|
Download the Nik editing suite. It's free now. It works standalone or within PS etc
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:36 |
|
|
Can someone explain why selective color is so frowned upon right now? B&W with red or yellow looks nice at times, particularly if the objects are interesting - umbrellas, road signs etc. But it seems as if the general opinion has turned to "selective color is bad and don't do it".
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
It's tacky as poo poo and is rightfully looked down upon. Schindler's List is probably the only good use of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Anarkii posted:Can someone explain why selective color is so frowned upon right now? B&W with red or yellow looks nice at times, particularly if the objects are interesting - umbrellas, road signs etc. But it seems as if the general opinion has turned to "selective color is bad and don't do it". If you have a picture of pretty red umbrellas, they will pop just fine without forcing the issue. If your pretty red umbrellas don't pop on their own, you have taken a picture that failed at meeting its purpose. From here you can think about your picture, ask yourself why they didn't pop, learn from your bad photo, and move on. Or you can knock the background into BW, crank the red saturation to +50 and pat yourself on the back. The first is how you become a better photographer. The second sort of yells (to people who care about such things) that you were more interested in making your umbrellas pop out of a bad picture than in taking good pictures. And that's tacky as poo poo and rightfully looked down upon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
A good photo won't need it, and it won't save a bad photo. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
I'm working (in Lightroom) on a wedding across two computers, so to do that I'm having Lightroom save sidecar xmp files. That way I can just copy out my xmp from one computer to another to keep everything up to date. This is fine, but for every photo now I have to click that up arrow and choose whether to import settings from disk or overwrite settings - I know I want to import settings, but I can't figure out how to do this for all photos at once. Am I going to have to do this one file at a time, or is there somewhere that'll let me do these in a batch?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
If you got network storage of some kind, you can just open the catalog on the other PC. Or get some kind of syncing tool to copy everything back and forth between the two machines. As long as you don't open the catalog on both machines at the same time it works perfectly. Seems a much smaller headache than using an intermediate file.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2016 15:24
|
|
|
xzzy posted:A good photo won't need it, and it won't save a bad photo. wanna get this on a t-shirt. Visually distinct is not the same as quality. Unfortunately we've reached a point where people have been desensitised to relatively color accurate photography that "filters" and aggressive color grading become popular purely because they're different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
xzzy posted:If you got network storage of some kind, you can just open the catalog on the other PC. Or get some kind of syncing tool to copy everything back and forth between the two machines. As long as you don't open the catalog on both machines at the same time it works perfectly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I'm working (in Lightroom) on a wedding across two computers, so to do that I'm having Lightroom save sidecar xmp files. That way I can just copy out my xmp from one computer to another to keep everything up to date. This is fine, but for every photo now I have to click that up arrow and choose whether to import settings from disk or overwrite settings - I know I want to import settings, but I can't figure out how to do this for all photos at once. Am I going to have to do this one file at a time, or is there somewhere that'll let me do these in a batch?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
jackpot posted:The problem I run into is one of the machines is my work computer, and they've locked me out of using any kind of outside networking or dropbox-ish tools. Basically I can copy anything I want onto this computer, but if I want to copy a file off it's gotta be something I can email to myself. So it's a very manual process. Just use a different computer. That feels like the sort of obstruction that would absolutely kill my productivity and ability to do anything really meaningful. If the issue is that you have a desktop and a work laptop then even a relatively inexpensive notebook with older components will likely run the software fine and enable you to get more done than a brand new, kitted-out work laptop hobbled by security restrictions. Grab a refurb 2013 MacBook Air for $500 or something.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
So I've been using LR at work (house photography for real estate) for a few years now, and I broke down and got LR CC recently on my own dime. I'm pretty happy with what it can do given that I have sub-mediocre hardware (business purchase decisions not being mine to make, especially with us financially cutting back); I have an underwhelming graphics card and a six-core CPU, so the only thing I can't really do with LR is panoramic stitching (I use KOLOR APG for this) and HDR merging (I use Photomatix for this), as the stitching/merging processes basically make my computer unusable while they are happening in LR. At any rate, the only thing I think I don't have figured out is the cataloging. I have a folder on my main hard drive wherein all my house photos go, and they are labeled by the street the house is on with the number address following. In those folders I separate the RAW photos into a "stills" folder for bracketing, and the vertical photos into a "panoramas" folder for stitching, and sub-folders therein for the various levels of editing until I end up with jpegs. I don't use cataloging at all, and I'm thinking maybe I should. When I get back to the office after an appointment, I usually put the SD card into the computer and manually cut and paste the photos into the folders I described above and take the bracketed photos straight into Photomatix for merging, THEN import them into Lightroom for further editing. I never edit the RAW files first, and while I'm fine with my organization, I do it all manually and I think maybe I could save time with cataloging and such. I don't typically delete any photos unless they are outright bad, like not focused or some such, but to re-edit any photos I basically have to copy them and paste the copy back into the same folder so LR will recognize it as a new photo not previously imported. Is cataloging worth it for me instead of my manual organization? I have read back a few pages and it seems many of you who are not doing HDR at all or only doing it in LR, flag and delete photos that they don't want to use in LR, and I don't delete much. If anyone else ever needs access to my photos, I feel like it might be easier to tell them how to find a specific photo in LR through the catalogs rather than trying to tell them to navigate through tons of folders and sub-folders and filenames and poo poo. edit: also, re: Photomatix. For any of you HDR photographers out there, is Photomatix pretty much the cream of the crop, or is there something better out there? I like Photomatix a lot, but it's left wanting in some areas when it comes to merging and processing bracketed photos in the "natural" look (i.e. not HDR'd out to gently caress to look like some arts undergrad's portfolio). As I mentioned before, my computer can't really handle merging them in LR if I want to do something else at the same time, so I don't use it for HDR merging. life is killing me fucked around with this message at 01:22 on Apr 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
I use Lightroom for panoramic stitching and HDR on a 2011 MacBook Air. I call it 'Cocktail Time'. You probably have more cases to use this than me, however, and 'Cocktail Time' might prove to be fatal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
EL BROMANCE posted:I use Lightroom for panoramic stitching and HDR on a 2011 MacBook Air. I call it 'Cocktail Time'. You probably have more cases to use this than me, however, and 'Cocktail Time' might prove to be fatal. Yeah, sounds about right. I guess standalone HDR and panoramic stitching programs work faster because they don't have all that other functionality.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
Does anyone know of a way to get LR to import photos to a different location? For example, I've never used the users/pictures folder for my workflow and I don't want to start now, but when I imported directly from my SD card this time since I started using catalogs and flagging and color codes, it copied the photos to the default Pictures folder, and though I know how to move the photos WITHIN Lightroom, I can't find out how to create a new folder using Lightroom anywhere BUT in the Pictures folder. Does this mean I have to move all my other poo poo to that Pictures folder? Also, can I delete the originals on my SD card now?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
life is killing me posted:Does anyone know of a way to get LR to import photos to a different location? When you import, you can click on the import location (top right of the import window) and that opens up a dropdown of recent locations as well as a location listed as 'other'. Select that and it opens an Explorer/Finder window that lets you choose a different location and create a new folder if you need to. A little further down on the right in the import window under File Handling is the option to make a second copy. This works in exactly the same way as the import location chooser. If your photos are imported and backed up then you can safely delete the originals on your SD card. Here's my question. I recently started shooting film and I'd like to import my scanned photos with EXIF that describes the camera and lens I used. I can't find a way to add that info. Editing metadata just gives me options to add GPS data and IPTC info. How do I put manual camera data into my files so that they report properly on Flickr? Helen Highwater fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Apr 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
http://www.essl.de/wp/2012/05/07/adding-foreign-lens-info-in-lightroom/
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Is there the same, but for film camera bodies?
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
I found this when I searched but it only updates lenses. Bodies still won't be listed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Does anyone know how to actually use VSCO presets in Lightroom as they intended? They have develop presets, camera presets, and curves presets. They all seem to have the same film stock names (for example there's a Portra 400 setting for each type of preset). Are you only supposed to use one type? Use them all together? Are you supposed to use the Nikon presets when you have a Nikon camera? I am probably overthinking this but I've always been curious why they include so many different options.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
They have videos on their site explaining how to use them. The Nikon/brand name folders do correspond to custom profiles built/adjusted for the specific brands. You can check on their website if they have one for your camera. They have one for the original Canon 5d, so yours is probably covered. Most of the presets will apply a set of adjustments and usually an input profile (replacing Adobe Raw 2012, if you have a Fuji it is where you would select a film emulation with a raw file). The + and -'s after a preset correspond to its strength. Think of - as weak and + as strong. I usually only use --, since most look crazy above.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
Thanks, I just noticed it automatically applies the camera profile when you choose a develop preset. It also applies a custom curves setting, but there are actual separate curves presets too. My guess is you can apply the curves presets individually without applying everything else.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
Is stuff like VSCO presets cool in the field or is it seen as chump poo poo (seriously not trying to judge)? On the one hand, I could see an 'artistic integrity' argument against buying preset filters and curves with intended looks, much in the same way that a lot of synthesizer players look down on artists who use factory-supplied or purchased presets in songs. On the other, one could make the argument that the only thing really separating a photographer choosing a VSCO pack for its intended look and a photographer choosing a specific brand and speed of film for its intended look is the cost and convenience.
|
|
#
?
May 9, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
I can't speak for professionals but I use it for stuff that I'm gonna upload to facebook as quickly as possible. Like if I'm shooting random snapshots at a family event, I'll usually slap on a filter, dial it back a bit, and then call it done
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
You can use it to get a specific look that anyone else with the pack can also get with the same amount of ease.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
Shellman posted:You can use it to get a specific look that anyone else with the pack can also get with the same amount of ease. Yeah this is one of the biggest problems of using VSCO. And instead of people telling you that your photo looks nice, they'll be asking you which VSCO filter did you use?
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 02:31
|
|
|
alkanphel posted:Yeah this is one of the biggest problems of using VSCO. And instead of people telling you that your photo looks nice, they'll be asking you which VSCO filter did you use? I got irrationally angry the other day when someone said my film shot had a VSCO look. That poo poo's #nofilter
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 06:28
|
|
|
I used to go ehhh at using presets at all but then I went on a camping trip and had >2000 photos. If someone modifying a filter to their tastes to achieve a certain look they've seen and liked annoys you then people imitating another photographers style should too because its the same thing though.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 08:34
|
|
|
Gonna guess you're using the pirated versions based on the questions, they're horribly outdated.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 09:03
|
|
|
You know you could always make your own presets to fit your own style and just copy that onto your 2000 photos as a starting point.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 11:27
|
|
|
For anyone doing panoramic photography: Is there any decent program out there that has good algorithms for stitching that won't make the resulting stitch look like a train wreck of parallax? I use a panoramic tripod head (Nodal Ninja). Currently, for stitching, I'm using Kolor's Autopano Giga (APG) and it's pretty good, but I've found that working with RAW photos and stitching them together in APG produces results that are very yellow. Editing them after the fact by changing the color balance only produces a mostly-white photo and no colors. I have not figured out why this is. I don't know if there's a RAW profile I need for APG or what. I'm using an older version because they released a big update last year for which they charged and we didn't want to pay for that. My version isn't pirated. Is there any way to be able to stitch RAW photos together in APG without making them completely yellow to the point that it can't be fixed? FWIW, working with JPEG is okay but I want slightly more quality and editing capabilities that I don't get with JPEG.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
KinkyJohn posted:You know you could always make your own presets to fit your own style and just copy that onto your 2000 photos as a starting point. For my trip I edited the good photos and then used those as presets for all the other snaps at that same spot. Still took a long time and if you are going somewhere that isnt the bush you are probably going to have a lot more than 2000.
|
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Why do you want 2000+ photos? Did you really look at every single one and thought "This is a keeper." ? I'm willing to bet if you pick 10 of those 2000 you'd get more than a better idea of the trip. bobmarleysghost fucked around with this message at 23:59 on May 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 10, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Lots of snapshots that arent good photos but still have value to the group. I kept about a quarter and spent more than 30s on about 50 of those, more than a few minutes on like 12.
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
I'm not sure whether this is the best thread for this question or the general photography thread is, but can anyone recommend a good monitor for post processing? I've been using a 5ish year old Dell 2209WA and it does its job well, but was wondering if there was anything newer on the market since it is about that time to get new computer stuff. The resolution in particular is sorta comparatively low on this monitor, which I realize isn't that big a deal for photography, but I like to play games too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:I'm not sure whether this is the best thread for this question or the general photography thread is, but can anyone recommend a good monitor for post processing? I've been using a 5ish year old Dell 2209WA and it does its job well, but was wondering if there was anything newer on the market since it is about that time to get new computer stuff. The resolution in particular is sorta comparatively low on this monitor, which I realize isn't that big a deal for photography, but I like to play games too. I got a Dell U2415 and think it's pretty good (1920x1200).
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
bobmarleysghost posted:Why do you want 2000+ photos? I'm now digging through 4.5k photos from a vacation and after the first pass I have about 10% selected. Not all of them are fantastic, just poo poo like the Trevi Fountain being just a flood of tourists resulting in pretty boring shots, but what you're gonna do. Especially on this trip, where I've been on three continents, I can't really choose just 10 and have them be representative of anything. Still, I'll probably do another pass and keep 10% that have the most artistic value as for prints and stuff. Speaking of which, is there any way to filter for photos that have been modified since last export? I already exported this first batch as jpegs but then went back to fix a few photos. I could do the whole batch of course but it would be nicer if there was a way to just update the handful that is actually needed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Is the "Photography" package from Adobe (includes Photoshop CC and Lightroom CC) worth it? I bought LR5 a while back and only have version 5.7. I'm wanting to use Photoshop, but is it worth just getting the combined photography package even though I already have LR 5.7? I would rather have a standalone product downloaded, but subscriptions seem to be the only way to do these things any more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
Are you making any money off your photography to justify the cost? I haven't looked into it in a while but I thought I recall those two being packaged for 10$ a month which is absurdly cheap for an always updated industry standard software package. I'm a graphic designer and shoot weddings on the side so the $600 per year I spend on the whole adobe cc software is paid for with a single project. If you're just doing this for fun, the photo package might be worth it for you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 04:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:36 |
|
|
tau posted:Is the "Photography" package from Adobe (includes Photoshop CC and Lightroom CC) worth it? I bought LR5 a while back and only have version 5.7. I'm wanting to use Photoshop, but is it worth just getting the combined photography package even though I already have LR 5.7? I would rather have a standalone product downloaded, but subscriptions seem to be the only way to do these things any more. Depends on whether you need the new features that they offer with each CC update. Plus camera raw support for newer cameras. I shoot film so there's no need to upgrade but I do like the new straightening options in LR/PS CC so someday I might just spring for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 04:25
|
|