Is your landscape photo a record, or do you put feeling into it?

When you photograph in RAW, you do have to edit the photo. You then make it the way you want it in terms of color, contrast, etc.

As far as I'm concerned, you can always edit a photo if it enhances the atmosphere and experience

I completely agree with you, this is exactly what I try to achieve with my photography!

Shooting in RAW automatically means editing. Now I state that for me there is a difference between editing and manipulating. Editing is making sure that you correct the colours (or greyscales in b/w photos) to the actual colours, set the right contrasts and convey the atmosphere that you experienced in the photo.
Manipulating, for me, is bringing something into a photo that was not actually there when the photo was taken. Here you can think of placing a different sky, adding sun rays, adding mist and haze, etc.
I will leave what is or is not permissible aside. One thing is crystal clear to me: Whether you edit or manipulate, you must also do it well and not overdo it.

when you photograph in RAW and that is, in my opinion, the best, you can better reproduce the atmosphere of reality yourself when editing and that is beautifully shown in your example.

My opinion is that, as long as you work in RAW, a photo should and may definitely be edited. But first learn how to take a good photo. Those tricks already existed in the darkroom in the past. You can find many of them in Photoshop as well. Also, working with old filters from, for example, Cokin is still fun and it stimulates creativity.

Regards Lauran

I usually shoot in RAW, so I edit. I also edit JPEG photos, if necessary. Sometimes a bit more/less exposure, color or whatever. A photo should convey something.

The photo from the camera is merely a semi-finished product.
It is the baker's dough which still requires a delicate treatment in the oven.
The dough only becomes real bread after a careful treatment in the oven.
Is there a photographer who devours raw dough?
The baker also puts his heart and soul into his end product and sells it with pride.
Fons Bitter, picture maker

Of course a photo from the camra must be good, but editing is part of it too. You used to do that in the darkroom too, consciously or not. In my eyes, editing software is the replacement for the darkroom, and a lot of magic was done there too.

Liesbeth Verkade wrote on Tuesday 14 March 2023 at 14:24  | reply

A photo straight from the camera should in principle be good in terms of composition, exposure, etc. I shoot in RAW, usually also when I take a photo with my phone. Editing can then give the photo just that little bit extra. I am very reluctant when it comes to editing because I find many edited photos too 'flashy'. I like subdued colors. Sometimes lifting a shadow a little, or toning down very harsh highlights a little. Of the two example photos in your article, the first, unedited one, is much more to my taste.

I think you only made the photo a bit warmer so that you get the feeling that the sun was coming through the mist. The unedited photo is cooler and gives the feeling that it was early in the morning with morning mist.
Personally, I think the edited photo is more beautiful because it looks more pleasant.
I myself am an avid editor of (some) photos in a way that nobody notices or that gives them an artistic look.

@Marc, Color blindness can indeed pose a problem for you. But what is stopping you from editing the photos in black and white? I assume you can perceive differences in contrast and shades of gray just fine. Give that a try. A photo can also be very beautiful and appealing in b/w.

Thanks for your nuanced article about whether or not to edit a shot. The shot itself has already been processed in/by the camera. Otherwise nobody would talk about typical Canon or Fuji colors, for example. Just as nuanced as the article, I would also like to see photo edits that are just as subtle. That is often not the case: garish colors come along quite often. By means of small adjustments to color and sharpness, a clear picture can be created of how the shot originally "came in" to the photographer (when he/she decided to take the photo).