any post processing advice ?

[goofball]

a question for you pros - how do you handle post processing ? any tips ? i am still trying to find my way around my digital world and get excellent fine prints, but it takes a little time in post processing. i don't want to spend that much time on every frame just to get a decent file to post on the web. my system now is start flat (contrast -4) and push things around from there. usually in hue/saturation/luminance, as well as my curve. hardly ever touch contrast itself outside of those tools. using cs3.

show me the way sifu...

[CarpeyBiggs]

Hmm... tough to say. Are you trying to get a consistent look across all of your images, a personal style? Perhaps it would be good to post what you want an image to look like, and we can offer advice on how to get it there.

For my batch files (like most of my trip reports) I almost always turn up the contrast to 35, saturation up 10, white balance is almost always warmed up from what it actually was, and I throw in some vignetting. That is just the look I like. Real warm tones, vignetted, and extra contrast and saturation.

But on my "fine-art" images, I process each one individually, and usually do some more localized touch up in Photoshop.

Not sure that helps or not... :ne_nau:

[R]

Always always always burn copies of you files in their original form, like a CD called "Moab, Oct 2007 RAW" or whatever. In five or ten years your tastes will have changed, and technology will have changed. And FWIW, I think the notion of archiving your stuff on a hard drive is a bad idea. Almost everyone I know has lost stuff because it was on a hard drive that crapped out. Burn twice, and hide one off site somewhere. Use quality CDs.

[goofball]

i definotely want to achieve soem consistency. personal style i think comes more in compositions and subject matter for me. i am still a minimalist, if it has to be edited too much, it was wrong to start w/.

most of all i think the images i shoot are generally too flat to start and my main focus is finding a way to speed up my processing instead of one at a time. can i set up parameeters for batch processing so i could choose a folder, apply all those preset modifications, like contrast adjustment, resize, sharpen, to all the images at once ?

probably i should get a guide book for cs, look at all its tools and options. but i always do better w/ more personal interactions as opposed to self study. sorry if i sound lost, i am. always knew exactly what i was doing w/ film. but digital is confusing to me still. plus i never shot landscapes, always street or documentary or "moody personal expression".

but here are a couple unprocessed to processed images that typify what i find pleasing.

and i really appreciate the help.

[goofball]

Always always always burn copies of you files in their original form, like a CD called "Moab, Oct 2007 RAW" or whatever. In five or ten years your tastes will have changed, and technology will have changed. And FWIW, I think the notion of archiving your stuff on a hard drive is a bad idea. Almost everyone I know has lost stuff because it was on a hard drive that crapped out. Burn twice, and hide one off site somewhere. Use quality CDs.

oh yeah. i back up to cd just as soon as i know i have one i consider a keeper.

[rooster32]

Always always always burn copies of you files in their original form, like a CD called "Moab, Oct 2007 RAW" or whatever. In five or ten years your tastes will have changed....

That's why I like Adobe Lightroom. I convert my raw files in LR and make some minor changes. What I like, is that it keeps the original fine as is...so I can always go back and change the changes. If I have a keeper that needs more work...I open up CS2 and it saves those changes in a copy. I'm not consistent enough with my shots to do much with batch processing...it's more one up stuff.

Need to work on the archiving aspect of things.....

[CarpeyBiggs]

i definotely want to achieve soem consistency. personal style i think comes more in compositions and subject matter for me. i am still a minimalist, if it has to be edited too much, it was wrong to start w/.
I think you'd benefit from developing your own RAW conversion presets, that will be applied to all your images by default.




most of all i think the images i shoot are generally too flat to start
Typical of default settings in most raw converters. Easily changed to your liking, if desired.


and my main focus is finding a way to speed up my processing instead of one at a time. can i set up parameeters for batch processing so i could choose a folder, apply all those preset modifications, like contrast adjustment, resize, sharpen, to all the images at once ?
Yessir. Can be done from either Bridge, or as a photoshop action that can be applied to entire folders. If you are shooting raw, I would do it in Bridge. If JPEGS, you can make a batch action in photoshop, and create a derivative folder with the new processing applied. For my web pictures, I have a batch action that I apply from bridge to process all of them in one action.



probably i should get a guide book for cs, look at all its tools and options. but i always do better w/ more personal interactions as opposed to self study. sorry if i sound lost, i am.
I hear ya. I've always told people I could teach everything I use in Photoshop in a couple hours, yet it's taken me years to learn what I know by reading... Oh well, the discovery is fun sometimes. Then again, I know nothing compared to the gurus.


and i really appreciate the help.
I really like the conversion on the kid. Nice and punchy, but not too punchy for flesh tones. The other one is a toss up for me.

[goofball]

thanks cb. gonna poke around bridge and get those batch action defaults set up.

and just one more q - does that full size sensor in the 5d really make a noticable difference to your image quality ? i really like the way your images look. nice tonal range, good shadows, just have a very "crisp" look. i like that. i have to work like hell (it seems) to get my images where i want, and usually i go over them a number of times, w/ pause for thought in between, before i settle on something i am truly pleased w/. don't mind that, but it sounded like you just make some minor adjustments from the capture and are good to go for your web images. is it the 5d, or natural talent ? :2thumbs:

[CarpeyBiggs]

and just one more q - does that full size sensor in the 5d really make a noticable difference to your image quality ?
When shooting in low light, it is substantially better than any other DSLR I've used. It has some great low light resolution.



i really like the way your images look. nice tonal range, good shadows, just have a very "crisp" look. i like that. i have to work like hell (it seems) to get my images where i want, and usually i go over them a number of times, w/ pause for thought in between, before i settle on something i am truly pleased w/.
Tonal range and shadows are properties of the camera. I can tell HUGE differences between my small point and shoots, and my 5D. The difference between my rebel, to my 40D, to my 5D is not very noticeable, but the clarity and quality of individual pixels on my 5D is always better. But I have to peep to notice. Probably can't tell a difference once sized for the web.


don't mind that, but it sounded like you just make some minor adjustments from the capture and are good to go for your web images. is it the 5d, or natural talent ? :2thumbs:
Hmm... Probably a combination of all? I still work on my techniques constantly. I see what some of the envelope pushers are putting out nowadays, and just scratch my head. It's hard to keep up. That said, if you use proper technique in the field, you shouldn't have too many problems seeing your prints the way you envisioned them in the field... If you aren't achieving those visions, it is probably in your post processing. Get it right in camera (no motion blur, proper depth of field, nice exposure) and you should be able to take the image where you want it when you "develop" it.

Sometimes though, it just isn't possible to make every picture work. Dynamic range is too big in the original scene, or you don't have a tripod handy, or whatever. Granted, it takes some practice to nail down Photoshop or Lightroom. For instance, my prints now are much better today then they were two years ago. I am able to be happy with many more photos now, then I was back then. But there are still some I just can't print to my liking... Maybe someday.

[rooster32]

It's not the camera...it's the individual running it.