Does that really add more value?

**DeepThrob** · 10-15-2019, 05:13 PM - **1 Like**

an exclamation point after 'hand held' or 'no post processing' is bragging

**Sir Nameless** · 10-15-2019, 05:24 PM

Haha, true that!

leekil · 10-15-2019, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by MJKoski

some thought was given to the process and composition.

Originally posted by MJKoski

Ultimately, the only purpose of digital camera is maximum technical quality in the easiest possible manner. A tripod helps everyone to reach this goal.

I don't think everyone has the same values or goals as you do. For example, I value more portable and less intrusive equipment for indoor candid photographs in low light.

tokyoscape · 10-15-2019, 07:51 PM

“Handheld”: if it is a night photo from a non-full frame body and it looks good. Yeah, It added value to me. It tells a good shooting technic was applied by the photographer. It will be very interesting to know the technic behind that.

“No tripod”: Depend on the scene and again, if it is low light or night photography?

“No post-processed”: I will take it as the photographer doesn’t yet have time to post-process it.

MJKoski · 10-16-2019, 12:14 AM

Cellphone on tripod easily equals $$$$ handheld. Of course it is my 2 cents only, but I see no point purchasing separate digital camera without some kind of stabilizer. Be it tripod or flash to freeze the moment if needed.

**Kerrowdown** · 10-16-2019, 01:21 AM

For me it's always been "the image is everything", the method for obtaining it is irrelevant.

**BigMackCam** · 10-16-2019, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by MJKoski

Cellphone on tripod easily equals $$$$ handheld. Of course it is my 2 cents only, but I see no point purchasing separate digital camera without some kind of stabilizer. Be it tripod or flash to freeze the moment if needed.

A cell-phone on a tripod isn't much use for photographing birds in flight, though... or shallow depth of field portraits from a number of different angles and focal lengths... or the winning goal at your local soccer team's football game... or... or... or... etc. As always, it's entirely dependent on the intended use case, the photographer's intent and personal preferences in how they prefer to work. Cell-phones offer some specific advantages in certain use cases. So do tripods. Flashes too. And, of course, larger sensor interchangeable lens cameras...

Zooland · 10-16-2019, 01:47 AM

Originally posted by Vasyl

Hi Guys,
Do the statements like "handheld", or "no tripod" , or " not edited/postprocessed", etc really add value to a photo?

As up to me, they are not.
Thanks
P.S. That is another chance for you all to increase your posts count. :-)

All depends on what you want to do with that photo.

**Rondec** · 10-16-2019, 02:34 AM

I don't think that people mention these things to "add value" to their photos. I think they mention it for one of three reasons (1) to explain and deficiencies in the photo, (2) to indicate how good their gear is (that is to say with IBIS they couldn't have gotten this particular image), or (3) for informational purposes. I don't usually mention if something is shot handheld, but I do mention if I used what is for me a really high iso setting (greater than 6400) more as an informational thing for those who view it.

As far as SOOC images, I don't particularly see the point. Yes, I have taken plenty of SOOC jpegs, but they aren't as good as if I process them and once I am going to work cropping a little bit or sharpening I might as well just shoot RAW.

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-16-2019, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by pschlute

Yes I often hear of folk that wont clone out an imperfection, or claim that only the colour of the camera's jpeg is the "one and true" record of what they are recording.

I don't argue anymore

But these two things are different.

Cloning out imperfections is modifying what was actually there. Making it something that is not the case. Imagine cloning out your least favourite family member from a photo. Same thing.

Right out of the camera simply explains ones mastery of the jpeg settings, and exposure. They took a shot with the desired effects that n the dead no further adjustment, that’s all

As to value of the different qualifying statements attached to an image, they add value to a discussion about technique but not monetarily

MJKoski · 10-16-2019, 04:24 AM

IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed.

pschlute · 10-16-2019, 04:31 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Cloning out imperfections is modifying what was actually there. Making it something that is not the case. Imagine cloning out your least favourite family member from a photo. Same thing.

I was replying to the concept of "purity". When I clone out an object in a picture (or even a person) I realise I am modifying what the camera "saw". But when I head out with a camera it is not to "record what is there" , I go out to make a photograph.

**BigMackCam** · 10-16-2019, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by MJKoski

IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed.

<Sigh>... You win. I give up

**Lowell Goudge** · 10-16-2019, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by pschlute

I was replying to the concept of "purity". When I clone out an object in a picture (or even a person) I realise I am modifying what the camera "saw". But when I head out with a camera it is not to "record what is there" , I go out to make a photograph.

Not to hijack the thread, but is the photo made at the time of exposure, or later, in the image editor?

Dartmoor Dave · 10-16-2019, 04:45 AM - **5 Likes**

Originally posted by MJKoski

IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed.

A few weeks ago, back when the weather was warm, I spent some minutes watching a keen photographer trying to photograph a group of Dartmoor ponies with his very high-end looking Canon on a tripod. The ponies would stand there patiently while he planted his tripod feet and adjusted the height, then at the moment he bent down to look through the viewfinder they'd move away out of frame. Each time the ponies did that the photographer moved his tripod to a new position and started setting up again, and each time he finally bent down to look through his viewfinder the ponies moved away. After about ten minutes of it the poor guy looked close to tears.

The thing is, ponies really don't like it when they can't see your face. So if you want to get good photos of them from close by you have to shoot handheld and shoot fast, with the camera up to your eye for the briefest moment possible. Of course you could try using live view and a tripod, although you'd still be most likely to end up with lots of photos of a horse's a**e and also look like one.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Does that make any sense to add the Tamron 70-200, if one already has the 50-135?	Bui	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	10-03-2019 11:32 AM
How much does a sticky aperture effect value (M42)?	pentax360	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-27-2018 10:50 PM
I don't see the value of rating value in reviews.	skyoftexas	General Photography	9	11-07-2015 04:35 PM
Does it make sense to add a DA* 300mm to my 70-200mm?	HenrikDK	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	03-28-2012 05:37 AM
K20D does action (very impressively I might add): Lots of images	palmor	Post Your Photos!	15	06-17-2008 05:25 AM

10-15-2019, 05:13 PM - 1 Like	#61
DeepThrob Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Taos, New Mexico Posts: 295	an exclamation point after 'hand held' or 'no post processing' is bragging

10-15-2019, 05:24 PM	#62
Sir Nameless Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2015 Location: Mass a chew sits Photos: Gallery Posts: 574	Haha, true that!

10-15-2019, 07:12 PM	#63
leekil Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,003	Originally posted by MJKoski some thought was given to the process and composition. Originally posted by MJKoski Ultimately, the only purpose of digital camera is maximum technical quality in the easiest possible manner. A tripod helps everyone to reach this goal. I don't think everyone has the same values or goals as you do. For example, I value more portable and less intrusive equipment for indoor candid photographs in low light.

10-15-2019, 07:51 PM	#64
tokyoscape Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2018 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,256	“Handheld”: if it is a night photo from a non-full frame body and it looks good. Yeah, It added value to me. It tells a good shooting technic was applied by the photographer. It will be very interesting to know the technic behind that. “No tripod”: Depend on the scene and again, if it is low light or night photography? “No post-processed”: I will take it as the photographer doesn’t yet have time to post-process it.

10-16-2019, 12:14 AM	#65
MJKoski Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 1,784	Cellphone on tripod easily equals $$$$ handheld. Of course it is my 2 cents only, but I see no point purchasing separate digital camera without some kind of stabilizer. Be it tripod or flash to freeze the moment if needed.

10-16-2019, 01:21 AM	#66
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	For me it's always been "the image is everything", the method for obtaining it is irrelevant.

10-16-2019, 01:43 AM	#67
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,674	Originally posted by MJKoski Cellphone on tripod easily equals $$$$ handheld. Of course it is my 2 cents only, but I see no point purchasing separate digital camera without some kind of stabilizer. Be it tripod or flash to freeze the moment if needed. A cell-phone on a tripod isn't much use for photographing birds in flight, though... or shallow depth of field portraits from a number of different angles and focal lengths... or the winning goal at your local soccer team's football game... or... or... or... etc. As always, it's entirely dependent on the intended use case, the photographer's intent and personal preferences in how they prefer to work. Cell-phones offer some specific advantages in certain use cases. So do tripods. Flashes too. And, of course, larger sensor interchangeable lens cameras...

10-16-2019, 01:47 AM	#68
Zooland Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2019 Posts: 370	Originally posted by Vasyl Hi Guys, Do the statements like "handheld", or "no tripod" , or " not edited/postprocessed", etc really add value to a photo? As up to me, they are not. Thanks P.S. That is another chance for you all to increase your posts count. :-) All depends on what you want to do with that photo.

10-16-2019, 02:34 AM	#69
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	I don't think that people mention these things to "add value" to their photos. I think they mention it for one of three reasons (1) to explain and deficiencies in the photo, (2) to indicate how good their gear is (that is to say with IBIS they couldn't have gotten this particular image), or (3) for informational purposes. I don't usually mention if something is shot handheld, but I do mention if I used what is for me a really high iso setting (greater than 6400) more as an informational thing for those who view it. As far as SOOC images, I don't particularly see the point. Yes, I have taken plenty of SOOC jpegs, but they aren't as good as if I process them and once I am going to work cropping a little bit or sharpening I might as well just shoot RAW.

10-16-2019, 04:14 AM	#70
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by pschlute Yes I often hear of folk that wont clone out an imperfection, or claim that only the colour of the camera's jpeg is the "one and true" record of what they are recording. I don't argue anymore But these two things are different. Cloning out imperfections is modifying what was actually there. Making it something that is not the case. Imagine cloning out your least favourite family member from a photo. Same thing. Right out of the camera simply explains ones mastery of the jpeg settings, and exposure. They took a shot with the desired effects that n the dead no further adjustment, that’s all As to value of the different qualifying statements attached to an image, they add value to a discussion about technique but not monetarily

10-16-2019, 04:24 AM	#71
MJKoski Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 1,784	IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed.

10-16-2019, 04:31 AM	#72
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,202	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Cloning out imperfections is modifying what was actually there. Making it something that is not the case. Imagine cloning out your least favourite family member from a photo. Same thing. I was replying to the concept of "purity". When I clone out an object in a picture (or even a person) I realise I am modifying what the camera "saw". But when I head out with a camera it is not to "record what is there" , I go out to make a photograph.

10-16-2019, 04:33 AM	#73
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,674	Originally posted by MJKoski IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed. <Sigh>... You win. I give up

10-16-2019, 04:33 AM	#74
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by pschlute I was replying to the concept of "purity". When I clone out an object in a picture (or even a person) I realise I am modifying what the camera "saw". But when I head out with a camera it is not to "record what is there" , I go out to make a photograph. Not to hijack the thread, but is the photo made at the time of exposure, or later, in the image editor?

10-16-2019, 04:45 AM - 5 Likes	#75
Dartmoor Dave Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Dartmoor, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,882	Originally posted by MJKoski IMHO handheld shooting prevents gaining any profit from IQ oriented hi-res camera. So better buy $4000 worth of bubblegum instead of new bling-bling Sony if run&gun is the name of the game. Bubblegum tastes better and can also be healthy if not swallowed. A few weeks ago, back when the weather was warm, I spent some minutes watching a keen photographer trying to photograph a group of Dartmoor ponies with his very high-end looking Canon on a tripod. The ponies would stand there patiently while he planted his tripod feet and adjusted the height, then at the moment he bent down to look through the viewfinder they'd move away out of frame. Each time the ponies did that the photographer moved his tripod to a new position and started setting up again, and each time he finally bent down to look through his viewfinder the ponies moved away. After about ten minutes of it the poor guy looked close to tears. The thing is, ponies really don't like it when they can't see your face. So if you want to get good photos of them from close by you have to shoot handheld and shoot fast, with the camera up to your eye for the briefest moment possible. Of course you could try using live view and a tripod, although you'd still be most likely to end up with lots of photos of a horse's a**e and also look like one.