Christine Aguila wrote: > Even with digital, I still try to get the best photo in-camera >to keep the post-capture processing down. When I started shooting digital, >I read somewhere that more than 5 or 10 minutes or so on a standard picture >should be enough post-processing. I try to follow this rule--obviously >there are exceptions with playful renderings etc--but for the most part--for >me--it's a good rule to follow. I've noticed that as my skills improve, I'm >even getting a lot faster than 5 minutes.
This is my approach *exactly*: I try to get the capture as close to perfect as I can - just like I did with film - with the goal of doing as little post-processing as possible (just like I did with film). ND grads, fill flash, reflectors, you name it, it's still in my arsenal of "get the best capture" tools. After bringing everything into Lightroom I do a quick pass to pick the standouts and eliminate the obvious mistakes. Then I spend probably about 30 seconds (at most) on most images doing rough highlight recovery, exposure and brightness adjustments, generally. After setting everything aside for a week or so (assuming no specific deadlines) I'll come back to the best shots to give them extra time and fine tuning (and to further delete the shots that a week's perspective has let me see aren't as good as I fists believed/hoped!) But with most collections we're talking about 2-5 shots out of every 100 or so that get extra time. The rare, portfolio-grade, shot will get additional attention in Photoshop. Being able to put aside the evaluation of your shots for a week or more seems to be a crucial part of the process for me. The extra time provides perspective and seems to let me be more objective about my own work. It's then easier to see which shots really stand out and which need to go into the bit bucket. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
