# How to post process numerous RAW files?



## Nakz (Aug 7, 2014)

I recently started shooting RAW with my D3200 and I absolutely love it. I also have Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5 for the post processing which also gave me excellent results. I am just curious, and this goes to everyone that shoots RAW, when you go out no matter what occasion it is, wedding/family/etc... Do you shoot RAW for all those photos? And if so, doesn't the post processing take very long? I would like to know is there a convenient way to process 100+ photos at once, or should I just not bother and shoot JPEG for specific events? Thanks.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Aug 7, 2014)

You can batch process if you need to (process one image and sync the settings across all the others).  I have to ask though, do you really need 100+ images from wherever?   If you're not getting paid to shoot the event, chances are you'd be better served by better editing (and by that I mean image culling).  Pick the best images, leave the rest.


----------



## chuasam (Aug 7, 2014)

Yes to Raw almost exclusively. No 100+ isn't very many. My girlfriend is a sports photographer, she uses photo mechanic instead because she finds it a lot faster.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 7, 2014)

How long post takes depends on how much you think each image needs.  If all you need to do is convert it to JPEG, then maybe you should be shooting JPEGs to start with.

Every one of my images is different.  Some take 10 seconds to work with, some take 5 hours.


----------



## Nakz (Aug 7, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> You can batch process if you need to (process one image and sync the settings across all the others).  I have to ask though, do you really need 100+ images from wherever?   If you're not getting paid to shoot the event, chances are you'd be better served by better editing (and by that I mean image culling).  Pick the best images, leave the rest.



Yeah I was probably thinking I could just batch process. No, I'm not getting paid but just to give an example if I were to go on a week long vacation with 1000+ photos.. Yes I know I wont need all of them but lets say half of them. Or another example, I own an automotive photography page with 5K+ followers, and if its a decent filled event I can get 200+ pictures.


----------



## Nakz (Aug 7, 2014)

480sparky said:


> How long post takes depends on how much you think each image needs.  If all you need to do is convert it to JPEG, then maybe you should be shooting JPEGs to start with.
> 
> Every one of my images is different.  Some take 10 seconds to work with, some take 5 hours.



What makes you think I would just convert it to JPEG? That sounds pretty pointless to me. I ALWAYS post process my photos, because taking them is only half the part.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Aug 7, 2014)

Nakz said:


> Scatterbrained said:
> 
> 
> > You can batch process if you need to (process one image and sync the settings across all the others).  I have to ask though, do you really need 100+ images from wherever?   If you're not getting paid to shoot the event, chances are you'd be better served by better editing (and by that I mean image culling).  Pick the best images, leave the rest.
> ...


Again.  Learn to weed out your own images.  Just because they're sharp and properly exposed doesn't mean you need to process them.  Think about this.   National Geographic might spend a year planning a story; the photographer might spend 6 months on an expedition, meanwhile the story will run with about a dozen images.   When you see photo essays they are usually only one or two dozen images.  Any more and you're going to bore your audience. 

When I go on vacation I might take 2-3K images.  I will process under 10% of them.    If I go out to shoot a motorcycle or mtb race I might shoot 1.5 to 2k images, but again I'll only process about 10% of those.


----------



## Nakz (Aug 7, 2014)

Oh okay I understand. Keep in mind I am very new with RAW, but I am pretty skilled in graphic design/editing/photoshop, so I am pretty familiarized with the post processing. I will just have to adjust to this workflow of shooting RAW, but it will definitely be worth it! Thanks for your help man, I really do appreciate it.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 8, 2014)

Nakz said:


> What makes you think I would just convert it to JPEG? ..........



How could I (or anyone here) know what you need to do?  You never stated what your post process is.  So we all just have to guess and assume.


----------



## Designer (Aug 8, 2014)

Nakz said:


> .. just to give an example if I were to go on a week long vacation with 1000+ photos.. Yes I know I wont need all of them but lets say half of them. Or another example, I own an automotive photography page with 5K+ followers, and if its a decent filled event I can get 200+ pictures.



So you're keeping 500 pictures out of 1,000?  That's phenomenal!  I'd be lucky to have 10% be worthy of saving.  Actually it's more like 1% for me.  

And you're posting 200 pictures of an event?  Do your viewers like them all?  That again is utterly fantastic!


----------



## Nakz (Aug 8, 2014)

480sparky said:


> Nakz said:
> 
> 
> > What makes you think I would just convert it to JPEG? ..........
> ...



Because It just sounds pointless to load RAW files then save all of them as JPEG without doing anything. That's all I was saying. Generally when people post process images they actually edit/tweak them to get the most out of the RAW file, THEN save the image as a JPEG. I was assuming you thought that, I mean I'm pretty experienced and I know what I'm doing. I don't think I've ever seen someone just convert RAW files as JPEG without editing anything and call it "post processing."


----------



## Nakz (Aug 8, 2014)

Designer said:


> Nakz said:
> 
> 
> > .. just to give an example if I were to go on a week long vacation with 1000+ photos.. Yes I know I wont need all of them but lets say half of them. Or another example, I own an automotive photography page with 5K+ followers, and if its a decent filled event I can get 200+ pictures.
> ...



It really all depends. But yes if I go to a filled event keep in mind I try to photograph all the unique cars individually, and there can be 200+ cars at and event, so easily I can get 100+ photos. And thanks I appreciate it, if you have an instagram feel free to check out my page @supercar.sunday


----------



## bhop (Aug 8, 2014)

Designer said:


> So you're keeping 500 pictures out of 1,000?  That's phenomenal!  I'd be lucky to have 10% be worthy of saving.  Actually it's more like 1% for me.
> 
> And you're posting 200 pictures of an event?  Do your viewers like them all?  That again is utterly fantastic!



I never understood why people only have such a small amount of keepers.  Is it the machine gun shooting mentality?  Inexperience?  Something else? I personally, don't take a shot unless I think it might be worth keeping.  Shooting film helps with that, but I try to have the same mentality with digital because I hate processing files. 

I'm not picking on you 'Designer', just using your comment as an example.  Sorry for getting OT..


----------



## Nakz (Aug 8, 2014)

bhop said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > So you're keeping 500 pictures out of 1,000?  That's phenomenal!  I'd be lucky to have 10% be worthy of saving.  Actually it's more like 1% for me.
> ...




Exactly what I'm thinking. Especially at car events when they're stills.


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 8, 2014)

bhop said:


> I never understood why people only have such a small amount of keepers......... ..




I've never understood why so many have the urge to even track the metric.  If I shoot 1000 frames at an event and 'keep' 500 or 100 or 25, what does that have to do with shooting 10 frames of a completely different subject in a studio and 'keep'ing all ten?


----------



## astroNikon (Aug 8, 2014)

I like car shows.
But after being to several now I see repeat cars, so I don't take so many photos.
At the last one there was this one Photog going crazy wild with photos of everything, anything, all things.  I think he took about 20 as I was just standing there for a few seconds.
I took over 100 easily.
But each individual shot is individually set as the sun comes and goes, etc.
So normally I end up tweaking each photo individually.

Lightroom contains the SYNC feature which lets you take one setup and push it too all the other ones.
There's also some "Apply during import" settings where you can do stuff to the entire set during IMPORT.

So I would use a product like Lightroom to manage your photos.


----------



## Scatterbrained (Aug 8, 2014)

bhop said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > So you're keeping 500 pictures out of 1,000?  That's phenomenal!  I'd be lucky to have 10% be worthy of saving.  Actually it's more like 1% for me.
> ...


I don't see why people see the need to share every image they take.  Maybe your idea of a "keeper" and mine differ, but when it comes to processing images, I'll pick my favorite from a set and that will be it.  If I go to an event, I'm not going to shoot every car/bike/competitor/etc and post it.    I'm going to pick the images that I both like, and feel represent the event or activity.   That doesn't mean that I'm "running and gunning", it just means that I'm even more selective once I get home and start culling.  Just because every image on my card is technically sound and properly composed doesn't mean they're all keepers. 
  Do you think people shooting for companies like NatGeo and Time are just running and gunning?  Of course not.   Do they share every shot they took? Oh no.  Not even close.    To bring up the oft quoted Ansel Adams, 





			
				 Ansel Adams said:
			
		

> Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.


----------



## cheshirecat79 (Aug 8, 2014)

Scatterbrained said:


> I don't see why people see the need to share every image they take.  Maybe your idea of a "keeper" and mine differ, but when it comes to processing images, I'll pick my favorite from a set and that will be it.  If I go to an event, I'm not going to shoot every car/bike/competitor/etc and post it.



It varies by the scene. If you're running a car photgraphy group, many followers want to see pictures that you've taken of their rides. Having pictures of other people's vehicles may also bring more followers when their friends tag them. There's certainly a reason to post them all if you're trying to build followers. As it applies to a portfolio, I agree- there's really no reason to exhibit anything other than your best or most representative work.


----------



## mkoller (Aug 8, 2014)

In Lightroom 5 you can A) add processing on import  B) use auto sync in the develop module and batch adjust like images.  This makes things much quicker for large groups of images.


----------



## cheshirecat79 (Aug 8, 2014)

Nakz said:


> Raw processing questions/workflow



You may want to check out The DAM Book | DIGITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS . It may give you some insight. Asset management, especially for someone like you that deals with quite a few photos, can be a real bear and time-sucker, but once you get into a habit of culling, sorting, and tagging your library, you may find you have more time to work on developing/enjoying your best photos.

To specifically address your questions about working on RAW versus Jpeg, you'll get used to quickly adjusting your RAW images. You will have to export or publish them, however, once you're ready to share the photo. RAW is certainly the way to go, especially for auto phography, which usually suffers from bad lighting conditions. The amount of detail you can salvage from shadows w/raw is huge.


----------



## xzyragon (Aug 8, 2014)

So you claim to be a graphic designer and familiar with all of post processing, but you're asking a question directly related to post processing?

Anyways, in lightroom, you can copy your "develop" settings for a photo, and copy those settings over to as many photos as you select.  For shoots, I'll edit one image until it's to my liking, and apply that to all the photos that were taken in the same series (same angle, lighting, exposure, etc), and then cull and do the fine touches on those photos after.


----------



## astroNikon (Aug 8, 2014)

Sync Settings across multiple photos ...


----------



## Nakz (Aug 8, 2014)

xzyragon said:


> So you claim to be a graphic designer and familiar with all of post processing, but you're asking a question directly related to post processing?
> 
> Anyways, in lightroom, you can copy your "develop" settings for a photo, and copy those settings over to as many photos as you select.  For shoots, I'll edit one image until it's to my liking, and apply that to all the photos that were taken in the same series (same angle, lighting, exposure, etc), and then cull and do the fine touches on those photos after.



Yes I am, but like I said I'm new with RAW and Lightroom and am adjusting to this type of workflow. And thanks that is batch processing I believe?


----------



## Nakz (Aug 8, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> Sync Settings across multiple photos ...
> 
> View attachment 81580



Thank you that's very helpful!


----------



## 480sparky (Aug 8, 2014)

Nakz said:


> ......... And thanks that is batch processing I believe?



Batch processing performs the exact same steps to all the files selected.  This is fine* if* all the adjustments apply to all the images.


----------



## Santa_Claus (Aug 24, 2014)

Cull, cull, cull. Ruthlessly cull. You don't want to waste progress bar time processing bad images. Unless you are going to start it and leave it I would avoid import processing, too. Render 1:1 previews on import since they will help you cull.


----------

