Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 32 of 32

Thread: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

  1. #21

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    waah 500-1000 images in 1-3 hours... pprroo... i normally take about 30mins to 1 hour for 1 picture.. hehe..
    TS, my suggestion is to go through your photos and pick out the ones you wanna edit and delete all the crap shots. you should have a lot fewer left (like 10%).
    batch process camera faults like noise, CA, distortion, vignetting, etc.
    The rest if you can group them, group them. otherwise, its quite simple, if they are taken under different conditions, then they will require different editing and as such cannot be batch processed.... so edit them individually.

    oh yeah, if you know you won't care enough to take the trouble to edit a photo individually then you should switch to JPEG mode and let the camera do the editing. Saves a lot of time. "Taking the trouble when taking the photo saves a lot more time when you're processing them."

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,717

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Quote Originally Posted by romeo tango View Post
    I read in one of the books by Scott K. - get it right the first time. If situation permits, shoot, review, no good, delete, re-shoot. Then no need to pp. For situations that does not permit re-shoot, I guess no choice but to pp. But I believe you will have less shots to pp
    yes, thats the best and recommended method. post-processing is time consuming

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,717

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Quote Originally Posted by nemesis32 View Post
    yes, thats the best and recommended method. post-processing is time consuming
    What unseen suggest is very true. You should be more self critical. If you take 10 similar shot, just choose 1 and process and post. No one is interested in 10 similar shots anyway. Just keep the other 9 for future use or deletd a few thats oof, wrongly exposed or what have you.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    NTU and Wdls
    Posts
    2,622

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Quote Originally Posted by mynameisgreg View Post
    waah 500-1000 images in 1-3 hours... pprroo... i normally take about 30mins to 1 hour for 1 picture.. hehe..
    TS, my suggestion is to go through your photos and pick out the ones you wanna edit and delete all the crap shots. you should have a lot fewer left (like 10%).
    batch process camera faults like noise, CA, distortion, vignetting, etc.
    The rest if you can group them, group them. otherwise, its quite simple, if they are taken under different conditions, then they will require different editing and as such cannot be batch processed.... so edit them individually.

    oh yeah, if you know you won't care enough to take the trouble to edit a photo individually then you should switch to JPEG mode and let the camera do the editing. Saves a lot of time. "Taking the trouble when taking the photo saves a lot more time when you're processing them."
    LOL the 1 - 3 hours is essentially basic conversion. It's enough to make most images pop. Going through photos a 2nd or 3rd time, some images will hit you with a "this is IT" kind of thing, those images I'll go tweak it further if I so wish, do abit more magic to them.

    ------------------

    And no, I don't pixel peep; Personally to me, CA, noise, etc doesn't really matter unless you're printing A4 size or larger... and you're not going to print all your images at A4 size or larger ya? Seriously, noise, CA, distortion, vignetting... how many of these actually spoil your travel photo?

    The one that kills your photo is bad composition, bad exposure, bad techniques.
    Everyone should have "saved" their image of its flaws like composition, exposure, and techniques on the spot. I suppose that's one of my problems, I kill the bad/test shots on the spot, and I'll retake and retake till I've a good shot.

    I think it's very silly to make a bad picture better, when you can take a good picture and subsequently make it superb.

  5. #25
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Priscella - just to give you some tips from my own experiences. I almost never use batch process as I am a slowpoke who likes to do everything 1 by 1 :P

    I use Nikon Capture for RAW processing, and I think it is really good. What I do is to spend more time to tweak one image, and then there's a function to "copy" the adjustments done; and on the 2nd image onwards, I'll just paste the copied adjustments and then tweak further. Most of the time, 90% is already done and minor tweaking is required.

    The amount of further tweaking from the base depends on the type of shoot and the consistency of the lighting. However, even in an outdoor portrait shoot; quite a lot of the time; unless your shoot spans many hours and/or many locations, they remain more or less the same. Hence the copy/paste method works fine. Its similar to using a template and then doing fine tuning.

    When I encounter a totally different set of lighting conditiions in the set, I then create a new "base template" and then cut and paste again from there.

    The upside is maximum control with as much "automation" as can possibly be". The downside is I tend to take forever to process photographs.

  6. #26

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Vince,

    Thanks for sharing. I know what you mean. In fact, I'm doing this also as part of my workflow. And that's the pain. Especially when the images are very different in lighting as I will be moving from one place to another (in travel photography).

    I've done some thinking and concluded that's the painful process one has to go thru as part of digital photography, if we want EVERY single image to be tip-top. Like you, I'm kind of a slow-poke! Guess it's that "perfectionist" nature in me.

    Another thing I realize also is that, I think I've been following too closely what the pros teach, which is not realistic for amatuers like me. As in, you got to adjust this and that precisely, right down to the exact numbers.

    Maybe as someone mentioned, this is just too academic. Ok, if you have the time in the world. I realize, no one cares if your shadows are completely black or highlights completely blown out. Seriously, on screen or in print, can anyone tell the diff or at least bother between R248 G248 B248 and R255 G255 B255?

    I've been chasing after stuffs like these. And I also ensure I can get the best out of my exposure even though in-camera the images seem to look great. So I always do "customized" tweeks here and there for every image. Maybe this part needs to go away in my workflow.

    One unfortunate thing in digital photography I feel, is that the camera don't give consistent colour reproduction. Everyone knows how inconsistent the AWB is. And that's one area where I do spend some time editing sometimes.

    My conclusion for myself is: Don't spend too much time editing images that already look acceptably good. It may be improved just marginally better, but the amount of effort needed is not worth it.

  7. #27

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Hi Priscilla
    Batch processing really only works for same conditions, like studio shot or so... for travelling with lots of changing situations it does not. If you have 300photos from a trip (and you are pretty darn good if they really deserve to be PP to WOW) then you just gotta spend the time. Remember pro travel photog shoot hundreds and thousands of photos for trip report and in the end you have a dozen (if so many) published. So one way to cut down time is to be a bit more stringend with yourself and cut down the number of pics... who of your friends and family really wants to look through 300 pics (honestly, most start to speed up and yawn after twenty).
    Canon's and Nikon's RAW converters will give you photos that pop straight away cause they use their enhanced jpeg conversion... use them for the majority. for that half dozen to dozen pics which are really outstanding use PS or LR to make them pop more... it does not really make sense to get 300 frames to pop...
    Never forget rule 5
    My Flickr

  8. #28

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    Hi Priscilla
    Batch processing really only works for same conditions, like studio shot or so... for travelling with lots of changing situations it does not. If you have 300photos from a trip (and you are pretty darn good if they really deserve to be PP to WOW) then you just gotta spend the time. Remember pro travel photog shoot hundreds and thousands of photos for trip report and in the end you have a dozen (if so many) published. So one way to cut down time is to be a bit more stringend with yourself and cut down the number of pics... who of your friends and family really wants to look through 300 pics (honestly, most start to speed up and yawn after twenty).
    Canon's and Nikon's RAW converters will give you photos that pop straight away cause they use their enhanced jpeg conversion... use them for the majority. for that half dozen to dozen pics which are really outstanding use PS or LR to make them pop more... it does not really make sense to get 300 frames to pop...
    Hi Michael, thanks for the advice. Yes, I've come to a point I can't agree more with you.

    Actually it's true that family and friends will just flip thru the pages and stop by the more beautiful ones. So it makes sense to me now to spend more time on those.

    Just that you know, once you have the knowledge on how to improve the images, and if you are the perfectionist sort, it's hard to say, Ok, forget it, even though that image can be improved I'll skip. Sometimes, just a tweak here and there can make a good image into a WOW one. But I realize the time spent is not worth it.

    I use Canon equipment and I'm ashamed to say I've never tried the Canon software. How does it help in the processing? Will the software "auto-correct" quickly?

  9. #29

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Just that you know, once you have the knowledge on how to improve the images, and if you are the perfectionist sort, it's hard to say, Ok, forget it, even though that image can be improved I'll skip. Sometimes, just a tweak here and there can make a good image into a WOW one. But I realize the time spent is not worth it.
    i know exactly what you are talking about...

    I use Canon equipment and I'm ashamed to say I've never tried the Canon software. How does it help in the processing? Will the software "auto-correct" quickly?
    i am on the darkside and have not used DPP or whatever it is called. The big difference between DPP and lets say LR is that DPP can read more information that is embedded in the RAW file. When you capture a RAW file the camera will write the same conversion rules into the RAW file as if it would create a JPEG. DPP can read these instructions and your RAW file looks exactly like the JPEG. Most people like the look of the jpeg that their cams produce but like the bigger RAW files cause they have more info. LR cannot read these instructions and what you are given is a neutral conversion without the pop of the additional saturation, S-curve and contrast boost. So in a way it corrects "better" or faster but they do not have many of the other features that LR for example has....
    Never forget rule 5
    My Flickr

  10. #30

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    Quote Originally Posted by Priscilia View Post
    Vince,

    Thanks for sharing. I know what you mean. In fact, I'm doing this also as part of my workflow. And that's the pain. Especially when the images are very different in lighting as I will be moving from one place to another (in travel photography).

    I've done some thinking and concluded that's the painful process one has to go thru as part of digital photography, if we want EVERY single image to be tip-top. Like you, I'm kind of a slow-poke! Guess it's that "perfectionist" nature in me.

    Another thing I realize also is that, I think I've been following too closely what the pros teach, which is not realistic for amatuers like me. As in, you got to adjust this and that precisely, right down to the exact numbers.

    Maybe as someone mentioned, this is just too academic. Ok, if you have the time in the world. I realize, no one cares if your shadows are completely black or highlights completely blown out. Seriously, on screen or in print, can anyone tell the diff or at least bother between R248 G248 B248 and R255 G255 B255?

    I've been chasing after stuffs like these. And I also ensure I can get the best out of my exposure even though in-camera the images seem to look great. So I always do "customized" tweeks here and there for every image. Maybe this part needs to go away in my workflow.

    One unfortunate thing in digital photography I feel, is that the camera don't give consistent colour reproduction. Everyone knows how inconsistent the AWB is. And that's one area where I do spend some time editing sometimes.

    My conclusion for myself is: Don't spend too much time editing images that already look acceptably good. It may be improved just marginally better, but the amount of effort needed is not worth it.

    I remember reading up at Strobist that it is always better to shoot at a specific WB adjustment rather then AWB so that for post-processing it will be easier. The same WB fine tuning in post processing can be applied to images taken at that place.

    Anyhow, just to share my little experience with post processing my images. I came back from a 9 day Taiwan trip with a total of 1500 pictures. Out of which, only about 120 are worthy of my time to post processed. Out of the 1500, there are quite a lot of repeat shots, underexposed, overexposed, different angle etc.

    I went through all the pictures, rate them in Adobe Bridge. Using ACR, adjust the WB/exposure/contrast. Batch covert all those that I have select to tiff. After conversion to tiff, again, in Adobe Bridge, give different ratings for pictures that requires further major adjustment in Photoshop and those that does not require except for maybe say a little bit of USM.

    In short, I try to do as much batch processing as I can by first sorting it out. I took about 2 weeks (everyday at night for about 2 hrs) to finish about 120 pictures. Tools are readily available in software to make life easier. It is about adapting the way we do things to fit these tools into it and make life easier.

  11. #31

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    To be frank, when one progress from the amateur mindset, batch processing is no longer an issue, or even required.

    C'mon, how many of you actually come back from a destination with 300 great shots? I would be happy if I get 3-4 definitive shots of a single destination. The rest (like 80%) are simply deleted.

  12. #32
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: RAW processing workflow -- REAL (travel, etc) photographers please come in!

    I agree with this - try to set at a specific WB rather than use AWB. It makes your life easier when you're RAW processing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gizmore View Post
    I remember reading up at Strobist that it is always better to shoot at a specific WB adjustment rather then AWB so that for post-processing it will be easier. The same WB fine tuning in post processing can be applied to images taken at that place.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •