Digital workflow

Dear all,

This is my first post. I would appreciate some opinion in how you do your digital workflow. Up to one month ago I use to:

1. shoot RAW

2. create a folder yyyymmddLocation

3. create subfolders: RAW (original files), TIFF (with layers) and JEPG (reduced)

4. and using "Bridge" and "Photoshop" to tidy everything up.

I now try to use "Lightroom" and I feel I should reorganize my photos. Do you feel the need of creating so many folders? Using "Lightroom", do you just leave all the files (RAW, TIFF JPEG) in one folder using labels and ratings you organize them?

Any other suggestion?

I think I have to streamline the whole process.

Thanks a lot in advance for your help.

alex

Hi Alex and Welcome.

I too use Lightroom in combination with Breezebrowser for my workflow.

I import, keyword, and rename photos using Lightroom. Then I use lightroom to flag the keepers.

After that, I tweak the keepers and export them as JPEG's to a "Develops" folder inside the folder w/ the RAW files.

It sounds like your folder naming system is OK. I tend to also put something in the filename w/ the location, since Windows already tells you when the file was created...

Cheers

James

James,

Thanks. I started to import all my folders. Having about 23000 photos (I guess this is the reason) the program stuck! I'll reimport them in a different way.

Cheers,

alex

Alex,

Welcome to wetpixel! Your website is very well done. The image on your homepage is absolutely stellar! The black and white is a nice touch too. Impressive.

Steve

Thanks Steve. It's homemade and I wanted to keep it very simple. I'm fair new in UW photography but I have many chances of diving in Asia because cheap and very close to where I am, therefore I have quite few photos.

alex

Thanks Steve. It's homemade and I wanted to keep it very simple. I'm fair new in UW photography but I have many chances of diving in Asia because cheap and very close to where I am, therefore I have quite few photos.

 

alex

Alex, we need to go find those elusive Hong Kong blue ring octopi... once it warms up a bit...

Dear all,

 

3. create subfolders: RAW (original files), TIFF (with layers) and JEPG (reduced)

4. and using "Bridge" and "Photoshop" to tidy everything up.

 

I now try to use "Lightroom" and I feel I should reorganize my photos. Do you feel the need of creating so many folders? Using "Lightroom", do you just leave all the files (RAW, TIFF JPEG) in one folder using labels and ratings you organize them?

Any other suggestion?

 

I think I have to streamline the whole process.

Thanks a lot in advance for your help.

 

alex

I too use Lightroom, but I convert to DNG when I import RAWS. When you use the "backup to" option in Lightroom the importer doesn't convert the backups to DNG on the backup disc so I end up with the raws on an external HD and the smaller DNG's on my macbook. I flag the obvious rejects and delete them entirely on the spot. (If I ever need to go back and get that out of focus shot or the one of my foot it is still in with the RAW files.) I only convert to jpeg when I'm done with Photoshop and Lightroom. In a perfect world I create a folder that has 40% quality jpegs that are good for email, flickr and the web etc and one that has 100% quality that is my archive for future posterity. I'm not super organized so the DNG's usually stay on my laptop until I run out of space, then I do a massive delete.

The only TIFF's I end up with are the ones that PS creates when I edit the DNG's. I just got a D300 which allows you to shoot TIFF's and noticed that the TIFF files it creates are bigger than the RAW files! Haven't played with the 14bit RAW's yet to compare with the 12 bit image.

At some point I copy the RAW's from the external HD to a CD. Eric Cheng once told me that he has never had to go back and get RAW's off of the CD and so far in 3 years I've never gone back to retrieve the original files. Not being a pro, I don't get crazy with multiple backups, but many people will tell you that when dealing with digital files they don't really exist until they exist in three places.

I am no expert so, like Alex I'm looking for ideas and feed back. Not sure why there is a need for Bridge when using Lightroom.

Andy

...but many people will tell you that when dealing with digital files they don't really exist until they exist in three places.

I don't think anyone who says that is much of a technical expert in computing. The machines we use are totally dominated by single points of failure. To insist, arbitrarily, than one aspect of the process needs to be done in triplicate is basically nonsense. I am aware, though, that some people place great importance on the need to do three-way mirroring on import. That gives me a little chuckle. Do any of them insist on triple card slots in their cameras? If their process of writing and copying files is so error-prone, perhaps they should reconsider the quality of the software they use. My biggest peeve by far with any of my dSLR equipment was when it became clear my 1DMk2 couldn't reliably write files to flash without corrupting the card. The insistence that one make 3 copies of a file just indicates to me that those that endorse the technique have grown used to computing equipment that doesn't work.

When I'm shooting I do frequent, incremental backups. I don't even use the two-way copy-on-import function that's built into a lot of software and I certainly don't bring blank disks on my trips. The odds of having a notebook drive failure AND a backup drive failure on a trip are not great compared to the likelihood of losing all my equipment during travel including those backup CDs that I would hope would save me. Those who choose to do more than me aren't losing out on anything other than some additional time and expense. The only times I've lost images were through user error and server failures without adequate backup.

I don't think anyone who says that is much of a technical expert in computing. The machines we use are totally dominated by single points of failure. To insist, arbitrarily, than one aspect of the process needs to be done in triplicate is basically nonsense.

I go with the triplecate mode myself for images and video - meaning a set to work on, a set of the originals close by in case I need them and then an offsite spot as a just in case. That is not quite the mirroring on import issue, but perhaps that is what the quote meant (in other words a good back-up routine?)

Of course when travelling, as you mentioned, the chance of physical loss of the drive or computer itself is greater than both going kaput. I often travel, however, with a couple of externals anyway to carry a boot disc and other things that I may work on (but never do it seems) and may make two copies of things depending on how I feel and if I got a good shot in there somewhere

I hear you about the card corruption, loved my old point and shoot that had two card slots in case one card failed. Of course a card never failed in that camera, only the older camera that had one slot

I think that backup plan is a fine one; I certainly wasn't referring to that when I was commenting on triple mirroring. Some people specifically value three-way mirroring on import.

Yep, my external drives are also boot disks. :-) I love that about the Mac notebooks.