Jump to content

Lightroom Import Workflow


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please forgive me if this has already been discussed--I tried searching, but I couldn't find anything. iPhoto does not import Leica T DNGs, so I've been trying to figure out Adobe Lightroom 5 for iMac. I've seen in other threads how everyone recommends DNGs over jpgs for the T. When I import both image files, it seems the DNG is about 2/3 stop over-exposed and some of the detail in the highlights washes out. Sometimes it actually looks worse than the jpg. Is this normal and/or should I make an automatic adjustment while importing? I'm looking for advice from experienced Lightroom users. Do you have an import workflow that you apply to all images? I realize there is much to learn about processing these images, but hopefully, I can figure out a starting point. Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before being concerned with import adjustments, the obvious question is whether or not you're slightly overexposing your images. Have you regularly checked the camera histogram? Have you tried an incident meter? Have you actually blown highlights, or is your LR histogram just toward the right side (in which case, recovery is generally easy).

 

I wouldn't worry about comparing the JPEG to the DNG; the former already has its share of processing, while the RAW file will likely require adjustments; that's expected.

 

For lots of help with LR practices….not just this issue…I recommend the free video tutorials from Adobe's Julieanne Kost (easy to search), as well as the LR book from Scott Kelby (just ignore the bad humor).

 

As an aside, I prefer using a calibrated monitor by either Eizo or NEC for best file rendering, better ensuring what you see is what you get.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the advice Jeff. They are all excellent points. I'm a novice, but eager to learn. I've had my T for about a week now and taken about 400 photos--almost all with Auto ISO, Auto White Balance, 0 EV adjustment, Aperture Priority, and Multi-Field metering. There is a variety, but I would say no really difficult lighting situations. When I import to Lightroom, it's fairly consistent for the DNGs to look overexposed. For example, I have a JPEG which shows a perfect bell curve in the Histogram, but the DNG is shifted to the right (with no corrections). My computer is an iMac which is only one year old--I think the calibration is fairly good.

 

The main reason I bring this up is because I'm not thrilled about having to "tweak" every single photo. Hopefully, the vast majority can be imported to simply enjoy viewing. As it is now, I'm getting more consistent correct exposures with the OOC JPEGs. I didn't think importing DNGs would be so much work.

 

Before being concerned with import adjustments, the obvious question is whether or not you're slightly overexposing your images. Have you regularly checked the camera histogram? Have you tried an incident meter? Have you actually blown highlights, or is your LR histogram just toward the right side (in which case, recovery is generally easy).

 

I wouldn't worry about comparing the JPEG to the DNG; the former already has its share of processing, while the RAW file will likely require adjustments; that's expected.

 

For lots of help with LR practices….not just this issue…I recommend the free video tutorials from Adobe's Julieanne Kost (easy to search), as well as the LR book from Scott Kelby (just ignore the bad humor).

 

As an aside, I prefer using a calibrated monitor by either Eizo or NEC for best file rendering, better ensuring what you see is what you get.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you'll learn the most by using manual settings and more selective metering (not multi-field) so that you control all the exposure variables. If you further use an incident meter to compare to your camera meter, you'll eventually be able to estimate without relying much on either, under typical lighting conditions.

 

I shoot with the M, not T, but use LR and the concepts are all the same. PP often requires some work, but even that can become fairly routine, especially once you learn how to utilize LR's capabilities with single or multiple pics.

 

Especially if you make prints, there's no getting around the basics of a disciplined workflow….from camera... to screen... to printer... to paper... to display. Just as in the darkroom days, but now a lot easier and quicker. It's a learning curve, but well worth it IMO.

 

Enjoy the journey. Oh, and welcome to the forum…check out the FAQs and use the search box to get lots of good advice.

 

Jeff

Edited by Jeff S
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you search around you'll find that barjohn posted up an import profile in one of the other threads. It included -0.6 in the exposure, and this seems to work well. Personally I have added a few other custom adjustments to suit my taste.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...

The main reason I bring this up is because I'm not thrilled about having to "tweak" every single photo. Hopefully, the vast majority can be imported to simply enjoy viewing. As it is now, I'm getting more consistent correct exposures with the OOC JPEGs. I didn't think importing DNGs would be so much work.

 

For most people, including many professional photographers, there is no compelling reason to shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is an option, not a rule. And RAW will always require more time and effort than OOC JPEGs. If you are happy with your JPEGs and they serve the intended use, why complicate your life?

 

However, if you have the storage space, keeping the RAW files is good insurance. And, if time permits, learning to process RAW files is a valuable skill for any photographer.

 

Enjoy your camera!

 

wonner

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

The main reason I bring this up is because I'm not thrilled about having to "tweak" every single photo. Hopefully, the vast majority can be imported to simply enjoy viewing. As it is now, I'm getting more consistent correct exposures with the OOC JPEGs. I didn't think importing DNGs would be so much work.

 

I spend less than a minute per shot...generally no more than 30 seconds. I import my camera roll...go thru and use the stars to highlight my selects. Then go thru the basic LR adjustments. If I have several shot under same lighting conditions you can copy your adjustments and paste them...then do minor tweaks. In all I average 20-30 seconds per shot unless I have a trouble shot. This results in far better images than OOC jpeg

 

 

For most people, including many professional photographers, there is no compelling reason to shoot RAW. Shooting RAW is an option, not a rule. And RAW will always require more time and effort than OOC JPEGs. If you are happy with your JPEGs and they serve the intended use, why complicate your life?

 

However, if you have the storage space, keeping the RAW files is good insurance. And, if time permits, learning to process RAW files is a valuable skill for any photographer.

 

Enjoy your camera!

 

wonner

 

Sorry, but I disagree. I don't even have JPEG turned on...the camera performs better this way and I tweak all of my shots. Its very simple in LR.

 

I would compare it to sending your 35mm film to the drug store for prints vs selecting your shots and having them printed by a professional. In this case you are the professional and LR is your darkroom. The big difference is that you don't smell funny when you are done and you spend a lot less time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

[mention=2734020]pilot-kurt[/mention]

 

Sounds like you're relatively sure the T over exposes by ⅔ and you would like DNG files to have a -⅔ exposure applied at import. This is easily done. Make a "preset" in LR* with -.6 or -.7 dialed in in the exposure slider. When you import files, there's a selection available for choosing presets to be automatically applied. Choose your -⅔ exp preset.

You've got a premium camera and fantastic lenses. Take some time and learn post processing and printing. The rewards are as satisfying as taking the initial snap.

 

*Plenty of tutorials available via YouTube, etc.

----

[mention=2734270]wonner[/mention]

 

For most people, including many professional photographers, there is no compelling reason to shoot RAW.

I strongly disagree, but a response here will take the thread way off topic.

 

 

Shooting RAW is an option, not a rule. And RAW will always require more time and effort than OOC JPEGs. If you are happy with your JPEGs and they serve the intended use, why complicate your life?

No disagreement here.

Edited by CaptZoom
formatting error
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for the excellent advice--much appreciated! I found barjohn's post with his import settings and that's what I was looking for to get me started, especially the -0.6 exposure adjustment. There is definitely an improvement with DNG over JPEG now that I'm closer to the correct exposure starting point. I'm looking forward to learning more about Lightroom. When I got the T, I was thinking about upgrading iPhoto by purchasing Aperture, but it seems Apple has stopped development--no idea if Yosemite Photos will be satisfactory. The complimentary Lightroom download that came with the T pushed me to try it out. I will check those Adobe online videos.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... now that I'm closer to the correct exposure starting point.

 

Not necessarily; the exposure starting point is in your camera. If you're not crystal clear on that, and I suggest you may not be with all the auto settings chosen, then all you've done is automate a 'correction' that may or may not have been needed since it's easy to modify exposure in-camera. And it assumes all pics will need the same adjustment; what if your pic demands highlight emphasis….will you then bring them back up again?

 

I stand by my recommendations, at least until you gain experience and know for sure what's happening, and why. But that's just me.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see my message was moved--sorry for posting in the wrong place.

 

Jeff, I truly appreciate your advice and I agree that understanding what's going on in the camera is foremost. I am a complete newbie with digital post processing. My first camera as a boy in the 1960's was my father's Ansco viewfinder. It had no automation, not even a rangefinder or light meter. I had to estimate distance with my eyeball, and estimate exposure by looking around--f/11 bright sun, f/8 hazy sun, f/5.6 bright overcast, etc. Sometimes my exposures were bad, but I learned with the limited film my parents could afford. I'll be the first to admit I've gotten lazy over the years with increasing automation. The T is only the fifth camera in my lifetime (in between: Minolta X-700, Nikon film SLR, Leica Digilux 2). I've had a busy career, and I'm just now rekindling my passion for photography while starting retirement. The technology has changed so much, even in the last 10 years. When shopping for a replacement for my Digilux 2, I was overwhelmed with buttons and menus on current cameras. The new T was just the answer and more affordable than the M.

 

I'm trying automation on the T to see what the "idiot mode" produces--I expect it should have excellent results in non-challenging lighting conditions. I've only had the camera one week and I fully intend to explore manual settings further. When starting out processing DNGs for the first time, I was a little surprised with the consistency of over-exposures compared directly with JPGs. barjohn even said in his post "I find the exposure is pretty spot on with the JPGs but the DNG's are over exposed in many cases (daylight outside)." Perhaps there is something going on with the T, considering it's such a new camera. There are other problems with the current firmware too. It's a learning process...

 

Thanks again for your advice. Cheers.

 

Not necessarily; the exposure starting point is in your camera. If you're not crystal clear on that, and I suggest you may not be with all the auto settings chosen, then all you've done is automate a 'correction' that may or may not have been needed since it's easy to modify exposure in-camera. And it assumes all pics will need the same adjustment; what if your pic demands highlight emphasis….will you then bring them back up again?

 

I stand by my recommendations, at least until you gain experience and know for sure what's happening, and why. But that's just me.

 

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It will not take you long to standardize your shooting and get good results most of the time. In LR you can then batch process to make your personal corrections; even save a preset which meets your needs. It is worth spending time on the Adobe tutorials; you will save yourself so much processing time in the future and get much better results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...