If you're fine producing mediocre shots due to some form of purism, go nuts.

Look at it from this perspective: people may not notice it was post processed, but you achieved what you felt was the right look on your shot.

>>2810939
You process the images that need processing. If the image doesn't need it, why would you do it? Or are you from /p/, meaning that you follow "rules" every time, regardless of whether they benefit you or not?

>>2810939
It's picture of a chair, guy. You shouldnt be asking yourself whether to process it or not, you should be asking yourself why the fuck you're taking this shot in the first place.

It's not worth it. The little things do make the difference.

>>2810939
So all you're doing is exactly what the camera would have done in the first place had you shot in JPEG mode? Then yeah, shoot in jpeg mode...

>>2810939
This is only true in best case scenarios, when the picture was perfectly exposed, with accurate white balance. If these parameters were wrong, raw files allows you to correct them.

Also, you're assuming that there is only one objectively correct result. Some people like editing to taste, i.e lowering the exposure if they want the image to look like it was taken in darker light, playing with white balance to make the image cooler or darker, using pre-made filters, etc.
A lot of people consider photography art. Art isn't objective, it's subjective and based on personal emotions. Editing allows you to alter the mood of the photograph, to make it convey what emotions you want it to convey, not an algorithm's emotionless "objective" interpretation.

I shot in raw for years. if you have anything other than a Canon, there's some really awesome things you can do with the raw format. isoless sensors are unbelievable at times.

these days though, I just use jpeg for most pictures. my camera has great colors out of the box, and a live histogram. I can pretty much get the result I want at the shutter press. I still switch to raw for anything that's paying, anything that's difficult to shoot or anything I want to do editing to.

for what it's worth, I prefer the left image on my display. the chair reaches quite close to white on the right and that isn't my favorite

>>2811154
>I prefer the left image
It's the SOOC.

Of course I understand that there's a time and a place for manipulating images.
I'm mainly talking about when you're just trying to photograph objectively; when you want to let the subject speak.

what a retard.

I honestly just throw my snapshits into lightroom or photoshop and fuck with sliders until it looks nice

>>2811314
>I'm mainly talking about when you're just trying to photograph objectively; when you want to let the subject speak
By taking him out of the context of his situation you are already not letting the subject speak, you are letting the picture speak. Even if you add context, for example a protesting man tossing a rock at riot police, without the backstory of the situation and the man the photo has already lost the voice of the subject.

Not to mention taht shooting jpeg isn't "objective photography", because you're just letting your camera do the post-editing for you.