Thoughts on editing, love it ,hate it , have a say, it is part of the digital photography age how are you doing?

[spudhead]

So editing it is a big part of digital photography, how are you doing? what software are you using, do you hate it, have you got to grips with it? , do you use masks? are you shooting raw or jpeg, have a say what ever it is. Just for the record I am probably the odd one out on here I use capture one pro 2022 and topaz AI

 

[Gaz]

I have Lightroom on my phone, iPad and desktop. The iphone/iPad version offers more pre-sets which I like to use first, then I adjust further.

I haven’t purchased pre-sets for the desktop version but I still enjoy using it.

I’m a rank amateur at Lightroom and should really do a course or something.

Sometimes I just import raw straight to iPhone from camera and adjust in photos app, which I’m very familiar with because of years of just using my phone for photos.

You’re spot on though. It’s a significant part of production these days.

 

[liggy]

I'm terrible at post. Right now for super casual - Snapseed on iPhone/iPad.

My go-to RAW developer is Topaz Photo AI. Just started to play with Luminar Neo today. Liking it so far.
Took a flyer on the Creative Cloud PS/LR combo and not getting much use so far.

Steep learning curve.

 

[Unframed Dave]

Cut my teeth using film, like the principle of getting it right in camera as far as possible.

Minimal editing, very rarely do any processing. I didn't retire to sit at a computer and since doing so, rarely have the time.

Mostly shoot jpeg as I'm happy with the results. It'll be a long time until I fill up a 512Gb memory card.

 

[alexpler]

I like it, I like the possibilities to transform an image, create the atmosphere you had in mind or maybe even a new one. Well done it can add to your style, just like composition or subjects of interest.

But you don't have to overdo it. Usually if an image needs a lot of editing and processing, that's an indicator that it wasn't that good in the first place.

I shoot jpeg xtrafine and then process the shots in lightroom mobile.

Previously I shot in raw but then I spent a lot of time editing, so that's why I decided to turn to jpeg: the images are usable from the moment you shoot and they don't require that much editing.

 

[Ralph]

I shot in Jpeg and when I can get a RAW program I will buy it and then move to RAW.
I edit with Photoshop CS6 which I bought outright and got updates for the 1st year but nothing since.
I have Topaz A1 but looking to get the set in the future.
Everything is done on my laptop and that is all.
And like Alex 's post above my one I use the Extra fine in photo quality.
One reason I have stuck with Jpeg is that I neve set out to make money from this.
So I thought I never needed the extra edit options, but now I want it for me.

 

[russellsnr]

Hi, I use On1 Photo Raw 2023 and only shoot RAW, previously used Lightroom and P/S CS6 but gave up like many when it became 'rent a year'
Purchased Lightroom Cloud option end of last year on the Amazon Prime day but didn't look into it enough, it's restrictive as to what you can do when it comes to using 3rd party software like Topaz.

As an amateur I think the downside of a lot of software nowadays is the more intense AI they are putting into it the more powerful computers you need to run it so approximately £/$100 for the software and £/$ 1000 for a new computer to run it.
Don't mind the PP on images especially on those UK rain swept days that are many
Russ.

 

[iain clyne]

I shot in jpeg and use Lightroom and photoshop. I’ve been using photoshop since 1995 for work and just carried on using it. I have Topaz that I now use as well.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I shoot only for fun, so I'm under no pressure to process my images (most of the time). I enjoy the process of turning a RAW file into a finished image.

I shoot RAW. I process with Adobe Photoshop / Bridge / Adobe Camera RAW, most of the time. But I have used Capture One Express for Sony, and DxO PhotoLab.

Never used Lightroom, but the idea of having it consume and "manage" all my images really doesn't appeal.

 

[spudhead]

I am not too fond of pp. Previous to shooting in RAW I used the photos app on my MBP and phone to do barebones processing, mainly cropping.

Started shooting in RAW about 6 months back and now use Lightroom for iPad and still do minimal post processing.

I personally do not like heavily processed photos irrespective of how nice they look. They always look artificial and I can usually tell they are heavily processed.

Just my 2 cents.

Two pennies.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

I use ON1 2023 and am very happy with it. I also have Photoshop Express, but hardly use that.
I shoot JPG+RAW as I have found it a good way to see how my editing stacks up against the "SOOC" image.
I love editing, when its one image at a time, like a random flower photo on a slow weekend.
I hate editing every other time because it is time consuming and family members have criticized me in the past for taking too long to send them photos from birthdays/events/etc (now I just tell them to use their own damned cellphones).

 

[evacguy]

I’ve been learning how to use LR Classic on a desk top PC for about 6 months I like it but still can’t say I’m even close to mastering it. I’m learning by trial and error, so it’s a slow process. I know even less about PS, but think it’s a great package. I try to use a light touch with all post processing, but some images require quite a lot of processing to pull out the details or to create a particular look and feel. I very much enjoy the PP part of photography, it allows you to exercise another form of creativity to pull out the stunning nature of the images you captured. It’s all part of the enjoyment for me.

 

[Unframed Dave]

For the 'Get it right in-camera' people: Every single image you take, whether HEIF, jpeg, or RAW is processed. The only difference is that when you shoot RAW, you get to choose what's right. When you shoot jpeg or HEIF, you're letting a Sony engineer decide what's right. That's perfectly acceptable if it's how you wish to proceed, but let's not pretend that 'getting it right in-camera' is somehow a more noble pursuit. It's a leftover from film days when we had no choice. These days it boils down to a challenge that many enjoy.

That the shot is processed in camera is understood. That a tree is removed, the shot is artificially sharpened, noise is removed and a different sunset is added is a totally different thing.

Whether it's a more noble pursuit isn't really my concern. I, like a few others, dislike over processed photographs. I also find the concept of AI and sharpening software, etc, a step too far. That's my personal view, if it works for others, that's fine. Each to their own.

I think that was the point of the question, for individuals to express their own personal preferences.

 

[Unframed Dave]

And as stated, it's perfectly acceptable. However, it is neither better nor worse. And while you may have extensive experience in such matters, many do not. It is important that people understand there is no such thing as an unprocessed shot, regardless of how that is accomplished. You may/may not take exception to my comments, I really don't give a sh*t.

I took no exception, I'm too old to fall out with an individual I've never met over a difference of opinion on the Internet.

Vive la difference.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Editing... do I like it? Hmmm. It can be a chore if I've been out and taken 800 shots and want to keep a lot of them, but I have time and it can be therapeutic. It also helps pass time at work on Saturdays when it's dead in the shop
Anyway. I shoot exclusively in RAW, import (and catalogue)using Adobe Bridge and the main parts of my editing, like highlight, exposure, contrast adjustment etc are then fine in Camera Raw, which I find yo be excellent. I will start by using the Auto adjustment, which for the most part is very good, but will still add some dehaze at times, and other highlight adjustments if I've used flash or it's been very sunny on shooting day. From there I'm in to Photoshop CC to crop, Topaz Denoise and Sharpen, add a signature and a small border, and then save to jpeg and PSD. I don't use CC for any adjustments at all.

 

[spudhead]

That the shot is processed in camera is understood. That a tree is removed, the shot is artificially sharpened, noise is removed and a different sunset is added is a totally different thing.

Whether it's a more noble pursuit isn't really my concern. I, like a few others, dislike over processed photographs. I also find the concept of AI and sharpening software, etc, a step too far. That's my personal view, if it works for others, that's fine. Each to their own.

I think that was the point of the question, for individuals to express their own personal preferences.

Correct Dave it was not really a question as much as a way of getting members to chat on here, and all views have a place, and obviously I had an idea of some members take on this that is all good, thanks for sharing views

 

[Unframed Dave]

Yet you felt the need to school me on the point of the thread. I take no exception to your point of view, I do, however, take exception to that.

My last word.

Kind of hard to play the injured party after this:

"You may/may not take exception to my comments, I really don't give a sh*t."

Before I schooled you.

 

[iamdlewis]

I have very mixed feelings on editing. Way back when I started doing photography I enjoyed darkroom (yes an actual darkroom) work more than taking the photos. Today I think more often than not I don't really enjoy it. Here are some of my issues:
- Too many photos to go through. A lot of this is that I like BiF and I know to get the shot you tend to need to take a lot, doesn't mean I have to like it.
- Too many keeper quality photos. No I don't wish for worse AF. I get it and still want better AF but I still don't have to like going through them all.
- Too many photos to label. This is more often after a big trip. Like did a trip to Ecuador in which I got 400+ new species and just identifying them got old quickly.
- I have taken a number of editing classes and for the life of me I can't get most edits to be where I want them to be.
- Each of the major editing software all do something common in a stupid way that just frustrates me. Adobe stuff is the worst at this, I don't understand why their crop tool is so bad.

Software - Primarily use CaptureOne but also have the Adobe suite and have used On1, a Topaz thing and Luminar. Use Topaz Photo AI as my denoise tool. I have Microsoft Image Composite Editor for when CaptureOne and Adobe do a crap job at stitching a pano. Have Fast Raw Viewer for culling when I travel.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I mention often and I'll say it again, I still only use the basic version of Lightroom for all my editing. I don't really believe in manipulating an image in a way that it no longer resembles the original image, I think it needs to be true to itself.

I'm a real minimalist when it comes to photography as well, so when I'm out shooting I don't take a lot of shots and I cull as I go. After a day out I'll come home with maybe 30 or so images, then I'll do a further cull on that 30 before I upload to the computer. Within a few hours of getting home I'll have all photos edited from the day and memory card cleared ready for next time.

I've learnt over time that less is more for me with editing. I used to try to make colours look bold, wind up the texture and sharpness etc trying to make the image stand out. But it wasn't until I basically done the opposite that my images actually started looking the way I wanted.

I've been doing this photography thing for two years now. I'm very happy with where I'm at.

 

[spudhead]

So ok we have some views here thanks for adding which ever side of the fence you sit. So denoise I use topaz as do many that edit I think also do, so the term topaz use with some of their software is AI, I do not really see how the product has changed, I only denoise mildly and hardly any sharpen added to any shots, because basically you can not fix bad shots anyway, and I think that is the big gap we see between shots on any forum anywhere, I know for sure I post stuff that is not always the best but I am good with that sometimes better to have the shot than not right so it just finding the balance? so noise reduction thoughts on that part of the chat and is it really AI? or is that just the latest in vogue term

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I don't think it's AI in the true sense, it's not manipulating the image yo be something it's not, ie removing an object and replacing the background for example. It's just noise reduction and sharpening, the latest version is fantastic at it too.

 

[AlphaWorld]

AI is just the latest label the marketing folks glue on things they don't understand.

Maybe they have been told that the software Analyses Images - "ooooh, AI - that's hot right now!". Yes, I confess it: I do not have a high opinion of marketing people

I've started using the new "AI" labelled de-noise in Adobe Camera RAW, and it's good. I've also used the DXO DeepPrime stuff (Deep was being used to label "smart" things after IBM's DeepBlue; Prime has been to label stuff using sophisticated mathematics; so clearly DeepPrime must be super-good, right?).

The Adobe de-noise has an "amount" slider, and if you drive it too high (which is worth trying while you are learning to use it) it will produce the "Barbie" effect (Barbie is a hot label right now, right?) - you turn humans into plastic dolls. I guess that's understandable - skin pores and texture could be seen as "noise".

So I'll keep using de-noise software on shots I'm taking at ISO 12800, but I'm only going to call it AI to make it clear that I'm using the version labelled AI, not because I think there's any meaningful AI content

Same thing with Sony's new AI chip (although I'm pretty confident that it does indeed Analyse Images ) - I imagine it's being used by software that was trained on large sample sets using machine learning techniques, but I think the software is frozen after training, not continuing to "learn". AI or not, the AF it powers is effective, and I'm enjoying using it.

BTW: I've been trying out the A6700, and as far as I can tell so far, it seem to have the same AF as the A7RV (for half the price). So if you want to try out the new AF without buying am A7RV, the A6700 is a way to go.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Makes me wonder how hot AI will be for the sheepies when it takes all the office jobs off them. On the other hand, they'll be getting their Universal Basic Income from the government so they'll probably be overjoyed that they can get paid to lay on the lounge and play their social media everyday! Yippee!

 

[AlphaWorld]

Makes me wonder how hot AI will be for the sheepies when it takes all the office jobs off them. On the other hand, they'll be getting their Universal Basic Income from the government so they'll probably be overjoyed that they can get paid to lay on the lounge and play their social media everyday! Yippee!

When the marketing types can get any image they like by talking to an AI image tool, product photography may vanish.

Sports photography - interesting question - I wonder how long it will be before we see scandals where a news publication shows a photograph of, for example. a dramatic catch, only to be sprung for faking it using AI (eg: "The catcher was Albert X, not Angus X as shown in this image!!!").

Wedding photography? "We can make your wedding look like the biggest and best event - give us photos of your late granny, and she can be in the wedding party, too!"

Sadly, that might make some of our toys more expensive because there will be fewer pros buying stuff because they don't need to. Still. it might mean shorter waiting times for new toys because there won't be 2000 bodies going to a new organisation....)

 

[Clix Pix]

I have gradually gotten more comfortable with the actual editing process, which indeed I still prefer to keep simple and straightforward. No tinkering with skies, adding something which was not present in the scene at the time I shot it, no fancy layering and all that. I do remove the odd bits of paper, perhaps a trash bin or something which was captured in the scene because for one reason or another I either overlooked it or even when I saw it couldn't change the camera's position or my own to successfully leave it out altogether. That third of a bird drifting out of the scene because he decided to move more quickly than the others, thus ruining the original composition I had in mind when shooting.....he goes away with a bit of cropping and that solves that problem.

Culling is still my biggest issue and that is another major time-thief when I've shot a lot of images in burst mode and such. I've used Photo Mechanic to help with this, and more recently, Narrative Select, and even more recently, a program called AfterShoot which utilizes AI to a more extensive degree than either of the other two programs. I'm finding that the latter can indeed be a real time saver when I've got a bunch of images where there are few changes from frame to frame. At this point I'm experimenting with using a combination of AfterShoot and Narrative Select. The AS program cuts through a lot of the duplicates. Narrative Select helps me go through the images selected by AfterShoot and narrow down the final choices. Only then do I take that file into DXO PhotoLab 6 to actually edit.

Sometimes after that I'll take tho edited images into Topaz AI for additional sharpening/possible upscaling of resolution, etc. Finishing touches are done in Luminar AI because I like their erase tool, their clone tool and their burning-and-dodging tools. Of course not every image needs those adjustments but that is why I keep Luminar AI around -- for the times I do.

About a month or so ago I bought ON1 Photo RAW but have to admit that I really haven't gotten comfortable with that program yet, haven't spent the time necessary to really learn it. The program looks really great and I know it can help me do nice things with images, but probably my timing wasn't good getting this new program right while I'm in the middle of doing a lot of shooting since it's been summertime. Not the best time to be learning the ins and outs of a new editing program! In the fall I'll be indoors and at the computer more and that's when I'll really dig into ON1 Photo RAW.....

Since I am strictly an amateur photographer, don't have any ambitions or concerns about selling my images, and I don't shoot portraits, weddings, annual family Christmas photos , baby and maternity images, etc., just mostly abstracts, birds, flowers....nothing critical, it really doesn't matter what I use to cull and review my images or for editing. Actually, AS does offer an editing component but I am not interested in trying that out. All I want is something which speeds up my culling. That's it, that's enough. To a limited extent I still like tinkering with my images even though I am nowhere near a skilled image editor or retoucher.

 

[iamdlewis]

When the marketing types can get any image they like by talking to an AI image tool, product photography may vanish.

Stock image photography will have problems but product photography will stick around as it will be difficult for AI to produce an image for a new product.

Sports photography - interesting question - I wonder how long it will be before we see scandals where a news publication shows a photograph of, for example. a dramatic catch, only to be sprung for faking it using AI (eg: "The catcher was Albert X, not Angus X as shown in this image!!!").

The first time some news agency takes this chance will be the last day the sports editor will have a job. There is no league that would allow this and it would be unlikely that any news publication would keep their right to publish stories about any games/events after getting caught doing this once since all the leagues would most likely harshly punish the first offender.

Wedding photography? "We can make your wedding look like the biggest and best event - give us photos of your late granny, and she can be in the wedding party, too!"

I can see this happening but personally I would find this creepy and wouldn't approve.

 

[Landshark99]

Editing has been part of my photography process since the old film days, back then it was harder in terms of time spent doing the basics. With work I started with Kodachrome, a film that was not very forgiving in exposure, so my editing was limited to culling out what was bad and letting the client do the rest. When I switched to E-6 films, I could adjust the exposure in development, which meant running back and forth to the lab to check and adjust development times of snip tests ( a few inches of film processed seperate from the whole roll ), after getting that right, it was again culling what was bad and the client doing the rest. During the transition of shooting film and then having it scanned digitally, it was again judging snips, culling, scaning, more culling and then off to the client. The big change came when it was all digital capture, everything was shot raw, instead of going to the lab, it came home where I first copied everything to a large desktop drive, edited, corrected exposure and color if needed and culled what was bad, in whatever software the raw images required, Hasselblad, Leaf, Phase One, Canon, recopy the images still raw to a portable drive and take it to the "lab"to have all the frames job renumbered and given to the client in both tiffs and jpegs. Those shoots were averaging somewhere in the area of 7,500 to 15,000 frames.
Now for me and my own stuff, I still use the same software, just newer versions. Everything is shot in raw, except with my Ricoh Gr which gets raw and b&w jpegs, it is then processed and rough edited in Capture One, PP in Adobe Photoshop and organized and searched for in Photo Mechanic.

 

[Doug Herr]

Photoshop for over 20 years, RAW only. I've tried several other programs (Gimp, Affinity, ON1, Capture 1) but always come back to Photoshop. Not fond of the subscription pricing model but it has all the features I want and it's compatible with all of my legacy image files.

 

[Clide]

I find editing, post processing fascinating; it is creative for me. In my profession I employed photos (macro) first slides then digital for education. They could only be cropped, no other alterations, I understood why and adhered to the rules. I do not sell my photos, they are for me, family and friends. I enjoy printing and holding the photo, making photo books, giving prints to family and friends. I will not change the story that I tried to capture, i.e. place an object in the photo to enhance it. But now in retirement, wow, I have LR, LR classic and I am learning Photoshop, let the creativity flow. I am fascinated by Photoshop generative fill. Topaz AI and Denoise are great appts especially with the new cameras that are coming out that can shoot at high ISO but then produce a lot of noise which can be removed. Old photos can be enhanced and brought back to life. I believe employing these tools has also helped me progress as a photographer. When you make as many errors as I have taking photos and then have to look at it on a screen and say "sHxx I have to clean that up" I learn!
Thanks for sharing I do learn from this group.

 

[Jeff A]

I shoot Raw and have the Photography subscription from Adobe, which, IMO, is dirt cheap for what you get.

I now really enjoy the processing. Seeing the photo come alive, to me, is thrilling. Once I get rolling in Lightroom I do the same 7-9 quick adjustments to every photo and it's over with quickly. I have over 4000 images on Flickr now and used to think I would only post images from either my A7M3 or A7M4. Recently I have found some old images shot with digital cameras from the "Dawn of Time", not to mention the fact that a lot of my images were sh*t as far as my photography basics. I have found that in a limited way, Lightroom can make some of the old JPG's I have bearable to display. These are not Photo contest entries, but memories of times and people in my past.

I have purchased both DxO PureRAW 2 as well as Topaz DeNoise AI, both are excellent programs but now, when I start a new batch, I run all the photos in the batch through Adobe's built into Lightroom DeNoise and never have to think about noise again. If you believe that none of your photos show noise, perhaps you need to invest in a better monitor.

The best thing about shooting Raw IMO is the Sony's Dynamic Range coupled with Lightroom's recovery of shadow detail. It's old stuff I know, but it pleases me every time I witness it.

True confession time. Although I have never attempted a sky replacement, I have learned how to deal with smoke from forest fires, industrial smoke and plain old Smog with a couple of clicks in Lightroom. I made my living flying above that sh*t and I would rather not see it in my photos.

OK, so in summary, I'm a believer in shooting Raw. I shoot Raw and JPG simultaneously and as soon as I get home, I pop the card from Slot 2 in my PC tower and review my days shooting. Sony does an excellent job with these JPG's, but they are in no way a match for a processed RAW photo in my opinion. Then, when time permits, I process my photos and while taking some time, it is, for me, an enjoyable experience.