameras to "factory setting", then dial in the exact same aperture, shutter speed and ISO and shoot the same scene at the same time with each of them. The results will vary greatly in terms of light, colour, saturation, white balance. Because of that, no serious professional photographer would ever publish an image "SOOC": at a minimum, he or she will adjust levels/curves and saturation to ensure that the image reflects reality (if going for photorealism).
Think of it this way: using "SOOC" as a source of pride in the digital world is like a film photographer taking pride in saying "processed at the local 1-hour photo lab" (instead of developing the film him/herself and controlling the final outcome through the chemicals used, developing time, etc -the "photoshop" of old-). Post-processing is part of the photographic workflow, and taking pride in skipping that step makes no sense to me...
Just a part of it...
Scene mode:
• Portrait
• e-Portrait
• Landscape
• Landscape + Portrait
• Sport
• Night Scene
• Night + Portrait
• Children
• High Key
• Low Key
• DIS mode
• Macro
• Nature Macro
• Candle
• Sunset
• Documents
• Panorama
• Fireworks
• Beach & Snow
• Fisheye Effect* (for use with lens converter)
• Wide Angle* (for use with lens converter)
• Macro* (for use with lens converter)
Art Filters:
• Pop art
• Soft focus
• Pale & Light Color
• Light Tone
• Grainy film
• Pin hole
• Diorama
• Cross Process
• Dramatic Tone*
White Balance:
• Auto
• Cloudy
• Shade
• Flash
• Daylight
• Fluorescent 1
• Fluorescent 2
• Fluorescent 3
• Lamp
• 1 custom preset
• Kelvin (2000 - 14000 K)
SOOC from this camera will probably give you hundreds of different outputs. Still SOOC, right?
PS - from http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusepl2/page3.asp