I know that many digital photographers are excellent at what they do and are able to learn about the tools they are using in order to capture what they intended to capture. BUT, I also feel that even these very photographers take excessive advantage of post-processing in order to deal with issues in their files/exposures. It's not to say that all of them do this because the analog greats that moved over to digital "should" theoretically be just as careful in correctly exposing and making an image intended through their vision as they had done when they shot with film.
With all of the power that post-processing allows/provides a person that shoots with a digital camera, one need only use the available resolution to do things like...
-Major crops (cropping out only a tiny section of the image)
-Apply all sorts of filters so the image looks however they want it to look
-Stitch multiple shots together+alter the look so it looks like it was done with an MF/LF digital back.
-Too much to list with all that a digital camera w/a computer can do.
Is this convenience something that brings one happiness in the end with respect to how they got from and to the final print?
My personal feelings reflect a question I was asked when I posted an image that I used VERY LITTLE post-processing on. If I never mentioned using any post-processing, I know the person never would have asked. The question asked was why I didn't use a filter for the exposure. He/She was correct in saying this, and even with such mild post-processing, I did not accept the post-processed version of the image as being something that I did, but rather, what the computer was able to do for me.