Anything Goes : Which you consider to be a better photographer? by Alan Zúñiga Ramos

The artist that brings their creative vision to fruition with the least cost . The shot created in reality will look different than the shot created in post. They will not be the same. The idea is to absolutely know what you can get from both toolsets and to plan and choose wisely to achieve your artistic goal Who is better? Personal expression isn't a competition..

I'd say the former. The photographer who does all the work towards perfection in post has already left the realm of "pure" photography for the most part. However, don't take that as a lack of respect for the post-production process and those that work in that area. Their skills are just as important and just as creative, but not as purely photographic. Both "sides" need an in-depth understanding of the other in order to produce the highest quality film.

As a still photographer with well over 30 years experience, I'll just say that there is no such thing as a perfect shot. The image, either on film or digital, is just raw material to work with. It is made more usable in post-either a wet darkroom or Photoshop. Think about your end use or user, and shoot with that in mind. Did somebody buy and/or publish your photo? Then it was "perfect" enough.

I absolutely agree! Keep on clicking!

"Fixing it in post" is a poor substitute for ability behind the lens. And 90% of the time, the cinematographer and the editor are two different people. (always a great way to ingratiate yourself with the editor - leave glaring errors on the film that you could have avoided by moving the camera a bit to the left)

I am not a photographer but it's same in music the perfect shot is always the best and most difficult to achieve Good luck with your work Alan

This is not about "fixing" it in post, which all too often is the opposite. Post production image manipulation tools are considerations added to what I do on the set and in pre-production testing. While I know I can make any scene look exactly as I wish on the set, I choose the combination that gives me my images as quickly, thus cheaply, as possible. As an example take the typical "summer blockbuster" look of greenish blue backgrounds , warmish highlights and increased gamma and vignetting (big generalization, but we all know the look). I can do all those things with camera set-up, lens filtration, and light filtration. Doing all of these things takes time and toys. Much easier to know that I will correct fully detailed specifically created images later to achieve the look I am after. While I pre-build an LUT so that the happy gang in video village keep their knickers untwisted, I know that in colour correction it will take only a few moments to make the shots exactly what I envisioned. This approach is much cheaper than doing it on the set, in this case. It is using everything at your disposal to bring your imagination to the screen. Again, the idea is to know how to use all of the available tools in combinations unique to each shot, in order to achieve your artistic intent as cheaply as possible that make the best images.