Your "editing process"... what do you send to the bride?

rleigh · January 4, 2011

I just went through over 1,200 photos of my first wedding shoot.
Now.... what to do, what to do!

I am considering sending her all the unedited photos and letting her choose X amount for me to edit. Does anyone do this as a pro?

Another option would be to edit the best ones and send her those along with all the other unedited ones. My concern is spending a lot of time editing photos she will never use. (I have a tendency to spend way too much time editing!)

What other options are there... how do you do it and how do you choose which photos to edit?

mpriest13 · January 5, 2011

That is a loaded question that can get some long and varied responses. I will let others share their workflow but I will say that I NEVER give ANYONE unedited photos for any reason.

Matthew Saville · January 5, 2011

rleigh wrote: »

I just went through over 1,200 photos of my first wedding shoot.
Now.... what to do, what to do!

I am considering sending her all the unedited photos and letting her choose X amount for me to edit. Does anyone do this as a pro?

Another option would be to edit the best ones and send her those along with all the other unedited ones. My concern is spending a lot of time editing photos she will never use. (I have a tendency to spend way too much time editing!)

What other options are there... how do you do it and how do you choose which photos to edit?

Yep, here come the DRAMATICALLY different responses! :-)

Personally, I wholeheartedly agree with you- Never do any editing that will go un-used. Firstly it takes up all your time, and secondly- perfectly edited images gathering dust on a shelf will not generate you any referrals.

So here's my workflow: I sort the images pretty judiciously, deleting of course the totally ruined ones but also any that are seriously un-flattering, or nearly identical to another photo, etc. So usually I shoot 1500-2500, and cull down to 600-900.

I sort using Nikon's View NX, so that allows me to see the in-camera processing even when shooting RAW. This allows me to output / proof images completely un-edited if I so choose.

I put a LOT of effort into making my images look near-perfect on the back of the camera, and when the light is good and easy, at least 50% of the images will be good enough to proof SOOC.

However, it just takes a couple seconds to fix an exposure or white balance issue in Bridge or Lightroom, so I don't hesitate to "proof" images that way either. It should only take a few hours to proof 500-1000 images, or at most a full day.

As a rule of thumb: if It's something that was my fault (exposure, WB) then I fix it, but if it was NOT my fault, (overweight subjects, ugly venue) ...then that doesn't get edited unless it's going in the album, or a print is ordered. Also as a rule of thumb, I only give myself 2-4 clicks per image, or 5-15 seconds when proofing. (not fully retouching; that can take 5-15 minutes) For example just blacks, brightness, white balance and contrast. Yeah, it's easy to go overboard, but honestly most of that work will go to waste. Just practice, practice, practice and get good at the 15-second edit.

Clients will understand if you tell them that it's just not a good use of your time, or their money, if you have to fully retouch every single image you deliver. If you get complaints about delivering *zero* completely edited images, then maybe add a selection of 50-100 favorites where you promise full editing. Of course you should already be fully editing 50-100 images for an album or other product. ;-)

BTW, here's a blog post that shows a few SOOC wedding images, and a few slightly edited ones:

http://matthewsaville.com/blog/2010/05/17/for-photographers-what-does-sooc-mean/

Good luck in streamlining your workflow! Time is MONEY...

=Matt=

studio1972 · January 5, 2011

I use aperture and would usually shoot about 2000-2500 images on a full day wedding shoot, editing down to 3-500ish. I do 99% of my work within aperture or using plugins as I sort through them which is quite time efficient and I design and order the albums from within Aperture as well. I would't ever send the unedited images to the client personally.

Weisel · January 5, 2011

Never let them see unedited images. This is no way makes you look good.

My system, pretty much as the others. I import all the RAWs into Lightroom. I cull through them. I edit them mostly in LR. I send about 5% of them to Photoshop for retouching, enhancement, etc. I place all the finals onto Smugmug for clients to view and order. Later, I design an album, using the best photos that best tell the story of the wedding day.
That's just me.

l.k.madison · January 5, 2011

oh here goes the can of worms....

My workflow -
- dump all images onto EHD ASAP
- load into photomechanic (for sorting/seeing as close to full screen as possible)
- find a few that grab my attention, edit, post as teasers on Facebook (or email to client, whichever they prefer)
- full edit to every picture that's going in the gallery (I've gotten tons of flack for it before, but it's my workflow and I'm sticking to it, I'm still in the learning stages, so some need more work than others), watermark and save (I save a .psd, a watermarked .jpg of every file, and a non-watermark'ed .jpg of each one they buy, but that comes later)
- make gallery and post online
- contact client with link/password to see gallery
I've had full galleries up within two days of the shoot and I've had some that have taken months (like the wedding I just ordered today that was shot just before Thanksgiving) it all depends on what other sessions need my attention.

when they order, I make the watermark layer invisible and re-save then use that .jpg to send to print.

Yes, it takes a while, yes, it may be time consuming, but I don't have enough work for that to bog me down just yet. I don't let the client see anything I wouldn't want my name on. I'm also the customer that wants to see what I pay for, aside from color imperfections from monitor to monitor, I want to pay for what I see on the screen, not what I trust somebody else to edit, so I use that mentality when it comes to posting pictures.

Never EVER let your client see your un-edited pictures, a little bit of PP goes a LONG way. You'll inevitably get *that* bride that wants a certain picture fixed a certain way and you can't promise you can do it to her expectations.

I've even presented a client with an 11x14 of a shot she didn't even know I took. She went above and beyond for me, letting me use her house when she wasn't home and standing up for me when another photographer was giving her flack about hiring me. She LOVED it. Just something to consider if you know your clients well enough to know what they'll want blown up.

Qarik · January 5, 2011

send them all 1200 unddited images and letting them pick is asking too much. If you are going to go that route at least cull out the bad/duplicates shots and get it donw to a managable number..like 1/2 that number.

me personally. I select my very best that represent the day in my eyes (about 400) and edit ALL of them with basic crop, color correction, exposure, minor levels, etc. Just batch process them. This should take more then a f ew hours. Then I hand touch all the better/interesting images. Over all it take me 8 hours or so for 400 images.

ShepsMom · January 6, 2011

Here is my process:

1. Shoot
2. Go home
3. Make coffee
4. Sit down and look at all the images on camera.
5. Delete the ones i don't like right there and then.
6. Go to sleep
7 Get up, make coffee
7. Load RAW stuff into LR
8. Do basic adjustments, exposure/color/etc
9. Coffee break
10 See if any of the images can use some additional loving, removing pimples/hair, etc., but only on images that will see the light of day.
11 If i really really like the image, i would do full editing with effects and all the shebang.
12. Coffee break
13. Upload all those which are good enough for me into online gallery.
14. Let bride look at them, if she needs me to do fancy shmancy editing, she'll have to pay.
15. If not, we're done!

It takes me about 24 or so hours to edit 8 hour wedding. I would never give images that i have not touched.

ETA: I usually give my brides about 65-70% of what i shoot.

mmmatt · January 6, 2011

First off, I also won't give up any images that I haven't opened in bridge to inspect. Also, I backup 2 copies of my original raw files... EVERY file and sometimes go back to the outtakes for use as a diffuse background in a book or for whatever reason, but I save my originals of everything. If it is a full day I may shoot 2000 images, but otherwise it is 12-1500 for the typical hour before service through reception. I Open them up in bridge and go through them all in ACR deleting (still saving an original in the backup folder) what doesn't cut it at that point and if I am torn between which one to deliver then I keep a few to rethink it later. Normally I am down to about 8-900 at this point. I then go through them again in bridge and create 2 folders within my main follder. cull and keep. probably 20% of what is left goes into the cull folder even though I spent time processing in acr. probably 50 percent goes into the keep without any further work, and the remaining 30% or so gets brought up into PS and gets some extra love. ACR is a powerful program, and especially cs5's version of acr... Most of what I do after ACR is creative processing using actions and some cloning or facial touch-ups. I try to keep my final gallery at 4-600 for just me or 6-800 images for a 2 shooter day.

Matt

Matt

trevorb · January 6, 2011

A photo proof box is included in all weddings I shoot. It has 350-500 edited images. Some people like to deliver more images; it’s a personal thing, however I have yet to have anyone complain of a missed shot or not enough images. I also think it’s important to put in your contract how many images your client should expect. It really should not take to long to edit 500-700 images.

Matthew Saville · January 6, 2011

Weisel wrote: »

Never let them see unedited images. This is no way makes you look good.
...

...I guess I don't look good then! (completely unedited images to follow)

...I see a lot of people agreeing that under no circumstance should any client ever see an un-edited image. Am I completely alone in appreciating the art that is the un-altered photograph? I've really enjoyed spending the last few years getting to know each camera I shoot with, getting a feel for it's colors, it's response to certain types of light, and seeing just how much the camera alone is capable of recording...

I'm definitely not against image processing; I proof images through Lightroom all the time. But it's FUN to set goals, and sometimes even more fun to set restrictions, just to see how artistic you can be with as few "tools" as possible...

Respectfully,
=Matt=

ssimmonsphoto · January 7, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

...I see a lot of people agreeing that under no circumstance should any client ever see an un-edited image. Am I completely alone in appreciating the art that is the un-altered photograph? I've really enjoyed spending the last few years getting to know each camera I shoot with, getting a feel for it's colors, it's response to certain types of light, and seeing just how much the camera alone is capable of recording...

I don't think that calling you "wrong", Matt, is what some people are trying to say. You have an incredible skill with your camera to get it right the first time. I aspire to have that. But, for those of us that don't have that skill level yet, post processing is a good crutch to have.

With your black & white one above, did you shoot it in b&w or did you change that in post?

mmmatt · January 7, 2011

Yeah... I get quite a few right in-camera but I don't trust it. I get plenty that need tweaking! The biggest things for me are composition, exposure and white ballance. I shoot a lot with primes so I often crop into photos to tweak my comps and feel this is inevitable shooting primes. Histograms mean nothing to me so depending on ambient lighting my chimping may or may not be acurate and I often shoot something a few different ways to cover myself. Flash compensation is a biggie and with side bouncing a slight shift in people can make the flash metering get funky. I almost never set my white ballance on anything other than auto. Exception would be at the actual service where I will often do a custom white balance to get me a little closer to what I want in-camera. If I do too may calculations on these things durring my shoot my mind is focused on that instead of things I can't change, like lighting angles and facial expressions. I hope someday that I can do all of that at once, and yes Matt I believe you CAN do all of that at once, but at this point I have to prioritize things that I simply can't change after the moment is gone. There is also the potential for sending out an embarrassing image with a wardrobe malfunction in the background or food in someones teeth and I think doing a quick full screen look-over for that is an important service to the client. In a perfect world they would be all SOOC'able, but that isn't realistic for me at this point and not all that high on my priority list. It is all about what you deliver!

Matt

Qarik · January 7, 2011

matt, we both know you shoot jpeg so you are in fact "editing" you images. =p

that said, I am one of those "never let them see unedited images" folks. But to be more exact, the wording should more like "never let them see images that you haven't proofed yourself". This might mean sooc, this might mean a slight color correction, this might mean heavy processing. Maybe 1/2 my shots could easily survive sooc but I still awlays look and evaluate every image.

studio1972 · January 8, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

...I guess I don't look good then! (completely unedited images to follow)

...I see a lot of people agreeing that under no circumstance should any client ever see an un-edited image. Am I completely alone in appreciating the art that is the un-altered photograph? I've really enjoyed spending the last few years getting to know each camera I shoot with, getting a feel for it's colors, it's response to certain types of light, and seeing just how much the camera alone is capable of recording...

I'm definitely not against image processing; I proof images through Lightroom all the time. But it's FUN to set goals, and sometimes even more fun to set restrictions, just to see how artistic you can be with as few "tools" as possible...

Respectfully,
=Matt=

I think you are missunderstanding people. By unedited I mean giving them all the images without sorting them and working on those that need it. Simply choosing the keepers is editing in my book. Most of my images just have a preset applied which is pretty similar to taking jpegs in effect.

Matthew Saville · January 12, 2011

ssimmonsphoto wrote: »

I don't think that calling you "wrong", Matt, is what some people are trying to say. You have an incredible skill with your camera to get it right the first time. I aspire to have that. But, for those of us that don't have that skill level yet, post processing is a good crutch to have.

With your black & white one above, did you shoot it in b&w or did you change that in post?

Both of the B&W's were shot using the in-camera B&W, the first was a straight JPG and the 2nd was a NEF file outputted straight from View NX with no adjustments. I often use in-camera B&W, sometimes with the faintest hint of warm tone on the Nikon D300 / D700, if you're familiar with those settings...

:-)
=Matt=

studio1972 · January 12, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

Both of the B&W's were shot using the in-camera B&W, the first was a straight JPG and the 2nd was a NEF file outputted straight from View NX with no adjustments. I often use in-camera B&W, sometimes with the faintest hint of warm tone on the Nikon D300 / D700, if you're familiar with those settings...

:-)
=Matt=

I think it's quite brave (in a good way) to shoot in B&W (especially at a wedding), I would be worried about seeing the shot later on and thinking I wish I'd shot colour instead. Can't deny that you pull it off brilliantly though.

Matthew Saville · January 12, 2011

studio1972 wrote: »

I think it's quite brave (in a good way) to shoot in B&W (especially at a wedding), I would be worried about seeing the shot later on and thinking I wish I'd shot colour instead. Can't deny that you pull it off brilliantly though.

When the lighting is difficult or the shot really counts, I do still shoot RAW. The reason I can still consider it "SOOC" is because I use Nikon's View NX to browse my photos, a program that allows me to retain in-camera processing 100% un-touched if I so desire. (And yet if I need the RAW file, I can always load it into Bridge or Lightroom etc.)

Thanks for the compliments though! I promise I'll beat my ego back down in a week or so... ;-)

=Matt=

Weisel · January 12, 2011

Matthew Saville wrote: »

...I guess I don't look good then! (completely unedited images to follow)

...I see a lot of people agreeing that under no circumstance should any client ever see an un-edited image. Am I completely alone in appreciating the art that is the un-altered photograph? I've really enjoyed spending the last few years getting to know each camera I shoot with, getting a feel for it's colors, it's response to certain types of light, and seeing just how much the camera alone is capable of recording...

I'm definitely not against image processing; I proof images through Lightroom all the time. But it's FUN to set goals, and sometimes even more fun to set restrictions, just to see how artistic you can be with as few "tools" as possible...

Respectfully,
=Matt=

Well, if your entire delivered product looks that good, SOOTC, then you are an exception to the rule

But technically, my words about this "in no way makes you look good" was directed at someone who just shot their first wedding. (It also applies to me, a relatively noob)
So....I hope the distinction is clear, in who I was replying to. If you had asked the same question in a new post, I doubt my answer would have been so matter of fact. :duel

Peace!

Matthew Saville · January 13, 2011

Weisel wrote: »

Well, if your entire delivered product looks that good, SOOTC, then you are an exception to the rule
But technically, my words about this "in no way makes you look good" was directed at someone who just shot their first wedding. (It also applies to me, a relatively noob)
So....I hope the distinction is clear, in who I was replying to. If you had asked the same question in a new post, I doubt my answer would have been so matter of fact. :duel

Peace!

Wholeheartedly agree. Nobody should let the world see an image before they're ready to. I do however strongly encourage photographers to always push themselves to do the impossible, and challenge themselves as artists, at every turn.

It did take me ~7 years with a DSLR and over a half million total clicks to be able to get comfortable with in-camera processing, or the "SOOC delivery" in general. So if you're just starting out, no pressure! Just don't use editing as a crutch, (which we all agree about) ...and always push your realm of what is possible. :-)

=Matt=

fionalornephotography · January 13, 2011

My workflow (regardless of if it's wedding, portrait, or whatever that I've shot):
1. Get in car and lose the shoes. Drive home.
2. Suck images off camera.
3. Open Corel X3 and start flipping through the RAW images.
4. Delete anything that I know isn't worth keeping, editing, or is the worse duplicate/near duplicate.
5. Select teasers for Facebook. This tends to be about 15% of the remaining images, sometimes less. What really tells the story and is best of the best in my opinion.
6. Proof them. Sometimes this just means adjusting the crop ever so slightly (wearing glasses throws off the crop I see in-viewfinder, and contacts aren't an option), sometimes this means the full shebang (especially if the bride/subject has some serious acne or scarring I can smooth out).
7. Self-watermark the images, save as a separate jpg from the unwatermarked version.
8. Upload all self-watermarked images to Facebook, commence tagging so bride/groom's family/friends can see highlights.
9. Go back to the remaining RAW images and work through them in chronological order.
10. Upload to SmugMug, make sure watermark has been applied, email the client, and wait for orders to roll in.

regionweddings · January 14, 2011

Matt - Your images are fantastic!! If it doesn't need anything, then it is ready for viewing. Myself, I have a few "ready to roll" images, but many more need to be edited. In the chaos of a wedding day, I CANNOT get every image exactly right in camera. However, I always strive for that. I whittle it down to around 500 edited images via ACR and Photoshop CS5. Part of my selling point is my retouching (no sweaty or pimply faced brides, etc.) so it's part of my routine.

So, I guess it doesn't matter how you get there, but the consensus seems to be showing fantastic images to the client.

cdonovan · January 14, 2011

I don't play into the how many images will we get question. I've been burned, and it largely, for me, anyway, depends on the people, and the type of people they are!

I provide a teaser as soon as possible, hopefully the day after of a few of my favorites. Then the couple have access to their gallery as I edit them. It's not all at once, rather a process that I take 4 - 6 weeks to work on. I don't want to edit them all at once, I don't want to be bored and then have that reflect on my editing!

Sort through, cull, sort and cull again. Remember quantity or quality!!

regionweddings · January 16, 2011

@cdonovan - I do like the teaser idea and I did that for the first time just last week. However, I've decided to make the showing of images an event. This teaser is the trailer to the main event which I used to hold many places (Starbucks, Panera, their home, etc.), but this year they will come to me. Going to have prints sales this night only, etc.

It is tough to edit all in a row, but I don;t want them waiting too long and I don;t want them off on their own, not understanding things like print sizes,etc. I want them to decide on the cover image of their wedding book right in front of me. Otherwise, they get busy and it never gets done.

I want family members their too and they can order their prints while emotions are high and I can answer their questions too. I let Smug Mug be my place for out of town family or casual friends to order prints. I like that the family deals directly with me. I think they like it like that too. No right or wrong, just my preferred method.

dawssvt · January 22, 2011

This is one thing I just changed. I shoot around 1,500 on any given day. I am now giving clients 500-600 fully edited images instead of the whole bunch.

Tas67 · January 27, 2011

Shoot around 2,000 images.

Load them into Lightroom and quickly "flag" the keepers.

Process those and give them to the couple. It usually works out between 500-600 images.

Your "editing process"... what do you send to the bride?

Comments