RAW wedding files taking up too much room on SM Pro

lisarhinehart

Hi friends,
I was told that I can't export any more photos to smugmug without paying for smug vault. I think the issue isn't so much me needing smug vault, but me needing to change my RAW wedding files to decent sized jpegs before putting them on smug mug. (I just started shooting RAW a few weeks ago). I could also clean out some of the files I'm not really using-- but they are all small/med jpegs, so I'm thinking it's the RAW taking up all the space.

If my suspicions are correct, I guess my question is what size do you recomend and how do you do this in lightroom?

--Lisa

mercphoto

lisarhinehart wrote:

Hi friends,
I was told that I can't export any more photos to smugmug without paying for smug vault. I think the issue isn't so much me needing smug vault, but me needing to change my RAW wedding files to decent sized jpegs before putting them on smug mug. (I just started shooting RAW a few weeks ago). I could also clean out some of the files I'm not really using-- but they are all small/med jpegs, so I'm thinking it's the RAW taking up all the space.

If my suspicions are correct, I guess my question is what size do you recomend and how do you do this in lightroom?

--Lisa

So..... you're trying to upload the RAW files to Smugmug? And are these raw files to be used for customer orders?

Qarik

lisarhinehart wrote:

Hi friends,
I was told that I can't export any more photos to smugmug without paying for smug vault. I think the issue isn't so much me needing smug vault, but me needing to change my RAW wedding files to decent sized jpegs before putting them on smug mug. (I just started shooting RAW a few weeks ago). I could also clean out some of the files I'm not really using-- but they are all small/med jpegs, so I'm thinking it's the RAW taking up all the space.

If my suspicions are correct, I guess my question is what size do you recomend and how do you do this in lightroom?

--Lisa

Why are you uploading raw files to SM? Typically you should be uploading the jpeg only. The customer should never see RAW files and they should only reside on your HD.

When you export from RAW to jpeg...set the quality to 10 or 11 (max 12) and 300dpi. Your file size goes from raw 30 meg to 3 meg or so

cmason

In lightroom, when you EXPORT, you convert to JPG, then upload to Smugmug. This conversion will change the file size, and compress the image, so it will be much smaller than the RAW. The RAW can not be used for prints anyway, so you can not upload a RAW to Smugmug anyway.

You can upload a RAW to SmugVault, but this is very different: SmugVault is for file backup, not display or ordering.

du8die

Lisa,

This may be helpful.

http://regex.info/blog/lightroom-goodies/smugmug

I've been using this for a while - when you've got your gallery ready to upload, I export using this plugin, and it uploads everything right to SM from the plugin...

d8

Scott McLeod Photo

You have unlimited amounts of storage on smugmug. Its just that you are limited in file types. And it won't accept true RAW files (ie .cr2, .nef, etc).

Shima

Scott McLeod Photo wrote:

You have unlimited amounts of storage on smugmug. Its just that you are limited in file types. And it won't accept true RAW files (ie .cr2, .nef, etc).

Yup, so if you're getting a message about needing smugvault it's because you tried to upload the RAW files.

That being said, I export to 90% quality 300 DPI when I convert my RAW's to JPG in lightroom as that trims down on the file size a bit without a noticeable quality loss.

mercphoto

cmason wrote:

In lightroom, when you EXPORT, you convert to JPG, then upload to Smugmug. This conversion will change the file size, and compress the image, so it will be much smaller than the RAW. The RAW can not be used for prints anyway, so you can not upload a RAW to Smugmug anyway.

Correct, and is why I asked why the OP was trying to upload raw files to Smugmug. Have Lightroom export a JPG, not a master. Have it export at the original resolution (i.e. so it won't be down-sizing the image) and the quality setting to 10, 11 or 12. Do not worry about the DPI, its absolutely meaningless. All you need to worry about is pixel count and quality.

I don't use Lightroom, I use Aperture, but the concepts are all the same. I export a version, not the master. This could be what you're doing wrong. I export a full resolution JPG at quality 10 or 12.

lisarhinehart

shoot raw, edit in LR, Smug plug-in
Do any of you shoot in raw and edit with lightroom, sending it to smug with the plugin? I think those of you who do that should understand just what I am talking about best but:

Over the last few weeks I bought light room and started shooting in RAW. During that process I've used the smug mug plug-in for lightroom refrenced above. Once the images for the gallery look the way i want, i click export which starts up the plug in that sends everything to smugmug.

This time when i was going about business as usual (the way I have been doing it for the past few weeks) I got the message that I needed smug vault.

I have not been changing the format from RAW to jpeg and i have put up 4 albulms of what I believe are RAW images (I think, unless the plug in automatically shanges them to jpeg). But if the plug-in was doing that automatically, I'm thinking I woudn't be reciving the message at this time.

I think I see what you are saying. Do you all save your images at 90% or 10-12 seperately from your raw files? Is that the last step in your work flow for a certain gallery, unless someone wants something special (like if they want a color image in sepia or some type of editing done to an image or something) in which case you would return the the raw file, convert it to jpeg and re-send.

It sounds like the bottom line is that RAW is great in that it can cover a multitude of issues, but it does require the extra conversion to JPEG step. Would anyone be willing to walk me through how to do this? i shoudl know how to do it in general, even for images that won't go through the smug mug plug in-- like a slideshow DVD for customers. It's probably obvious-- sorry, I'm a newbie!

--Lisa

Qarik

The only files I keep on my HD is RAW and and the only files that get uploaded is jpeg.

I don't keep a jpeg directory at all on my HD. It's redundant. I have created a folder called "Smug Mug Export" on my desk top. After RAW editing I export the jpgs (ie convert and save) to that folder. Then I upload to smug mug from that folder (no plugin). Then I delete the jpgs in that folder.

cmason

lisarhinehart wrote:

Do any of you shoot in raw and edit with lightroom, sending it to smug with the plugin? I think those of you who do that should understand just what I am talking about best but:

Over the last few weeks I bought light room and started shooting in RAW. During that process I've used the smug mug plug-in for lightroom refrenced above. Once the images for the gallery look the way i want, i click export which starts up the plug in that sends everything to smugmug.

This time when i was going about business as usual (the way I have been doing it for the past few weeks) I got the message that I needed smug vault.

I have not been changing the format from RAW to jpeg and i have put up 4 albulms of what I believe are RAW images (I think, unless the plug in automatically shanges them to jpeg). But if the plug-in was doing that automatically, I'm thinking I woudn't be reciving the message at this time.

I think I see what you are saying. Do you all save your images at 90% or 10-12 seperately from your raw files? Is that the last step in your work flow for a certain gallery, unless someone wants something special (like if they want a color image in sepia or some type of editing done to an image or something) in which case you would return the the raw file, convert it to jpeg and re-send.

It sounds like the bottom line is that RAW is great in that it can cover a multitude of issues, but it does require the extra conversion to JPEG step. Would anyone be willing to walk me through how to do this? i shoudl know how to do it in general, even for images that won't go through the smug mug plug in-- like a slideshow DVD for customers. It's probably obvious-- sorry, I'm a newbie!

--Lisa

I use the Smugmug export plug in as well. It converts to jpg and uploads to my smugmug galleries. I never noticed before, but it appears that you can upload a RAW file, if you have configured it to do so. Check to be sure that you have selected JPG in the "File Settings' selection box:




I use 90% myself, and dont notice any diff between 90 and 95%.

One thing to note on the plug-in: you do not have to keep any of the JPGs locally. The plug in has the option to "Export to a temporary folder (will be discarded upon completion)" With Lightroom, there is really no reason to keep the JPG, as you can create one anytime you need by going back to your image and exporting. I create multiple 'Virtual copies' when I want B&W, sepia etc variants, preserving my initial edits this way.

As for RAW: the entire point of Lightroom is RAW conversion. That is what it is for. Any of the outputs, be they export for image upload, printing, web, DVD, etc, all assume you are starting with RAW. In the other modules, like Print and Web, you do not have to "Export' first, as they do the export for you as part of the output. (well print doesnt really export as jpg, but trying to keep it simple).

Lightroom basically means you can manage JPG and RAW images in one tool and with one set of controls. You need to bear in mind that they are different images, with typically JPG having already been processed, so you should not process JPG as you do RAW, as it will look overdone, but you will learn this as time goes on.

cj99si

Anyone notice an upload speed difference between macdaddy and the smugmug upload through LR?

cmason

cj99si wrote:

Anyone notice an upload speed difference between macdaddy and the smugmug upload through LR?

Yes, BUT...the LR plug-in is doing more than MacDaddy: it does the RAW conversion, writes file to folder (or temp folder), creates galleries in Smugmug and uploads to Smugmug. The LR progress bar does not inform you what it is doing, so its hard to tell.

If you count the time it takes to convert the RAW, write to a folder, create the galleries on Smugmug, then go to MacDaddy and upload, its probably not that big a difference.

That being said, I do believe that MacDaddy is using multiple threads to upload, and I get the feeling that Jeffery's Smugmug plug-in might not be.

lisarhinehart

thanks
Thanks so much for taking so much time to help me out with this. You are right, I had inadvertantly checked something that tried to send RAW files when I changed it to convert to 90% jpegs there was no problem. Thanks again!

DavidTO

I. Love. That. Plugin.

FedererPhoto

Qarik wrote:

... and 300dpi. Your file size goes from raw 30 meg to 3 meg or so

I'm sure you are already aware of this, but the dpi setting doesn't affect the file size at all.

marikris

FedererPhoto wrote:

I'm sure you are already aware of this, but the dpi setting doesn't affect the file size at all.

But a 72 dpi image will take significantly less storage space than a 600 dpi file because it has less information. I'm not sure I follow. Going to read up on it; I must be missing something.

Art Scott

I am going to suggest you get a copy of Scott Kelby's book LightRoom 2 for photographers .....many copies new and used at AMAZON.....it i wll delve into everything except the plug-in.......which I do not use......Kelby's books are easy to read...like a recipe book for cooking.....

mercphoto

marikris wrote:

But a 72 dpi image will take significantly less storage space than a 600 dpi file because it has less information. I'm not sure I follow. Going to read up on it; I must be missing something.

DPI is meaningless unless you also know how many inches your image is as well. That is what the guy is getting at. When it comes to storage all that matters is how many pixels you have and what your compression is. That's it.

DPI -- dots per inch. Unless you also say how many inches you have you don't know how many dots you have. That's why DPI is nearly always useless information.

I'll give a concrete example. a 4x6 image at 200 dpi is the very same image as an 8x12 at 100 dpi. The DPI figures differ, but the pixel count and the file size and the information content are identical.

marikris

Thank you for that mercphoto!

I'd been reading this article http://www.just-stuart.com/photogs/DPI_Confusion (about five times now lol, got a little inundated there), and the gist is the same:

The typical confusion is that DPI relates to the size of the file. Many situations require limiting the size of a file (setting a minimum and/or maximum). DPI does affect file size when you're dealing with physical inches -- printing, scanning, etc. -- but as you learned above, there is no such thing as DPI for a digital image that is only stored in a computer. So what does affect file size? The basic answers are pixel dimensions, compression, and color depth.