I need help improving my archiving and workflow - suggestions?

[trevans]

<p>Hey everyone,<br>

I'm normally pretty active in the Nikon forum, so I may recognize some of you.</p>

<p>Anyhow, I've gotten to the point where I want to improve my workflow and go to strictly RAW. Right now, I shoot RAW+JPG(basic) (it's all the D40 does), I import everything using Picasa3, put the pics in folders named as the date I imported them and then the "keepers" go into an album with a more appropriate name.</p>

<p>For instance:<br>

Folder: (External HDD)\Photo\20090814<br>

Album: Family Vacation 2009</p>

<p>Now the reason I shoot RAW+JPG is because I can usually get it pretty close to how I want the picture to look in the camera and haven't really wanted to change that. If I get a particularly good photo, or something I messed up (WB or exposure, that kind of thing), then I have the RAW file I can edit. I haven't gone to JPG conversion from RAW because, well, I don't care for ViewNX, and I'm not willing to pay for CaptureNX. I do have Adobe CS3 (and if I recall, ACR updated itself to CS4, but Photoshop is still CS3 obviously).</p>

<p>I've been really happy with how Picasa works as it is quite intuitive. However, it just feels a little slow since I'm starting to amass a lot of pictures and I'm not sure it handles some RAW files right. Some of my shots end up looking like their JPG previews, then they lose the saturated colors and look RAW, and then darker ones sometimes get even worse with all sorts of horrible noise.</p>

<p>Basically, my point is, I've got CS3, and I was wondering if I would really benefit from dropping Picasa and in-camera JPGs and going with CS3 (or CS3 + ViewNX). Any thoughts? I've never tried a batch conversion, the concept seems somewhat daunting...</p>

<p>Thanks for your help.</p>

[tonybynum]

I have what I think is a better option, buy Lightroom and use the web tutorials and a good book to learn it before you start. It's not a huge learning curve, but you should understand a bit about the platform before just throwing a bunch of images at it. . .

[scott_ferris]

<p>Hi Tim,</p>

<p>I haven't used most of the programs you mention but when I was looking round for the same kind of functionality you are looking for two programs were mentioned more than anything, Apples Aperture and Adobes Lightroom, I tried both on free trials and went for Lightroom. Latest ACR is included, and always will be, best way to manage extensive RAW file libraries across any number of HDs and totally non destructive, what more could you want?</p>

[pbarnes]

<p>Tim, if you have Cs3, use it, I say. Shoot raw only. Learn what Bridge can do for you in terms of storing, sorting and cataloguing images. Find out about the difference between using 16 bit and 8 bit images in Photoshop. I find that I can do most of my processing as 8 bit (quicker on my machine) but occasionally I will need to open a file into PS as a 16 bit. Opening raw files into ACR and saving them as jpgs individually or in batches is easy. Batch processing of images in Bridge and Photoshop is not difficult, or hard to learn. Import your raw images straight into Bridge, and convert them to compressed .dng files at the same time, then you will have digital negatives stored in the open source industry format (means you won't have problems in 10 years time, 5 years after you stopped using Nikon and forgot to install the Nikon software on your new computer)</p>

[vanner]

<p>Mac or PC? If you are a Mac user, you sound like the kind of guy who would love Aperture's image library management. While it is true that Aperture lacks some of the sophisticated editing options availabel in Photoshop, it is very strong when it comes to library management (ie folders, projects, albums, keywords, etc. . etc. etc. ). I use Aperture exclusively, I shoot RAW, and I love it</p>

[trevans]

<p>PC (XP Pro SP3) and Linux, actually. :) I can't bring myself to spend the kind of cash that Apple wants for its notebooks (or desktops for that matter).</p>

[thomas_sullivan]

<p>Yes, I agree with the suggestion to use Adobe Bridge. In CS3 it's pretty good....a whole lot better than in CS2, that's for sure. It is a little awkward to learn how to use it to your best advantage however....meaning it's not quite as intuitive as Picassa 3, but then again, with RAW files Bridge is faster than Picassa.</p>

<p>having said that though.....the best option for file handling, organizing, and editting of RAW files is the afore mentioned Lightroom.</p>

<p>I've used all three.....CS3 (etal.....photoshop, bridge and ACR), picassa, and lightroom. Lightroom is definitely my program of choice all around these days. The only reason i use photoshop itself these days is for Smart Sharpen.</p>

[jennifer_spencer]

<p>I use a Mac for photography and I really love Lightroom. I wasn't sure how I'd like it, so I tried the 30-day free trial first. I was hooked. Since I already knew Photoshop basics, it was easy to learn, and I don't usually think that about an Adobe product. Since then, I have shot all raw, no jpeg, and it's great. My workfow using it so much faster than if did Photoshop alone. </p>

<p>The batch conversion is really easy, in PS or Lightroom. Take the plunge and try it.</p>

[ted_tahquechi]

<p>I used ACDSee for a long time but once I bought LR2 I haven't used anything else, and like Mr. Sullivan I mainly use Photoshop for sharpening now. The bulk of my workflow is done in LR2. The program is pricey but I personally believe the time it has saved me in post processing is well worth the investment. As a side note LR2 is well laid out well thought out and is great for those of us with less than perfect eyesight.</p>