Post-Processing Recommendations?

[darkblue-x]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

 

[Ysarex]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

 

[benhasajeep]

GIMP is similar to photoshop and it's free! Though I just signed up to Adobe photo CC (lightroom and Photoshop) $10 a month.

I used to buy stand alone versions of both. But they stopped selling photoshop and now can only get it online. I guess you can still buy Lightroom.

 

[ShutterVan]

I did a lot of research and reading the online reviews. I have used many graphic programs, including Adobe. The main reason I decided not to go with Lightroom is because of the monthly fee. The program that I decided to use was Affinity Photo, $49.00. I'm very happy with my decision.

 

[darkblue-x]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

 

[Derrel]

I love Lightroom for Nikon .NEF files or for Adobe-created DNG files. Lightroom is a parametic image editor, and it works smoothly, has a lot of features, can create and upload gallerys directly to Facebook, etc.. I relaly like the Lightroom presets, and how they can be used, pasted, edited and saved and modified and re-named, etc..

I've READ some good things about Affinity...and $49 is inexpensive for a stand-alone image editor. However, I am not familiar with Affinity's full feayure set.

 

[Ysarex]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

Then you should consider Lightroom seriously as your best choice. Lightroom gives you an image database (DAM) coupled with an excellent parametric editor that will be able to handle most of your editing needs. Lightroom is not a pixel-level editor and you'll still need that for some tasks. Those tasks should be secondary and you can address them with a supplemental editor -- Affinity that was mentioned would be a good choice to fill that slot.

A lot of folks go with the Adobe lease option in which you get Lightroom and Photoshop bundled together for $10.00 month. The downside to that is $10.00 month over time is actually pricey compared with alternatives and when you stop paying the software stops working.

You can still purchase Lightroom with a perpetual license: Amazon.com: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6: Software however we are all concerned that this option may disappear soon.

Joe

P.S. We use the term workflow to describe the entire editing process from raw file import to RGB file (print) ouput. There are a lot of variations on how you can structure a workflow. Over the past two decades steady movement has been toward the workflow structure supported by Lightroom. Not wanting to start too much of a kerfuffle here but I'm going to just blurt this out: The workflow sturcture supported by Lightroom is the right way to do this. It's most efficient and productive. It's how you want to work. You can do the same with a few other alternative Apps but Lightroom is the industry choice for good reason.

 

[darkblue-x]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

Then you should consider Lightroom seriously as your best choice. Lightroom gives you an image database (DAM) coupled with an excellent parametric editor that will be able to handle most of your editing needs. Lightroom is not a pixel-level editor and you'll still need that for some tasks. Those tasks should be secondary and you can address them with a supplemental editor -- Affinity that was mentioned would be a good choice to fill that slot.

A lot of folks go with the Adobe lease option in which you get Lightroom and Photoshop bundled together for $10.00 month. The downside to that is $10.00 month over time is actually pricey compared with alternatives and when you stop paying the software stops working.

You can still purchase Lightroom with a perpetual license: Amazon.com: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6: Software however we are all concerned that this option may disappear soon.

Joe

P.S. We use the term workflow to describe the entire editing process from raw file import to RGB file (print) ouput. There are a lot of variations on how you can structure a workflow. Over the past two decades steady movement has been toward the workflow structure supported by Lightroom. Not wanting to start too much of a kerfuffle here but I'm going to just blurt this out: The workflow sturcture supported by Lightroom is the right way to do this. It's most efficient and productive. It's how you want to work. You can do the same with a few other alternative Apps but Lightroom is the industry choice for good reason.

that is quite helpful and I definitely appreciate that.

if I may ask more questions: you had mentioned lightroom, are photoshop and lightroom two very different things, can one use only lightroom to produce professional results. is photoshop more of a graphic design tool as opposed to a post-processing buff.

should a newbie learn photoshop, lightroom or both?

 

[Derrel]

Photoshop edits images at the pixel level. Lightroom edits are sets of instructions which can/will be applied to the RAW file, to create an exported image. Instead of needing to Save a 128- to 256-megabyte TIFF file in Photoshop, a Lightroom user can save a small 36k sidecar or instruction file, a "recipe" if you will, for how to process and develop the final image from the RAW file data.

Look up parametric image editing. That is the way Lightroom works!

Photoshop is very 1990's in its approach. Lightroom can develop images to a high degree of professionalism, limited mostly by the user's capabilities. After 20 years of being a Photoshop user, I switched to Lightroom for 99.5% of my image processing on a daily, or regular basis.

 

[Ysarex]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

Then you should consider Lightroom seriously as your best choice. Lightroom gives you an image database (DAM) coupled with an excellent parametric editor that will be able to handle most of your editing needs. Lightroom is not a pixel-level editor and you'll still need that for some tasks. Those tasks should be secondary and you can address them with a supplemental editor -- Affinity that was mentioned would be a good choice to fill that slot.

A lot of folks go with the Adobe lease option in which you get Lightroom and Photoshop bundled together for $10.00 month. The downside to that is $10.00 month over time is actually pricey compared with alternatives and when you stop paying the software stops working.

You can still purchase Lightroom with a perpetual license: Amazon.com: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6: Software however we are all concerned that this option may disappear soon.

Joe

P.S. We use the term workflow to describe the entire editing process from raw file import to RGB file (print) ouput. There are a lot of variations on how you can structure a workflow. Over the past two decades steady movement has been toward the workflow structure supported by Lightroom. Not wanting to start too much of a kerfuffle here but I'm going to just blurt this out: The workflow sturcture supported by Lightroom is the right way to do this. It's most efficient and productive. It's how you want to work. You can do the same with a few other alternative Apps but Lightroom is the industry choice for good reason.

that is quite helpful and I definitely appreciate that.

if I may ask more questions: you had mentioned lightroom, are photoshop and lightroom two very different things, can one use only lightroom to produce professional results. is photoshop more of a graphic design tool as opposed to a post-processing buff.

should a newbie learn photoshop, lightroom or both?

Derrel's got you started there. Yes, two very different approaches and you will need both, but what you're going to want is exactly what Derrel described: 99% of your work done in LR.

This winds back to your NEF files. You said you want to get started using raw files. The raw file structure is internally different than an RGB photo (JPEG). Your camera saves a 6000 X 4000 pixel image. In raw form those pixels are either red pixels, green pixels or blue pixels. They lay out in a pattern 4 square with one red pixel in one corner, one blue pixel in the opposing corner and two green pixels. An RGB photo on the other hand has a red, green and blue value assigned to every single pixel.

The raw file can't be edited at the pixel level -- you can't for example shift the red value of a pixel higher while shifting it's blue value lower -- change it's color. Photoshop is designed to edit RGB files in this manner. It is a pixel level editor designed to work with RGB files. To get there we need to take your raw file and convert it from it's native format into an RGB file. To do this we need software that we call a raw file converter. LR is designed to be a raw file converter. In this process we use the raw file to generate an RGB file. We can't make changes directly to the raw file.

History lesson: Over the past two decades we've been evolving this process. In the past it was a two step process. We would use a raw file converter to create an RGB file and then move on to edit that RGB file with a pixel level editor. This was a two step two App process -- a more complicated workflow. Many folks still work this way because the raw file converter they use has limited editing capability.

Raw converters as Derrel noted actually save your editing work in a text file as a set of instructions -- we call this parametric editing. This is good, but it has it's limitations. For example you really can't do things like remove utility wires from a photo -- stuff like that. Early raw converters didn't have a rich enough tool set to allow us to do all the editing we wanted to do to an image. For example we couldn't darken or lighten just a discreet section of a photo. So we were forced into the two app process: convert the raw file then edit the RGB file.

That is what has been changing in the last few years. Lightroom gets credit for leading this evolution. Ligthroom's toolset has evolved to be rich enough so that we can start the edit work there and usually finish the edit work there -- one app workflow. And done parametrically we're only saving a tiny text file. Huge advantages open up with this workflow. It's trivially easy to create an edit variant for example. Then THIS: That parametric text file permits totally non-destructive re-editability. This is BIG! A day later, a month later, a year later you can change any edit surgically without re-doing all your work.

We're still going to occasionally need to remove utility wires or something similar, but normally not. When we need that we can use Photoshop or an alternative.

Lightroom is the industry leader here. There are alternatives but only a few that achieve the same result of a single app parametric workflow that is non-destructive and re-editable.

Joe

P.S. It's time here to turn on the TV and watch Colbert ridicule Trump -- I need my evening laugh. If you're around in the morning I'd be happy to show you some examples.

 

[darkblue-x]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

Then you should consider Lightroom seriously as your best choice. Lightroom gives you an image database (DAM) coupled with an excellent parametric editor that will be able to handle most of your editing needs. Lightroom is not a pixel-level editor and you'll still need that for some tasks. Those tasks should be secondary and you can address them with a supplemental editor -- Affinity that was mentioned would be a good choice to fill that slot.

A lot of folks go with the Adobe lease option in which you get Lightroom and Photoshop bundled together for $10.00 month. The downside to that is $10.00 month over time is actually pricey compared with alternatives and when you stop paying the software stops working.

You can still purchase Lightroom with a perpetual license: Amazon.com: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6: Software however we are all concerned that this option may disappear soon.

Joe

P.S. We use the term workflow to describe the entire editing process from raw file import to RGB file (print) ouput. There are a lot of variations on how you can structure a workflow. Over the past two decades steady movement has been toward the workflow structure supported by Lightroom. Not wanting to start too much of a kerfuffle here but I'm going to just blurt this out: The workflow sturcture supported by Lightroom is the right way to do this. It's most efficient and productive. It's how you want to work. You can do the same with a few other alternative Apps but Lightroom is the industry choice for good reason.

that is quite helpful and I definitely appreciate that.

if I may ask more questions: you had mentioned lightroom, are photoshop and lightroom two very different things, can one use only lightroom to produce professional results. is photoshop more of a graphic design tool as opposed to a post-processing buff.

should a newbie learn photoshop, lightroom or both?

Derrel's got you started there. Yes, two very different approaches and you will need both, but what you're going to want is exactly what Derrel described: 99% of your work done in LR.

This winds back to your NEF files. You said you want to get started using raw files. The raw file structure is internally different than an RGB photo (JPEG). Your camera saves a 6000 X 4000 pixel image. In raw form those pixels are either red pixels, green pixels or blue pixels. They lay out in a pattern 4 square with one red pixel in one corner, one blue pixel in the opposing corner and two green pixels. An RGB photo on the other hand has a red, green and blue value assigned to every single pixel.

The raw file can't be edited at the pixel level -- you can't for example shift the red value of a pixel higher while shifting it's blue value lower -- change it's color. Photoshop is designed to edit RGB files in this manner. It is a pixel level editor designed to work with RGB files. To get there we need to take your raw file and convert it from it's native format into an RGB file. To do this we need software that we call a raw file converter. LR is designed to be a raw file converter. In this process we use the raw file to generate an RGB file. We can't make changes directly to the raw file.

History lesson: Over the past two decades we've been evolving this process. In the past it was a two step process. We would use a raw file converter to create an RGB file and then move on to edit that RGB file with a pixel level editor. This was a two step two App process -- a more complicated workflow. Many folks still work this way because the raw file converter they use has limited editing capability.

Raw converters as Derrel noted actually save your editing work in a text file as a set of instructions -- we call this parametric editing. This is good, but it has it's limitations. For example you really can't do things like remove utility wires from a photo -- stuff like that. Early raw converters didn't have a rich enough tool set to allow us to do all the editing we wanted to do to an image. For example we couldn't darken or lighten just a discreet section of a photo. So we were forced into the two app process: convert the raw file then edit the RGB file.

That is what has been changing in the last few years. Lightroom gets credit for leading this evolution. Ligthroom's toolset has evolved to be rich enough so that we can start the edit work there and usually finish the edit work there -- one app workflow. And done parametrically we're only saving a tiny text file. Huge advantages open up with this workflow. It's trivially easy to create an edit variant for example. Then THIS: That parametric text file permits totally non-destructive re-editability. This is BIG! A day later, a month later, a year later you can change any edit surgically without re-doing all your work.

We're still going to occasionally need to remove utility wires or something similar, but normally not. When we need that we can use Photoshop or an alternative.

Lightroom is the industry leader here. There are alternatives but only a few that achieve the same result of a single app parametric workflow that is non-destructive and re-editable.

Joe

P.S. It's time here to turn on the TV and watch Colbert ridicule Trump -- I need my evening laugh. If you're around in the morning I'd be happy to show you some examples.

I'll have to take you up on that. I don't think my mind fully registered this, may have to come back and take a look in the morning hoping that this registers better.

Enjoy Colbert, I always found him at that John Oliver quite funny.

 

[darkblue-x]

I have been using VSCO on my mobile phone to edit photos for some time, it does a decent job, but I'm looking to step up my game.
I just got a new laptop today and should be stepping up my game to something better.

What are the recommendations? I keep hearing that Photoshop and Lightroom are the go-to's???

Let me know...thanks.

Photos from what camera? Raw files or camera JEPGs?

Joe

Oh sorry...

Nikon D3300

I want to move on to RAW. I've been shooting in JPEG because it was just easier to send to VSCO for editing.

Then you should consider Lightroom seriously as your best choice. Lightroom gives you an image database (DAM) coupled with an excellent parametric editor that will be able to handle most of your editing needs. Lightroom is not a pixel-level editor and you'll still need that for some tasks. Those tasks should be secondary and you can address them with a supplemental editor -- Affinity that was mentioned would be a good choice to fill that slot.

A lot of folks go with the Adobe lease option in which you get Lightroom and Photoshop bundled together for $10.00 month. The downside to that is $10.00 month over time is actually pricey compared with alternatives and when you stop paying the software stops working.

You can still purchase Lightroom with a perpetual license: Amazon.com: Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 6: Software however we are all concerned that this option may disappear soon.

Joe

P.S. We use the term workflow to describe the entire editing process from raw file import to RGB file (print) ouput. There are a lot of variations on how you can structure a workflow. Over the past two decades steady movement has been toward the workflow structure supported by Lightroom. Not wanting to start too much of a kerfuffle here but I'm going to just blurt this out: The workflow sturcture supported by Lightroom is the right way to do this. It's most efficient and productive. It's how you want to work. You can do the same with a few other alternative Apps but Lightroom is the industry choice for good reason.

that is quite helpful and I definitely appreciate that.

if I may ask more questions: you had mentioned lightroom, are photoshop and lightroom two very different things, can one use only lightroom to produce professional results. is photoshop more of a graphic design tool as opposed to a post-processing buff.

should a newbie learn photoshop, lightroom or both?

Derrel's got you started there. Yes, two very different approaches and you will need both, but what you're going to want is exactly what Derrel described: 99% of your work done in LR.

This winds back to your NEF files. You said you want to get started using raw files. The raw file structure is internally different than an RGB photo (JPEG). Your camera saves a 6000 X 4000 pixel image. In raw form those pixels are either red pixels, green pixels or blue pixels. They lay out in a pattern 4 square with one red pixel in one corner, one blue pixel in the opposing corner and two green pixels. An RGB photo on the other hand has a red, green and blue value assigned to every single pixel.

The raw file can't be edited at the pixel level -- you can't for example shift the red value of a pixel higher while shifting it's blue value lower -- change it's color. Photoshop is designed to edit RGB files in this manner. It is a pixel level editor designed to work with RGB files. To get there we need to take your raw file and convert it from it's native format into an RGB file. To do this we need software that we call a raw file converter. LR is designed to be a raw file converter. In this process we use the raw file to generate an RGB file. We can't make changes directly to the raw file.

History lesson: Over the past two decades we've been evolving this process. In the past it was a two step process. We would use a raw file converter to create an RGB file and then move on to edit that RGB file with a pixel level editor. This was a two step two App process -- a more complicated workflow. Many folks still work this way because the raw file converter they use has limited editing capability.

Raw converters as Derrel noted actually save your editing work in a text file as a set of instructions -- we call this parametric editing. This is good, but it has it's limitations. For example you really can't do things like remove utility wires from a photo -- stuff like that. Early raw converters didn't have a rich enough tool set to allow us to do all the editing we wanted to do to an image. For example we couldn't darken or lighten just a discreet section of a photo. So we were forced into the two app process: convert the raw file then edit the RGB file.

That is what has been changing in the last few years. Lightroom gets credit for leading this evolution. Ligthroom's toolset has evolved to be rich enough so that we can start the edit work there and usually finish the edit work there -- one app workflow. And done parametrically we're only saving a tiny text file. Huge advantages open up with this workflow. It's trivially easy to create an edit variant for example. Then THIS: That parametric text file permits totally non-destructive re-editability. This is BIG! A day later, a month later, a year later you can change any edit surgically without re-doing all your work.

We're still going to occasionally need to remove utility wires or something similar, but normally not. When we need that we can use Photoshop or an alternative.

Lightroom is the industry leader here. There are alternatives but only a few that achieve the same result of a single app parametric workflow that is non-destructive and re-editable.

Joe

P.S. It's time here to turn on the TV and watch Colbert ridicule Trump -- I need my evening laugh. If you're around in the morning I'd be happy to show you some examples.

you seem to really know what you are talking about thoroughly!

I had made the decision to get the lightroom subscription. OH MY. there is so much involved with it...
I went from using VSCO X, which is nice most particularly on mobile for presets filters and light-overall editing...

I fear that my photography is going to take a bit of a plunge in quality because of my post-processing switch before it gets better.

are there any go-to guides that you would recommend?

 

[Ysarex]

you seem to really know what you are talking about thoroughly!

Thanks, I get paid to teach this stuff.

I had made the decision to get the lightroom subscription. OH MY. there is so much involved with it...
I went from using VSCO X, which is nice most particularly on mobile for presets filters and light-overall editing...

I fear that my photography is going to take a bit of a plunge in quality because of my post-processing switch before it gets better.

Quite the contrary. It is in fact easier to process your photos starting with raw files than to shoot camera JPEGs and try to edit those. You'll catch on quickly.

are there any go-to guides that you would recommend?

Read this: class notes
This site is fair: Cambridge in Colour
Adobe has lots of good tutorials for LR on their website.

TPF here is a good resource.

Joe

P.S. Take some photos with your camera. Save NEF files. Find one you like. Create a free Dropbox account and upload the NEF file. Get back to me and let me have the link. I'll process it for you in LR and send you the XMP file.

 

[darkblue-x]

you seem to really know what you are talking about thoroughly!

Thanks, I get paid to teach this stuff.

I had made the decision to get the lightroom subscription. OH MY. there is so much involved with it...
I went from using VSCO X, which is nice most particularly on mobile for presets filters and light-overall editing...

I fear that my photography is going to take a bit of a plunge in quality because of my post-processing switch before it gets better.

Quite the contrary. It is in fact easier to process your photos starting with raw files than to shoot camera JPEGs and try to edit those. You'll catch on quickly.

are there any go-to guides that you would recommend?

Read this: class notes
This site is fair: Cambridge in Colour
Adobe has lots of good tutorials for LR on their website.

TPF here is a good resource.

Joe

P.S. Take some photos with your camera. Save NEF files. Find one you like. Create a free Dropbox account and upload the NEF file. Get back to me and let me have the link. I'll process it for you in LR and send you the XMP file.

You're an interesting man, Joe. I enjoyed your writing style...Thorough, as mentioned last, though a good amount of relatable expression and humor--and highly informative.

I did learn from this. A decent amount of it was new to me such as the Bell Curve, gaining a deeper understanding of the science behind the device and it's ability to capture it's environments--or not--given that some photos cannot be captured in a way that makes them of any amount of quality.

I'm intrigued by all of this. So much so that I had actually just looked at college courses in my new area (Ottawa, Canada). I'm not sure if it would be asking too much to see more of your material perhaps...I'm highly intrigued.

 

[Ysarex]

you seem to really know what you are talking about thoroughly!

Thanks, I get paid to teach this stuff.

I had made the decision to get the lightroom subscription. OH MY. there is so much involved with it...
I went from using VSCO X, which is nice most particularly on mobile for presets filters and light-overall editing...

I fear that my photography is going to take a bit of a plunge in quality because of my post-processing switch before it gets better.

Quite the contrary. It is in fact easier to process your photos starting with raw files than to shoot camera JPEGs and try to edit those. You'll catch on quickly.

are there any go-to guides that you would recommend?

Read this: class notes
This site is fair: Cambridge in Colour
Adobe has lots of good tutorials for LR on their website.

TPF here is a good resource.

Joe

P.S. Take some photos with your camera. Save NEF files. Find one you like. Create a free Dropbox account and upload the NEF file. Get back to me and let me have the link. I'll process it for you in LR and send you the XMP file.

You're an interesting man, Joe. I enjoyed your writing style...Thorough, as mentioned last, though a good amount of relatable expression and humor--and highly informative.

I did learn from this. A decent amount of it was new to me such as the Bell Curve, gaining a deeper understanding of the science behind the device and it's ability to capture it's environments--or not--given that some photos cannot be captured in a way that makes them of any amount of quality.

I'm intrigued by all of this. So much so that I had actually just looked at college courses in my new area (Ottawa, Canada). I'm not sure if it would be asking too much to see more of your material perhaps...I'm highly intrigued.

Thanks, I'm flattered. I'd be happy to share more of my class materials -- may take some pushing. I'm in my ninth year retired now but I still teach part-time. I have a lot of similar hand-out material I've prepared for class but not in the same web-form as what I just showed you. When I retired my wife started to (gently) suggest I create an e-book of all that stuff. I've made fits and starts and mostly abandons but that's how the piece you read came about. I've worked on some more but not gotten it ready yet. You can join my wife and bug me and maybe I'll get back at it.

In the meantime when you ask questions here at TPF there's quite a few folks who will give you good info.

Joe