Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters

I have 1080i HDV footage that I'm using as the basis of an SD project. To start I used
the AME CS4 to convert all the HDV clips to avi. I'm doing all my editing with
the avi clips. No issues so far with that part of the process.
As the project progressed I got intolerant of the noise in the footage (from the original HDV) and decided
to use the Neat Video plug-in. It also works well except it takes a huge amount of
time to create previews and render. So far, the effect is being applied to the converted
SD clips.
What I'd like to do is go back and convert the HDV clips to SD again, only this time
with the plug-in effect applied. That way I can just do a "replace footage" in the
project and get the noise-reduced versions of the avi files and avoid any further
mega-processing incured by the filter.
What I want is a "batch convert with effect applied" workflow.
Possible? Options?
Thanks.

Sorry, I'm not familiar with the Neat filters, so I can't answer that. But on your other remark about converting at the start or the end, in my experience I prefer, keeping Graig's comments in mind, to do the conversion at the end.
My usual workflow from HDV material is edit and only when finished, encoding to I-Frame MPEG2 @ 100+ Mbps with 1920 x 1080 resolution and with 422 profile, maximum render quality and maximum pixel depth, then encoding with HC to MPEG2-DVD and then adding the AC3 track. My experience is that HC takes way more time than AME, which does the job at least twice as fast as real-time. So encoding with AME takes less than 30 minutes for a one hour timeline. That does not bother me very much.

Similar Messages

RED Workflow questions with Mac Pro (including third party plugins)

Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
Editing all footage off 96TB Raid 6 mini-sas server (getting about 1100mbs read/write rate according to AJA system test) which is faster than any Thunderbolt/TB2 drive array I have.
Media I work with is footage from the RED Epic (normally 5K) as well as DSLR footage from the 5d.
Software:
-PrPro CC 2014 (8.1)
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
My question(s) pertains to RED post-pro workflow in combination with third party plug-ins and the different approaches to make it more efficient.
Right now, majority of the clients need a 1080p HD master, and they are generally anywhere from 2-8 minutes (usually). So my sequence settings are as follows:
Video:
Editing Mode: RED Cinema
Size: 1920 x 1080
Audio: 48Hz
Video Previews
Preview File Format: I-Frame Only MPEG
Codec: MPEG I-Frame
1920x1080
Maximum Bit Depth unchecked
Maximum Render Quality unchecked
Composite in Linear Color checked
Export Settings
H.264
1920x1080
VBR 1 pass
Target Bitrate 12mbs
Max bitrate 12mbs
Maximum render quality/depth/previews unchecked
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
Would using offline editing help at all?
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
Is there anyway to improve export settings when using an array of filters?
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?

Hi This Is Ironclad,
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
The biggest issue is that most people have is that updating OS X causes certain folders to be set to Read Only. See this blog post: Premiere Pro CC, CC 2014, or 2014.1 freezing on startup or crashing while working (Mac OS X 10.9, and later).
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
It's a nice base system. How about an additional speedy disk for media cache files. You also did not mention which version of OS X you are running.
thisisironclad wrote:
Software:
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
The Red Giant website does not indicate that this software is yet updated to work with Premiere Pro CC 2014.1 (8.1). Proceed with caution here.
thisisironclad wrote:
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
I would not use this plug-in until you get the OK from the manufacturer.
thisisironclad wrote:
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
Again, I suspect your plug-in.
Keep in mind that exports are largely CPU based but you can make sure that GPU acceleration is enabled for AME at the bottom of the Queue panel.
thisisironclad wrote:
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
It's OK.
thisisironclad wrote:
Would using offline editing help at all?
No need when you should be able to edit natively. Relinking might also be an issue.
thisisironclad wrote:
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
That's one way you can do it with the benefit of being more organized.
thisisironclad wrote:
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
I do. Of course, that's a preference.
thisisironclad wrote:
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Try the following:
Sign out from Creative Cloud, restart Premiere Pro, then sign in
Update any GPU drivers
Trash preferences
Ensure Adobe preference files are set to read/write(Hopefully you checked this out already)
Delete media cache
Remove plug-ins
If you have AMD GPUs, make sure CUDA is not installed
Repair permissions
Disconnect any third party hardware
If you have a CUDA GPU, ensure that the Mercury Playback Engine is set to CUDA, not OpenCLYou have AMD GPUs.
Disable App Nap
Reboot
thisisironclad wrote:
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?
I really shouldn't answer that question.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

Yet Another Workflow Question

Ok I too, like many others here, am new to the Mac (thanks to Apple's I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ads that my wife couldn't get enough of). I have done some searching around and I see that there are quite a few iMovie workflow questions out there. I have not quite found what I am looking for however, so I thought I would make my first post tonight. So here it goes...
I have 3 different ways I capture video:
1. Canon Vixia HF10 (HD)
2. Canon Powershot (SD)
3. Blackberry Storm (SD...I know it isn't a good phone)
I record everything to SD cards. I am wanting to know the best way to store my raw video for editing at any time. Do I copy the AVCHD file structure (for the Vixia) and .avi files (for the other non HD) to my hdd, or do I just import into iMovie '09 and let it reside there, or both? I noticed that iMovie had an archival option (which appears to just copy the AVCHD structure to my hdd), which is why I ask. I want to always keep my raw video in case I decide to go back later and create a new video.
After I have the raw video archived, I would like to know the best way to use iMovie. Depending on where I end up storing the raw video, should I keep the imported video in iMovie once I am finished with a project, and then reimport it at a later date if need be? Or, do I leave it in iMovie as events? I guess this all rely depends on the first question...where do I store the raw video for archival purposes...
Finally, when exporting my iMovie project, should I store that in more of a, pardon the Windows reference, "My Videos" folder with a original size, web optimized size, and ipod optimized size? Thus, keeping the actual exported version of the project separate from the raw video?
I hope I have asked the right questions here. I appreciate any and all help I can get!
Ron

Welcome Ron to the  iMovie boards..
very interesting : 'switchers' care sooo much for 'storage strategies' ..
the by Apple intended workflow/concept for iApps is:
any 'photocam' related material (still or movin') comes-in via iPhoto, and is stored in an iP Library (=you can tell iP to create 2/many Libs, if you prefer to organize manually....)
any 'camcorder' related material HAS to be imported by iM - why? because, iM has some internal routines to make such material editable (codecs, thumnails, stuff....). the same material as 'file by Finder' does not import.. in most cases!
storage..
iP stores in its Library (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
iM stores in Events (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
to make Projects/Albums accessible to any iApp, you should keep your fingers off that structure.
Erasing Events 'kills' projects.
allthough, once 'shared to media browser' there's a 'copy' of your project WITHIN the project file. (= the socalled Media Browser is no single Folder somewhere hidden in the system)
there's this Spacesaver feature to erase any Event content which is not in use in any project to keep Events lean.
use the Archive feature from within iM to keep things easy and convenient.. if you miss a single file of the SDcard file-structure, the whole card's content is kaputt ..
summary:
• use iApps as intended.
• use iP for cameras, it stores 'raws' (the avi too)
• use iM for camcorders, use Archive to store raws..
• purchase a dozend of HDDs to store your material..

Sharpening export workflow question

I have a sharpening workflow question. Say I have pictures from a portrait session I just finished. I have to send 10 pictures the client ordered to a print lab and I also will make some small facebook sized pictures and upload them to my business facebook page. The level of sharpening needed for large prints (I upload to print lab as RGB JPEGS) and sharpening needed for the very small sRGB facebook-sized pictures is different. In Lightroom I have the option to set the sharpening on export and have a bunch of presets that alter the export size, color space, sharpening, etc(WHCC print lab, facebook, Client CD, etc). I don't see how to do that in Aperture. I see they have the option if you have a printer, but not on normal export.
For those of you that have to export batches of pictures in multiple different sizes (with different levels of sharpening), what is your workflow? I could use some photoshop droplets/actions after Aperture export but I was hoping there was a way to avoid the extra step. Am I overlooking an export feature? The BorderFX plug-in looks like the only other option.
Thank you in advance for time and help!
Scott

Frank Scallo Jr wrote:
The thing is guys - Once a file is sized down it WILL lose sharpening - what we are doing is sharpening the full size RAW file or rather what the full size output would be like. Once we export a version sized down it will lose some of the 'bite'. LR has sharpening options on 'output' which is not only smart but a necessity. Adobe realizes that output for screen needs another sharpen. Apple either doesn't know or didn't bother. It makes ANY output for screen less than best.
Bear in mind that there seem to be two separate issues going on here - sharpening adjustments not being applied on export, and resizing.
As far as resizing is concerned, Aperture appears to use something roughly equivalent to Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper setting. Because of this I've never had much problem with Aperture's exports when used for the web, but obviously everyone's taste for sharpening differs which is why an option for output sharpening would be good.
Sharpening adjustments not being applied on export is a separate issue and should be reported via the feedback form ASAP by everyone who is experiencing the bug.
Now printing is another animal - I wouldn't print directly from RAW in aperture either if I'm printing small. Again, LR beats Aperture here as well since they include output sharpening for print.
Aperture has had output sharpening for printing since 2.0 came out (unless it in was 1.5). In A3 you need to turn on 'More Options' and scroll down, I can't remember where it is in A2. I don't know how effective it is as I print via a lab, but it's there and it's been there for a long time...
Ian

FCP - Color Workflow Question

I have DVCPRO HD sequences in FCP that I have applied Smoothcam filter to in many instances (one 10 minute sequence probably has Smoothcam applied to at least 15 of the clips). With over 4 hours of footage and Smoothcam applied often it would seem very labor intensive to have to create individual Quicktime movies for each of the clips where Smoothcam is applied and then drop those into the FCP timeline before sending to Color (especially as I will likely have to tweak the Color settings multiple times before getting the perfect outcome).
My sense is that I may be able to minimize the workload by:
1) creating one Quicktime movie of say an entire sequence with multiple instances of the Smoothcam fliter applied (instead of creating individual Quicktime movies of each clip where Smoothcam is applied)
2) sending that Quicktime movie to Color for grading
My question under the scenario directly above is how do you then split the Quicktime movie into the individual clips in Color so that each clip can be graded individually?
The only other alternative I can see is to:
1) remove all of the Smoothcam filters (and sharpening filters) in the FCP timeline
2) send sequence to Color for grading
3) roundtrip to FCP
4) apply Smoothcam filter (and sharpening filters) to all of the individual clips again after color grading is totally complete
I am a little daunted by the thought of this with over 4 hours of DVCPRO HD footage. Your suggestions regarding the best and most efficient workflow would be greatly appreciated.

Not quite six of one and half a case of the other, but you are in for some effort either way. Thomas Edison had an observation about "opportunity" arriving dressed in coveralls, but most people take a pass on it because it looks like "too much work".
If you elect the "bake out one big QT file" workflow, there is some efficiency to bringing the new QT onto a copy of the originating timeline and using that as a cutting guide to "razor in" the event boundaries, and then send that to COLOR. It will save a significant amount of re-rendering time.
If you remove the Smoothcam and other filters and send the raw source media to COLOR, that would be a normal workflow. I'd imagine there will be a significant amount of "attribute" copying after the fact, and of course all the smoothcams will have to go through "re-analysis". (I'd send a duplicate sequence, so the original filtered sequence can act as a source.)
The smoothcam filter will probably yield a different rendition on the COLOR-graded media, since the Boolean re-scaling (to keep the image within the active picture area) may not exhibit the same behaviour -- since you will only be dealing with the selected footage, rather than the entire source clip.
Sending the clips with an attached Smoothcam filter would probably result in massive render times, since FCP requires the entire intact source media to compute the stabilizing script, similar to sending a clip with a speed adjustment.
jPo

Questions on best filters for vocal (podcast) processing

Hi All,
I'm a very recent convert to the Mac and Garageband world-- I've been a Windows-only user up to this point, and have a TON of experience with audio editing in Sony Vegas.
Couple of questions on Garageband:
Do the audio effect filters apply during recording, or only when you play the raw recorded track (I have a USB mic recording directly to Garageband)?
Do the audio effect filters apply sequentially from top to bottom?
What filters and settings would you recommend I choose to best compress and normalize a male voice for spoken word podcasting?
Thanks!
Jeff

KBjeff wrote:
Do the audio effect filters apply during recording,
no
KBjeff wrote:
or only when you play the raw recorded track (I have a USB mic recording directly to Garageband)?
yes:
http://www.bulletsandbones.com/GB/GBFAQ.html#nondestructive
(Let the page FULLY load. The link to your answer is at the top of your screen)
KBjeff wrote:
Do the audio effect filters apply sequentially from top to bottom?
yes.
you can rearrange them by dragging the effect by the 3 verticle dots on the left of the effect slot
KBjeff wrote:
What filters and settings would you recommend I choose to best compress and normalize a male voice for spoken word podcasting?
there really isn't such a thing, or else there wouldn't be so many parameters to set.
you need to experiment to find what works best with a particular voice/room/mic/etc. in fact change any of those things and you'll likely want to tweak the settings again

OWB workflow question

I'm an OWB-newbie (using PARIS) and have a question about OWB workflows.
I want to create several mapping workflows.
All the mapping workflows should send a mail with the outcome of the workflows (success, error, warning) to an administrator.
I don't want to always code the same mail activity with the same parameter values.
So my idea is to write one subprocess which handles the mail-routine with some input parameters (calling workflow-name, process state (success, warning, error)).
In the subprocess I want to test the input parameter "process-state". If the value is 0 (success) then a mail with the workflow name as subject should be generated incuding an static text e.g. "mapping successful". If the value is 1 then "mapping warning" and so on.
What OWB activity has to be choosen for testing the input parameter "process-state" like an if-then-else construct or a case-construct?
How can the value of the input parameter "workflow-name" be included in the mail-body?
Regards
Martin

To my experience, using the OWF for these things is not very practical. I would suggest that you would make your own PL/SQL procedude that does this, and then call that procedure from within the actual mapping (post-mapping), using the values you have there.
This might not be what you want, however. I simply find the email capabilities of OWF too limited for actual work.

Adobe Camera Raw workflow question #2901

Now that I have my new digital camera-dedicated rig up and running I have been using ACR and CS2 to process my backlog of Canon 30D CR2 files. I am trying to get them ready for posting on the internet. Currently I am using ACR only to tweak Exposure and White Balance, then I move the file in 16 bits/AdobeRGB to CS2 where I do noise reduction, levels, curves adjustment, saturation then resize, sharpening then convert to an 8 bit, sRGB Jpg.
I have adopted this workflow because it was similar to the one I used when my old creakin' PC required me to use DPP to do my RAW conversion (and I subsequently did PP in CS with a 16 bit TIFF)
But I notice ACR has many choices and options such as contrast, shadows, saturation, sharpness, noise reduction controls that one can perform prior to RAW conversion. I have read in the past theoretical comments that adjustments are best made to a file during RAW conversion rather than while as a jpg. Does the same apply to a 16 BiT TIFF? In the workflow above, am I working on a TIFF?
I am wondering if I am better off to make all of the adjustments in ACR window instead of the more lengthy process in CS2. Are there any advantages to doing these adjustments prior to RAW conversion? Or is it better to do PP on 16 bit files using layers?
What are the relative merits of processing the file in either ACR window or as an 16 bit file in CS2?
If it matters, I work on a PC and prefer to PP each file separately rather than in batches. But I DO use batch runs in CS2 to save time using Actions with around 10 file batches to do noise reduction and resize/convert to sRGB/save as.
As always, thanks for the time you take to help me out!!

>"What does Pixelgenius PhotoKit Sharpener do that I can't do, perhaps with more trouble, by applying what I've read in his book? And would I have a problem trying to use it with CS3? "
I have a few observations and perhaps Jeff can comment. With images taken with a digital camera at high ISO, noise reduction may be necessary in the capture phase of sharpening. PhotoKit offers the sharpen and smooth option for this purpose. One can exert some control over the smoothing process by changing the opacity of the smoothing layer and the blend if sliders.
In his sharpening book Bruce uses Photoshop's reduce noise and despeckle filters to reduce noise (sometimes using the despeckle filter multiple times), but I don't know what filter is used in the PhotoKit smoothing operation or what parameters are used for the reduce noise filter if it is used.
If you use Bruce's book and the "roll your own" approach, you have more control over the noise reduction process and also the possibility of using a third party NR product such as the Noise Ninja plugin. Furthermore, just as an edge mask is used to restrict the sharpening to the edges, a surface mask may be used with NR to keep the smoothing away from the edges. The surface mask may be derived by inverting the edge mask used for sharpening, but Bruce says that some tweaking may give improved results.
An alternative would be to use the third party NR prior to using PK sharpener. However, you would still need to make a surface mask for optimum results, but I doubt that many users take the trouble of doing this.
In my own work with the Nikon D200 (which has rather high noise at high ISO), I find that I often get unacceptable noise and artifacts with PK Sharpener when used with high ISO images.
Also, many landscape photographers mask off areas of clear blue sky and foliage that do not need sharpening, thereby avoiding accentuation of noise secondary to sharpening in these areas.
>Bruce gave you the recipies...he didn't give you the exact numbers to use. So, you'll have to do what he and I did...trial and error, to arrive at optimum numbers...
For output sharpening, the PK defaults seem to work quite well and the trial and effort of rolling your own is usually not worthwhile, IMHO.

Question about metadata filtering and document sets

Hello,
I have a question about the metadata filtering when using document sets.
When i use the metadata filter for example for "Installatie: P00001" it shows.
But i wan't to show only the document set and not all the documents. Is this possible OOTB?

Hi striker,
You can add the "Content Type" in Hierarchy Fields for your list, then click the "Document Set" to filter the document set type item, then you can input the "P00001" in Installatle key filter, click apply, then it should show only document set
items with field value P00001.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-001/sharepoint-help/set-up-metadata-navigation-for-a-list-or-library-HA102832523.aspx
Thanks
Daniel Yang
TechNet Community Support

Workflow Questions - How to execute the steps in a workflow automatically?

I am using MDM 5.5 SP6.
My Question is how to execute the steps in the workflow automatically. That means NO user interaction.
I have a simple workflow, Start- Process -- Syndicate - Stop.
When a new record added /updated/inserted this workflow will start automatically. The workflow inbox, the workflow status is u2018Receivedu2019 Step is u2018Processu2019. Now I have to right click on the record then u2018Next Stepu2019 then click on u2018Syndicateu2019 then workflow completes automatically.
How to execute the Syndication step automatically?. I donu2019t want to have any user interaction to syndicate these records.
Is this possible?
The reason for this is I want to do some field validation and based on the field validation some assignments then then I want to syndicate these records without user interaction..

Hi,
If you want to do some validations and then based on result assignments on some of the fields before syndicating, then you have to use workflow. Only syndication server will not fulfill this requirement.
you may try by making validation's automatic property as "Error". This way it will not allow to add any record not fulfilling validation. You can also try using calculated fields instead of assignment.
I am not sure if you can make your workflow fully automatic, because atleast one process step is must for any workflow, and process step means user action.
Regards,
Shiv

Workflow Question - Recently moved from PC to Mac

So, let me say that I'm a die hard Windows user -- in fact, in my "day job" I own a software development company and we're a "Microsoft shop". But, my side business is Photography and I'm making the switch to the Mac & Aperture. So, what I'm hoping to get from this post is a "yes, you can do that" or a "no, you can't do that" with Aperture. I'm happy to figure out how -- I just need someone to tell me if it's possible.
Here's my current workflow (coming from the PC - which required several applications to accomplish these steps):
1) Import images and rename "IMG_1234.CR2" to "1234.CR2" -- essentially dropping the "IMG_" from the name. Is this possible w/ Aperture?
2) Do all of the processing on the images (No questions here yet -- got that pretty well figured out in Aperture).
3) Create a black & white version of each image. Currently doing this by making a duplicate version in Aperture. But, I would like it to be named "1234-BW.CR2" rather than just have "version 2" tacked on the end. Is this possible in Aperture?
4) "Develop" the pics into jpg's. Again, the final image names should be "1234.jpg" and "1234-BW.jpg" respectively. Again, the question has to do with renaming the original & duplicate version of the image.
5) Choose all of the color versions of the photos and then selectively pick some of the b/w versions and export them to a "Web" size along w/ Thumbnail versions that will be posted on my web site. (Again, this should be easy if I can name things like I want them to be named in question 3 & 4.)
So, right now I'm the biggest thing that I'm having a problem with in naming the images -- how flexible is Aperture with this? I've tried to customize the naming but can't see to figure out how to simply remove the "IMG_" when importing and then how to tack on "-BW" when creating a duplicate version.
So far I really like Aperture -- it will ultimately save me from having to use 5 different applications on the PC and thus greatly improve the efficiency of my workflow. There are some things I've noticed that would be nice -- for example, on the PC I used a program called Bibble Pro to "develop" my Canon RAW files. Bibble is a little smoother (read faster) when making some adjustments. For example, when I'm in full screen mode and adjust the exposure, contrast or sharpening Aperture is not as smooth and "real-time" as Bibble. (And, the Mac I have is the top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I would assume that processor speed is not an issue.)
Anyway, if you have any insight into this post please let me know. Thanks in advance for any help you can provide... If you want to see my web site to understand what I'm doing the URL is http://www.level3photography.com/proofs.aspx
Thanks again!
TK Herman
[email protected]
iMac Mac OS X (10.4.8)

...the Mac I have is the
top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I
would assume that processor speed is not an issue...
Many folks from other disciplines think that applications should, well, just run on any computer. Not so with graphics apps. Photoshop, for instance, slows if not provided a second physical hard drive for scratch disk; Aperture craves GPU hardware; both gobble RAM; etc. Existing PSCS2 Photoshop performance improves up to 8 GB RAM, and we have not yet empirically determined the max amount of RAM Aperture will benefit from but it certainly is more than 2 GB.
iMacs are consumer machines, not pro graphics boxes, even though many folks successfully use them as such. And, "top of the line iMac made today" would include not the 7300 GT graphics but the 7600 GT graphics card and 3 GB of RAM rather than 2 GB.
All that said, your iMac should run Aperture well if you keep the box well maintained. Just don't be surprised if you do see some hardware imposed limitations.
-Allen Wicks

Lightroom to Photoshop CC noise/sharpening workflow question

Most of my images I process 100% in Lightroom. HOWEVER, I do at times need to send and image from Lightroom over to Photoshop CC to finish. Then when finished in CC the image goes back to Lightroom 5 as a TIFF. My question is should I apply sharpening and noise reduction in LR5 prior to sending the image to CC? Or should I apply sharpening and noise reduction after the end of the round trip to CC and back when the image arrives back in LR5 as a TIFF. And yes I have tried a number of different ways. I have tried sending the same image from LR5 with sharpening and NR applied as I would if I were finished. I have sent the same image over to CC with just the default sharpen and noise settings AND I have zeroed out the settings. I sent all images to CC as 16bit TIFF. I tried those various ways and have gotten mixed results. So I was looking for someone with expertise as to what the best procedure is to take when using this workflow.

Getting mixed results is normal as it depends on the initial image and what happens in PS. If you’re changing the overall toning or local contrast in PS then the noise will be different and probably needs more tweaking afterwards.
I would generally go part way toward my final Detail settings in LR, then do what I have to do in PS, then do more in either PS or LR as appropriate.
What I usually do in PS is use Smart Sharpen after I’ve resized down to whatever my final size is—usually my screen size for desktop wallpaper, because I like how PS SS works, an in that case I’ve probably done all my Detail work in LR and only do the resize and SS in PS.

A Print workflow question

I outsource my printing using the "Print to File" option in the Print Module. My workflow is straight forward: Import, Image Editing (using the Develop Module) and Printing (Print to File). I sharpen my images during the Image Editing phase using the Develop sharpening tool. I use a calibrated Monitor to makes sure that I am seeing a representative image on my screen. In the Print Module (under Print Job) I can select an option “Print Sharpening” (low, standard and high).
Question: Does does the “Print Sharpening” negate my sharpening settings in the Develop Module? If not, what is the difference between the two sharpening tools?

Panagon-1 wrote:
Question: Does does the “Print Sharpening” negate my sharpening settings in the Develop Module? If not, what is the difference between the two sharpening tools?
Print Sharpening (often also called output sharpening) work in combination with the capture sharpening you set in the Develop module. This constitutes 2/3 of the sharpening workflow concept by Bruce Fraser see: Out of Gamut: Thoughts on a Sharpening Workflow
The aim of the capture sharpening in the Develop module is to regain the loss of apparent sharpness cause by the optical system and the sensor. The goal is to have the image "look good" at 1:1. If properly accomplished, the Print Sharpening combines with the capture sharpening to sharpen for the final output–which really can't be judged visually...
So, make it look good in Develop then add the Print Sharpening on top.

IPhoto 6 workflow questions -- iPhoto & Elements

All -- just installed iLife 6, but have not used it yet. The combination of iWeb & .mac looks very promising for finally being able to easily share my photos with my family/friends. But I am still not clear on the best file workflow to be able to take advantage of all the iPhoto/iWeb/,mac functionality, and also the editing power of Adobe Elements (the editing software I am using). If you all could help me with this I would be so grateful.
I shoot JPEG.
I move a photo from iPhoto to Element to edit it.
If my goal is to move it back to iPhoto to share, how should I resize it? How should I optimize it for the best quality while viewing on a monitor, but with enough quality that if folks want to make a print, they can?
What format should I save it back to iPhoto in? JPEG? Or can iPhoto handle TIF or PSD and is that recommended?
What about a master, unedited image. Should I worry about that? And if so, where will that live?
If I plan on printing a photo, should I optimize the file for that purpose and print from Elements instead of bringing the file back into iPhoto?
As you can see from my questions, I am still unclear on the relationship of iPhoto and Elements (or any other editing software). I would be so grateful for any help you can give in this discussion, or other places you can point me to get this information.
Thanks everyone!
Greg

haha, the way I work is, if a program doesn't do what I want the way I want it, then I find a program that does. For many, just iPhoto will fit the bill.
This is what I do. I take a photo shoot. If it is important photos, I upload them to ClubPhoto so others can download and print them. Most often I do not print my 4x6 photos. I wait till there is a special at ClubPhoto for half price prints and order all my yearly prints at that time. I buy one photo album that fits 200 photos and I order 200 photos from my albums online to be printed. Year in photos are now done.
If someone comes over and says, hey, I love that photo, can you print it out for me? then I use my Printers software to print the 4x6 or 8x10.
I used .mac and now iWeb to keep family and friends informed of whats going on in Photos and videos. It's more or less just for fun.
When I said I have an iWeb site, I mean that I have used iWeb, a new application in the iLife suite to publish a web site with photos movie clips and a blog.
You do not have to do any resizing if you are going to use iWeb as the software does it for you behind the lines.
If you are resizing to upload anywhere else or for another purpose, it all depends on what size you need for your purpose. For album sites, 800x600 is a good size.
For emailing a photo, either do it right within iPhoto and you will get a choice on what size you want to send, or export to the desktop, at which time you can input the size you want to export the photo at.
I always keep full resolution photos in my library. If I want a smaller size, I always export the image at a smaller size and keep the full size in the library.

Workflow Question: Audio Documentaries

Hello there,
I am trying to figure out the most efficient workflow for 2 types of audio pieces that will end up in a podcast:
1) The first type is one long interview (an hr) that will be extensively edited (e.g., sentences and words rearranged; "ums" deleted, sentences shortened and tightened ) and inserted into a podcast with some narration and sound fx. I'm unsure if I should be marking (so I know what's where) and editing the interview in the waveform or multitrack. In the waveform, marking is easy; I can break the entire clip up into a series of chunks. But then what? Export them all as individual files? OR Export the entire file with the markers into multitrack? The problem with the first solution is that I then have a tons of files that are out of order. The problem with the latter is that any subsequent edits I make in the waveform puts the clips out of sync in the multitrack. Another option is to edit it all in the multitrack, but it seems that there's less ability to use features like zero-crossing and the markers apply to all tracks not individual ones. Suggestions?
2) The second type of piece is similar to the first, except it involves 10 or more different interviews that are going to be edited into one piece.
Any tips? Suggestions? Advice? Workflow resources?
Any and all input is really appreciated.
Best,
David

Steve's speech editing 101:
Long rambling interviews are a huge problem from this POV - if you did the interview yourself, you generally learn pretty rapidly that actually structuring the interview itself whilst recording it is a pretty good idea! So is the concept of getting the interviewee to include the question in the answer - this generally makes editing a whole lot simpler.
De-umming and -erring in waveform view is fine - you won't need to redo any of this, whatever you do next. So you can do this, and save the resulting file as a first pass (always keep the original though - you never know...). At this point, as you've realised, you have options. The only thing I can sensibly do is tell you what I do when presented with this sort of thing; it makes sense to me, and you may just about retain your sanity. And yes, the whole thing revolves around markers. The first thing you do is to identify individual chunks of interview, and mark each end of them. What you do then is turn these into a marker range, and most importantly give this a name that means something. There's more than one way to go about this - if it's really complicated then give the ranges numbers, and have a separate reference list. If you think you can put adequate information in the marker, then do this - but bear in mind that when it's all scrunched up, these aren't always so easy to read. The basic idea here is that, if you can manage it, these are like paragraphs - a short collection of related sentences, preferably based around one idea only. You don't want to keep them too long though - I tend to break longer collected sections into separate sub-numbered sequences.
The most important thing as far as marking is concerned though is to have a structure for it, especially if you have multiple speakers in different interviews. If you keep to a unified scheme, you should easily be able to identify the speaker and the particular point being made easily. And that means that you should be able to assemble a final piece without going completely mad...
Anyway, what you do then is batch process these marker ranges into separate files, using the marker name for the file name. And now, you can import the whole lot into multitrack view, and start to assemble your interview. At this point it should be fairly straightforward; you can reassemble the clips in any order you want relatively easily, and with a bit of luck, you won't have to do too much editing during assembly - although that option is still open to you.
So to sum it up, the key to this is organisation and structure. At first it won't seem like you're doing any 'editing' at all - except that really you are - you're doing the most important bit. This is a conceptual thing; editing isn't about cutting out the bad bits, it's about assembling the bits you want. And when you think about it like this, hopefully the foregoing will make some sense. Hopefully it will also be obvious that this scheme works for either single person or multiple person interviews.

Workflow question - HD/SD/Filters

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for