More shooting, less editing

[Original katomi]

Shoot in raw and jpg if you can. Then pick and choose which images you want to work on

 

[Timppa]

I shoot in JPEG and raw and just find the jpegs never good enough.
I should indeed try to get better jpeg images straight from the camera.
Or yes, I am to fussy!
I currently use a d7500 and mostly my sigma 18-35 now.

 

[smoke665]

Up to this point it's a guess on everyone's part to understand the problem. How about posting an image of one you have a problem with.

 

[Timppa]

Up to this point it's a guess on everyone's part to understand the problem. How about posting an image of one you have a problem with.

I don't have a problem with a image, I just feel the need to edit less and I am looking for ways to speed up the workflow, take more pics and edit less. I made that clear in my first post

 

[Strodav]

I might shoot 500 to 750 pics in raw format on a typical birding session. I download them to my camera backup drive on my computer. I go through all of them and delete all of the ones that have technical problems (camera shake, subject motion, out of focus, severe exposure issues) or composition issues (cut off important parts of the subject, subject facing away from camera, didn't get the eye, ...). I download the rest to LR and go through them again assigning 1 to 5 stars. 1 means mediocre, 2 mean not really, 3 means has possibilities, 4 means good shot, 5 means possible portfolio shot. I then only look at the 3s and above and choose which ones I want to spend time on. So I might work on a dozen or two out of the lot.

 

[Original katomi]

I use my jpg images as proof images. I go through them and weed out the images that are no so good

 

[ac12]

I shoot in JPEG and raw and just find the jpegs never good enough.
I should indeed try to get better jpeg images straight from the camera.
Or yes, I am to fussy!
I currently use a d7500 and mostly my sigma 18-35 now.

The D7500 is a GOOD camera.
If you can't get good JPG out of it, it isn't the fault of the camera.

If the JPG are "never good enough," I suggest going back to the basics, and reviewing your technique.
Maybe you just need to learn and understand lighting and how to meter better, so that there is less need for exposure adjustment in post.

Nikon matrix metering will NOT work for all lighting situations.​

Maybe it is composition that you need to work on.
etc.

 

[smoke665]

Up to this point it's a guess on everyone's part to understand the problem. How about posting an image of one you have a problem with.

I don't have a problem with a image, I just feel the need to edit less and I am looking for ways to speed up the workflow, take more pics and edit less. I made that clear in my first post

Not to pick but in your original post you say , "The biggest problem I would say with me is getting the white balance great, dealing with noise and getting great colors". Then you go on in another post "Maybe I am to strict on myself?". So without seeing an image to determine where to start or what to address, it's a guess at best. "Editing" actually starts before you ever push the shutter.

 

[vintagesnaps]

You can look at his Flickr. Of course I don't know how much those photos were edited.

 

[Dacaur]

I also shoot in jpeg+raw. But my goal is not not have to edit.
The vast majority of the time I delete the raw pictures after transferring to my computer. Exceptions are once in a lifetime type events, and pictures I determine during my cullujg process are "awesome" and deserve some time editing.

My culling process is as follows. If I have downtime, I look through my camera and delete any obviously flawed images. Next at home I hook it up to my 65" tv and go through them, and delete anything that doesn't "wow" me. My goal is to delete 90% of pictures before they ever make it to my computer. Haven't ever made it quite to 90% though....
Once on the computer anything that I could shoot again later, unless it's simply amazing, gets it's raw twin deleted, and jpeg goes into archives...
I've arrived at this process after realizing that after decades of taking pictures, 90%+ of my pictures are just "meh" crap.. I have gigs and gigs of crap....
Basically these days, if I wouldn't want it hanging on my wall, it goes bye bye. Obviously I make exceptions for pictures of family, especially kids and pets, and anything that doesn't really "wow" me, plus anything I think "Hmm, maybe, after I retire and get bored, I might come back and see what I can do"....

 

[Derrel]

I have never met anyone who says that his or her goal is to delete 90% of photos taken before it is time to download. I would say that perhaps you need to rethink your approach to photography.

 

[Dacaur]

Nah, I just take a LOT of pictures.

 

[Strodav]

I have never met anyone who says that his or her goal is to delete 90% of photos taken before it is time to download. I would say that perhaps you need to rethink your approach to photography.

It really depends on what you're shooting. My passions are nature / wildlife / birding. For nature shots, I don't take that many pics and keep quite a few. For wildlife and birding, in order to catch that one shot when the subject is doing something interesting, like grabbing something out of the water or feeding or BIF, it is not unusual to hold down the shutter button at 10fps and take somewhere between 10 and 30 shots. I end up deleting the vast majority, maybe up to 90%. For slower moving subjects in lower light, I use a technique where I start shooting at the "right" shutter speed, which usually means a higher ISO, i.e., noisy, then knock down the shutter speed in 1/2 and take 3 or 4 shots hoping one will be sharp, then knock down the shutter speed in 1/2 again and take like 8 to 10 shots, then ... That way I know I have at least one sharp shot, the first one, but noisy, with the hope I have less noisy sharp shots at lower shutter speeds. I end up throwing most of them away. Similar story for indoor sports.

 

[Derrel]

Perhaps you might want to work more on timing and less on holding the shutter button down and hoping. There is a lot to be said for trying to get the exact moment you want using your brain instead of firing rate. After all if you are discarding 90% of your shots then you are making 9 of 10 shots that are no good, which is a bad hit rate.I think if you were to rely more on timing that you would find that you would discard far fewer shots .Even at 10 frames per second it would seem to me that you could try to get a little bit closer to the desired action.

 

[Strodav]

Perhaps you might want to work more on timing and less on holding the shutter button down and hoping. There is a lot to be said for trying to get the exact moment you want using your brain instead of firing rate. After all if you are discarding 90% of your shots then you are making 9 of 10 shots that are no good, which is a bad hit rate.I think if you were to rely more on timing that you would find that you would discard far fewer shots .Even at 10 frames per second it would seem to me that you could try to get a little bit closer to the desired action.

To each his own. I'll continue to use what Steve Perry and Tony Northrup have taught me as it works for me.