Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

photo stuff

Several things:

I dramatically slam my door when arguing with Andy. After about a year of this, I sheepishly asked Andy to please glue the door back together since it started to separate out, and I occasionally pinch my fingers between the wood.

Someone told me: "I was looking to get headshots, and I realized the best headshot I got was from you. So will you take my headshots?" When I first got my D80 I was experimentally snapping away, and he loved my photo of him, and I gave it to him. That was over a year ago, so I said yes... and he was like: "When". I gave him a few dates, and told him that he can have a friend rate of $40 for headshots. And then I didn't hear from him again. That annoys me a little bit. Firstly, we're not close friends, and it's 2 hours of my work. Secondly, $40 for headshots is really cheap, and also a simple email back of: "oh, I can't afford that right now" would've been nice.

I'm going through the wedding pictures from Saturday very slowly. Even though I create presets that I apply for pictures shot in the same place/angle, during a wedding there's lots of movement and light changes. So I'm tweaking each photo. At 900 pictures, 5 mins average, we're looking at 75 hours of post processing. That's a bit ridiculous. I've fired up photoshop for a few things like removing a powerbox behind the bride. And removing manhole covers. Andy says I'm obsessing. It's true. I need to not do so much editting. It's okay right now since I don't have that much weddings, but I need to figure out how to edit less.


Oct. 5th, 2010 05:11 pm (UTC)
I realized after I posted my thingie that if you're using Lightroom you've probably got more batch-processing power than I realized. I don't even have Lightroom yet! I just can't bring myself to learn a new program. *sigh*

But anyway. You probably don't have to tweak each photo. For the wedding that I shot last weekend I applied batch adjustments to groups of about 10 at a time, and out of those groups of 10 I would open up one or two in Photoshop to fine-tune some stuff. Then again, mine were only the "second shooter" shots, so they weren't quite as crucial.
Oct. 5th, 2010 05:36 pm (UTC)
OMG you're missing out. What are you currently using if you don't mind my asking?

Lightroom is exactly what you would expect to get if the makers of Photoshop talked to a bunch of photographers and asked, "What do you do most often, and how can we write a program that helps you do that faster and more efficiently?" I highly recommend trying the 30 day free trial, just play around with it and see how you like it! :)
Oct. 5th, 2010 06:25 pm (UTC)
lightroom or aperture is pretty crucial for most photographers. I really really like lightroom. I do most of my edits there, and only go to photoshop for liquefy or something serious.

Did you get my flare photo?...
Oct. 5th, 2010 06:41 pm (UTC)
I tried out Aperture and I didn't like it. I should try Lightroom at some point, especially since I get a discount through the school I work at. But I learned about photography in 2005 and I guess that I'm really stuck in my ways. I'm pretty content with the post-processing workflow that I currently have in Bridge/Photoshop. It's quick and easy. But yeah. Maybe not so current. :)

I also use Capture One, which is kind of like Lightroom I think.
Oct. 5th, 2010 06:43 pm (UTC)
And yeah, I got your flare photo! I haven't been able to sit down and focus yet today, but I'll try to see what I can do with it tomorrow. When do you want to give the photos to the client?
Oct. 5th, 2010 07:04 pm (UTC)
Probably in two weeks for client delivery.

Thank you so much!!!

As for LR, it even has an adjustment brush so you can just brush a mask on and adjust that. The problem is then I spend even more time doing fine-tune editing.
Oct. 5th, 2010 07:08 pm (UTC)
See, this is what I don't get about Lightroom. The adjustment brush sounds cool, but how is that different than creating an adjustment layer in Photoshop and using a layer mask on it? I feel like I'd just be learning a different way to do the same stuff. But I guess I shouldn't knock it until I try it.
Oct. 5th, 2010 07:41 pm (UTC)
It's definitely a subset of photoshop, but it's kinda like a faster way to do things. For ex, you don't have to create an adjustment layer, just brush on her wedding dress, and move the exposure slider down, then you move on.

Also, it has all the things that a photog need like temperature, tint, exposure, etc, all there. Along with the histogram. I also use the tone curve a lot, to make it an S curve. Most people end up using LR as their main editting, and photoshop for surgical fine tuning. But I'm also not a photoshop expert.
Oct. 6th, 2010 02:46 pm (UTC)
Okay, you're selling me on this now. I'm going to download the trial version. :)
Oct. 6th, 2010 04:13 pm (UTC)
Hahah, it's like photoshop-lite for camera people.

I'm still interested in your sunflare tutorial!
I think for more hardcore stuff, like making the bride skinnier, you still need photoshop.