RAW files and working with layers - ordering workflow

[SamHH]

Hi,

I try to make all of the edits to what I crudely think of as brightness and colour in RAW. I understand, and it is my experience, that RAW files have more flexibility to make changes before they start looking bad.

Sometimes I also want to combine multiple photos, or multiple processes of the same photo, into a single image using layers. For example, when dealing with a bright sky over a dark landscape. I'm guessing a lot of people do the same. How do you order your workflow? As far as I can tell, it is necessary to convert the files into a TIFF or JPEG before you can start working in layers. Right? But I often come up against the problem that it is not until I have put the final image together that I realise I want to make another brightness or colour change. If I want to make those adjustments to the RAW data, I have to step back to the stage before I converted into TIFF or JPEG. Is there an easier way to deal with this problem? Essentially I want to be able to 'feed in' my re-edited RAW to the output file, without destroying the work I've done with layers and layer masks. Either that or to be able to do everything in RAW.

 

[redhed17]

You may want to look into opening your RAW files in Photoshop as Smart Objects. If using Adobe Camera Raw pressing the Shift key changes the Open Image button to Open Smart Object.

A Smart Object opens the RAW file in a virtual wrapper as a Layer, which allows you to double click on that Layer at any point and reopen the RAW file in ACR, make changes, click OK, and it goes back to Photoshop with the changes. There are some things you can't do to Smart Layers, Cloning, Healing Tools etc. I don't know all the limitations in that area.

You can also Convert for Smart Filters any normal layer. Basically the same as a Smart Object. Converting for Smart Filters allows non destructive editing, as you can click to reopen any filters used at any time to change settings, or turn on and off. Once converted for Smart Filters there is also a Mask to effect only part of that layer. Depending on which version Photoshop you have you may also have the Camera Raw Filter, which brings most of the normal Camera Raw options and allows them to be applied to a layer, with a Mask.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


If what you want is to achieve the best from the
recorded data, a dedicated RAW converter would
the right tool …and so much simpler too!

From the converter, you may publish in any format
and size for any pixel editor.

 

[Craig_85]

Hi,

I try to make all of the edits to what I crudely think of as brightness and colour in RAW. I understand, and it is my experience, that RAW files have more flexibility to make changes before they start looking bad.

Sometimes I also want to combine multiple photos, or multiple processes of the same photo, into a single image using layers. For example, when dealing with a bright sky over a dark landscape. I'm guessing a lot of people do the same. How do you order your workflow? As far as I can tell, it is necessary to convert the files into a TIFF or JPEG before you can start working in layers. Right? But I often come up against the problem that it is not until I have put the final image together that I realise I want to make another brightness or colour change. If I want to make those adjustments to the RAW data, I have to step back to the stage before I converted into TIFF or JPEG. Is there an easier way to deal with this problem? Essentially I want to be able to 'feed in' my re-edited RAW to the output file, without destroying the work I've done with layers and layer masks. Either that or to be able to do everything in RAW.

Correct a raw file has more latitude for changing things like white balance and exposure, specifically when pushing exposures (making them brighter).

It's a good idea to want to process raw files twice and then merge them later in my opinion. Even better is to capture multiple exposures and merge them.

So, covert your raw/s into 16bit tiffs which are a lossless format unlike JPEG and still have a lot of data to work with. Then when working in layers you can still tweak a tiffs colour, contrast and exposure to get a balanced merge.

Back to my earlier point the advantage of raw with exposure is being able to push a little without damaging the iq too much. Now we are working with tiffs in layers what you will find is they won't brighten as well as a raw but there is little to no penalty in pulling them back (making them darker) assuming nothing is blown.

So, when you convert your raw/s into tiffs err on the bright side, then simply add a levels or curves adjustment mask to the tiff layer you need to tweak and aim to darken it down to where you want it.

Out of interest what camera are you using? This may be mainly irrelevant if it's and a7r2 or d810!

 

[SamHH]

Correct a raw file has more latitude for changing things like white balance and exposure, specifically when pushing exposures (making them brighter).

It's a good idea to want to process raw files twice and then merge them later in my opinion. Even better is to capture multiple exposures and merge them.

So, covert your raw/s into 16bit tiffs which are a lossless format unlike JPEG and still have a lot of data to work with. Then when working in layers you can still tweak a tiffs colour, contrast and exposure to get a balanced merge.

Back to my earlier point the advantage of raw with exposure is being able to push a little without damaging the iq too much. Now we are working with tiffs in layers what you will find is they won't brighten as well as a raw but there is little to no penalty in pulling them back (making them darker) assuming nothing is blown.

So, when you convert your raw/s into tiffs err on the bright side, then simply add a levels or curves adjustment mask to the tiff layer you need to tweak and aim to darken it down to where you want it.

Out of interest what camera are you using? This may be mainly irrelevant if it's and a7r2 or d810!

Thanks for your reply. OK that makes sense to use a TIFF so that post-RAW conversion edits are at least made to the greatest amount of data possible. And to err on the bright side. But presumably it is still better to make these adjustments to the RAW data rather than to the TIFF?

Out of interest what camera are you using? This may be mainly irrelevant if it's and a7r2 or d810!

Usually a Panasonic G6 or Nikon D700.

 

[SamHH]

You may want to look into opening your RAW files in Photoshop as Smart Objects. If using Adobe Camera Raw pressing the Shift key changes the Open Image button to Open Smart Object.

A Smart Object opens the RAW file in a virtual wrapper as a Layer, which allows you to double click on that Layer at any point and reopen the RAW file in ACR, make changes, click OK, and it goes back to Photoshop with the changes. There are some things you can't do to Smart Layers, Cloning, Healing Tools etc. I don't know all the limitations in that area.

You can also Convert for Smart Filters any normal layer. Basically the same as a Smart Object. Converting for Smart Filters allows non destructive editing, as you can click to reopen any filters used at any time to change settings, or turn on and off. Once converted for Smart Filters there is also a Mask to effect only part of that layer. Depending on which version Photoshop you have you may also have the Camera Raw Filter, which brings most of the normal Camera Raw options and allows them to be applied to a layer, with a Mask.

Sorry for the slow reply. I've been having a go with Smart Objects, and it seems like they might be the solution I was looking for, albeit I'm still trying to figure out the details. Thank you!

Reading this article it seems that if you are editing the RAWs in Lightroom, you are still 'stuck' with the whatever setting you select in Lightroom at the moment you click "Open as Smart Object in Photoshop". In the sense that, although you can make the same adjustments using Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop, they won't feed back into the Develop module in Lightroom, and conversely subsequent adjustments in the Develop module in Lightroom won't show up in the Smart Object? Is that correct?

The one thing I'm stuck on – and I can probably figure this out myself, but perhaps you know the answer – is how to preserve the Smart Object once you copy it to another image. So the situation is:

• I have two photographs of the same scene with different exposures (or Virtual Copies of the same photograph in Lightroom)
• I make adjustments to the RAW files in Lightroom, but do not export the files
  
• On each file I click "Open as Smart Object in Photoshop" in Lightroom
  
• I then copy one of the Smart Objects (say the version exposed for the sky) and paste it into the other Smart Object (say the version exposed for the foreground), ready to mask it in.
• But the pasted layer is no longer a Smart Object, and so cannot be adjusted in ACR. How do I paste the sky exposure as a Smart Object, so that I can still make ACR adjustments even after I have masked it in?

 

[SamHH]

•


If what you want is to achieve the best from the
recorded data, a dedicated RAW converter would
the right tool …and so much simpler too!

From the converter, you may publish in any format
and size for any pixel editor.

Hi Kodiak,

Perhaps my initial post was unclear. I am using a RAW converter. My question is about editing the files after I have moved away from the RAW converter program and begun to work in layers in Photoshop. Thanks for replying though.

 

[Craig_85]

Thanks for your reply. OK that makes sense to use a TIFF so that post-RAW conversion edits are at least made to the greatest amount of data possible. And to err on the bright side. But presumably it is still better to make these adjustments to the RAW data rather than to the TIFF?



Usually a Panasonic G6 or Nikon D700.

Sorry for the slow reply. I've been having a go with Smart Objects, and it seems like they might be the solution I was looking for, albeit I'm still trying to figure out the details. Thank you!

Reading this article it seems that if you are editing the RAWs in Lightroom, you are still 'stuck' with the whatever setting you select in Lightroom at the moment you click "Open as Smart Object in Photoshop". In the sense that, although you can make the same adjustments using Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop, they won't feed back into the Develop module in Lightroom, and conversely subsequent adjustments in the Develop module in Lightroom won't show up in the Smart Object? Is that correct?

The one thing I'm stuck on – and I can probably figure this out myself, but perhaps you know the answer – is how to preserve the Smart Object once you copy it to another image. So the situation is:

• I have two photographs of the same scene with different exposures (or Virtual Copies of the same photograph in Lightroom)
• I make adjustments to the RAW files in Lightroom, but do not export the files
  
• On each file I click "Open as Smart Object in Photoshop" in Lightroom
  
• I then copy one of the Smart Objects (say the version exposed for the sky) and paste it into the other Smart Object (say the version exposed for the foreground), ready to mask it in.
• But the pasted layer is no longer a Smart Object, and so cannot be adjusted in ACR. How do I paste the sky exposure as a Smart Object, so that I can still make ACR adjustments even after I have masked it in?

Smart objects are great but may be complicating things for you right now.

The easy way is to export as tiffs, arrange these as layers and using your example put the sky within a group (folder icon) with a mask for the sky on the group.

Then create adjustment layers for the sky in the group and the ground in the layer beneath it not in the group.

By using adjustment layers it is completely non destructive editing until you flatten it all down. So there is no real penalty to adjusting the tiffs in Photoshop compared to Adobe camera raw, unless you need to significantly brighten a layer beyond its originally exported exposure or change white balance vastly.

To try and explain clearer;

If you took a tiff, opened curves from the image edit menu and darkened the file, clicked ok to close curves then opened it again and brightened it yes you would damage the files iq slightly.

If you opened 2 curves adjustment layers in the layers palette, one darkening and the other brightening you have changed nothing and do not affect the iq. the changes are not burnt in until it is flattened down and saved.

 

[SamHH]

Thanks for the tips. Yeah, I agree that it probably won't make any difference to darken or slightly brighten the image as a TIFF. It's more just tidy-mindedness on my part: if I've got the RAW file in the first place, it seems a shame to be making adjustments in a (theoretically) less optimal way. Would you also say there's not much to be lost by making saturation and contrast changes to the TIFF?

I figured out a solution to my 'copying Smart Objects' question, btw: just dragging the object from the layer panel into the destination window.

 

[Craig_85]

Would you also say there's not much to be lost by making saturation and contrast changes to the TIFF?

If you are increasing contrast then no, there is literally no IQ loss at all. If decreasing contrast, you are increasing the signal to noise ratio of the shadows and this would be better done to the raw. But for regular tweaks I doubt you will tell the difference, it really will be indiscernible. Only if you want to push it a couple of stops will you really tell the difference.

I would suggest when you get used to getting good accurate exposures in the first place the adjustments to the RAWS will be less. From there when you learn what luminance your layers need to be you will also then need to make smaller adjustments once they are TIFFS in PS. A tip for this by the way is to open the different RAWS in survey view in LR before you export them, that way you get to see them side by side.

Seriously, adjustment layers on a TIFF do very little damage at all. If I really wanted to confuse you I would tell you that a smart object comprising of a stack of around 12 TIFFS created from individual photos using image averaging has cleaner shadows when pushed than one of the individual RAW files!

I'd also add that whilst I'm a bit of a perfectionist and like the technical IQ of the picture to be as high as I can make it with the post processing, the actual quality of the picture really does come down to what you do before you press the shutter, and the quality of the scene/light involved.

 

[SamHH]

Thanks again Craig.

 

[redhed17]

I would suggest when you get used to getting good accurate exposures in the first place the adjustments to the RAWS will be less. From there when you learn what luminance your layers need to be you will also then need to make smaller adjustments once they are TIFFS in PS. A tip for this by the way is to open the different RAWS in survey view in LR before you export them, that way you get to see them side by side.

Using ACR or LR is not just about correcting exposures, it is an easier, quicker and more intuitive way to edit imho. You can have perfect exposures, and accurate colours, but maybe use the power of ACR and LR to be more 'artistic'.

Having the Camera Raw Filter in Photoshop offers a lot of that power and intuitiveness to any layer, but while that can be applied to an individual layer, unless that layer is Converted for Smart Filters, or comes in as a Smart Object from ACR or LR, there is no way to undo or change the effect of that filter without going back in the History, or deleting that layer and starting again. Sometimes it is not possible to go back enough steps in the History. While Converting for Smart Filters will enable the possibility to make changes to the whatever settings were used with the filter depending on how the image changes during the editing process, it also enables a Mask which allows for using the Filter selectively for part of the layer/image.

I think the Camera Raw Filter may only be in CS6 and CC versions, which may be another reason to open as a Smart Object from ACR or Camera Raw if one were to have earlier versions of Photoshop.

Obviously this all depends on how convoluted the editing one does is, but from what the OP described the Smart Object route may be the one to look into. Imho.