Workflow for HDR or other multi-image editing in PS

A client asked us to shoot some interiors at a country club clubhouse. With bright windows looking out over the golf course and the relatively darker interior, it was a natural for HDR.
The question became how to actually do it.
Since HDR seems to work better with jpegs rather than RAW, I thought it would be good to shoot RAW and large fine jpeg. What a mess. Every time I clicked on an image to bring it into PS, it would bring in the wrong image (one I had brought over before) over and over again, creating more and more PSD-edited files of the wrong image. My advice -- Don't import RAW and JPG.
After removing all the files from LR and the disk, I imported just jpegs all over again. Now... on to HDR.
LR doesn't seem happy when you send over a bunch of images to PS and then combine them into one, as you do with HDR. It likes to get back as many as it sent, and it creates PSd files all over the place, even if you didn't save the image.
I ended up using Bridge dragging and dropping to an external HDR processor, saving tone mapped image to TIF and importing into PS for finishing up, finally importing into LR for some final color correction. Wow. Pretty painful, but a good learning experience.
Anyone have a better workflow for HDR.
-wick

>Personally I think I would have shoot raw only.
Developed my raws in LR.
Exported jpegs to the disk.
Opened these jpegs in PS and do the HDR stuff.
You'll get better results by just selecting the RAWs directly in the PS HDR generation script.

Similar Messages

User Friendly Image Editing Program?

OK, I have searched everywhere I can think of for a simple photo and image editing program. All I want to do is manually crop images into irregular shapes and make one image transparent over another, and not have it look spliced together when I get done. I have been using Appleworks draw, but these are two things it lacks. I have downloaded and tried dozens of applications, everything from Adobe trial version to freeware programs and none of it does any good. The complicated expensive applications make you spend two hours figuring out how to rescale an image and the cheap ones can't even do basic overlays. Is there some kind of image editing program out there that can do these things, but has a simple interface like IMovie or IPhoto?
IMac duo-core 1.83ghz intel Mac OS X (10.4.6)

I use Photoshop Elements v2 with Tiger. Since it's old, you should be able to get a copy for $10-$20.
 Cheers, Tom

Need help with HD Multi-cam editing...

So it is my understanding that you can't view a multi-cam sequence unless the footage you are viewing is unrendered/unlimited...
So my question is... how do I take rendered footage and de-render it so its unlimited... I tried adding an effect but even color corrector just makes the footage go from rendered to "needs render" which is no good.
For those who understand multi-cam editing better... could you provide some pointers. Thanks!

nvm i figured it out.

Aperture, Photoshop, and Apple's possible direction for Image Editing

All,
After using Aperture now for several days, and reading many different forum topics, in particular this one which speaks of desired enhancements to Aperture:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=253594&tstart=0
there is one thing that really sticks out on my mind. While all of us photographers have slightly different specifics to our workflow, in general they are very similar. And with respect to Aperture, there is one huge area where most of us seem to be hitting the brick wall: image adjustments, and by extension, image file management. Let me explain what I mean.
I think it is a fair generalization to say that the vast majority of serious digital photographers are using Photoshop (or some other image editing app, but I'm just going to refer to Photoshop for convenience) for post-processing of some kind. In using Aperture, and figuring out how to fit it into workflow, we've got this situation of how to move from organization and image library management to the full gamut of image adjusting functionality (photoshop) and back again to library management. The need to use photoshop then exposes the issue of how files are stored on the filesystem, etc. Stay with me here...
I have found myself thinking, and it is pretty clearly demonstrated in the forum topic mentioned above where folks are making suggestions for improvements to Aperture, that there's this barrel people are over in knowing whether Photoshop and Aperture should live in the workflow together, or whether Aperture should (or is intended to) replace Photoshop in the workflow. This got me to thinking about the fundamental question -- what is the intent, i.e. the vision for Aperture? Is it meant to replace Photoshop, or restated, is Aperture meant to be the app in which all image adjustments are to be made, OR is Aperture meant to just ease workflow, and is it intended not to be the primary app for image adjustments, but rather integrate with the primary image adjustment app?
The reason I bring this up is that the answer to this question makes all the difference in what enhancement requests and what people should expect from Aperture now, and in future versions. If Aperture is the primary place for image adjustment, then its obvious that there are some very significant additions that need to take place to Aperture, and likewise, the issue of putting images on the filesystem becomes much less important. However, if Aperture is a workflow-easer, then such image adjustment improvements are minimally important if at all, and filesystem / Photoshop / PSD file integration becomes paramount.
I know what Aperture does, what features it provides, etc. But I can't help but realize that its not really that clear (or I just don't understand yet) what the full scope of Aperture now and in the future is intended to be, and the forum topics are pretty decent documentation of the fact that the user base at this point is fairly cloudy on that too.
I can't help thinking that in the midst of the Apple pro line of tools, where we have tools that edit: video, audio, DVD creation, text effects, and now digital photography workflow, that there's one glaring hole: static image editing, i.e. a direct Photoshop competitor. I went through the Aperture video demos before Aperture shipped, and watched these photo pros talk incessantly about how "now there's an app that addresses how I work -- Aperture". That's great, but Apple has to know the role that Photoshop plays in present photography workflow -- for those pros too. So I'm sitting here thinking to myself, why would Apple roll out such a product with some clear workflow hurdles to common Photoshop usage.
Ok, here's the punchline: does anyone else here have a sneaking suspicion that Apple is not to far off from releasing their own image editing application that's a direct Photoshop competitor? I mean come on, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Sountrack, and by extension of the CEO to Pixar, Renderman. How can you not have a static image adjustment application entering the scene at some point?
I'm curious what others think. I'm just trying to make sense of how to fit the neat stuff I see in Aperture into a workflow that doesn't play very nicely with Aperture at some points (because I'm using Photoshop).
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

So Apple adds curves adjustments,
we'll need noise reduction, greater sharpening
capability, etc., etc., and then when we have all
those features, surely we'll need masking and select
capability to perform those adjustments selectively,
etc. Where does it end?
Actually that could be a good cut-off point - add a few more/better 'global' adjustments but leave all mask, selection and layer based tasks to external editors. Personally, I used to swear by curves, but haven't really touched them in PS for a year since shooting more RAW and learning how to use the shadow/highlight adjustment properly. Sometimes for overall colour for JPEGs, but that bit can be done just as well in levels.
My workflow isn't particularly typical, but here goes.
Type of photography - stitched panoramas as a professional, plus general snapshots/nature/landscape as hobby. Single user with no network storage.
Currently I use a very organised folder structure in the Finder, along with aliases in DragThing docks for easy access to final stitched files, all with their own unique ID. RAW conversions are done in ACR/PSCS2, or Bibble if I'm in a hurry on the laptop. About 40% of the panos are shot in RAW, 40% are bracketed JPEG and the remaining 20% are 'single' JPEG. The panoramas go through quite a lot of post-processing in PS using a whole series of actions and AppleScripts.
I'm expecting my workflow to look something like this:
1) Download directly into Aperture, possibly with added help from Automator/Applescript when it comes to proper date-based names.
2) Divide download into a new album for each panorama.
2a) If it is a people pano there will be quite a lot of duplicate shots for each panohead position - make a stack for each position and choose picks - this bit will speed things up enormously by itself. Reorder stacks to fit correct order of images going around the scene.
3) Export to TIFF (sometimes JPEG) and stitch using PTMac (sometimes Realviz Stitcher). Oh, and any people who think Aperture is limited, buggy and bad value should go and look at Stitcher - it costs the same, has a far more limited feature set, is on version 5 and by comparison makes Aperture look bug-free.
4) Bring stitched panorama into Photoshop to adjust seams through layers if needed, flatten, final tone adjustments (usually using shadow/highlight), possibly some colour tweaks, sharpen. For bracketed shots I will blend together the three exposures at this point using a custom action - this kind of thing is unlikely ever to make it to Aperture.
5) Bring final print-ready file into Aperture for cataloguing/backup.
5a) If file is too big for Aperture, make a smaller version for cataloguing and store original file in Finder. This gives me a good file for 90% of purposes, with the huge file available with a bit more work.
Too big? I've found that Aperture gets sluggish with files over 18-20,000 pixels wide, and chokes totally somewhere between 25,000 and 32,000 pixels wide - 'image format unsupported'.
To summarise - organise and convert in Aperture, stitch in specialist software, do PS-specific stuff then bring final image back in to join the source images.
Ian

Best workflow for editing Logic Pro 8 regions/tracks in Soundtrack Pro?

I've searched for a solution for the below question in several forums and to no avail. Thanks in advance for any help!
What is the easiest workflow for editing Logic Pro 8 audio files with Soundtrack Pro 2? And I'm thinking of a process very similar to the Final Cut Pro timeline audio-to- Soundtrack Pro Audio File project workflow.
I'd imagine that a good amount of the time, I'd be editing regions rather than full audio files -- as in, once in a while, while mixing sessions that another engineer has tracked, I'll hear clicks and pops from pre-amps clipping; or I'll hear an air conditioner blower running or something.
Basically, I occasionally hear noise in the arrange window while mixing that I'd like to edit out with Soundtrack Pro, and I need to know the easiest way to send that audio clip to Soundtrack Pro and then back to Final Cut Pro.

Connecting your FS Mobile to powered speakers will not increase latency. Latency is simply the fixed amount of time it takes for your computer to process sounds. Once the sound is processed and available at the outputs of the FS Mobile, it can go anywhere; to a PA mixer, a separate monitor mixer, headphones, etc. One thing you will want to consider when playing live is to have a personal monitor very close to you and pretty loud. The reason being is that the physical distance between you and the main PA speakers will itself induce a type of latency since sound travels at about 1126 ft/sec or 1000 msec of delay for every 1126 feet. Adding this delay to your latency could make holding a groove or pitch for that matter nearly impossible. The delays add up pretty quickly. For example, if your speakers are say 50 feet away from you, you would likely have around 20 msec of delay right there. Add this to your system latency of 20 msec and your up to 40 msec which is like trying to play a rubber guitar underwater. Even if your PA speakers are closer, the delays add up quickly. So having that nice loud monitor right up next to you will insure that you only have to get the feel of your system latency.

Best Monitor for Image Editing?

Hi people!
Since Apple is making super-bright-extra-saturated monitors since the LED technology, I'm wondering which monitor would be good for image editing. I noticed that the LED one has too much contrast and the images looks like "already edited" in these monitors, but they're not. Is there a way to change that instead of buying a new monitor, for example? Like using a monitor calibrator, but certainly, I have found that Spyder Software to do so (or the one which comes with the Macintosh) has complicated user interface.
Any suggestion?
Thanks,
Ø3

Gemmac:
Welcome to the Apple Discussions. My preference has to be Adobe Photoshop Elements 4.0 (Mac). It's the little brother of the standard of the industry in image editing, Photoshop. Here's an example of some of it's advanced editing capabilities.
Do you Twango?
G5 Dual Core 2GHz, 2G RAM, 250G HD; G4 Dual 1Ghz, 1.5G RAM, 80G HD, Mac OS X (10.4.7) 22 LCD Display, 200G & 160G FW HDs, Canon S400, i850 & LIDE 50, Epson R200

When shooting source images for "HDR Pro", is it better to using 16 bit TIFF rather than 8 bit JPEG?

When shooting source images for "HDR Pro", is it better to using 16bit TIFF rather than 8 bit JPEG?

Yes, you will bracket the exposure.
Take as many shots as you need. Take a normal shot, underexpose twice or even three times and then overexpose twice or three times.
That's how the camera will register all teh details in the image - in the highlights, in the shadows and in the midtones. When you bracket, remember to change shutter speed (if you shoot manual, that's what I do), not the aperture because you will end up with different depth of field.

New to apple: what to use for image editing?

I am new to apple and I just bought an ibook g4 with ilife05 on it, and i would lkike to know what software that is presumable already installed on this ibook in which to do image editing. I dont want photo management (iphoto), but image modification.
on a pc this would be such programs as ms paint.
thanks
mike

The last big improvement to iPhoto was to give it beefier editing capabilities. If you are running 10.3/iPhoto5, click on the button in the lower panel that looks like ">>" This brings up adjustment featues. Also, if you have Appleworks, there is a paint program in there. If you have 10.4/iPhoto6, again adjustment buttons are at the bottom of the screen, with better labeling.
The next step up is Photoshop Elements. You might be able to find PSE3.0 for cheap, as intel Mac people are waiting for the universal build of this softo.

The End Of The Road For FCE And Other DV Editing Programs?

I am just curious about how long the average amateur will be able to continue using FCE etc. The reason for my pessimism?
Mini- DV cameras do seem to be on their way out.
A popular UK "catalogue" chain-store called Argos is currently selling around 30 camcorders. Only 5 of them are mini-DV !
The same trend is also obvious in the "serious" camera shops. DVD and HDD sales are rocketing amongst the general public who have little or no desire to edit.
The day will come - probably extremely soon - when no amateur DV cameras are made, and any professional ones will cost the earth, along with their tapes.
OK, we will still be able to use our existing equipment until it goes to that happy-camcorder-hunting-ground in the sky, but tapes will probably be sold at a premium.
If this scenario were ten or twenty years away, I wouldn't mind, but I fear it will be the case by the end of this decade.
Our only hope is that DVD, HDD and Flash Memory camcorders have been improved so that their video can be edited as easily and to as high a standard as DV can today.
At present I can't see any sign of this happening.
Have a nice day!
Ian.

One of the major issues with HDD and card based formats is workflow. A good way has to be found to archive the material you shoot. You're shooting a once a lifetime event if you're an amateur, or you're shooting something professionally that has perhaps been staged at great expense. Your card is full or your drive is filling up. You have to offload this material into a secure format which can be stored and from which it can be retrieved. Professionally this means you have to do it on location . The card media doesn't hold very much; cameras with drives built-in are not really practical as you don't want to be in a situation where you have to take the camera out of service, stop shooting while the material is downloaded. This also means the material has to be backed up onto a hard drive and stored on the hard drive. Hard drives have a high propensity for failure over time. For production media and important personal media that means you're going to have to have archival redundancy. You can burn your media to disk or DAT tape or put it on multiple drives. All of this takes time and expense. The workflow issues for memory-based formats still need to be resolved, and the camera manufacturers, just have they have done nothing to facilitate post production with their choices of compression formats, have done nothing to create viable workflows for non-tape based system.
Most of my professional work is done in FCP. We shoot in HDV, recording on tape and simul-recording onto a DTE. The DTE material, QuickTime clips, is dumped to a separate hard drive for editing, and the second drive is shelved as it fills and projects are completed. The tape is kept as a redundant second source. I've rarely had to access the tape. Only when there has been an operator error. The problem with card-based and HDD based formats is that for safety's sake a second archive, the redundant backup, needs to be created before the camera card can be erased and put back in service. That either needs having a lot of camera cards available (which are still really expensive), or having someone on location with an edit system processing and backing up your material to re-cycle the cards.

Multipage forms- best workflow for future editing

I'm struggling with understanding the proper workflow for creating and editing multipage forms. I need to create a medical history form (PDF) where patients can enter their medical history and patient info.
This form is usually 6+ pages. Each page has a header (logo and office address) and a footer (page number).
The problem I'm running into is when we need to make a change like add a question or change the wording of a question. Is there a way we can edit the form (either in Word or an Adobe product) and not have to recreate the form in Acrobat Pro?
I've hired contract workers from Odesk and each one I've hiried claims they can edit the questions after the form is created. But each time this happens, the form looks worse after each edit. I'm pretty sure this is the problem because they are editing the text in Acrobat Pro, which has very limited text editing capabilites.
I'm wasting so much time going back and forth with contractors explaining to them that the text format looks like crap.
I'm very capable of designing and editing these forms myself, but I just don't have the time. So I'm contracting this work out.
I'd greatly appreciate any advice on the best workflow for PDF forms.
Thanks!

Yes, there is a way. You need to edit the original file format (Word, in
this case), and then create a new PDF.
You then open the old version (that has the form fields in it), and use the
Replace Pages command to replace the old pages with the ones from the new
file. This will maintain the form fields in place, although you might need
to rename them and align them with the new page contents.
This is a much better approach than trying to edit the PDF directly
(although this option has been greatly improved in Acrobat XI).

Best h264 workflow for editing multicam 1080p 24fps

I have had reasonable success in editing footage from my Canon 5D mkii in CS5 multicam on my quad-core win 7 machine. I'm finding though that the exported encoded footage (uncompressed AVI) seems to have lost some of its colour rendition (I haven't ventured into colour grading as yet). Is there a preferred workflow for lossless editing of h264 footage or should I convert it before importing into CS5? Any suggestions?

It sounds like your offline-online protocol is not what it should be.
Make dv versions of your media. Do not change the names of the clips. Be sure you are carrying over the proper timecode to the dv versions.
Do your edit with the dv versions.
Highlight the converted DV clips in the browser and make off line. Do not make the clips in the sequence offline.
Then reconnect the clips, but point instead at the HD clips. Everything should repopulate-- sequences, etc.
Does this not work?

Workflow for editing multiple size projects

Hi,
I work for a digital design agency and we often produce edits that are for multiple sized placements on websites. For example we may have one for an MPU (300x250), another for a leaderboard (728x90) and so on.
The problem I've found, and there doesn't seem to be a good solution for, is that Premiere Pro doesn't allow a project setting to be changed after the fact.
The only solution I've found is creating a new project at the required size, importing the sequence in and rendering from that, and I was wondering if there's a better workflow?
Somebody suggested using AE to do everything, but it seems to make more sense to me to use the editing app to do the editing. One problem with the workaround is that the sequence just comes in as a single block apparently, it doesn't keep the edits separate. And sometimes I might want to tweak the edit for different placements.
It all seems a bit convoluted at the moment, and I'm just trying to figure out a streamlined workflow for producing edits to multiple sizes.
Thanks,
Steve

Hi,
it has to go to quicktime I'm afraid - I've questioned this myself, but basically it goes to another authoring company who encode to flash, host the site etc.
Normally I do it as uncompressed or animation at highest quality.
Yeah, the encoding doesn't take long - just trying to feel around the best way to do this - trying to get something that's composed for one aspect ratio to work in a completely different one is more of a bottleneck than the actual encoding.
I may be mistaken, but I'm sure older versions of Premiere allowed the project settings to be changed at any point.
Thanks,
Steve

Simple Image Editing for Mac

Hey,
under Windows I used Ulead Photo Impact for simple image editing. Is there something comparable for OS X?
Thanks

GraphicConverter:
http://lemkesoft.de/
It does cost about $30 but most features are enabled in trial mode. It is very capable of drawing. You'll find it so useful you'll want to pay for it!

Free Image Editing software other than AW??

Hi
I've got an Intel MacMini and AppleWorks is simply not working well at all. I can't transform images in paint. I tried the "clicking off" trick from the document in the knowledge base -- that gets the boxes up but I still cant resize.
From reading this forum it seems there are no fixes for this problem.
Was hoping someone could suggest some free software I could download to edit images. Something like Photoshop, but maybe with a few less bells.
Thanks for the help

Take a look in Made4Mac. Click the Apple tab above, then the Made4Mac link in the row below the tabs.
In the Software list, click Design & Print.
Select the Image editing radio button, and set the License type to Freeware.
You'll get a list of half a dozen or more, most of them Universal binary.
This one looks promising:
GIMPShop is a free Open Source image editor that is similar to the popular Adobe Photoshop. Specifically GIMPShop is a version of the GIMP that has been edited to be more user-friendly for Photoshop users.
There's a link to the GIMPShop site in its Made$Mac entry.
Regards,
Barry

Best workflow for round trip editing?

I understand that iPhoto does not support (yet) round trip editing, i.e. a RAW file can be sent from within iPhoto to an external editor but the resulting edited file cannot be saved back directly into iPhoto but has to be temporarily stored somewhere (i.e. desktop) and reimported into iPhoto using the Import function.
However,this screws up my "roll" filing structure, because the imported file is now part of a new roll and cannot be moved back to its original one.
Sure, I could process my photos before importing but this only postpones the problem. Indeed, next year, there will be an other iteration of Nikon Capture with new features and I will want to reprocess some old files to get better results ... and they will have to be reimported into iPhoto!
Has anyone come up with a suitable workaround that allows an imported file to be part of an existing roll or a solution to merge 2 rolls?
Thanks
Michel

Solved!
It's again RTFM ("Read The F*ng Manual").
Workflow would be as follows:
1. Edit RAW photo from roll, say "Xmas '05", with external editor.
2. Save modified photo as jpg version (so that the modifications are visible in iPhoto) to desktop.
3. Import into iPhoto (this creates a new roll, say "Roll 112", number is automatically assigned by iPhoto)
4. Select all photos from "Xmas '05" and "Roll 112" in the iPhoto library
5. Select Create New Roll from the File menu (all photos are now combined in a single roll, say "Roll 113" with today's date)
6. Rename Roll 113 into Xmas '05 and change the date to keep the chronological sequence
Voila! Roll "Xmas '05" has been updated (just tried it. It works).
I should have completely read the manual before posting.

Workflow for HDR or other multi-image editing in PS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for