Hello,

Do you use editing with photoshop or any other software to your photos or you just keep it as it is?

Quote from: satforce on March 25, 2009, 19:17
Hello,

Do you use editing with photoshop or any other software to your photos or you just keep it as it is?

I would estimate that I use post-processing with Photoshop on approximately 100% of my shots

Since I'm always shooting in RAW, the post processing in the RAW conwerter is an essential part of the workflow. In almost all cases, I use the photoshop RAW conwerter for this. It's easy and not time consuming at all.

No never.  And I´ve never had anything rejected, for noise in the dark areas, or sensordust

Quote from: Magnum on March 25, 2009, 20:29
No never.  And I´ve never had anything rejected, for noise in the dark areas, or sensordust

Sounds great... But none of those examples has anything to do with the normal post processing. These possible issues are fixed in the image editing in photoshop or simular programs.

100% of my images have some degree of edition, even if it is just a tweak in contrast.

Regards,
Adelaide

Quote from: Magnum on March 25, 2009, 20:29No never.  And I´ve never had anything rejected, for noise in the dark areas, or sensordust

Right, just plug in your memory card into the Dreamstime FTP and let go. That's the spirit! 
Photoshop is for sissies 

Quote from: photox on March 25, 2009, 19:24

Quote from: satforce on March 25, 2009, 19:17
Hello,

Do you use editing with photoshop or any other software to your photos or you just keep it as it is?

I would estimate that I use post-processing with Photoshop on approximately 100% of my shots

I'll second that

I post-post-process: Post-process first in Lightroom and then sometimes I make post-post-processing in photoshop :-)

Yes, I use it on every single image.

Always.

Quote from: Freezingpictures on March 25, 2009, 22:20
I post-post-process: Post-process first in Lightroom and then sometimes I make post-post-processing in photoshop :-)

That's my workflow too.  Edit raws in lightroom, then open in photoshop for any final tweaks and removing logos etc before saving as jpeg. 

Quote from: photox on March 25, 2009, 19:24

Quote from: satforce on March 25, 2009, 19:17
Hello,

Do you use editing with photoshop or any other software to your photos or you just keep it as it is?

I would estimate that I use post-processing with Photoshop on approximately 100% of my shots

I would agree about 100% that I post process an estimated 100% of my shots. 

When I shot film, except for contact sheets, I also manipulated developing, and post processed everything I printed, including using different papers, filters, chemicals and ways to enhance the final results. Some anti-photoshop people seem to forget this. Either that or they never shot film and printed their own pictures. 

You got to love missed sarcasm

Yes, 100% of my shoots.

Here is a brief of my workflow:

- Shoot in RAW 14 bit uncompressed
- Process in Capture One Pro, save as TIFF 16Bit
- Final tune in PS
- Save As TIFF in Archive
- Save JPG quality 12 for Agency
- Archive RAW

bye!

Quote from: antoniodalbore on March 26, 2009, 09:18
Yes, 100% of my shoots.

Here is a brief of my workflow:

- Shoot in RAW 14 bit uncompressed
- Process in Capture One Pro, save as TIFF 16Bit
- Final tune in PS
- Save As TIFF in Archive
- Save JPG quality 12 for Agency
- Archive RAW

bye!

nice process, but why don't you keep the archive as RAW file not TIFF?

I keep archive of both RAW and TIFF because:

- TIFF is the output of my processing job, sometime it take some time, and I don't want to waste my time. Also very useful for metadata storage (Keywords, Caption, etc.). TIFF is also used to be stored in my image database managed by Extensis Portfolio. My TIFF are all stored at 8bit channel/color in Adobe RGB color space. Each time I need new different variant always re-process RAW > TIFF 16bit > Final Tuning > Convert 8bit > Save TIFF/JPG.

- RAW is useful because with the development of the raw processors SW often I can reprocess an old file and get actually better result. Also need when for a certain job require different image (B&W, more saturation, etc.). Consider of it as "digital negative".

bye.

Quote
nice process, but why don't you keep the archive as RAW file not TIFF?

@satforce:

The RAW file is the so called digital negative. You can not save your modifications to the RAW format.

The many steps of TIFF's, I don't understand...  Since I'm using the PS RAW converter, I don't need the TIFF after processing in capture one. I go directly into PS CS 3/4 and alway save the edited version, including all layers in format PSD.

I don't see any reason to save in TIFF unless this is a requirement for a specific purpose...

To the best of my knowledge, you'll have the highest degree of details including history and such when saving in photoshops own file format.

What is the specific benefit in TIFF, compared to PSD? 

If needed at some later point, you can always create it from the PSD file.... The PSD file has a perfect level of meta data details as well, including description and keywords... 

No specific benefits, TIFF and PSD share most of the features.
Just my personal choice of archive and considered by me more "open" and "standard".

Anyhow, It is a matter of fact that ALL Raw Processors save image in TIFF files. This is not true for the PSD.

Quote
What is the specific benefit in TIFF, compared to PSD?   

Quote from: photox on March 25, 2009, 19:24


I would estimate that I use post-processing with Photoshop on approximately 100% of my shots

lol me 2

I guess most people post-process their images....
even little adjustments are very helpful...

Yes, I used the free Gimp but have recently invested in Lightroom. HUGE improvement!

- Shoot in Raw
- work in Lightroom (catalog, develop and keywording, title and so on)
- In photoshop only if really need (logos, skin, hard clones) but not much
- export in jpg
- upload

« Reply #20 on: March 26, 2009, 16:23 »

Seven years old.  Going for the record?