I'm just getting into the wedding side of photography and I recently shot my first wedding for a friend. I have narrowed the number of images to around 350 from 1100 and I gotta say it's a bit daunting to think about having to manually process each of these images. My question is do you guys manually process each image or do you batch some and manually process some? I guess I'm really looking for some workflow tips on how to handle this many images.



Thanks

it depends. if its a series, i will do a small batch, but for the most part, i do most of them individuiallly. i like it, i actually find it really relaxing and the best part of the wedding (almost) (cake )

GOD NO!! could you image how much time it would take??? I give my clients around 700 images in their proof book and they are all batch processed though lightroom. Some series photos may be extra batch processed though photoshop, but to do each individually at 5-10 mins each would take all week.

I do individually process prints for albums and orders though.

+1 on that one.

Yep, I pretty much do. I batch things like noise reduction, etc...but then I go through each one, by hand and upload them within a week.

I like it too, but to be honest the editing time, is really taking away from my time with my family, so I'm looking at outsourcing alternatives now.

Only half editing or only proofing, is not an option for me.

Until I buy Lightroom, I've been using raw presets to do each one, and yes, it does take forever. I totally don't recommend it.

Thanks for all the responses everyone. I guess I need to develop a standard development flow and learn how to batch in Lightroom.

When you guys run a batch do you generally batch to get a baseline for the images and then select certain images to do additional processing like black and white or other stuff?

I think it somewhat depends on your post-processing style. If you are doing minimal or basic processing, it makes more sense to run a lot of batches- obviously other things like dodging and burning, color enhancement, or retouching, etc. isn't a batch process type thing. If spending some time on an image is going to set your images apart- I would encourage spending some time on them- your processing style can really make your images unique, but you have to strike that balance cause it can take a ton of time to individually go through them.

Our last wedding we shot about 2500 images, imported into lightroom with our standard preset culled them down to about 1400 images that they will get to see. Of those, about 200 we have spent some time individually on in Lightroom and about 20 of them I will pull into photoshop for some additional work.

Now that we have things like Batch Raw processing, and Lightroom things get pretty simple.

Basic outline of my workflow. Nearly all my shots get some sort of auto preset from my Power Workflow collection. Then 4 and 5 star (best shots) get more personal attention but I still am fairly automated because I'm using the presets. 5 star shots all get this treatment, and a bit more tweaking.

Lastly is PS. I have actions to do the final effects, glows, and crazy cool stuff I can't do in LR. This is just done to the very best of the favorites. Maybe 15-25 images.

All set and I'm ready to export my final JPEGS. I love LR

Gavin

I manually do each one and it does take forever,but I am addicted to having my final product be what it is so that's what keeps me doing it---I want to present all of them like that

Hallll No!

If I did them all individually my perfectionism would take over. It would probably take me months.

I usually pick out some of my favorites, or close-ups of the bride & groom and process those in photoshop.

lightroom for everything else.

isnt that basically processing them yourself? your still putting them through lightroom.... ????

Ok. Did I misunderstand the question?

I load them in lightroom and sync each set (portraits, indoors, etc) to a certain preset. a few big batches. I don't go through each one and tweak them individually.

If I find a few that I would like to process more, I put them in photoshop.

i do a quick run through with the star labelling from 1-5:

anything above 3 for me stays, so then they go through the syncing process.

i then edit 200 of a whole selection and usually they dont ask for any others to be edited, and the 200 usually start as all or a good base for any albums, slideshows etc that you will create for them.

lightroom or aperture is key though, but i do like editing the photos individually rather than just giving a batch to them color corrected.

Yup!

Edit down from to about 4-500 but no more using Bridge. Run batches thru ACR that are similar in WB, location etc.

Then take everyone through PS for dodging and burning, slight vignette on most, usually extra contrast and sat.

Even though my RAWs are pretty good SOOC I want my work to be top quality. No one sees non-processed work. I do sell high res files but outside of packages and each file is ready to print (enhanced how I would like to see it). That way I have a bit more control over my images.

Album images and enlargements may get even more work such as minor retouching, reducing eye shadows etc.

I love my PP. I love being alone on my computer. I find it very relaxing and try not to rush through. If I find I am getting bored, I do something else for a while.

My couples don't see the proofs for about 4 weeks after so I've got plenty of time to edit, plus I only do 1-2 weddings per fortnight so I'm not stressing too much about having a backlog of 15 weddings to edit!

I'm getting pretty quick at it now actually.

fortnight? I need to google that...

lol

This sounds like how I do it actually... I blog some within a week, then about 2 weeks after that I have their slideshow done of the "best of's" then a couple weeks after that I present all the rest! So they are getting peaks little by little and my clients seem to think that is a lot of fun! It keeps them excited to see more over the 4-5 weeks or so that it takes for me to finish. I too keep my wedding volume down so that I can do it this way...

I am just starting out, so I don't know if I will do this forever, but right now it is how I like to do it.

Simple answer: YES

+1

ditto on that! I can't not edit every image individually... You just have to make sure you are charging enough for the time you spend doing it.

We do almost every image individually. We do run some batch WB and color corrections. Then we look at each image, throw out the bad, clean up crops, colors, do conversions, etc. We decided about a year ago, that we were only going to present our best and we are not so swamped that this takes forever. A wedding with 800 keepers probably takes about 2 days, maybe 3, once we get into it. I find it harder to select images than to edit them.

It takes me 21 minutes to edit 1000 photos. These are the photos that are left after choosing my favorites for the blog.

The process is called, "Keyframe" editing.

Have a look if your interested; you'll have to read the article for the video to make sense.
http://www.haskinsphotography.com/thepeapod/?p=16

Thats so funny! Thats exactly how i work in Lightroom, didnt realise it had a name or a real 'process'! Im obviously a trendsetter without knowing it

nope....that's just the name that I gave to it.

pfffffffffft....cant i live in my little world of illusion where im the popular cheerleader type girl who everyone wants to be?? please?????

I touch every image, typically twice once in lightroom for general corrections and then in photoshop for specific treatments. It's taken me a while to ween off of photoshop only because the image winds up in there anyway.

Have you guys tried the lightroom 2.0 beta, sweetness... I like Lightroom, tried DxO, CaptureNX2, I find that depending on the image they could possibly have their place. Which basically means they are fired. For overall productivity it's hard to beat lightroom.

Also getting to the opinion more is not necessarily better, I use about 150 images for slideshows. I like post work to me it's where I put my flavor into what I have captured. I don't mind presets or actions I use them but I still like adding the personel touch.

It takes me about 8 hours to post process about 700 images in lightroom with different effects. Then 2-3 more hours for some extra retouching in PS3.

I use a lot of my own actions and it's getting better and better. I am hoping to cut it down to 8 hours with my new techniques that I am about to implement.
Having a good computer also helps. Last thing you want to do is sit and watch for 10-15 seconds as each filter is processing. 10-15seconds per image is a lot if you have thousands of images.
What I would never ever do is use "keyframe" editing.That's just bad!!! It's only good for studio work.

21 minutes for 1000 files? I mean no offense, as I'm sure that works great for you... but that means you are spending barely more than 1 second per image. How can you possibly be sure they are all 100% rock solid, best-work-you-can-produce images? I couldn't even rate/cull 1000 photos in that time and do a good job. Then again, that's the rub... "and do a good job". For me, 'do a good job' involves a manual, personal, custom touch.

I guess I could 'process' a million files in 4 seconds... if all I did was rename them.

I think it's a bit of a philosophy thing... I'd much rather give my clients 6 files that blow their doors off, and have it take an hour, than give them 3000 files processed at 1 per second in the same time.

I batch do the images, in lightroom, tweaking a little each one. Then I show these are proofs. The ones for the album or print I then take a spend at least 15-30 minutes each in Photoshop making it perfect.

I edit every single one I give to a client...and it takes me for-ev-er. I use LR and I am definately going to teach myself more about it. What I know I have taught myself, I just need to watch more tutorials and go through the online manual. I am doing better though with making culling decisons quicker. I have a love-hate relationship with my editing process...I have to have every one perfect, I just can't give one to a client that I haven't made perfect because I personally wouldn't want to see one thing and then recieve another after I ordered. I usually end up making a nice large pot of coffee to encourage me to finish in a decent amount of time...of which the remnants is sitting on my desk in a nice large mug right now. I may not be the most efficient yet, but I'm working on it...and working up to charging for it too.

Hi Mike!

I used to edit every image individually and on my old HP it literally took a week with my PC running non-stop. Since LR I batch edit more and also batch using my own actions in PS.

But, this past weekend I edited 4,000 images from an 8 hr. Hapkido DVD shoot. My neck still hurts and I can't spend that much time again. I haven't mastered DJ's 2 hr hands-free editing but would like to. In this case I had to "touch" every image as there was a banner in the background and it wasn't straight in my shots (next time I'll use my grid).

How do you handle your client's response? Most of my clients want their images the next day. How do you set the proper expectations?

I manually edit all the images that I cull out as being acceptable. I guess for a portrait shoot it really isn't 'that' time consuming (thinking of the thousands of photos from a wedding). (>.<)

For those of you who DO NOT fully edit every photo that goes to proof but do a bit of photoshop to your album or blog images (TRA, doding, burning, saturation, ...whatever you do to make your images stand out), how do you handle that separation between the images you present on your blog/ marketing pieces/ albums, and the more bland images you present as your proofs? Especially those of you that have a "signature look"; how do you handle the fact that your proofs do not have your signature look that attracted your clients in the first place. For an example, let's say you post a couple of sneak peaks on your blog and they are fully edited and treated. Then you present your proofs. Are the clients like "what the heck...how come they don't look like the ones on your blog?"

All the pp in the world is no substitute for a well captured image post should ideally be the iceing on the cake, the cake should be fulfilling on it's own. That's my take on it. I could not concieve processing a couple of thousand images for a one day event.

Robert, Thanks for your response and I understand what you are saying. However 90% of what is shown here on OSP, or on our blogs, or the stuff that goes into the album is stuff that is not straight out of camera, or even just lightroom adjustments. Most of it has been tweaked to some degree in photoshop to give it some punch or maybe stylized with textures or actions. I am not referring to having good camera technique. I am talking about the difference between an image that is properly exposed and white balanced shot, and the ones that we actually spend time on to present on our blogs (the icing that is on the cake). I would bet that not very many photographers put photos in albums that have just been tweaked in lightroom. And I wanted to know how photographers deal with that difference between thier "proof" images that are just adjusted, and the "final" images that have all the treatments. Do clients ever complain that they got 500 proofed images that don't look anything like the 5 you put on your blog or the ones in your portfolio? Or to put it in your words, do they ever complain that their proofs don't have any icing on them like the ones that you had in your portfolio you used to sell yourself with.

Are you referring to just weddings?

For portraits, I actually edit every single photo before proofing.

my clients never see unfinished pictures.
period.

album selections get a little extra treatment, but proofs are always finished and looking their best as I wouldn't want it any other way. I batch for wb and exposure, then each lighting scenario might get a particular batch to boost color/curves etc, but then I look at each individually to perfect them and balance (in Lightroom). Once LR edits are done, I run a few enhancements actions and do texture work through Photoshop on a selection of about 50-60 images, and finally a batch to sharpen everything. Still takes a good chunk of time but I like presenting my pictures in their best format. First impressions are the most important right? especially when clients are looking at their images for the first time....they need to be wowed by what they see, not told they will look better when they get into an album. I like Yervants idea I read above about showing the client an un-finished version of proofs during the consultation. I think this would really help show the value in the time spent processing.

Curious. Do you use a sharpening action? If so, which one? Thanks!

you betcha.

kubota magic sharpen on every single full res image.
sometimes I find it too much for web res images so those get a lighter action like "Boutwell Magic Glasses" and or the "Better Web Sharpen" both by Totally Rad. If you dont have those actions, you could easily create a USM one in PS.

Matt K, I see, now while I'm far from being a purist I find an occasion or two to enjoy an image with little or no processing. But to answer your question clients do not see unprocessed images anything I present is corrected, tweaked and or enhanced.

Matt it seems like part of your question is also one of personal style and actual post processing method. For some, blog images may just be a matter of a curve and saturation bump after color correcting an image. (Doesn't necessarily requisite Photoshop). Lightroom has the capability now to do a good bit of treatment to an image without even having to open Photoshop. And to your point, I think there are a number of photographers (Swan comes to mind, forgive me if I'm wrong about this) that do, in fact, find themselves off to the races once the images have been touched in Lightroom. Unless you're batching actions or engaging in some specific layer masking or retouching or object removal, there's just not much need for it (Photoshop work) even in the context of cranking out blog images.

That said, I doubt you'll find many clients scrutinizing proof images. Unless you follow a workflow like that of a Pictage or Digilabs user where turnkey fulfillment is at play, most color correct and resize for proofs and leave the heavy work for actual orders. In that case, the blog images would also be "favorited" photos that would make their way into the portfolio sooner or later.

Lastly, I think the differentiation you talk about is also a matter of positioning and managing client expectation. Becker and John Mireles, among others, use the difference to illustrate the actual work and artistic vision they bring to the creative process. A client may get digital images to have, as an example, but that aforementioned difference between proof and blog is what drives the print sales of finished photos. In that way the value of the work, and the work itself are justified, as people are paying for what the photographer provides, and the photographer is working from a results-based context rather than a "let me fix ALL 1K of these images and hope they buy... all of them so my work wasn't in vain."