Photo editing software for editing lotsa pics

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by Dave, Dec 15, 2008.

  1. Dave

    Dave Guest

    I need photo editing software that allows for very efficient / large
    scale editing of pictures. I'd like to be able to edit several
    thousand outstanding pics (from a couple of longer trips I took), and
    photoshop is taking just too long. (I'd like to be able to edit each
    picture in seconds, and not minutes.)

    The problem with photoshop is I've found it doesn't allow for quick
    work flows of basic touch ups. 90% of my touch ups involve tweaking
    shadows and highlights, levels, Hue / Saturation, and the like.

    Any good software recommendations?

    thanks so much, dave
    Dave, Dec 15, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Dave

    Guest Guest

    i'd suggest lightroom. you can also batch edit (which you can do in
    photoshop too but it's a bit more awkward).
    Guest, Dec 15, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Actually Photoshop does offer some quick basic editing of photos. A lot of the basic adjustments like levels or hue/sat offers you to save presets and apply them to other images. You can also utilize actions to do complex series of effects to one photo, and then by one click repeat those settings. For instnace you could create an action that applies a levels adjustment, hue saturation, perhaps a softening or sharpening filter, and then have it save and close.

    In my job I frequently have to take 20-30 images and scale them down to video or web friendly screen sizes and do color and levels adjustments. Actions easily decrease my time by more than half.

    If Photoshop is too pricey look at Photoshop Elements. You can alos Google "Gimp", which is a free shareware version of Photoshop, but which is by no means as robust. IT actually makes me want Photoshop more, however being free you can't argue the price.
    chuckwagon524, Dec 15, 2008
  4. I also like to use Adobe Bridge to batch edit RAW images.
    chuckwagon524, Dec 15, 2008
  5. Dave

    Dave Guest

    OK thanks that's unfortunate, as my photos are varied / i was indoor,
    outdoor, all over the place. I'll still check out Lightroom, but will
    likely keep looking for other batch editing software.
    Dave, Dec 15, 2008
  6. Dave

    Jurgen Guest

    DxO Optics Pro.

    It lets you run on auto or individually adjust images and then does a
    bulk development of your images, dumping them into a new folder or the
    source folder with a different name to the images.

    It will also fix on the fly:
    Lens errors
    tonal range
    and just about anything you care to make it do.

    Learning curve for custom adjustments is short and most of all, it works!
    Jurgen, Dec 15, 2008
  7. Dave

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Seriously, try Nikon NX2.

    Eric Stevens
    Eric Stevens, Dec 15, 2008
  8. Dave

    Charlie Groh Guest

    ....the only problem I find with DxO is that it won't address a RAW
    file. That's a big deal with me. I've been trying to "Adobyize" just
    to keep things in the same corral and really like Lightroom, and
    Bridge is becoming useful as a wonderful viewer. Of course, the
    "bridge" to Photoshop is handy. I've tried Bibble recently and find
    the crop function to be clumsey compared to LR...other than that
    Bibble really is pretty good. And,yes, Eric, I've tried the Nikon
    software, too, but the allure of all that is Adobe keeps me coming
    back and learning a bit more every time...all that said, if it saves
    me time when processing 3,000 shots I'll switch in shutter priority
    (that's *fast*)!

    Charlie Groh, Dec 16, 2008
  9. Dave

    Jurgen Guest

    Hate to burst your bubble Charlie but DxO Optics Pro is one of the best
    RAW developers in the world.

    It's only purpose for existing is to process RAW files and fix all the
    lens errors (for lenses which it has modules for) whilst also fixing the
    quaintly digital problems micro lenses on the sensors cause. The current
    version goes a lot further and fixes noise like no other software I've
    used before.

    Recommended workflow for RAW development is: DxO Optics Pro followed by
    Adobe Lightroom. DxO integrates with Lightroom to achieve a quality
    result. 3,000 images will take you the best part of 5 hours with a fast
    PC. In Lightroom the time will be longer because much of what DxO does
    automatically has to done by hand in LR.
    Jurgen, Dec 16, 2008
  10. Dave

    Charlie Groh Guest

    ....well, duh! *Oj course it does RAW*, I had it mixed-up with
    something else...I've had it for a year or so and in recent months
    went away and started using LR from start to finish with Bridge as a
    viewer. I am chagrined!

    Charlie Groh, Dec 16, 2008
  11. Dave

    Charlie Groh Guest

    ....ah,*Noise Ninja* won't do RAW in their stand-alone version, I've
    been going round and round with all this stuff trying to find my ideal
    work flow, I might just be welmed! Actually, Jurgen, we've discussed
    this in the thread about NN that I started...I've come to really like
    the texture that NN gets, compared to DxO and that's why I left DxO,
    but the problem remains that I have that extra step... LR won't allow
    me the batch NN processing that I need for the night work I do and yet
    I want and *need* the RAW mode to work in so LR is still in the lead
    ....I'm cooking some files up in DxO right now and will try to be
    empirical this time..heh, well *patient* is prolly a better word..I
    find the controls in DxO to be clunky compared to LR...

    Charlie Groh, Dec 16, 2008
  12. One of the reasons I like LR so well is that it's a much better file
    manager than Bridge.
    John McWilliams, Dec 16, 2008
  13. Dave

    Charlie Groh Guest

    ....that's where I'm trying to get, Alan. I'm slowly going thru
    Kelby's CS3 book and using LR alot from the get-go! So I guess I'm a
    little backwards, but nothing new there...

    Charlie Groh, Dec 17, 2008
  14. Are you sure you're recalling correctly? LR's images are totally
    apparent as to place. Early versions of Aperture hid them, IIRC.
    John McWilliams, Dec 17, 2008
  15. Dave

    Paul Furman Guest

    Yeah, that makes no sense. Alan, given that you aren't one to take
    hundreds of photos, I don't think LR would benefit you much. I think it
    would help for my style where culling is a major part of the task.

    Paul Furman

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
    Paul Furman, Dec 17, 2008
  16. outdoor, all over the place. I'll still check out Lightroom, but will
    likely keep looking for other batch editing software.

    Dave, I had much the same problem as you (but not as large). I found it
    was the saving that took the time, not just the tweaking as I work on
    originals and save as a copy. So, I wrote an action so that now when I
    press F12 it does - save as copy (to a holding directory), close original
    without saving changes. This has speeded up my work quite considerably as
    the action does it much quicker than I did.

    This is probably an unprofessional way of doing things but it works for me.

    Hope this helps,

    Geoff. Hayward, Dec 17, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.