>>4086937Your feelings are wrong and invalid.
Photography isn't about making objectively good or bad pictures, it's about being good compared to other photographers.
If you don't like your photos because they don't look as good as others you view online, then you do like editing, you just are upset that photography requires skill and practice in editing *if* you want to be happy with your pics.
And what's more disingenuous, editing a shot so it comes out as you imagined, or leaving the editing up to a dumb computer using sooc shots? Who knows more about how *you* viewed a scene, you or the camera?
I don't shit on computational photography, it's fantastic for getting great quality snapshots from very cheap sensors and lenses. The people that do are those that feel threatened and insecure over it, because it does a better job of editing than them.
Editing was always a HUGE part of photography, we say heavily edited is "airbrushed" because that's what we used to do, we'd use airbrushed and special inks to paint directly on film negatives, and it was the worst shit ever, one tiny mistake and you had to wipe the thing clean and start from the beginning, and your canvas is less than 4cm wide, and you can't really see what the fuck effect is happening until you expose a sheet from it. If editing is your least favourite part of the hobby, Be glad that you can just click some buttons on a mouse and have an undo button for this.
