Switching from Elements to Lightroom 3

[Tim Pindar]

Now I've bought Lightroom, that will obviously dictate my workflow going forward, in particular working in RAW with LR adjustments.

I've also imported my Elements database into LR3.

However, since I started in DSLR about 3 years ago I've gone through several workflow ideas as far as my use of the Elements database is concerned. The common factor was that once I had processed the RAW files, converted via Adobe Camera Raw or Canon's DPP, and improved the photos, I would save them to another format and leave that file in Elements and not the RAWs. This was mainly because I wanted to use the slideshow facility in Elements, and that works too slowly with RAW files.

So now all my old photos are stored in the LR3 database in other formats - variously JPG, TIF or PSD.

Whilst I still have the RAWs they obviously don't contain all the processing I carried out, nor all the tagging, rating etc.

I expect it best to simply leave things as they are, and if I want to improve an older photo choose whether to import the RAW and start again from scratch, or work on the converted file. However I just wondered if anyone has any good tips for this situation - after all, once upon a time, no-one used Lightroom!

 

[Larry Bolch]

Realize that as you continue with photography, your skills and perceptions will improve. Also realize that the software you use and the machines that run it will also continue to improve. When I process an image for a print, I don't save my working file on the hard drive. I consider the print itself as the "Save".

If in five years, I need another print of the same image and I had saved the print file, by re-using it, I would be just printing an imitation of what I was as a photographer half a decade back. By going to my original RAW file and interpreting it again, all the taste, insight, artistic growth and any new software and hardware developed over those five years are brought to bear, resulting in a truly honest work representing the best I can do at the present.

In fact, I have reprocessed a couple of my site's portfolios just in the past month or so. They truly reflect my photography as of today and incorporate the subtleties that Photoshop CS5 provides me, to more closely match the image to my present feelings toward it. Since the original RAW file does not change, the concept of my original exposure is also reflected in each image.

 

[Hamish Gill]

I think larry has pretty much covered it... I'd not worry until the situation arises that you want to do something to a old image... I don't import any files that I am not intending on processing there and then.
My older work, what I didn't loose in the 'great hdd death of 09', just sits on the hdd's and when I want to do something with one of the photos I import the raw file and then open the version I originally made in a separate viewer ... I might imitate it to a point, but as larry says, there is the extra few years (or how ever long it has been) of experience to work with, not to mention the vast improvments in software.
The answer is, just don't worry, I know the feeling of disorganisation or files that you are feeling... I got it when I first got
Lightroom, and indeed have done when my hdd died and i lost my catalogue ... It will pass (that's not meant to sound patronising... Im just pretty certain I know exactly the feeling you have toward the situation you are in)

 

[Pete Askew]

Hi Tim,

I agree whole heartedy with Hamish and Larry and Larry makes a very good point of the re-interpretation issue. I do the same with both digital and film negatives. I have the guidance of the old version / printing map, but I can of course (and often do) interpret the image in another way. Thinking about it, this might actually highlight a 'problem' with the LR workflow. If after you 'edit' a file all you ever see in your catalog is the edited version, you may never go back and re-interpret an image. Maybe it would be better to always work on a copy (say, rate the edited as a 5* and the RAW as a 4*) so you can see what you used as the starting pointing with more ease. For commercial projects (like your weddings Hamish), I guess you may never go back as once the money is in the bank you will have moved on, but for personal work perhaps another way is more useful. Bridge is of course useful for that but unless you 'output' files from LR you don't see the comparison. What do you think?

 

[Tim Pindar]

Thanks for the thoughts. I'll leave things be in my catalog.

I completely accept Larry's and Hamish's points of view. However it demonstrates that it is horses for courses. My work is all strictly amateur and mainly for personal and family enjoyment (my photo website is largely a vanity project). By having everything in the organiser and tagged etc I can do things like, say, set up a slideshow of all the photos with my wife's family in them, to display when they come visit as a talking point. Hence my catalog contains all my pre-DSLR photos, taken on compact cameras or even film ones scanned onto CD by Bonusprint in 2001 when my kids were very young.

I agree with Pete that the LR workflow has its bad points, especially for non-commercial uses, e.g. if you want to reinterpret an old photo, can you easily re-import the original RAW file and have LR treat it as a new distinct photo? Perhaps by renaming it? Otherwise you have no sense of "before " and "after".

The number of my photos which now actually get printed is very low so I don't regard a print as a "save". In fact, my equivalent "save" is when my daughters take my photos of our holiday or a party and throw them onto facebook without even asking me. (Something they probably won't be able to do in fact once I'm using LR, though I have a sneaking suspicion facebook may accept RAW files which is a very scary thought...)

By the way, it actually bothers me that if someone comments on a photo on my website and then I re-interpret it and re-upload, the comments might "stick" even though they don't relate to the current version!

 

[Hamish Gill]

Hi Tim,

I agree whole heartedy with Hamish and Larry and Larry makes a very good point of the re-interpretation issue. I do the same with both digital and film negatives. I have the guidance of the old version / printing map, but I can of course (and often do) interpret the image in another way. Thinking about it, this might actually highlight a 'problem' with the LR workflow. If after you 'edit' a file all you ever see in your catalog is the edited version, you may never go back and re-interpret an image. Maybe it would be better to always work on a copy (say, rate the edited as a 5* and the RAW as a 4*) so you can see what you used as the starting pointing with more ease. For commercial projects (like your weddings Hamish), I guess you may never go back as once the money is in the bank you will have moved on, but for personal work perhaps another way is more useful. Bridge is of course useful for that but unless you 'output' files from LR you don't see the comparison. What do you think?

You can make as many versions as you like using the snapshot feature
Create a snap shot of the imported file before you edit, the a snapshot for various versions... Then just flick between them!

 

[Pete Askew]

Thanks Hamish. This is a good discipline but of course the temptation, and the way many people work, is to adjust the imported image straight away. So in many instances people don't have a starting point to compare with unless they 'reset' the image. One of the reasons I started thinking about this is when I'm away I will often sit of an evening and edit the contents of the catalog. If I like the set there is a chance that I won't revist them and so won't think to re-interpret them. Unless I view the originals in another way.

 

[Hamish Gill]

I don't do it for my work really only for personal stuff..
I could swear there was a button called "import" in the snapshot bit in older versions... But i can't find it any more...
It allowed you to flick back to the import version once you have created a snapshot... Although, if im honest I can't work out if I have just invented that in my head... Let me know if you can find that feature anyone