How much PP....

[Briggie]

Just a general question if you'll indulge me!... On average, how much time do you spend in post proc on a "keeper" photo? Just curious!

[shatch]

Depends...

Some that are shot well only take a couple of minutes to add a little punch (2-3 minutes), while other complex composit shots I have taken up to 15 hours on.

I would say that the majority of photos that I put through Post Production that don't require removing wires, blemishes, treebranches out of ears, etc.; only take about 1-3 minutes to add some punch. But if you are really lucky, just click on a "preset" in Lightroom and call it done. :wink

I would be interested to hear what others have to say on this as well.

[pathfinder]

1 to 3 minutes for most images. Occasionally, I might spend 10-15 minutes if I need to do selections or more than one exposure for blending.

Very rarely much more than 10 minutes.

[Briggie]

thanks for your answers, folks... what is your weapon of choice?? :wink

[shatch]

Photoshop and Lightroom

[pathfinder]

PhotoShop CS 3

[jjbong]

Just a general question if you'll indulge me!... On average, how much time do you spend in post proc on a "keeper" photo? Just curious!
I think 5-10 minutes on average, going occasionally to 30 minutes for something really special (such as bringing out the Himalayas that were in the distance when we were in Darjeeling, but weren't particularly impressive in the shot).

Weapons of choice: Dan Margulis Picture Postcard workflow, K channel (works really well for bringing out detail in monuments and signs and also roughness in seas), channel blending in CMYK to get rid of the red splotches that many of us have in portrait like shots (of us), other stuff.

One really powerful thing is to recognize and fix casts. I used to do this kind of thing in LAB, but after watching Dan Margulis' videos, I'm using curves in RGB in Color Mode.

[SloYerRoll]

30 seconds to 1 min per shot in Lr. I only use Ps for further editing. I try to avoid Ps for photogarphy and use it more for design.
If I'm compositing or really digging into a shot 30 min to whenever it's what I envision (the longest time I have on one shot is roughly 40-50 hours. This is me walking away, working on it again a week later kind of thing though)

Lr, Ps, Ai are my tools.

[Richard]

I use ACR/CS3 and probably spend about 5 minutes on each pic. The more experience I get, the less time I spend processing because 1) I am getting better shots to start with; 2) I know the PP tools better; and 3) I recognize sooner when a shot is truly hopeless.

[Briggie]

I use ACR/CS3 and probably spend about 5 minutes on each pic. The more experience I get, the less time I spend processing because 1) I am getting better shots to start with; 2) I know the PP tools better; and 3) I recognize sooner when a shot is truly hopeless.

Number three is so true!.... what's ACR, though? pardon my ignorance:dunno

[Briggie]

30 seconds to 1 min per shot in Lr. I only use Ps for further editing. I try to avoid Ps for photogarphy and use it more for design.
If I'm compositing or really digging into a shot 30 min to whenever it's what I envision (the longest time I have on one shot is roughly 40-50 hours. This is me walking away, working on it again a week later kind of thing though)

Lr, Ps, Ai are my tools.

And Ai is?

[RomeBoy]

Number three is so true!.... what's ACR, though? pardon my ignorance:dunno

Adobe Camera RAW. It's a standalone RAW processor/converter. Its functionality is embedded in the LR Develop module

[SloYerRoll]

And Ai is?Adobe Illustrator.
It's a vector art application. It uses vectors instead of rasters (pixels). You can use vector art with raster art though to make some really cool images. :D

[Richard]

Number three is so true!.... what's ACR, though? pardon my ignorance:dunno

Adobe Camera Raw...it's the raw converter that comes with CS3 and is also used in Lightroom. I find myself doing more and more with ACR and only the trickier stuff in Photoshop itself.

[Briggie]

Ah... thanks for the ACR definition... all i've got is PS Elements! so, not very fancy! Is it just me, or is Elements a bit useless??

[Briggie]

Adobe Illustrator.
It's a vector art application. It uses vectors instead of rasters (pixels). You can use vector art with raster art though to make some really cool images. :D

I see!! so much to learn!! :huh

[SloYerRoll]

I see!! so much to learn!! :huhI wouldn't worry too much about Illustrator (aka Illy). It's a pretty simple program to learn (years to master though), but you have to have a specific need for it.

I've never used elements before, but I'm fairly certain you can do almost anything in Elements as the regular Photoshop. Of course there are differences, but I don't think anyone uses all the functionality of Photoshop since it's so diversified.