Post Processing

[IgsEMT]

Not really a Q, just something I learned recently and wanted to share. Often, on this site and other forums, folks often ask which program is BEST to use. Here's my little story:

When digital age started and I got into it, the question became which software to use. YEARS later, I got LR, PS, ACDsee and use them ALL. Up until few months ago, I was a JPGer all the way and never had an issue. When tried RAW, post processing was a pain in the @$$ since images didn't look as near as they did on the screen and the 20-30sec that I used to spend on JPGs turned into 2-3minutes in RAW. Few days ago, I tried Capture NX (I'm a Nikon shooter) and used their RAW converter (no editing, just convert to JPG). When comparing the JPGs from Capture, LR, ACDsee, PS (ALL W/O editing, just conversion) Capture won.
POINT IS using more then one program is sometimes more beneficial as it provides better (subjectively speaking) results in the final product.

 

[NateWagner]

I'm sorry, I don't see how you got to your point. I mean, if you had said
"POINT IS Capture NX is the bomb and I like it the best" That would have made sense to me. I don't get how you're saying, get more programs to make the picture better.

Also, why on earth would one use LR, ACDsee (not actually too familiar with that one) and PS, and not edit?

 

[IgsEMT]

I don't get how you're saying, get more programs to make the picture better.

I didn't say it is better. I said

sometimes more beneficial

I can spend 4-5 minutes in PS adding soft focus or use Nik's Color effex and do it in 30seconds.
I'm lucky b/c I freelance for few studios and over the years, when I was doing editing FOR THEM, studios allowed me to install their software on my computer, hence my collection. ACDSee, I use only as a viewer and on rare occasions when need quick edits for web, I use it. PS was probably my first prog that I got into and use till this day. It is GREAT when it comes to small&great edits but I got in LR b/c it sped up the workflow. When banging out a wedding 500-600 frames a night, spending 1-2mins per image on minor edits (crops, filters, VERY LITTLE THINGS) vs 30-40seconds (in LR) does change things. In my case, it is beneficial:thumbup:.
When I began playing with RAW, although I now had about 2-3times much more room to play, I found that I spend more time to process an image to look how it did in camera. On various forums, people have been using camera-brand raw converter, which in my case, I believe in Capture NX and after trying it, it worked GREAT. The RAW file that I got out, rather then TURNING IT into what I see in camera, I added to what I see in camera.

I'm sorry, I don't see how you got to your point

There really isn't ONE best software, everything has its limitations.

I'm sure there are plugins or filters or w/e that I can add to LR or PS that it'll read my camera's settings and will give me the results. Unfortunately, I don't have the time, to research that but if someone can offer an insight, I'd love to hear/read about it.
There's always something more to learn...

 

[Garbz]

You're missing the key point. Adobe has an idea of what colours are and their profiles try to standardise all cameras to it. Nikon has an idea of what colours are and their profiles try to standardise their cameras to it. Canon does too etc etc etc.

The conclusion drawn from Capture makes it look more like the camera JPEG does not make capture better or more ideal, it means the defaults that capture is set to look more pleasing the way you want the image to appear. (Personally I tend to think of it as oversaturated).

If the results you're getting with Lightroom aren't what you expect, and if you're spending 2-3minutes setting up each JPEG, then the real issue is you haven't set up Lightroom for YOU. You can play with all the settings including make your own camera profile if you wish to go that far, and then set them all as defaults which would bring you back down to the few seconds editing. This would also give you your desired Nikon colours in Lightroom.

All the features for it are there, but you can't just open up a RAW in Lightroom and expect it to be right for you straight away. The same goes with Aperture, PhaseOne or any other RAW editing program unless you're trying to directly emulate your camera's processing, in which case the manufacturer's RAW converter will work out of the box just fine.

 

[skieur]

Adobe and the other general editors however have to standardize their features across several cameras and depend on the info. that they can get from the RAW and jpeg files produced by Canon, Nikon, Sony and the rest.

The camera makers however can customize their editors to the features, strengths and weaknesses of their own camera and how they designed it.
Dynamic range adjustments, for example, tend to be where the camera maker's software is often better than 3rd party editors.

skieur

 

[Garbz]

Not quite. Adobe standardise the software and how the sliders behave. However Lightroom is very much customised to each and every individual camera. The Adobe Standard profiles loads custom profiles for every camera. You can see that quite clearly when a new camera comes out that isn't supported but people use it anyway. The resulting quality of the image is usually quite poor as is colour reproduction because the right profile isn't loaded. Google Canon 7D and Lightroom for a classic example of this going on right now.

Basically the dataset people are working from is the same, and there are enough tone curves, profiles, contrast, saturation, recovery, blackpoint etc sliders in Lightroom to get every bit of dynamic range out of the image. The only real difference is vendor specific functions, like the Nikon Active-D system. This for instance is similar yet still quite different to the Fill Light slider. However that doesn't mean that you can't make an exactly identical image in Lightroom by tweaking every other setting.

If the manufacturers really did have a dynamic range edge over the competition, then a whole world of professional photographers wouldn't be using Adobe CameraRAW to process their photos.

 

[IgsEMT]

Garbz, very interesting. You are right, I haven't setup LR for me.
A bit more then a year ago, one of the photogs who I work with called me in his studio and set me in-front of the monitor with LR. I had a wedding about 600 frames and do minor adjustments on them. Normally I would do it in PS at home, here I was in studio. They were all in JPGs, first image took me the longest - I had no fricken clue what I was doing but got a hang out - it is pretty intuitive. I don't go above develop module and again, keep it to basic editing. My whole Pain in the @$$ started when I decided to jump on the RAW wagon and realized the time I'm spending is greater then what I need/want and have.
So I am lucky since I work with different studios, I have access to various software but you said

then the real issue is you haven't set up Lightroom for YOU

. How do I set it for me?
I have 3 Nikons in my arsenal. D70, D90 and D300.
Thanks for your help!!!
P.S. Things were so much simpler b4 I got into PP, I just shot it, and let the lab deal with it.

 

[Garbz]

How do I set it for me?
I have 3 Nikons in my arsenal. D70, D90 and D300.
Thanks for your help!!!
P.S. Things were so much simpler b4 I got into PP, I just shot it, and let the lab deal with it.

Oh god that's a loaded question if I ever have seen one, It all depends in what effect you're after. Take an image and play with the sliders all day. See if you can find one combination that works really well. Before you even start that though, head down to the camera calibration tab in the develop module and try selecting "camera standard". That is a profile provided by Adobe to more accurately match your camera's default settings.

When you're done, in the file menu you can click develop -> set default settings. These defaults are camera dependant so you'll need to repeat the process for a RAW file from each camera.

If you by any chance have a colour checker chart (I suggest getting one anyway it's great to measure the quality of light and white balance in a photo), with the colour checker chart you can create your own camera profile, using the DNG profile creator and import it into Lightroom: DNG Profiles:Editor - Adobe Labs (be prepared to dedicate a weekend to this though )

 

[IgsEMT]

(be prepared to dedicate a weekend to this though )

hhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmm - that will be FUN.
thanks for the link, i looked at it - IT'LL BE MORE THEN A WEEKEND
thanks for your help