DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

That's one good thing about Lightroom. It does nondestructive editing. The original file is read, but not changed. Even if you're editing jpgs, LR will strongly resist overwriting the original. (I believe it can be done, but not without a lot of work and knowledge about how LR works). On the other hand, Photoshop does not save the history of edits and can overwrite the original, so you should be careful.

Of course you should always save at least one backup before doing any editing.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

I agree with almost all of your posts in general but sometimes... Well I do not.

I do not use LR at all. ACR allows the same sync as LR edits over a large number of files so the time 'so called saved' is where?

As to using PS CC, sorry but when it comes to portrait and retouching LR does not even come close. Yes, you can pass hours refining a portrait in PS CC , edit pore by pore if you want. The reality is that it is up to the photographer when enough is enough as far as post processing goes. I am from a school (of thought) that says 'minimal is best'. I do not understand 'over cooking' whatever the subject. If or when I need to retouch, modify or correct, sorry but LR is the last thing I will reach for... For good reason, I did not even install it!

Please note that I did not type or imply that no one should use LR. Far from it. You use it? You like it? Great. Just do not slam other program(s) because you think you are wasting time. Other do not.


-------
By the way... (not part of my answer to you)...

PS CC does not modify the originals either so the LR 'non destructive' argumentation is moot. ACR imports into PS CC and uses the same XMP sidecars when allowed. Not only that but ACR allows the opening of files as 'smart object'. Something a few folks need to look at too. (I don't like it thought - smart object as background)...

Ah, oh... PS CC does not touch the original ever unless someone makes a mistake of using a JPG and saving the damned edits onto the same name. Computer training folks, not software error.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I consider the time saved is not necessarily in the editing, but in the searching for old stuff (which I do a lot of). I understand that you can do some of that with Bridge, but I'm used to the LR way of searching/filtering. All my files go through LR because it makes it possible for me to find them later. LR has rudimentary editing capability, but that's sufficient for many of my images. The rest get sent to PS from LR, and back to put the edited file into the catalog. The value of LR to me is predominately the catalog.


Agreed.


That's true if you start with a raw file (or jpg or tiff), but not if you start with a psd.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Save a PSD under a different - related - name like ~ V001 (or much more descriptive but still sequential).

A bit like we did when it was the start of the computer age and we needed to keep edited versions of the same document.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

Do the same with a jpg or tiff. Another good reason to shoot raw, since you don't have to resort to these ancient workarounds.

anotherview Loc: California

Try to get composition and framing right in the camera. Depending, then, you may not need to crop at all.

You could develop the whole photograph, and afterward, make crops from copies of the finished photography.

JohnTxNC

These replies are good... I am going to touch on a few of yours here.... collectively in one message.

Burke, your input and the detail you provide is very appreciative! I did not know the "overlay" was even a "thing". I have often wondered by todays' manufactures did not include that .... at least as an option. As a portrait shooter...(my real love in photography) .... I can seriously consider this "modification" as a possibility. Thanks for providing the link!

D2B2, you and SharpShooter, Grnway and Jerryc41 are all cut from the same mold..... You guys never change your minds... never make a concept mistake and your clients love all your work, just as you present it! .... Damn, should I ever be that Lucky! ...hahaha Thanks for the feedback!!!

Jerry - I wished that LensAdjustment was further up the hill too... half the time, I tend to forget to use it...although I am getting better about that.

wteffey - ..... I think you and I are on the same page... I often use the center focus point in my indoor portrait work. When I back up and place that on the models' eye... there is a ton of space above her head that I know I will never use. I sometimes crop a bunch of that away, before I get started editing. But I have regretted cropping away too much too! Thanks for the response!

TheDman ....... I have been hosed before... lesson learned.... That is what is so surprising about the replies here... many more "crop first" than I was expecting.

Dbs82 .... Cropping is "reversible in LR" and I often create a Virtual Copy of a fully edited image and crop it a second way.

DirtFarmer.... That is good feedback... I will look into that... I will admit..I am stronger in LR than I am in PS ... and I consider myself "Weak" in LR... haha

SusanFromVermont... Working on a "Virtual Copy" in LR .. straight-away.... DingDong...the doorbell sounded with that message... Because I have in more than one occasion needed a fast look at the original un-tampered image. Thanks!!

JackDoor .. haha ... I take it you have not felt the "awww shiet" affect of cropping poorly in the beginning yet . . . So, we are glad this post helped!

Hey DeanS ... hope you see this... I think you and I are on the same page, right? You edit a full image, though it might be a copy of the full image. So you and SusanFromVermont are in tandem. You keep the original file untouched and work in a virtual copy.



So here is my take, after reading all of the replies and commenting on several:

Cropping is to the most part.... (like a lot of our work) an individual taste.

Group A) Some people see the final delivered image from the "original capture". You photograph a woman standing by a tree and you know right off the bat, that it's going to be a upper body 8x10 and after the initial cropping you are off to the races - editing and never looking back..

I envy Group A

Group B) I fall into Group B - I see the woman standing by the tree, but I also see her $5,000.00 poodle standing beside her. She would make a beautiful portrait cropped as an upper body alone, but oh my gosh....she does love that dog!!! So, yes... I edit the whole image... I edit the background and might even pop a little twinkle in the dog's eyes... Then I will move the image to PP to get rid of the kid on the bicycle in the background. From PS, I "SAVE_AS" a Tiff File and add "_" to the file name. LR automatically picks up the image and places it next to my original edit. From here, I double check the image for final quality and make one Virtual Copy. I crop the first as an upper body 8x10, color code it GREEN (for 8x10) and Rate it a 5-STAR as a Final. Next, I crop a 5x7 of her and the dog and color code that image as YELLOW (for 5x7) and Rate it a 5-STAR as a Final Image. I may have 50 images to deliver to the client, so I sort in LR all "5-STAR", YELLOW and export them with "57" in the file name indicating to the client it's a 5x7 image. I will next sort the 8x10's and any 4x6's or squares I may have until all 50 images (which may equate to around 75 are exported) She is happy and I am exhausted..... Again... I envy Group A.

Group C - is everyone tired of my typing.... hahaha

Thanks again... I promise to not post too often!

John



Thanks for all of the input!!

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

John, you can post as often as you like! That is, as long as you continue to come up with thought-provoking topics and demonstrate such a great sense of humor...

I am interested in the different ways people use the "ratings" symbols in LR to signify certain characteristics of their images. I use color coding to signify different categories of images rather than different sizes. Final/best are Green, another version or second best are Red. Virtual copies are yellow. Originals are purple. HDRs are Blue. I use my cataloging system to separate the Greens and Reds from the Purples and Yellows. Have not had much luck with stars - keep forgetting what they are designating! White flags are used when sorting to indicate ones I want to look at more closely and possibly edit first. Black flags - get rid of them!

Never thought about a code for image cropped size! But lately I have been trying to make photos in more traditional aspect ratios, with the thought of buying pre-cut mats in quantity. Perhaps I can use the stars for that? It certainly would make it easier to remember which ones are 5x7, 8x10, 11x14, 16x20. Thanks for helping to precipitate that idea in my brain...

The only changes I have been making to the file name is to indicate which camera the images came from. Since I leave the file name as the numbers that come out of the camera, it seemed prudent to give LR a way to tell that files with the same number are not the same image, rather that they are different because they came from different cameras...

Thanks again! Enjoyed your post and the ensuing lively conversation.
Susan

wesm Loc: Los Altos CA

Everything in Lightroom is reversible. The original file is never modified. The edits you made are saved as a sequential set of instructions in the catalog, and applied every time you open the image (or any virtual copy).

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

I don't use ratings much, but probably should. I do use color labels, primarily at the start of my workflow. Initially, the images have no labels. When I run through them in my first pass, I put a red label (just press "6") on all the images that have potential. When I get through all the images I can filter on the red label and do a second pass. On the second pass I start editing. If I get something reasonable but have to give it some more work after thinking more about it I give it a yellow label. If I think it's done I give it a green label. Images that have to get sent to Photoshop get a blue label. An image that returns from Photoshop (as a psd) still has a blue label, so I change it to green. I then take the original (blue) image and the Photoshop image (green) and stack them. When I'm done with all that I select all the unlabelled images and delete them (from the catalog, not the disk). More information on my workflow at http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/user-page?upnum=1584

As far as cropping is concerned, I have never felt compelled to crop to standard sizes. My cropping is driven by composition, not standardization. That's partly because I rarely print the images. They are used mostly on the computer or online. Sometimes in newsletters. None of those venues really requires standard aspect ratios.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

Sounds like you are using color labels much like I use flags - to indicate what needs to be looked at for editing - but carried to a different level! My catalog is set up much like a filing cabinet with topics and sub-topics. The subtopics are further divided into categories similar to your use of color labels, but each is in a separate folder: Main topic name contains red and green (best and almost best), under that are In Progress, Outtakes, Support Photos. Support Photos are composed of stacks of all images that went into making up the green and red images. In Progress are ones I think I will work on in future, Outtakes are ones I don't think I will want to use, but are being kept because I might change my mind, or be able to use a part of them for something else. This way I can open the topic name and find the ones I want to either show, share, or print! [This method was presented by Ben Willmore in one of his video tutorials I watched on CreativeLive.]

I do not really feel compelled to crop to standard sizes. But there are times when I would like to be able to use a pre-cut mat. In general I cut my own for each image, but there are times when I can see that an image will look good in a standard size. This is why I was thinking about marking those so I could "take the easy way out" sometimes! Of course, I don't always use the same color mat for all images, and if one demands a certain color, then I definitely have to cut it myself. For instance, I have a bunch of 8x10 frames and was thinking about what to fill them with. Usually I do not care for pictures that have no mat, so I ended up ordering a package of pre-cut 8x10 with an opening for 5x7. Then I took a group of photos and did 5x7 crops on them that fit perfectly into those mats and frames. Not finished putting them together, but the ones I have done look very good.

Thanks for sharing!

Susan

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

I use color assignments in Lightroom so that (by sorting on color) I can group similar subject matter. But I do use ratings a lot.

I've been thinking a lot about speeding up my workflow. This is in recognition of the fact that I have a large and (until very recently) growing backlog of images that need processing. Lightroom does seem to be helping me speed up my workflow, but one thing I am thinking about is whether I might be more ruthless about discarding apparently bad images earlier in the process. I've tended to delay these decisions until after at least making some basic editing adjustments because I have sometimes seen images that initially look hopeless turn out to be quite good. Well, I'm still thinking about that - I hate to take a chance on discarding a great shot hiding under a lack of processing.

But now that I'm using Lightroom, whenever I do make that decision to throw out an image I do use ratings for making that decision. Intitially, I assign a rating of 2 to all of the images in a collection and then make repeated passes through the collection making decisions about the individual images. Terrible images I just remove from the collection, but often I just increase or decrease the individual ratings. After a few passes I just remove the ones rated 2 or less.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The LR experience is very different from Photoshop. LR is meant to be a "cottage industry professional photographer's" workflow tool. It has lots of automation and presets and was designed with beta test input from over 10,000 working professionals in all fields of interest. It was designed first as an image management tool, then as a "global level" image processor.

PS is a giant toolbox used first by graphic artists and then photographers. Yes, it has tremendous value, especially for pixel level editing, layers, masks, text, composites and montages... But it isn't designed as a workflow tool. It handles one image at a time.

The time savings comes from using the combination... using the right tool for the job.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

My solution to grouping subject matter is to use folders. For instance, Maine Pictures, with different topics under that, all images taken in Maine. One of those is Harbors in Maine, divided into folders named according to which Harbor. Some Harbors have sub-categories according to what year I took them! Same idea for Landscapes in Maine, Lighthouses in Maine, Landscapes in Maine, Rivers and Lakes in Maine, and Acadia National Park. My aunt lived in South Princeton on Lake Pocomoonshine and we would visit her at least once or twice a year. See my previous response to dirtfarmer for more info on my cataloging system!

I know what you mean about images that don't look like much until you start playing with them! That is why I don't like to delete anything unless it is beyond saving. Periodically I will go through my "Outtakes" folder just in case something catches my eye. Also I will revisit some of my "best" and try something different starting from the original, or re-edit my edit. We are constantly learning more about the tools we use and how to use them. It makes sense that eventually we might be able to bring out the best in an image we thought was just taking up space!

Susan

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont