I need to know what is a photography purist?

I recently joined a photo group and some people call themselves purist. They don't like cropping, enhancing contrast, color etc in post processing. I simply don't understand this. If there is something that makes the image better shouldn't you use it? They are content with shooting b&w and some even use film. It appears to me that those who don't understand "new" digital technology and Photoshop, Lightroom etc. call themselves purist. If they really were purist wouldn't they still be using daguerreotype?

While I don't know what this group's motives are, I define a purist as someone who tries to create images close to the reality and doesn't rely on excessive editing. By that definition, I'd be considered one too. My goals are to get the images I want in-camera while I'm at the scene, as opposed to relying on editing to "save" my images.

I do edit, though - but minimally. Crop, straighten horizon (I almost always have a slight tilt), minor tweaks to different adjustments, maybe B&W if I think it'd look good, etc. Most SOOC images need a light touch to bring it to life.

I do not like gimmicky editing like wacky HDR, faux gold sun toning, Instagram-ish postprocessing, etc. They're fun, but they're fads, and the craze for the styles passes very quickly.

Seems to me that, while your group may take the purism ideal a tad too far (like I said, most images need a little editing, IMO), it'd be good for you because it helps teach you good habits instead of relying on crutches. My two cents.