Name Your Top Two Photography Things Learned This Past Year

I don't actually remember that what I learned last year as new things happen and there is no end to learning upon which I read so many thing which need to be improved and that changed many things in terms of photography. So keep learning and keep improving.
 
I think journaling has had an impact on my learning as well. Looking at my images, notes, and goals are dialing in where I want to go tomorrow.
 
This year I learned that I can charge a LOT more than what I think my service is worth.

Another was to stop using dodge and burn to add an artificial contour in post, and to instead enhance the facial contour with the lighting itself. Dodging and burning still plays a major role in my retouching, but only to clean up the skin.

And a third, just because: Light is light, it doesn't matter where it's coming from. Use the most of what's available to you, whether it be a window, household bulbs, a flashlight, or the fluorescent lighting inside of a parking garage. You'll be shocked at what you can achieve with just a little bit of skill and an unusual light source.
 
Last edited:
You have to travel to incredible places to make incredible portraits. And you need interesting subjects to make great portraits.
To make incredible portraits, you need incredible lighting and incredible skill, location plays little to no part in this. Some of my best portraits were shot in parking garages or just next to a window. Same with "interesting people"; everyone is interesting and has a story to tell, you the photographer need to be able to see what's interesting and beautiful about them.
 
Last edited:
Even if you have never in the life of your camera changed it from saving raw files, apparently tiff is an actual thing. Always check your settings before an important shoot.
Somewhat related, I actually convert my raw files to tiff and do all of my editing in PS on the tiff file.
 
Last edited:
I actually convert my raw files to tiff and do all of my editing in PS on the tiff file.

Can you explain "your" reasons for converting to a tiff first?
 
I actually convert my raw files to tiff and do all of my editing in PS on the tiff file.

Can you explain "your" reasons for converting to a tiff first?
I shoot in raw, then do the typical color and exposure tweaks in ACR. Once that's done, I convert it to a tiff file in order to do the heavier editing in photoshop, such as skin retouching, mood toning with various adjustment layers (color "grading" with selective color, contrast with curves, etc), selective corrections with masks, and finally sharpening. I save the tiff file with all of the layers (this is the file that usually get's sent to publications, especially if they want to make their own tweaks to fit with the overall flow of the magazine), and I save a flattened jpeg file for internet use and for clients who don't know what to do with a tiff file. Tiff files don't degrade, unlike jpeg files which degrade over time and every time you open them, so I like to make sure my finished photos are archived in this file format to retain all of the quality and data I achieved in the final edit. Some people will say that you should save them as PSD files, but even the engineers of Photoshop itself will tell you that you should be working with tiff files instead and that PSD is a bastardized file format.

PSD is now a bastardized file format that is NOT a good idea to use. Even the Photoshop engineers will tell you that PSD is no longer the Photoshop "native" file format. It has no advantages and many disadvantages over TIFF.
TIFF is publicly documented, PSD is not. That makes TIFF a preferred file format for the long term conservation of digital files.
And, let me be blunt, anybody who thinks PSD is "better" than TIFF is ignorant of the facts. If Adobe would let them, the Photoshop engineers would tell you to quit using PSD.
Source: Is it better to store edited photos as PSD or TIFF files?
 
Last edited:
@DanOstergren sorry, I said it wrong. Why do you save as a tiff "then" edit in PS instead of going ACR-PS-tiff. Is it because of your work flow (batch processing in ACR), or is there something about how you like the way PS handles tiff vs raw?
 
1. Shallow depth of field is a more popular fad than I had thought.
2. Too many people think better cameras will make them better photographers.
 
@DanOstergren sorry, I said it wrong. Why do you save as a tiff "then" edit in PS instead of going ACR-PS-tiff. Is it because of your work flow (batch processing in ACR), or is there something about how you like the way PS handles tiff vs raw?
It's the workflow I was taught from the retouching workflow that Lara Jade demonstrates in her retouching tutorials (Fashion Photography 101 on Creative Live and Photographer Shoot-off: Lara Jade VS Joey L.). I follow this formula because I trust Lara Jade to know what she's talking about based on her level of photo quality and her industry success.

Considering that raw is like a digital negative, I shoot in that format to retain the most data in case I have to do major exposure or white balance corrections in ACR. Once I've determined that the photo is ready for processing in photoshop (after I've made white balance and exposure corrections in ACR), I use ACR to convert the raw file to a tiff so I can then open it in photoshop and not be editing with an 8bit jpeg file that degrades.
 
Last edited:
#1. Fuji rocks in both AF and colors

#2. Too many lenses is a thing
 
I have to do major exposure or white balance corrections in ACR. Once I've determined that the photo is ready for processing in photoshop (after I've made white balance and exposure corrections in ACR), I use ACR to convert the raw file to a tiff so I can then open it in photoshop and not be editing with an 8bit jpeg file that degrades.

Ok I understand where your're coming from now, I wanted to make sure you weren't doing something unique that I needed to look into. We do somewhat the same, except I do my first pick of images on the card, from Bridge. After deleting those that I know I don't want, I use a batch command in Bridge to move and rename the raw files to a working file, and a duplicate to backup. Once I have my working file, I import those into to LR, using custom presets based on my specific camera. I'm trying to do better on something you alluded to earlier - getting it right in camera, so that less editing is required. I'm finding that as I learn more, I'm able to quickly accomplish the majority of edits in LR, without a lot of adjustments. If an image requires further processing I use the "edit in PS command", which duplicates the image w/LR adjustments, then imports it into PS as a proRGB 16 bit image. After processing using "save" puts it back in my LR collection as a 16 bit tiff.

Edit: Dan, you might be interested to know that I've been utilizing some of your instructions on sculpturing with light in reverse to "de-emphasize" certain things on seniors. Thanks to your instructions, I think I'm making progress with the technique.
 
Last edited:
Tiff files don't degrade, unlike jpeg files which degrade over time and every time you open them, so I like to make sure my finished photos are archived in this file format to retain all of the quality and data I achieved in the final edit.
Just wanted to clarify this often quoted mistake. Jpegs do not degrade with time - they will last as long as the disc they are on lasts. Also, you can open them as often as you want with no degrading of the image.

The only problem with image degradation with Jpegs is if they are repeatedly saved as there is a very small degradation the each time the image is saved. Save the Jpeg just the once and the image will be fine for all time.


Sent from my 8070 using Tapatalk
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top