What programs do you use for your workflow?

dynamitetony wrote in post #10395608
why not edit/ PP / delete first in RAW and then export to JPGs just the ones you want to keep ?

It's not the deletion process. It's PP'ing a lossy format then running those pics through another generation of JPEG compression during the final export.

If one is going to immediately convert the RAW pics to jpeg before touching them, you may was well shoot in that format to begin with.

I rename images as soon as I import them, so they're sequential when i'm culling. Multiple cameras have multiple filenames, and sorting by date/time in Bridge slows things down a little. I rename again once I have the keepers for the customer.

LR2, CS4, Topaz Adjust, Enfuse, and sometimes Photomatix.

RT McAllister wrote in post #10395711
You "compress" RAW files to jpeg and then do PP?

Sounds backwards to me.

Not quite. The noise reduction algorithm in LR is poor compared to DPP, and I use RAW for the exposure and NR headroom primarily. Once I am satisfied that the NR is correct, I then export them for use in LR for culling (slideshow for pick/reject) and for image toning. Also, I believe that LR does not "save" the original JPG again - it creates a new JPG based upon the export conditions that I have set. So not really lossy after lossy, and I have yet to see any difference between the files when saved at level 10.

But my workflow is much the same as the old days when ACR meant you had to convert to JPG as Photoshop could not use CR2 files. Now you can use a smart import, but old habits die hard...

Ken

LR3 has much improved NR. Fixing your images before culling seems pretty backward.

kencas wrote in post #10396559
Also, I believe that LR does not "save" the original JPG again - it creates a new JPG based upon the export conditions that I have set. So not really lossy after lossy, and I have yet to see any difference

I'm not even sure what you mean by this. If you make any changes to a jpeg you have to re-encode it as new jpeg. I know if you open a jpeg in ACR then hit close it embeds the changes in the file, but doesn't create a new jpeg with the changes unless you save it out to a new file. Not sure what LR does in this area.

kencas wrote in post #10396559
Not quite. The noise reduction algorithm in LR is poor compared to DPP,

You need to fork over the $100 and upgrade to LR version 3. Then trash DPP. The only use I've ever found for it was to show focus points. Otherwise It's basically crap.

This isn't the workflow you initially described. You made it sound like you do no post work on the RAW files.

Stamp 2.8 to download images off cards, and rename them with a date stamp (I rename files to time, so IMG_5788.CR2 shot at 1:33pm and 57 seconds is renamed to 133357_5788.CR2
Pixort to cull and rate images. I use this instead of lightroom because it's 10 times faster than lightroom. Pixort will load an image and rate it as fast as you can press a key. You can cull/rate 5 photos in one second if you are fast enough. Lightroom has a delay and loading time between each file which makes it really SLOW.
Lightroom 2 to process photos. I will wait until 2011 to upgrade to 3.
Photoshop CS2 for any additional edits LR cannot do. I didn't find any benefit in upgrading to CS3 or CS4 but CS5 really has me thinking that it's worth the upgrade.
Picasa to index and browse jpegs after export.
ncFTP to upload them to my blog, photocart, or website
No HDR, noiseware or skin smoothing software... I find that stuff kinda useless and gives mediocre results.

Do you sync your cameras to the second? That should be a function of Canon's software somehow; like you hook each successive camera to your computer it syncs them both exactly.

Each time I do it (by setting the time manually before a wedding), I try and hit the "set time" button sequence at the exact same time so they are as close as humanly possible. I hate when things import even slightly out of order as I was switching back and forth.

TheHoff wrote in post #10398201
Do you sync your cameras to the second? That should be a function of Canon's software somehow; like you hook each successive camera to your computer it syncs them both exactly.

Each time I do it (by setting the time manually before a wedding), I try and hit the "set time" button sequence at the exact same time so they are as close as humanly possible. I hate when things import even slightly out of order as I was switching back and forth.

I sync mine using Canon software that adjusts the camera's time to match that of my computer. It will keep them very close for a day event. Over time, they start to drift apart since they are not the best timekeepers in the world. From there I just sort by time stamp but am looking into trying out renaming of files. This thread has me thinking in a new way.

TheHoff wrote in post #10398201
Do you sync your cameras to the second? That should be a function of Canon's software somehow; like you hook each successive camera to your computer it syncs them both exactly.

The Canon software probably does it to the millisecond, and I find the drift is only seconds per week. I do reset it before every wedding though.

I can't remember the name of the software that does it, but it comes on the CD in the camera box.

RT McAllister wrote in post #10397311
You made it sound like you do no post work on the RAW files.

As I said, only exposure (if needed) and NR - that's it.

And my present workflow works for me. When LR3 gets its usual run of bugs out of the way then I'll consider it then. But until then I would prefer to wait and use what I already know works well for the cameras I use.

Ken.

RT McAllister wrote in post #10397311
You need to fork over the $100 and upgrade to LR version 3.

I generally agree, the NR is LR3 is vastly improved. That said, I don't find it equal to programs like Noiseware. Going forward, I will probably be addressing noise in LR3 90+% of the time, but some images will probably still require a dedicated application.

TheHoff wrote in post #10398201
Do you sync your cameras to the second? That should be a function of Canon's software somehow; like you hook each successive camera to your computer it syncs them both exactly.

Each time I do it (by setting the time manually before a wedding), I try and hit the "set time" button sequence at the exact same time so they are as close as humanly possible. I hate when things import even slightly out of order as I was switching back and forth.

Big K wrote in post #10398247
I sync mine using Canon software that adjusts the camera's time to match that of my computer. It will keep them very close for a day event. Over time, they start to drift apart since they are not the best timekeepers in the world. From there I just sort by time stamp but am looking into trying out renaming of files. This thread has me thinking in a new way.

tim wrote in post #10398260
The Canon software probably does it to the millisecond, and I find the drift is only seconds per week. I do reset it before every wedding though.

I can't remember the name of the software that does it, but it comes on the CD in the camera box.

I sync my cameras as close as I can, and do it manually. I can't use the canon software because I shoot both canon and nikon. The canon software sucks... it totally DOES NOT sync to the millisecond; I tried it many many times. Sometimes my cameras were off by over a second right after time syncing from the software. Well timed finger pushes in the camera menu is what I use.

Sync cameras - relatively simple. Using the clock on desktop (windows 7) with second hand going set time individually. First camera for eg at 11.10 then the second at 11.11 and so on. Will recalibrate about every six months.

[QUOTE=Peacefield;1039​9060]I generally agree, the NR is LR3 is vastly improved. That said, I don't find it equal to programs like Noiseware.

Interesting turnaround. Back in February you said:

after playing around with LR3 beta and its enhanced noise handling, I can imagine NW sitting idle.

I upgraded mainly because of your testimonial.

Yes, I find NW works better than LR3 with pics I shot at 1600 ISO on my 50d's (but I avoid this as much as possible). However, 800 ISO or less I can't tell the difference. And anytime I can avoid sucking another gargantuan PSD file into my hard drive is fine by me.

Imagenomic makes fine PS plug-ins. I still use "Portraiture" a lot.