Depending on the situation I will set any of the following even thought I'm shooting in RAW: ISO Aperture Shutter speed.

It depends upon the situation and how I am on time. If I have a tight deadline, I'll do as much in camera as possible. But overall, I try to do all my processing later.

The less time spent on post processing, the better.

Photoshop, and other editors, tend to handle the attributes more fully.

I set color balance, usually default daylight, sometimes custom tungsten, and turn sharpening right down. K-10D.

After I set up I like to shoot quickly and get as many shots as possible. It's much easier to see and work thoroughly with the product on a PC.

The preview screen on the camera isn't accurate enough to judge the in-camera adjustments, no matter how "cool" they may be.

For landscapes I set -2/3 stop in order to retain cloud detail.

More choices in the camera leads me to more errors in shooting.

No professional allows a camera to do post processing!

I will usually set the camera up for the type of shooting I will be doing, i.e. Landscape, a few days at an air show, etc. I customize, in-camera, the saturation, sharpness and contrast.

The new "art filters" are going too far thought, for me. I'd never use them, and I think they cheapen camera work.

As I see it the big problem with in camera processing is the lack of ability to see the image at a large enough resolution to make any accurate judgements about it. Therefore the adjustments in the camera can very easily be incorrect even with the photographers input.

I use RAW files for images that will be printed. JPEG's are used for web, slide shows or email. I like the Nikon Camera Vivid profile for certain pictures particularly landscape or flower photography.

I would never use in camera processing for any kind of image manipulation, especially 'art'sy filters.

Why strap yourself into a bind with in-camera processing? Just capture the best exposure possible and you can do anything with it later.

Process in Lightroom 2, occasionally using appropriate presets.

While pre-visualization of the final print is essential to creating a good digital "negative," I prefer to make such adjustments in the digital "darkroom." But that may be because of so many years spent in a wet darkroom.

First it was a DSLR then it does Video and now more features, I want to spend time shooting not doing photo adjustments in the camera.

I shoot in RAW, but also use aperture priority almost exclusively for better DOF control. Also, I almost always use a tripod. And finally, I try to get the white balance correct in-camera.

I try to keep it as natural as I can.

I trust my computer and my monitor much more than the LCD screen of my camera and I can see so much more detail on the comptuer.

Just started shooting RAW and like the options available to improve the photo in Photoshop.

The camera does not know what I want as I want different things with different images.

I'm not a RAW snob but I think its usually better to make these decisions under controlled conditions with a calibrated monitor and printer.

I just don't get it. Why try using a 2-3" screen to determine effect ? How can you undo what the camera has already decided to do?

I rather work with a large monitor and keyboard, than play with tiny buttons and a 3 inch screen. I shoot a large amount of my work in extreme and rapidly changing lighting conditions, and it would very impractial to keep having to change camera settings.

I shoot RAW format in order to correct what areas that it allows. I still try to be careful to setup the camera prior to the shot in order to have exposure as close to complete as I can, whether using program mode (for most shots) or selecting manual control for tricky light situations. EV compensation plays a helpful role while using program but must remain aware of setting as going from light to dark background subjects.

I shoot raw at 14 bit loseless compressed. I see no logic in buying a DSLR and shooting below its capabilities.

The joy of shooting RAW is that the photographer has complete control of the image from previsualizatiion to print. Why would we want any of those decisions in the hands of a camera technician?