There is so much great advice in this thread. Based in the advice in this thread, my plans are the following:
A post process. Figure this out. Learn how to make good images into great images. Lightroom will be a must. This stage will have to happen in downtime. The workflow can't change right now due to the volume of events.
Selective equipment upgrades. Just as I've learned where my current equipment is deficient, I'll look for second hand equipment that fill these gaps. Because this equipment will be able to do much more than just fill gaps, it will also overlap a major function of current equipment. A few pieces like this will phase out all my current equipment. Using this newer equipment will allow me to max it out and prepare for phase two of the equipment upgrade where I get exactly the gear I need. By this time, I'll also have solid post process down, and I'll be able to produce pro images all the time within all the other requirements.
As an update to this, I rented a 50D and a 24-70 2.8L for the Indy race. By some lucky fortune, I got the setup 5 days early so I was able to use it this weekend as my primary camera for event coverage. I know this camera 70% as well as my others after shooting this weekend.
It has completely blown me away at what I'm able to do with this equipment. I really don't know how I'll be able to get back to my old equipment without feeling some sense of resentment. But that being said, there's several things I've found that are serious limitations that my other equipment does very well. I think all five cameras at my disposal at Indy will be the ultimate, so I'm really happy and can't wait.
I also learned that my storage workflow would have to be completely revamped for this type of new equipment. Because I could shoot RAW+JPEG with no lag, I did. The downside is that I filled up an entire 32GB card in one weekend--something that would usually take about a month. The amount of data produced increases drastically more once I move into equipment of this level. And my whole storage methodology will have to be revamped before I can make such a move.
Using this camera also reinforced how good my current equipment really is. With a post process, I know I can regularly make images at 80-90% the non-post quality level of this rented setup. And these images are already blowing everyone away. People that would be on par with me can't touch me with this equipment in my hands. It does indeed take me to the next level. And knowing that my current equipment with a post process can get me to this level is really a great thing to know.
The downside is that I filled up an entire 32GB card in one weekend--something that would usually take about a month. The amount of data produced increases drastically more once I move into equipment of this level. And my whole storage methodology will have to be revamped before I can make such a move.
Storage is a huge thing, I am entering month 4 of my clean up process. But I do have a suggestion that a coworker of mine learned the hard way. Don't put all your images in one basket. He purchased one "large" (relative term) card for his camera. When he went to download the images using a card reader something went wrong and the card became unreadable. Since ALL his images were on the one card he lost everything. I use a few smaller cards (4 - 8GB instead of 1 - 32GB) and don't face that issue as much. I often will fill one up and then go to the next one. If something bad happens, well the risk of losing ALL the images is reduced. Of course YMMV but figured I would add another option.
Storage is a huge thing, I am entering month 4 of my clean up process. But I do have a suggestion that a coworker of mine learned the hard way. Don't put all your images in one basket. He purchased one "large" (relative term) card for his camera. When he went to download the images using a card reader something went wrong and the card became unreadable. Since ALL his images were on the one card he lost everything. I use a few smaller cards (4 - 8GB instead of 1 - 32GB) and don't face that issue as much. I often will fill one up and then go to the next one. If something bad happens, well the risk of losing ALL the images is reduced. Of course YMMV but figured I would add another option.
Interesting approach. Since I rented the camera, I got the 32gb card that was available, but this is a really good point. Luckily, I never shoot more than a few hundred on one camera before dumping the card, so this probably won't be an issue.
My suggestion to learn photoshop was more directed to decluttering otherwise great images rather than managing workflow. I don't use it myself, as I said, but my wife is a whizz. It only takes her a few minutes to clean up a photo - you can't do this with Lightroom or Aperture. With PS you can get great images up quickly. As long as the basic image is shot well you do not need to spend hours massaging every pixel - although you can if you want to.
Learning PS is not going to give a quick return on investment - it will take hours of practice and most likely attending a good course. Plus you should buy the software, which is not cheap. Still at the end your images will take a huge step forward - bigger than any kit enhancements will give you. You could, for example, shoot the foreground (car and driver) and the background (track, etc) separately and merge them in post.
I think you may have the wrong impression of what photoshop does. Aperture or Lightroom are different animals. My own ideal workflow would be sorting and quick fixing of eg WB and exposure in Aperture or Lightroom. Send the keepers to Photoshop for the finishing touch (ask my wife!).
My suggestion to learn photoshop was more directed to decluttering otherwise great images rather than managing workflow. I don't use it myself, as I said, but my wife is a whizz. It only takes her a few minutes to clean up a photo - you can't do this with Lightroom or Aperture. With PS you can get great images up quickly. As long as the basic image is shot well you do not need to spend hours massaging every pixel - although you can if you want to.
Learning PS is not going to give a quick return on investment - it will take hours of practice and most likely attending a good course. Plus you should buy the software, which is not cheap. Still at the end your images will take a huge step forward - bigger than any kit enhancements will give you. You could, for example, shoot the foreground (car and driver) and the background (track, etc) separately and merge them in post.
I think you may have the wrong impression of what photoshop does. Aperture or Lightroom are different animals. My own ideal workflow would be sorting and quick fixing of eg WB and exposure in Aperture or Lightroom. Send the keepers to Photoshop for the finishing touch (ask my wife!).
Thank you for the insight into PS. My impression after speaking with other photographers and reading on dgrin was that Lightroom does some of the main 'fixing up' type things PS does, and can do them quickly in batch. I know PS can do batch processing, but something tells me it's not quite as efficient as LR or Aperture, and that's why I was leaning towards just using LR for now.
Another thing I think I read were some issues resulting from slow computing... Did I get that correctly?
That may be cheaper to fix in the short run...
How much time can you get back with faster computing?
The new equipment and image sizes are going to tax your computing and storage even more
Yeah, that's the first barrier to getting LR. I will have to get new computing power, and I won't be able to work from anywhere like I do now. I have to figure out the whole workflow with LR before I even start. It'll be October before I can even touch this. I just stay too busy during the season.
It's also going to be an adjustment to go back to single system computing. I compute on the network. I have multiple systems, servers, wans, lans and all sorts of stuff in the mix. This way, I don't have to wait on a system that's tied up doing something, I just use another. And since everything is networked with file servers, any system can access anything.
So I basically will have to have a dedicated machine for LR and make sure it interfaces properly with the network. With win7 being so prevalent now, that's probably going to cause some issues if I have to use it. But I haven't even checked LR system requirements yet, so there's a lot of reading to be done first.
Ps
As far as I see it the biggest difference with PS and tools like Aperture and Lightroom is the ability to work with layers. With layers you separate out the different elements of a picture rather easily and work on them independently. You can also merge layers to create a new image. It is rather easy to take someone out of a picture altogether, or to insert an image into a completely different background.
I notice my wife now shoots differently. She'll take a central object without worrying about background except that it will be easy to remove, and she will shoot a background so she can place her objects conveniently. She starts with a mental picture of what the photo ought to look like and then shoots the different elements.
Some people think this is not real photography, but it works.
@Ziggy. I am trying to convince her but she is not that interested other than as a source of raw material and she is happy that I use Smugmug to keep our family snapshots. Also PS is not discussed here much.
As far as I see it the biggest difference with PS and tools like Aperture and Lightroom is the ability to work with layers. With layers you separate out the different elements of a picture rather easily and work on them independently. You can also merge layers to create a new image. It is rather easy to take someone out of a picture altogether, or to insert an image into a completely different background.
Thank you very much for the insight. This is very good information as I would rarely need layers on a daily basis. Maybe only once in a while for special shoots. I remember using layers back in the day on ps2 or ps3 using an 8x11" scanner to scan a 24x30 poster and the use the transparency of layers to line up the different scans before flattening the image and saving it.
Comments
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
It has completely blown me away at what I'm able to do with this equipment. I really don't know how I'll be able to get back to my old equipment without feeling some sense of resentment. But that being said, there's several things I've found that are serious limitations that my other equipment does very well. I think all five cameras at my disposal at Indy will be the ultimate, so I'm really happy and can't wait.
I also learned that my storage workflow would have to be completely revamped for this type of new equipment. Because I could shoot RAW+JPEG with no lag, I did. The downside is that I filled up an entire 32GB card in one weekend--something that would usually take about a month. The amount of data produced increases drastically more once I move into equipment of this level. And my whole storage methodology will have to be revamped before I can make such a move.
Using this camera also reinforced how good my current equipment really is. With a post process, I know I can regularly make images at 80-90% the non-post quality level of this rented setup. And these images are already blowing everyone away. People that would be on par with me can't touch me with this equipment in my hands. It does indeed take me to the next level. And knowing that my current equipment with a post process can get me to this level is really a great thing to know.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Storage is a huge thing, I am entering month 4 of my clean up process. But I do have a suggestion that a coworker of mine learned the hard way. Don't put all your images in one basket. He purchased one "large" (relative term) card for his camera. When he went to download the images using a card reader something went wrong and the card became unreadable. Since ALL his images were on the one card he lost everything. I use a few smaller cards (4 - 8GB instead of 1 - 32GB) and don't face that issue as much. I often will fill one up and then go to the next one. If something bad happens, well the risk of losing ALL the images is reduced. Of course YMMV but figured I would add another option.
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
Revisiting this thread.
My suggestion to learn photoshop was more directed to decluttering otherwise great images rather than managing workflow. I don't use it myself, as I said, but my wife is a whizz. It only takes her a few minutes to clean up a photo - you can't do this with Lightroom or Aperture. With PS you can get great images up quickly. As long as the basic image is shot well you do not need to spend hours massaging every pixel - although you can if you want to.
Learning PS is not going to give a quick return on investment - it will take hours of practice and most likely attending a good course. Plus you should buy the software, which is not cheap. Still at the end your images will take a huge step forward - bigger than any kit enhancements will give you. You could, for example, shoot the foreground (car and driver) and the background (track, etc) separately and merge them in post.
I think you may have the wrong impression of what photoshop does. Aperture or Lightroom are different animals. My own ideal workflow would be sorting and quick fixing of eg WB and exposure in Aperture or Lightroom. Send the keepers to Photoshop for the finishing touch (ask my wife!).
Be sure to tell your wife she has an open invitation to join in the fun at the Digital Grin.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
That may be cheaper to fix in the short run...
How much time can you get back with faster computing?
The new equipment and image sizes are going to tax your computing and storage even more
It's also going to be an adjustment to go back to single system computing. I compute on the network. I have multiple systems, servers, wans, lans and all sorts of stuff in the mix. This way, I don't have to wait on a system that's tied up doing something, I just use another. And since everything is networked with file servers, any system can access anything.
So I basically will have to have a dedicated machine for LR and make sure it interfaces properly with the network. With win7 being so prevalent now, that's probably going to cause some issues if I have to use it. But I haven't even checked LR system requirements yet, so there's a lot of reading to be done first.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!
As far as I see it the biggest difference with PS and tools like Aperture and Lightroom is the ability to work with layers. With layers you separate out the different elements of a picture rather easily and work on them independently. You can also merge layers to create a new image. It is rather easy to take someone out of a picture altogether, or to insert an image into a completely different background.
I notice my wife now shoots differently. She'll take a central object without worrying about background except that it will be easy to remove, and she will shoot a background so she can place her objects conveniently. She starts with a mental picture of what the photo ought to look like and then shoots the different elements.
Some people think this is not real photography, but it works.
@Ziggy. I am trying to convince her but she is not that interested other than as a source of raw material and she is happy that I use Smugmug to keep our family snapshots. Also PS is not discussed here much.
Want faster uploading? Vote for FTP!