Roger Hicks
Veteran
...and it's time consuming. Shot under everything from ISO 160 to 2500, sodium vapour to dappled sunlight, in the Pyrenees. That's nearly a fortnight's pics. For non-English-speakers, a fortnight is two weeks: fortnight = fourteen nights.
This is quite a few hours in Lightroom. How does anyone who shoots 100-200 pics per day ever manage to process the shots?
Cheers,
R.
This is quite a few hours in Lightroom. How does anyone who shoots 100-200 pics per day ever manage to process the shots?
Cheers,
R.
le vrai rdu
Well-known
trier d'abord telle est la solution
jbf
||||||
you dont process everything. edit down. brutally edit. get rid of all the riff raff.
i usually spend a few days editing down/categorizing all my shots. ones that work for a specific purpose, ones that i think have a potential in a bigger group, etc. then do basic adjustments. come back later when i have more specific idea that they'll work for sure, ill go back and do finer adjustments.
i usually spend a few days editing down/categorizing all my shots. ones that work for a specific purpose, ones that i think have a potential in a bigger group, etc. then do basic adjustments. come back later when i have more specific idea that they'll work for sure, ill go back and do finer adjustments.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
1 weed out the bad ones and delete them from the catalog
2 mark all shots that need no work at all 5 stars
3 mark all shots that need color correction only 4 stars
4 mark all shots that need exposure correction and color correction 3 stars
5 mark all shots that need cropping, exposure correction and color correction 2 stars
6 select the 4 star shots only (filter) and assign the color flags to different jobs of color correction. Select the four star shots with a certain colored flag, edit one shot and sync the others
7 do 6 for 3 star, 2 star shots as well
8 fine tweak the lot as you see fit. Should be only minor tweaks if all went well.
That's how I did it when still shooting digital. Still takes time, but LightRoom really is a long way from individual shots through PhotoShop... much faster.
Good luck! Looking forward to seeing some of those shots here!
2 mark all shots that need no work at all 5 stars
3 mark all shots that need color correction only 4 stars
4 mark all shots that need exposure correction and color correction 3 stars
5 mark all shots that need cropping, exposure correction and color correction 2 stars
6 select the 4 star shots only (filter) and assign the color flags to different jobs of color correction. Select the four star shots with a certain colored flag, edit one shot and sync the others
7 do 6 for 3 star, 2 star shots as well
8 fine tweak the lot as you see fit. Should be only minor tweaks if all went well.
That's how I did it when still shooting digital. Still takes time, but LightRoom really is a long way from individual shots through PhotoShop... much faster.
Good luck! Looking forward to seeing some of those shots here!
MartinP
Veteran
Almost makes me glad I haven't got round to buying another scanner yet ! My 'cunning plan' in future is to scan prints, that way most of the work (editing, curves etc.) is already done. It remains to be seen if this really works.
Good luck Roger ! Can grouping them by light-conditions work, or maybe there would still be 923 groups of one.
Good luck Roger ! Can grouping them by light-conditions work, or maybe there would still be 923 groups of one.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Le vrai rdu: Trier, c'est vrai.
But there are pics that could be 5* when processed but are (at best) 3* before processing.
Thanks Johan for the workflow analysis. Better than mine: I shall adopt it forthwith. But it's still a f***of a lot of work for 923 pics. Sure, I've overshot. Even so, there's more there than I can process in a day.
Martin: cunning stunts spoonerizes well. It's not 923 groups of 1 but at least 50 groups of 1-50.
Again, thanks to all,
Cheers,
R.
But there are pics that could be 5* when processed but are (at best) 3* before processing.
Thanks Johan for the workflow analysis. Better than mine: I shall adopt it forthwith. But it's still a f***of a lot of work for 923 pics. Sure, I've overshot. Even so, there's more there than I can process in a day.
Martin: cunning stunts spoonerizes well. It's not 923 groups of 1 but at least 50 groups of 1-50.
Again, thanks to all,
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
dogberryjr
[Pithy phrase]
All this, plus make use of that handy-dandy Lightroom feature that allows you to Copy/Paste settings from one photo to the next.
Michiel Fokkema
Michiel Fokkema
I shoot 1000-2000 at a wedding, 300-500 at an engagement shoot.
I delete everything that's bad. Pick everything I like. That takes me one hour per 1000 pictures. Then go through the picks and take the best ones from that. These are corrected.
That's it.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
I delete everything that's bad. Pick everything I like. That takes me one hour per 1000 pictures. Then go through the picks and take the best ones from that. These are corrected.
That's it.
Cheers,
Michiel Fokkema
Austerby
Well-known
Go back to 36exp per film and you won't be so overwhelmed!
Roger, I'm interested to hear if you think there are more shots of a higher quality than if you'd used a film camera - i.e. does digital present a stronger ratio of keepers to rejects, or is it just a phase we're all going through?
Roger, I'm interested to hear if you think there are more shots of a higher quality than if you'd used a film camera - i.e. does digital present a stronger ratio of keepers to rejects, or is it just a phase we're all going through?
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Funny, I just came back from a fornight camping in the outer hebrides with 1457 shots including my wife's and childrens. I only took the 1Ds3 as camping can equal damp and my wife took her GX100. Loads of work, but I'm just running through them in date rder and printing the ones I want for the album first. The a tighter edit to about 3 for the wall
Mike
Mike
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I generate proofsheets in Bridge and edit there. I'm pretty ruthless with proofsheets- and too easily seduced by the images on the screen, so the printed page works better for me.
I've also saved several starting points in the DNG converter for various situations- that saves a lot of time- as I can click though several processing set-ups quickly to get close. Just getting started with LR, so not sure how simple this is to do there.
I've also saved several starting points in the DNG converter for various situations- that saves a lot of time- as I can click though several processing set-ups quickly to get close. Just getting started with LR, so not sure how simple this is to do there.
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
Lift and stamp, lift and stamp. Those pictures that have suvived the ordeal of selection, group them according to what type of adjustments are needed and to which extent. WB, sharpening, definition, recovery, contrast, curves etc. When happy wirh one lift the adjustment and stamp the other pictures that would benefit from the same tweeks. Only then do image by image final tweeking; burning, dodging, healing, cloning etc.
ampguy
Veteran
Roger, here's the key - take a good picture the first time, learn to expose, and compose what you want the final image to be, then you can eliminate that photoshop and cropping and whatever else you do and just end up with keeprs.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
don't look back, delete one immediately that can't make an impression on the computer screen. or do 50%-25%-10% reductions.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
The catch is that digi includes 'free Polaroids' -- the best of which are of the same (technical) quality as the keepers...
Bear in mind that my professional background is in advertising; or in other words, in Polaroid tests.
But regardless of how good you are at triage, it's still a long, slow process.
The other thing is that selectng (say) 25 shots of a single subject is not the same as selecting 10-20 photos each for at least 5 different purposes (3 websites, magazine/s, book/s)
Cheers,
R.
Bear in mind that my professional background is in advertising; or in other words, in Polaroid tests.
But regardless of how good you are at triage, it's still a long, slow process.
The other thing is that selectng (say) 25 shots of a single subject is not the same as selecting 10-20 photos each for at least 5 different purposes (3 websites, magazine/s, book/s)
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
You mean, the M9 doesn't take perfect photographs ... and it costs how much? :angel:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
You mean, the M9 doesn't take perfect photographs ... and it costs how much?
Dear Keith,
Sure, it does. Problem is, I don't...
Cheers,
R.
Dear Keith,
Sure, it does. Problem is, I don't...
Cheers,
R.
yanidel
Well-known
I now edit on my LCD screen every day to avoid your kind of situation. After a week in Arles, I had 300 pictures left to process which is fine.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I now edit on my LCD screen every day to avoid your kind of situation. After a week in Arles, I had 300 pictures left to process which is fine.
Tried that. Didn't work for me. Too worried aboit losing (potentially) good shots that I can't judge adequately on a tiny screen. Besides, it just moves the editing process to a little earlier, with an inferior viewing medium. Like judging slides without a good loupe.
Cheers,
R.
Tried that. Didn't work for me. Too worried aboit losing (potentially) good shots that I can't judge adequately on a tiny screen. Besides, it just moves the editing process to a little earlier, with an inferior viewing medium. Like judging slides without a good loupe.
Cheers,
R.