Tom!
I just spent some of my valuable time left in my life reading every
one of these posts about P.S., Lightroom, Aperture. I'm not sure why.
But I will say that it appears to me that you are the one "not getting
it." You asked the question. These others are trying to help you
understand how the two LR/Aperture programs work in making life easier
for photographers. You are impeding their attempts.
Remove the term "workflow" from all the previous posts. To me it does
seem to impose some limitation to getting the job done.
First off, you forgot and left your K-7's white balance set on
"cloudy" from the shoot the day before. Damn. So you find the
appropriate sheet of Blue Wratten filter to lay out on the light table
to correct the white balance for the sunny day that it was. (batch WB
correction before examining the slides)
Lay DUPLICATES of all your slides from a day's shoot out on them. Use
a Sharpie marker to mark each one that is exposed correctly and has
the subject sharp and within the frame with a dot. Take the others and
throw them away, or store in a "bad" shots bin for later interpretive
manipulation. Now go through the ones on the light table again and put
a second dot on the slides that are the best of each particular subject.
Take all those "two dot" slides and look at them very carefully, maybe
project them, maybe just use a loupe. Choose the best of those, the
very best, and make minor corrections in WB, color matching with more
Wratten Filters, and put a third dot on them. Take that batch and show
them to the client. Put a fourth dot on the ones the client chooses as
the ones he thinks would meet the criteria of the project he has you
working on. Set all the Two and Three dot slides aside.
Now, Tom, you ARE that client and can now communicate to the lab who
will be making the finished prints (also you) what changes you want
made by dodging or burning, retouching, cropping, horizon
straightening, lens distortion repair, etc. on each and every final
image. Then you must annotate each image with key words, dates, etc.
on a mini-label for easy retrieval later before you place it
carefully alongside the original slide in the appropriate filing
cabinet, after making yet another dupe to be sent to archival storage
in an abandoned bomb shelter. Up to this point, LR/Aperture would do
the job for you, rapidly.
Now you must send the final print on to the graphics dept. for titling
and anything else that is needed for finished copy. This final step is
for Photoshop.
Maybe now you will have gotten it.
On Aug 7, 2010, at 15:31 , steve harley wrote:
On 2010-08-07 14:33 , Tom C wrote:
I don't find it odd at all. Of course, I asked it.
What I find odd is that one would use an *automated* *image
adjustment
workflow* in a manner that is like taking ones images to a 3rd party
processor and having all images processed using the same parameters.
One might get consistently mediocre or even decent results, but
likely
not optimal, unless each image in the batch being processed was very
similar, and the adjustments were tuned to that batch or standard set
of shooting conditions.
i'm reading this carefully and trying to understand how it is
relevant; i suppose a naive user of Lightroom might create one
preset and push every last image through it with mediocre or garish
results; like hammering screws; one coudl do that, but that's not at
all what Lightroom is designed for -- might as well use a Photoshop
action instead -- so i'm not sure whom it is you think would do what
you find odd
Joseph McAllister
pentax...@mac.com
http://gallery.me.com/jomac
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
