Post Wedding Editing Time

[toddlaffler]

Hello all. Todd here with another question for the group. I am interested in finding out

average editing times for people doing post wedding editing. I know there are a lot of

factors that go into this, such as quality of the original shots (i.e. don't need much PS

work) , speed of compact flash card readers, hard drives, DVD burners, RAW vs jpeg etc.

So let me set up a scenario for you:

 

10 hour wedding: Let's say you shoot 900 RAW images

Post Production: Download all images to your computer

You edit out 300 that the client won't see (the duds)

You now have 600 RAW images you want to do rough edits on.

Once completed you will burn DVD's of all the originals, plus all the edited files.

 

How long would you think something like this should take you? I have done a bit of

searching on the forum here and have heard some other photographers say it takes

roughly 3-4 hours. (Don't count the time it takes to convert the RAW's to jpegs, as that can

be batched overnight)

 

Personally, I don't understand how this can be accomplished with any real attention paid

to quality of post production editing. I understand about batch correcting etc., but still.

Also, don't you have to at least open every single image to even check wether or not it is in

focus? You can't batch cropping either. I figured (conservatively in my opinion) 1 minute

on average per image, so 600 images, 600 minutes= 10 hours.

 

I would be very curious to hear other peoples estimates for doing this. Also, if anyone had

any good links on speeding up workflow.

 

Thanks so much in advance,

 

Todd

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

If your exposures are close, you trust your focusing and you crop using your feet and/or lens then what should be the problem?

 

It takes me 2 hours at the computer and the vast majority of that is culling/editing. I rarely need to crop an image, I rarely have focus issues (handshake is something else!) and I have a custom profile for my RAW files which means that the only sliders I ever have to adjust are the brighness/exposure in ACR and maybe a tiny tweak of the curves at about 5 seconds max per image. If you know how to use your programs to milk the best workflow possible then it shouldn't be hard and remember every time you say 'I'll fix it when I get home' you are adding precious unpaid time to your workflow and you deserve it.

[allen_d.]

I'm probably closer to your estimate than the 3-4 hours and I usually end up culling 900-1000 images to about 400. (I personally think we overwhelm our clients with too many images sometimes) I probably put way too much time into it, but I average 1 wedding per month right now so I have plenty of time. My problem is the amount of other stuff going on related to a "business" (plus having a family, among other things!) often interferes with my workflow, slowing me way down. CS2 has seriously improved my workflow however (for raw files), so if you're still on CS, suggest you upgrade.

[fotografz]

I think it is really a wide range of possible times. If I could do 500 images in 3 hours I'd be

a happy guy. But I know it'll never, ever happen. Few are faster than I am at photoshop,

and once I get even more key commands down pat, I'll be even faster. Still takes me days.

 

Because I'm too compulsive about everything.

 

Compulsive when shooting by often not using the obvious focussing point, and shooting

with wide-open apertures most of the time. So I do need to view the images beyond

thumbnails (what you see on a focussing screen isn't necessarily what is actually recorded

when seen larger).

 

Compulsive about processing all my keepers to a certain standard, and fixing stuff others

may not even see.

 

It's a reason I have to up-grade my client demographic. I need to get paid for my

compulsions : -)

[kari douma]

I am with Mark. It usually takes me about 12 hours to get images to proof. (Although not days like Marc.) Then when they order I spend a little more time on it. The 12 hours includes downloading, sorting and culling through the bunch to narrow it down to about 350, a quick crop if needed, and a color adjust if needed. I'll change a few to B&W, and touch up a few of my favorite a little more than that. Anything more major than that I wait until they order. (I'm not quite a compulsive as Marc!)

[matthewkane]

I'm with Marc it takes me a WHILE. I'd say you're about right with a minute per image...

however some images take '10 minutes'. So yeah it typically takes me 10hrs or a bit more.

I find stretching it out over a few days helps... a bit here a bit there. I too am picky with

what I do and how the image turns out almost to a fault. I'm actually even trying to widdle

down the edits further these days. Like someone above mentioned many times clients are

overwhelmed with 350+ images and I strongly believe most people only want roughly 200

quality shots. Many more than that and it becomes a daunting task to sort through.

Recently I gave a client 150 even and she was happy with that. Less is more.

[khaisy]

Since we are in the subject, I was going to ask few questions in a new post.

Kari, when you say you will fix them more when they reorder? do you give them proof, CD or 4x6 prints? also if you photos are quite complety fixed? I am just asking to learn that is all.

everyone, I am trying to make 100% leap to Digital, I have been reading here, there so much inforamtion and variation. Jpeg vs Raw, MP setting etc... here is my questions

is this statment correct :

if you do not plan to make prints over 11x14 than just 4MP is more than enough.

If you learn how control you you Exposure,framing etc.. there is no need to use Raw because theer is no difference in print quality.

what do you set your camera RGB or SRGB? I was told SRGB is much better because most lab that what they use.

are you using PScs2 for workflow when you use RAW or third party software like capture one? Thank you

[mark_jacoby___raleigh__nc]

We tell clients we spend up to 20 hours in editing. I would say 12+ hours as Mark described above and then more time ordering prints, designing albums, packing prints for delivery, making dvd etc.

 

But I'm pokey and easily distracted.

[kari douma]

Khalil, I have online proofing and I also give the customer a "proof book". It is a book printed by my lab. The pages are 8X10, and there are 4 images on a page, with the image number printed under the image. It is spiral bound with a nice metal spiral. When the customer orders, I sharpen the image, soften the skin, remove any blemishes, whiten teeth if needed, and take out distracting things from the background.

 

I won't answer the RAW vs JPEG quesiton, because I am still working on that myself. (I took half raw at my wedding yesterday. I don't have enough cards for all RAW yet.) BUT I always shoot in the highest quality JPEG when I am shooting JPEG. I would rather have too big of a file than too small. I crop quite a bit after I shoot also. (I am working on changing that too!)

[marcsaint]

Todd, funny you should mention it...

My wedding yesterday was 860 shots, all RAW format. It took me from 9:00 AM to 11:30 AM to:

 

1. Transfer files from portable hard drive to computer.

2. Do my first pass through all the pix, deleting blanks, blurs, etc. (I also rotate the verticals, something I won't need to do should the camera fairy leave me a D200 someday:-))

3. Write metadata to files (copyright info, etc).

4. Burn 2 sets of safety DVDs of the original files.

 

My workflow has 2 more passes that include culling down to <500 images, putting images in storytelling order, and a few other steps.

 

The "one hour of post-processing for every hour of shooting" is a good goal to shoot for but it takes a lot of work to get there.

 

Marc St.Onge

[toddlaffler]

Thanks for the quick responses.

 

Ben: I trust my focusing on formal shots, but I mostly shoot candids, and when things happen quickly, I can't rely on my focusing. Same thing with cropping, I can't always crop with feet or lens, sometimes it's just a matter of getting the shot and worrying about it later. There's just no other way (for me anyway). I just don't quite understand how you can be sure every image is in focus, and that each image you send to the client is indeed a keeper, or that black and white conversions are being done the best way for a particular image etc. Maybe I need a clearer definition of "rough edit"? :)

 

Allen: You say you have plenty of time, which you may, but in the end I think it comes down to figuring out how many total hours you spend plus expenses and see what you are earning per hour for your efforts. Something I am strarting to really realize. I have a HARD time not spending "too much time" on each image. I'm somewhat of a perfectionist, and not a robot on an assembly line so to speak. This is something I have to learn when it's ok to go "overboard" and when time is money.

 

Marc: I'd be a happy guy too. Although I'm sure I could do it, I'm just not so sure I'd be happy with the results. ;) I have a high standard on every image I produce as well, but the bottom line, I'm now realizing, isn't profitable. Unless you can get someone to pay you for all that computer time of course.

 

Kari: That sounds pretty reasonable to me. I love working on images in PS, but not when I'm notally getting paid for it. I can take some freelance wedding gigs from a studio, but they pay a flat fee of $500 for a 10 hour wedding. They want the images edited as well. So, there is no incentive for me to work images beyond a rough edit. This is something I have to "learn" to do because I care too much! :)

 

Matthew: well, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one; however as I mentioned it all comes down to dollars and cents. If we aren't getting paid for all this time, then Ben is making the most of his time, provided the clients are happy with the end results.

 

Just a quick thought: would people be comfortable knowing that their lab (back in the old days, hehe) were rushing to get your negs developed and printed? Who knows, they probably did!

 

 

Thanks again for the responses, I hope to hear some more people chime in.

 

Todd

[toddlaffler]

MarcSt.Onge: Is that a typo? You did all that in 2 and a half hours?

[marcsaint]

Todd, I did just the steps I noted (1-4), not the whole thing. Transfering files, rotating verticals (in ACR), and burning DVDs takes very little time. The bulk is spent clicking through image after image and hitting the delete key on the duds.

 

It'll take me another couple of hours to narrow it down to <500 images. Then 3-4 hours to fine tune exposure, cropping, etc.

 

Sorry for the confusion.

 

Marc St.Onge

[toddlaffler]

Marc: Thanks for the clarification.

 

To all: So what is it then? Based on the responses so far, it seems taking 10 plus hours is

more the norm. What are we all not getting? If anything.

 

I guess the ultimate test would be to hand a person who does this all in 3-4 hours and

someone who spends 10 hours, 600 RAW images taken by the same photographer (with

good skills) the same set of files and then compare the final results side by side and see if

there is a visible difference in the images. Anyone willing to take on the challange? :)

[chris_kight]

The simple answer is the EXACT SAME answer whether you're shooting film or digital. Get it on the negative/raw file. Each photo you take, make sure the exposure is right, it's in focus, the cropping is right and (digital) your white balance is right. Then, post production, you just give everything a quick look and toss out the blinks. If you're not shooting to these standards then you need to step-up your professionalism and learn to get it right in the first place. Post production with digital I spend about an hour and 15 minutes to do the above. I still shoot medium format film for 60+ of the 85 (upper middle priced) Weddings I shoot each year.

[toddlaffler]

Chris: I know exactly what you're saying, and it is cetainly something to strive for, but why

settle for just the "right" settings/exposures? I really hope you don't mind, but I went on

your web site and downloaded a random sample image and took it into PS, and spent

about 5-10 minutes "playing" with it to see if I could (in my opinion, improve on it). See

what you think. I did some selective blurring, desaturated the background/foreground a

bit, adjusted white balance, added a vignette, and did minor sharpening. Personally I like

my edits better than the original. My point here is, I don't think you can make every

creative decision, nor control EVERY aspect of a wedding photo every time out in the field.

Just because the exposure etc. is right on, doesn't mean it's the best that photo can be.

 

I'm not attcking you by any means, so I hope you don't take it that way, I'm just raising

some points/questions and illustrating my thoughts. Thanks for commenting.

 

Todd

 

My Edited Version:<div></div>

[fotografz]

Just a clarification. I don't do proofs and have the clients select. I correct all the keepers to

print level quality including retouching. I then select and print the album while I'm

processing. Usually 40+ 7X10s and 2 12X18 display prints, plus some group portraits not in

the album. All keepers are then proofed on 13X19 contact sheets and labeled. I then do a

120 image slide show. Thus the days it takes me.

[conraderb]

Todd - good question.

 

I'm using a slow computer, so it takes me 2.5-3 hours to review all of the 900-1200

images to select the final 300 or 400 that I show to the client. After that, another 45

minutes to go through and make sure that white balance is okay and exposure is okay

(around 50% are just fine to show from camera w/out changes), and then another 20

minutes to go through the ones that I want to present as b/w only, or b/w AND color

together.

 

I would guess that 95% of my images do NOT get cropped in post prod - I try to compose

as carefully (yet quickly) as possible on the shoot. I'm obsessed with getting focus right

when I shoot, so I would guess that around 95% of my images are in focus w/out me

having to check closely in the post prod phase. In terms of clone stamping out stuff -

things coming out fo people's heads, beer bottles, etc, etc, etc - I usually only need to do

that to 10 images out of 300 or so, so that's around 10 minutes (1 minute/image for me).

 

generally, I would guess that 25% of my images from a wedding have small exposure

tweaks within 0.66 or maybe one stop, and 5% within two stops. the two stop correction

are usually ones that I'm experimenting in, and the ones I would usually have thrown away

with film. 50-55% of my images are ready to convert to JPG without any corrections except

for aesthetic ones - contrast or conversion to b/w or sepia.

 

If I had a really fast computer, I think I could cut this time by .... around 30%, b/c I wait for

2 seconds at least for DPP to display all of the image in edit mode.

 

Batch processing the 300-400 files takes between 45 minutes to one hour for quality 10

JPGs. All in all, perhaps 3.5-5 hours, depending on how many proofs we are talking about

showing to the client. Not that far off from your estimates if you are doing twice as much

as what I am doing (600 instead of 300).

 

Someone once suggestd to me that I farm out the color correction and retouching to

someone else, which is probably a good idea, but the majority of my time is not spent on

correction/retouching, but simply selecting the images I will show to a client. It's tough b/

c I usually have quite a few good shots and expressions to work with - so those are artistic

calls that I need to make that I dont' want to farm out to someone else. I probably only

spend 1 hour per wedding doing 'correction' work that can be taught how to do (ie. there's

nice flesh tones and there is crappy flesh tones). you can teach correct color balance, but

you can't teach which images you prefer, I'm afraid.

 

Hope that helps.

[matthewkane]

Todd I would say the image you worked on is overdone. I would try to find a medium

between the original and the image you redid somewhere. To each his own though.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Todd, I don't shoot wider than f2.8 and use the center focus point with focus recompose so by the time I'm recomposing I know I have already acheived focus.

 

For culling I use a full screen slideshow using zoombrowser (canon software, I would use the bridge slideshow but it doesn't show the sharpening at all which confuses issues) which gives me an idea where there might be a focus/shake issue and I have bridge runnning at the same time so I can very quickly find that photo and check at 100%.

 

The time I'm talking about is for the proofs. For album/enlargement images I can take far far longer depending on what is needed of course. If I have to enter PS to work an image, i.e. to do something more than I can acheive within seconds in ACR, then I've done something wrong on the shooting end. If, as I do, the proofs are worked within ACR/Bridge then if you have the WB right (I use Whibal) and the exposure in the ballpark, it shouldn't take longer than a few seconds per image and you can batch RAW settings to a whole group of photos that all need the same corrections such as the family groups,, etc.

 

The SF and B&W is done using actions, as are the conversions from RAW to sharpened hi res jpgs and from there to 7X5" proofs.

 

Tell me Todd, what programs are you using within your workflow? If you are using ACR/Bridge then there is a huge amount of batch functionality within bridge that is rarely used or even known about. Even Lightroom, the new do it all workflow program from Adobe is only bridge with extras. You might also be interested in this review of RapidFixer http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/rapidfixer.shtml a program which adds even more functionality to bridge. Personally I wouldn't find it that much better that I would prefer it to batching within ACR but I can imagine that many would love it, at least to make a basic set of corrections before tweaking individual images.

 

When I first started shooting weddings I took an easy one hour of post for every hour of shooting. This was mainly because I needed to tweak each and every image, often extensively. When CS2 came out offering Bridge with crop/rotate tools as well as curves I learned how to batch RAW settings more efficiently. Whibal cut an easy hour off my PP time, I always found getting the WB right one of the hardest things to do and the AWB of the DIGIC 1 cameras was awful. The 1Ds taught me that I needed to get the exposure right in camera first time and my PP dropped dramatically, I also learnt not to rely on cropping to bail me out of compositional error. Now using a slideshow for editing/culling while having Bridge running simultaneously for checking purposes, I can usually edit and tweak proofs at a rate of a 500 image wedding down to 200 corrected proofs ready to be actioned in 2 hours.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

I think there is some confusion here as whether we are talking about editing for proofs (as I was talking about) or editing for final print (as Marc is talking about and Todd too seemingly).

[kari douma]

I think what Todd and Marc are talking about is for final proofs (even though marc doesn't use proofs), but they take the image to the level of final print from the start.

[lb-]

I spend about 2-3 hours per wedding at the computer.

 

I shoot 5 hours and generally capture around 500 total images of which I usually keep

250-300.

 

I use PSCS.

 

After the cards are loaded and backed up I make a couple of quick edit passes flagging the

keepers etc. I have a custom view setup in the file broweser for this which speed things

up.

 

Then I do my color correct/levels tweaks in the RAW converter window.

 

the only time I spend in PS is crops, B+W conversions and the occasional clone or healing

brush pass on close ups etc.

 

then it's plugins and actions from there for sharpen, resize, backups etc all of which are

batched and I can walk away from.

 

I don't do prints or albums really and there's no post wedding meetings or follow up so

other than an upload to an online gallery ( if they want it) I'm pretty much done at that

point.

 

I charge $50/hour US for the time I sit at the computer.

[lovcom_photo]

Although I'm yet to shoot my first wedding (on 2/25), I've shot many functions, and events, and often I can shoot 500+ images during these things.

 

My PP is around 5-8 hours for a typical 500+ shoot, and this is what I do:

 

First off, I shoot RAW only.

 

I use BreezeBrowser to flag the keepers, then from this point on I ignore the duds, and only process the keepers.

 

In general I identify around 50-100 keepers, and for each one I do the following:

 

1. Mostly NO batch processing. Like a craftsman, I do all PP manually and by hand, applying unique and custom changes as required for each image. Yes I know it's tons more work, but doing this often extracts the very highest image quality.

2. Check/correct exposure, and white balance as required during RAW conversion. Color Space is aRGB, 16-bits, and DPI of 584.

3. Once converted into PS-CS2, I resize to 4x6 without resample, and cropping as necessary.

4. Apply anti-noise function as required to reduce/minimize noise, and/or to condition human skin (making it glow, giving it a gloss, making it smooth). I am mindful of not losing too much detail when running the anti-noise function.

5. Apply levels/curves as required.

6. Apply saturation as required.

7. Save as TIFF 16-byte WITHOUT doing any sharpening (USM). The application of USM is a function of how the image will be used and the target output, and the size of the target output. For this reason I NEVER archive/save post processed pictures after applying sharpening. In short, all archived/saved images are NOT sharpened.

8. Before I print or email the image, I apply Unsharp Mask as required for the target of my output, be it an email, the web, or a print, and if a print, for the size of the print. The amount of USM is a function of the type of output, and for this reason, I never apply USM to a post-processed image BEFORE I save it.

[troy witt]

How can you make a profit spending 10+ hours post processing just to get to the client proofing stage? Sometimes I think the potential benefits of a self service digital workflow, as opposed to the photo lab, are far outweighed by extra time spent making an excessive amount of tweaks.

 

When you shoot film, the lab does the tweaks for you. You just have to concentrate on shooting with the proper exposure and focus, and let the lab handle the headaches. Actually, even with digital, a good lab can still do most of the work for you.

 

Granted we're all perfectionists, and digital affords us more precision with our output, but 10+ hours of tweaking seems excessive. Second, why spend all the extra time making the slightest tweaks, when most customers would be just as happy without them? Is there really a difference if you exceed their expectations by 1% or 80%.

 

Granted, if you are charging appropriately, and I don't mean $500 per wedding, then the extra time spend could be justified. Are these jobs done as a hobby or as a means to support a business? If itﾒs the later, then Iﾒd think youﾒd either want to be properly compensated or deliver quality based on the price point.