Post Processing for Print Question...

I have been doing photography with my 40D now for close to a year, and now I am wanting to print some of my work. My question is how do I get my files ready for web and print?

Normally my work flow is: Shoot>Lightroom (Save as jpeg)>Photoshop (save as highest quality jpeg which usually is around 5mb). I shoot only in raw, and I am sure this is probably the worst way to save my work flow for web and/or print. Please help... Thanks so much for your time...

Well, you'll see a variety of workflow preferences in a big group like this because each person finds what works best for them, at least for the time. So, take everything everyone says with that in mind, and realize it's up to you to try things out and find out what works best for you, but keep learning and be open to change to something better!

For me, a couple key points I'd make.

First, when I began shooting Raw, I was determined to get the best out of that format by getting the most out of my Raw processing. Up until three or so years ago, the choices were limited, so my workflow was pretty much ACR for the Basic stuff then straight into Photoshop for all my more refined stuff.

But that all began to change with CS3 and Lightroom 1 (which I fully adopted during the second minor release -- the Beta and first release were not working well for me), when the Raw tools became more refined, and I found I could do more and more in Lightroom before wanting/needing Photoshop, and in fact found that for most output purposes such as Web posting and small prints and a lot of large prints I actually didn't need Photoshop at all. Photoshop became a specialty toolbox, no longer the center of my workflow. Lightroom 2/3 has made more significant improvements in this regard by the development of the local adjustment brushes and gradients.

The point of all this is that I'd encourage you to fully utilitize the Raw format by doing all you can with your Raw processor. Take the time to read some books and watch some tutorials on how to fully massage those Raw files in Lightroom, since you have it and use it, and maybe as you pick up the skills to get the best out of the process, you may find yourself needing PS less than what you thought.

My second point is about what to do when you do need Photoshop. You are converting to a jpeg first, then going into Photoshop, then saving a jpeg (presumably using Save As to create a copy rather than overwriting the original), leaving you now with three copies of the same image. And, at the point where you convert to a jpeg you are also throwing away data that Photoshop could need to make high-quality adjustments because a jpeg conversion does a compression from the Raw 14 bits to an 8 bit per channel format, losing image data, then compresses the resulting file by discarding "matching" pixel info but those matches may be not as close as you'd like, depending on the level of compression, and it gets worse when you do multiple saves.

If you are concerned about image quality, I'd suggest not creating a jpeg until the final output -- either a Web-size jpeg, something to share with others, or a large-size jpeg for an external print. for an intermediate "project" file for use in Photoshop, a 16 bit tiff or a PSD is the way to go because it retains the image quality inherited from the Raw file and also because you can save it with Photoshop layers intact so you can always revisit your work, including the original "background" layer which has your unaltered image.


The problem with tiffs is that they are huge, and they as well as jpegs add to the clutter of different copies of one image for different reasons, and that's a big reason for my first point -- do as much as you can with your Raw processor and you may be able to save yourself from that clutter.

There is also an efficient way to go into Photoshop from Lightroom for quick fixes for an output but without the need to save a tiff, and that's to go the Edit in Photoshop using the Smart Object option -- this was sadly missing in LR 1.x, but can be very valuable when you don't want/need a tiff "project file" but want to do a bit of needed work for an output -- you could open in Photoshop, do the work, save the jpeg for output and then close and avoid the extra tiff hanging around.

Hope this all helps a bit! If you haven't seen it, check out our Raw Conversion Before and After thread:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=684360

Super great stuff Tony. Thank you so much for your time, it is really appreciated. I myself have been using Lightroom 2.4 and have been realizing that the need to go into photoshop has been less and less now that I have been learning a lot more about the tools in Lightroom. But what had been baffling me was what file format do I save for print for my final image. I see that you're saying that stacking jpegs can be a waste of HD space, and the bonuses of saving into a tiff (16bit or 8bit) file going into photoshop will reduce the loss of image detail and will help save my work in Photoshop other than saving a PSD along with my other jpegs (all of the same image). That alone is a HUGE help.

Now you said that if I am concerned about image quality that I should not creat a jpeg until my final output. Is jpeg the only file I can print from? I am still kinda new to tiff files and didn't know if tiff files can be used for a better quality print. Like say for blowing up an image and not getting noise.

All and all Tony, I wish I could give you a hug for the lesson you have just given me. This is going to save me a lot of time and HD space. Thanks a ton for your expertise.

My own workflow is aimed at print making and everything I do has that primary aim. This means if I do want to prepare something for web posting I have a small amount of work to do to it from its print-ready state. Actually I need to know this before I do my final print-shapening routine, because an image ready for printing looks horrible on screen.

Unlike Tony I use DPP and export the image to Photoshop and do all my post processing within that programme. Exporting means I don't have to save it as anything, it just transfers to PS. When I'm done I save the finished product as a TIFF. As I also save the original RAW files elsewhere, so I have 2 versions of any processed file.

I print from pscs4 from a psd and see no diference from jpeg or psd

taknbyd wrote in post #9432226
Now you said that if I am concerned about image quality that I should not creat a jpeg until my final output. Is jpeg the only file I can print from? I am still kinda new to tiff files and didn't know if tiff files can be used for a better quality print. Like say for blowing up an image and not getting noise.

If you need to print with an outside printer, using a jpeg in the sRGB color space is "safe". Assuming it's a large high quality jpeg it will have good quality assuming it is not a saved version of previous jpegs. This is why it's not a good idea to convert to a jpeg before opening in PS -- you will be converting and compressing twice for a print, rather than once if you open either directly or as a tiff. Of course, if you print to your own printer, you can do that directly without saving a file.

One thing brought up this morning is good to look at, and that is output sharpening for printing. This can be done in Lightroom as well. The idea is that printing can benefit from a special application of sharpening that can depend on the subject and the print size.

It makes a big difference whether you are printing at home, taking the files to a shop on a CD or usb stick, or uploading them to an on-line print lab. At home you can print from any format - tif, psd, jpg or whatever. In fact I often print directly from an edited RAW in Lightroom without ever exporting and saving anything. If you are sending the files out through the web, a big ole' tif can take a long time to upload and if you have a bunch of them that can be inconvenient both for you and the lab, so for that reason it is best to make jpgs. Even the best quality jpg is much smaller than a tif and any theoretical quality loss will be invisible. Putting the files on a portable medium is in the middle - the deciding factor is the capacity of the medium.

My workflow is essentially the same as Lowner described, except I primarily use ACR rather than DPP.

I use LR and I never create a jpeg for saving purposes. I work with the file in LR exclusively unless I need to do some PS work. Then I create a PSD or TIFF which is re-imported to LR when done in PS. I generally print directly from LR so no extra files created. If I do print outside of LR then I'll export it as a high quality jpg to a temporary folder, print it then delete the file from the temp folder when I'm done. I can always export it again if I need to reprint or whatever. Files for web, the same, export to temp folder then delete when done. I never save or work with jpg files. The only long term jpgs on my computer are the images from my pre-RAW days.

Scott

Lowner wrote in post #9432284
Unlike Tony I use DPP and export the image to Photoshop and do all my post processing within that programme. Exporting means I don't have to save it as anything, it just transfers to PS.

How do you export an image from DPP to photoshop ? Do you mean click "Open" in PS and browse for the image ?

Diver-Down wrote in post #9478149
How do you export an image from DPP to photoshop ? Do you mean click "Open" in PS and browse for the image ?

DPP Menu > Tools > Transfer to Photoshop

Or... Alt+P

ChasP505 wrote in post #9479241
DPP Menu > Tools > Transfer to Photoshop

Or... Alt+P

Thanks didn't know that was there.

But, "Transfer to Photoshop" is grayed out for me, with a picture opened or selected. I have PSE 7, maybe it only works with CS_ ?

Diver-Down wrote in post #9481385
Thanks didn't know that was there.

But, "Transfer to Photoshop" is grayed out for me, with a picture opened or selected. I have PSE 7, maybe it only works with CS_ ?

Yeah... It only works with Photoshop (7 through CS4), not Elements.