Confused re RAW workflow.

Southdowns · 22 Nov 2011

Hi, first post here! I bought a DSLR a couple of weeks ago, my first, and am loving it, but I'm a little confused re a suitable workflow for using RAW files.

I can really see the benefits of RAW, and am getting there with how to process them, but my issue is what to do with them once processed.

I have Aperture 3, a Flickr Pro account, and Pixelmator.

At the moment I import directly into Aperture, into a project called "RAWs". I then process the files, and export to my desktop as jpegs, from where I edit in Pixelmator if necessary (haven't needed to yet), then re-import into Aperture in a project called "jpegs". I then take those jpegs and put them in albums in Aperture, and upload them to Flickr in sets named after the albums, so family and friends can see them.

This all feels quite inefficient, with too many steps, and I wonder if I should just be keeping the RAW files and not bothering with jpegs? I guess I have to for file size reasons, and so others can use them if they download them from Flickr?

Or, given that these shots are just for my use, should I delete the RAW files after processing then exporting them? I'm guessing if I did that I'd one day find I needed the RAW for some reason or other!

Just after thoughts really. Maybe it's just a discipline I need to get used to!

Mark

Stratman · 22 Nov 2011

The RAW files are the equivalent of film negatives and you wouldn't throw those away, would you?

Your workflow is pretty normal, producing different sized and quality jpgs for different purposes is exactly what you should be doing.

Moos3h · 22 Nov 2011

I'd always use and keep RAW files until you're sure you won't need them.

What I'd recommend is downloading a trial of Photoshop Elements and/or Lightroom - you may find that alternative software (I have to confess to hating Aperture) makes things feel much simpler!

Southdowns · 22 Nov 2011

Thanks for the fast replies! Yes you're right Stratman re the RAW files; I guess I knew that, but I'm just not used to it!

Moos3h I don't mind Aperture, but then haven't tried anything else! To be honest I'd rather put the money towards a better lens at this stage, but I might give PSE/Lightroom trial a go.

Mark

Dexy101 · 22 Nov 2011

Ive just been out shooting for myself. Now im home, cf card in the reader, copy raw files to pc and back up hard drives. Import said photos to lightroom, edit if needed, upload to Photoshop, add a sig. Save and upload to the net. Thats what i do, i enjoy it so cant complain the time it takes.

One thing though "RAW" is not an abreviation so need to capitalise it

Ps, Lightroom 3, get a trial download.

Iris · 26 Nov 2011

I import, edit and export raw files straight to Flickr/email/Faceache straight from Aperture - I only save them to my desktop if I'm going to open them in another program - so that does save a lot of time

Southdowns · 28 Nov 2011

Thanks again.

Dexy101, the capitalisation came from seeing it that way in a magazine! Shows what I (and they) know!

OK, so I've now got trial versions of Lightroom and PS Elements, and can see why they're better options. However, I'm still confused, more about the workflow than actually using the software. That's mainly because both offer to organise pictures and I don't know which is best for it, neither does everything so I'm unsure which one to start in with a new file, and because passing pictures from one to the other doesn't seem that fluid (PS CS5, yes, but not Elements).

For example, lets say I've taken three bracketed shots, and want to merge them for good exposure. Do I merge them first in PSE, then send the result to LR for further developing (is that even possible?), or do I work on all 3 in LR and only then send them to PSE to merge? If I do the latter, aren't I losing quality in the process, and am I not possibly making the merge process less likely to work well?

What is the logical workflow using these two programmes?

paulcamcas · 28 Nov 2011

Just my tuppence-worth but there is very little that you cannot do within Aperture. Although I have PS5 alongside Aperture I very rarely need to use it. The only time I fire up PS5 nowadays is if I need to merge two images.

I import the raws to Aperture; do any batch processing I fancy; file the images in projects and folders; do any individual development; upload to flickr and Facebook - all from within Aperture. All the way through, the raw file is kept intact by Aperture so I can redevelop from scratch with ease at any time if I need to.

I've tried Lightroom and Capture One but prefer Aperture for no particular reason I can put my finger on.

For safety, I do also keep several backups of the raws outside of Aperture.

Iris · 28 Nov 2011

paulcamcas said:
Just my tuppence-worth but there is very little that you cannot do within Aperture. Although I have PS5 alongside Aperture I very rarely need to use it. The only time I fire up PS5 nowadays is if I need to merge two images.

I import the raws to Aperture; do any batch processing I fancy; file the images in projects and folders; do any individual development; upload to flickr and Facebook - all from within Aperture. All the way through, the raw file is kept intact by Aperture so I can redevelop from scratch with ease at any time if I need to.

I've tried Lightroom and Capture One but prefer Aperture for no particular reason I can put my finger on.

For safety, I do also keep several backups of the raws outside of Aperture.

(except I only keep backups of important files though ie events or portraits, I take hundreds of shots where i am just mucking about and practising with different settings so don't worry about these)[/SIZE]