Another Raw Workflow Question

ChrisGardner

I've been shooting raw and converting with Lightroom for about 2 years now, so I have an understanding of raw conversion in general. However, my version of LR is old (version 1, with no local adjustment brush) and I've never been really happy with the results, so I'm looking at some other options. The most obvious would be LR 3 (I have the beta version now), but I was also looking at DxO and CaptureNX 2.

So here is a scenario - I take a hundred shots with different lenses. I point DxO at the files and it does its magical corrections (Or I use CaptureNX 2). I then want to open all those files in LR, add them to a catalog and make more adjustments. What is PHYSICALLY happening to the files? Are they being converted to TIFFs? All software packages have their own way of manipulating raw files, so I don't understand how you could pass raw files in between programs and keep adjustments. I guess the fundamental question is this: Is the FIRST program you use the only one that is actually manipulating the raw file?

Thanks!

pathfinder

Importing a file - RAW, tiff, jpg - into Lightroom does not change it in any way if I understand the program correctly.

Depending on how you set up Lightroom's importing preferences, it may leave the file where it presently resides, or copy it to a new folder or folders holding all your Lightroom images and their back ups. This file is never altered, but merely stored as an original file to allow Lightroom to create any new edits you add to it later in Lightroom as metadata. If you wish to use an external RAW editor first, I would suggest importing the RAW edited files as tifs, not as RAW files, as I am not sure Lightroom would recognize and honor your previous edits stored in the XMP files.

You can edit a file in Lightroom as a Smart Object, move it to Photoshop, duplicate it as a new Smart Object, click on the thumbnail of the new layer in the Layers palette, and it will open in Camera RAW to re edit in RAW. I am not aware of a way to do this in DXO or Capture One as I do not use these programs.

Miguel Delinquento

1. Lightroom never manipulates your RAW files. It is a non-destructive editor, which means it manipulates metadata about the raw files. Physical changes are made to file versions that are exported.

2. Lightroom v. 2 is significantly improved over the version you know. Version 3 is a beta with some functionality limited. I would not base any quality decisions on V3 as the team is testing many things out. Version 3 may not be released for another 3 months. I would give version 2 a good workout for the 30-day free trial. I think it's the best workflow and development tool out there. I was a beta tester of Photoshop in the late 80s and now only use Photoshop about 9% of the time.

3. If the one-button magical approach to RAW files offered by DxO is what you really intend, that's fine, but I would question the reason for shooting RAW to begin with.

4. Lightroom can accept imported non-RAW files, but it will continue to perform non-destructive edits on them. You will have to export them for editing by other applications.

5. I would really model out a comprehensive workflow and eliminate time-consuming redundancy. Lightroom is used mostly as a total workflow tool. Though one can use it solely for cataloging, that's really not its strongest, nor is it its intended function. There are better, faster asset management tools without any development and printing capabilities.

What are the primary objectives you are trying to achieve with these tools?

M

ChrisGardner

Miguel Delinquento wrote:

1. Lightroom never manipulates your RAW files. It is a non-destructive editor, which means it manipulates metadata about the raw files. Physical changes are made to file versions that are exported.

2. Lightroom v. 2 is significantly improved over the version you know. Version 3 is a beta with some functionality limited. I would not base any quality decisions on V3 as the team is testing many things out. Version 3 may not be released for another 3 months. I would give version 2 a good workout for the 30-day free trial. I think it's the best workflow and development tool out there. I was a beta tester of Photoshop in the late 80s and now only use Photoshop about 9% of the time.

3. If the one-button magical approach to RAW files offered by DxO is what you really intend, that's fine, but I would question the reason for shooting RAW to begin with.

4. Lightroom can accept imported non-RAW files, but it will continue to perform non-destructive edits on them. You will have to export them for editing by other applications.

5. I would really model out a comprehensive workflow and eliminate time-consuming redundancy. Lightroom is used mostly as a total workflow tool. Though one can use it solely for cataloging, that's really not its strongest, nor is it its intended function. There are better, faster asset management tools without any development and printing capabilities.

What are the primary objectives you are trying to achieve with these tools?

M

(The thing that attracted me to the "one button magic" approach of DxO is its ability to correct things like distortion, lateral CA, etc. automatically on raw files based on specific lens-aperture-focal length combinations for each shot. Plus high ISO optimization for the camera used. I certainly wouldn't use it to make artistic changes.)

Basically I'm looking for a high quality raw converter that's fast to use, and as you say, not redundant. I don't HATE sitting in front of my computer working on images, but I certainly get sick of it quickly (I sit at a computer all day for my day job already!). The idea of using CaptureNX on all my images seems too time consuming. I really like the Lightroom flow, but I didn't think it produced the best images from raw. I know this is something they're working on for Lightroom 3, so maybe it will be significantly better?

pathfinder

It is interesting that when I edit my RAWs in LR2, I do a chromatic aberration correction on each file, and I do not find a consistent set of settings for a given lens that I can routinely count on to be correct. The direction of the light, and the distance from the film plane both seem to influence the R/G and B/Y corrections that I choose for my images. It is interesting to me also, that sometimes my lesser lenses, say a Tamron travel zoom, has less CA for a given image, than a Canon L prime. Not always, but certainly some times.

I liked your Antarctica blog and your gallery, Chris. You have a good eye for color.

ChrisGardner

Yeah, that's exactly why I'd love to have software correct those "technical" things automatically (CA, distortion). I really hate working on that stuff...the less of that I have to do, the more time I have to work on the "artistic" things.

Thanks for the compliment - as you might imagine there isn't much color in Antarctica, so it's certainly what I'm drawn to down there.

Photometric

ChrisGardner wrote:

(The thing that attracted me to the "one button magic" approach of DxO is its ability to correct things like distortion, lateral CA, etc. automatically on raw files based on specific lens-aperture-focal length combinations for each shot. Plus high ISO optimization for the camera used. I certainly wouldn't use it to make artistic changes.)

Basically I'm looking for a high quality raw converter that's fast to use, and as you say, not redundant. I don't HATE sitting in front of my computer working on images, but I certainly get sick of it quickly (I sit at a computer all day for my day job already!). The idea of using CaptureNX on all my images seems too time consuming. I really like the Lightroom flow, but I didn't think it produced the best images from raw. I know this is something they're working on for Lightroom 3, so maybe it will be significantly better?

CaptureNX2
FWIW, If you take one image from your shoot, and make your corrections, CaptureNX2 has a facility to save the edits you made, and then run those edits against any number of images at the same time. It's called Batch mode. For example, I shoot for a high school marching band. Sometimes due to weather, their competitions are held inside the high school and many high schools have different lighting. So I shoot in autoWB (I have lost many wb cards and forget to order new ones), and then when I get home, I find the correct WB for one on photo and use the batch function to do for the rest of the shots.

Additionally, all kinds of edits can be combined, including for CA, and LD can be saved and executed against any list of photos at the same time. I typically do that and then go into ViewNX to see the edits and do any individual correction from that point forward.

pathfinder

LR also offers the ability to batch correct any of the typical RAW edits as well, color balance, camera profiles, exposure corrections, chromatic aberration corrections, etc.

Edit a single frame as desired, copy the settings, and then paste the settings on however many images you desire. Whamo! Done!