Do you post-process *all* images for the proof set?

[l_c10]

Hello everyone,

 

I'm using an online service to host my clients' proofs, take print orders, etc.

 

I want my clients to love their prints, so I do lots of post-processing work on every single "keeper" image

file before uploading to the service. I spend about 10 minutes per shot retouching, dodging, burning,

color correcting, etc. so I average about 7 shots per hour.

 

This is obviously insane. I'm looking at the upcoming wedding season and thinking that something has

got to change.

 

Should I just do a quick process on the proofs? What if someone sees the proof online and orders an

enlargement, and I haven't done any blemish correction -- or much of anything at all, for that matter? I

would feel terrible if someone got a less-than-first-quality print.

 

And yet it seems crazy to put as much work in on an image that no one buys as one that the couple wants

to blow up huge and hang over their fireplace.

 

How do you all manage this?

 

Many thanks for any insights.

[tony_hoffer]

If you want a simple answer... LIGHTROOM!

 

I post-process all the images as well (except I don't do too much dodging and burning), and

I use lightroom for 95% of the work for proofs. Batch processing is a HUGE timesaver. If

clients order albums or prints, then I do very intensive editing for those images.

[www.withheart.ca]

I also edit all proofs. Since I inlcude the digital files I edit everything intensively for them.

 

I just got Lightroom and this speeds it up ALOT! I highly recoomend it. I've also practiced getting the pictures as perfect as possible in camera so there is less to do afterwards. Although dodging and burning still needs doing. Some professional labs will do this work for you and burn images to a CD if you pay them, so that is an option.

 

I tell my clients that I do this and charge for it. So, then there is no worry about it. They like getting all the images all perfect on a DVD. :)

[l_c10]

OK, thanks. I already batch images in Photoshop but I was just wondering if there's a

solution for retouching, etc. that cannot be batched.

 

I think your strategy is probably the best, Michelle -- do great quality work and charge for

the service of having every image look great.

 

Thanks again!

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste1664880652]

Shouldn't take that long to post process, think film days, a good proof had perfect colour and density. With digital I would add the ability to have a perfect crop and perhaps vignetting correction if using wide angles but all that in a program such as LR should take less than a minute per photo and far less once you get used to it. You can even do some quick cloning before batch processing the lot for proof presentation. When they make the orders you do all the fancy stuff, most of it can't be seen all that well online using uncalibrated screens anyway.

 

Get hold of a trial copy of LR, set up some 'defaults' for your pictures which will serve as a good starting point, learn where the tools you need are and how to disable or ignore the rest and start moving those files fast!

 

That said I (and every other pro I know using them) would kill for a dodging and burning tool in LR/ACR, some bright/blown whites are unimportant but especially when in the foreground are extremely distracting. I hate having to go into PS when proofing, it usually is only when I've screwed up very badly and I can't remember a time I couldn't fix something with the simple tools in ACR.

[russ_konrad]

We solve the entire issue by getting it right in the camera - just like we did with film.

 

The majority of our images don't need any work at all. I do add a few special effects - like slight vignetting, black and white conversion, and maybe a blemish removal or two - on about 15% of the images. Otherwise, nothing is done at all except cropping to an 8 x 10 ratio for the usual "wall shots".

 

The client website with all 300 to 350 images is usually up and ready within a few days after the wedding.

[jonj]

Russ, Do you shoot one shot in color then change over to Black and White? You would still have to process B&W even if you get the color spot on. I process all images including the B&W prior to the bride and groom seeing them.

[bruce_rubenstein___nyc]

Proofs get: exposure & WB correction and a crop if needed. Beyond that, any thing that requires more than a "one click" action is giving away something for nothing.

[russ_konrad]

We shoot everything in color and convert selected images to black and white. There are many shots IMHO that do not benefit from the conversion.

 

All of our images do get "processed". We shoot in RAW and batch convert everything to JPEG before uploading to the proof website.

 

My point is that we do very little to the majority of our shots and it probably only takes 5 or 6 hours to go through 1000 shots and pick out the best 300 - 350 for the client.

[wedding-photography-denver]

I touch every shot somewhat. I can often batch a bunch then tweak for each one a little in LR and have a wedding completed within the same time it took to shoot or less (I'm really working on half the time if possible).

[david_schilling___chicago_]

10 minutes per shot?????

 

I use batch actions on PS and let the computer do the bulk of the work. I eyeball each image before saving and typically spend less than 30-40 seconds per image. Many images don't require any tweak after the batch action set. I do work each image before uploading but, my online proof galleries on smugmug do allow a backprinting option. So, I could only work the images that the clients actually order if I wanted to use that feature.

[l_c10]

Some things just cannot be batch processed. Say a bride has a pimple on her forehead and a

big mosquito bite on her shoulder -- most of the day's images will need to be cloned. And I

think every image could benefit from at least a little dodging and burning.

 

I will investigate the backprinting option, David -- I'm with Exposure Manager and they offer

that, too. It's a good idea.

 

Thanks to everyone for your insights!

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste1664880652]

In that case LC you are as someone said above giving away something for free, you are talking about a considerable time in photo manipulation something which cannot be free unless your economics of wedding photography differ from mine. Your time is worth money, not just your products, infact with wedding photography the majority of your product is just that - time.

[fotografz]

Different people have different criteria as to what a finished image is, and at what stage of

the process it's finished. So, there's no pat answer nor any standard measure. The images

that should be most attended to are the ones being display printed. Otherwise you are

retouching hundreds of shots that'll never see the light of day except as 4X6 proofs ... if

even that.

 

BTW, the notion that people got it right with film is a fairy tale. It's the Lab that got it

right. The exposure latitude of lower contrast films has saved many a photographer ...

who when switching to digital got quite a shock.

[russ_konrad]

<b>"...BTW, the notion that people got it right with film is a fairy tale. It's the Lab that got it right. The exposure latitude of lower contrast films has saved many a photographer ... who when switching to digital got quite a shock."</b>

<p>

And for people who mainly shot slides - the switch to digital was not much of a "shock" at all.

[david_schilling___chicago_]

"Say a bride has a pimple on her forehead and a big mosquito bite on her shoulder -- most of the day's images will need to be cloned".-LC

 

5-15 seconds with the healing brush tool for most images, about 60 seconds tops for portraits.....unless we're talking about those summer North Dakota mosquitos that are about the size of a volkswagon :-)

[l_c10]

Ha ha, yeah, the mosquitos are big here in Wisconsin, too : )

[sam_ellis]

Russ,

You shot slides at weddings? The only people I know who regularly shot slide film (myself included) were nature and landscape photographers, and they (we) usually had the time to plan the shot out before clicking the shutter (spot meter an area, adjust exposure compensation, bracket exposures, etc). Granted, you can get pretty quick with settings, but lighting changes too quickly at weddings and I doubt you can nail every shot 100% perfect 100% of the time. I agree with the previous poster about it being a myth.

[russ_konrad]

No - I shot (and still shoot) slides for most of my landscape shooting.

 

Doesn't change anything. Getting the exposure mostly right in the camera compared to post processing is the point. I did it with my slides and I do it now with most of my exposures with the digital camera.

[karen barnes]

I'm just starting out, and have been wondering about this, too.

It's taking me FOREVER to process the wedding I shot last weekend, and I think I"m putting way too much work into it.

Is there a way to batch process white balence, other than using curves? I want to be able to adjust the white balence without changing the exposure and brightness. If there's a way to do this in ACR, that would be fantastic.