RAW to JPEG processing

After a slew of rejects for soft photos on jp.net, I need help!

I typically shot RAW, convert in Adobe Bridge and then edit in Photoshop CS3. I think my workflow is pretty typical;
straighten
crop
resize to 1600
Levels
Contrast
Equalize, clone out dust
resize to 1300
resize to 1024 :frown: Lost my large file upload due to excessive rejects :frown:
USM 100, .2, 0 repeat 3-5x

Any pointers on how to do it better?

Here are two test images that should be pretty decent to work on. Also feel free to comment on my shooting settings!

Saab 340
http://jeremyd.smugmug.com/Airplanes...531_ef5qe-O-LB

MD-11
http://jeremyd.smugmug.com/Airplanes...631_dzxqR-O-LB

For me I use the canon program,
change white balance, contrast, shadows/highlights, saturation and sharpness. Then once it is converted drop it in to photoshop, level, resize, look for dust spots, then USM .2,0,200-450 1 coat. Save w/out watermark then apply watermark and save again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDANDO

After a slew of rejects for soft photos on jp.net, I need help!

resize to 1600
resize to 1300
resize to 1024 :frown: Lost my large file upload due to excessive rejects :frown:
USM 100, .2, 0 repeat 3-5x

---

Are you saying you resize it 3 times, and also unsharp mask it 3-5 times? Have you just tried one resize and one pass of USM? The test images you posted should be plenty sharp not to get a soft rejection at 1024px. My usual workflow is:

1) crop in LR, export to PS
2) check for dust
3) resize to 1200px
4) USM .2, 0, 300-400
5) save for web

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cary

Are you saying you resize it 3 times...

---

There seems to be the thought (often perpetuated on the A.net photo forum) that resizing in steps results in a better quality photo. I've always resized in one step, down to 1024px and never noticed any difference the few times I've tried it in multiple steps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moose135

There seems to be the thought (often perpetuated on the A.net photo forum) that resizing in steps results in a better quality photo. I've always resized in one step, down to 1024px and never noticed any difference the few times I've tried it in multiple steps.

---

Yeah, I heard about that a while ago (I think just 2 resizes, not 3)...it seemed overkill to me back then and it still does. I recently helped someone who was getting everything he submitted to A.net and JP rejected and he was using an "advanced" workflow like that. I processed two of his photos the normal, simple way I do it, and both got accepted by both sites.

Jeremy, All,

I think a lot of the information out there on the web re: workflows for A.net and the like, especially sharpening, is outdated. It was started back when the tools did not have the right controls built in and have stuck even though the tools have improved tremendously.

RESIZING is one... there is no MATHEMATICAL or PERCEPTUAL difference in using the right algorithm in PSCS5 or LR than in using an older method with steps. Meaning that BiCubic method is already taking into account all the old tricks for properly resizing in one single step. Indeed BiCubic has improved to even include a normal, sharper, or smoother to give you just the control you need for one stop shopping. There have been plenty of tests done in the wild that are conclusive in that STEPPED resizing results are the same as BiCubic in subjective testing. From a technical perspective, using data analysys there has been "nothing found" in terms of perceptual or mathematical differences. One such test is a size test where the resulting size speaks to the data in the image. Sharper images have more detail and more data and therefore would be larger.

SHARPENING: There is again too much old data out there. The new algorithms are so good you need not overthink it. I too was guilty of overdoing it when I first started to submit images to A.net and JP.net and now I have become more knowledgeable of what they want and have adapted to their expectations with MY workflows... I am happier and produce more keepers for their tastes :-)

USM and Smart Sharpen are adaptable so the need for masking is really not necessary.

Noise and reduction of such is still a major obstacle only easily tackled by exposing at low ISOs unfortunately.

So, my simplified workflow which gives me the most accepted photos on A.net and JP.net from the quality point of view, I still get rejects on Motive but I am always pushing it with them LOL.

WORFLOW:

My workflow is very simple. My motto is DON'T DESTROY DATA and definitely don't mess with it too much.

--I organize ALL my images in Lightroom 3.3. Metadata, Cataloguing, Keywording etc.
--Basic RAW development in Lightroom 3.3 (ACR 6.3 is EXACTLY the same as below)
+CROP and STRAIGHTEN
+Camera Tone and Profile
+Lens Correction (CA, Pincushion, Barreling, etc.)
+RAW sharpen and denoise. In LR, for my Nikon D3, my base is 40,1,40,25,25 (Sharpness, Radius, Detail, Masking, Luminance in that order. The rest of the controls at default)
+Curves. I usually increase the contrast a bit, depends on the image
+RAW process/WB. I will typically use the eyedropper on a WHITE, GRAY or BLACK area I KNOW to be white, gray or black :-) Otherwise, leave as recorded or visually adjust to taste. TINT is hard to get right manually
+I never use AUTO for exposure controls and will always use the sliders manually. If the image was not properly exposed, I will bring down the Highlight slider a bit and use the EXPOSURE slider instead. They are VERY different mathematically. Then increase contrast as needed, add black if needed (or reduce it)
+MAJOR dust or dirt removal in LR. If I somehow screwed up my normal daily DUSTING of the sensor and mirrorbox, I will undo the big obvious ones here.

OUTPUT to Photoshop as a 16 bit ProPhoto TIFF or PSD (PSD is a TIFF container anyway for the image pixel data)

In Photoshop, I will immediately resize to 1200, 1400, 1600 or 1024, depending on the target and on the original quality of the image and my desire to show off at larger size or not :-)

-- BiCubic

Final touches

--Denoise ONLY if needed. This is usually only if I shot above ISO 400 on the D3 or ISO 250 on the D2Xs. Otherwise, no NR.
--AUTO COLOR. It just works. 99% of the time it is spot on. If your WB is waaay off, you will have trouble so I will manually do the color balance otherwise AUTO COLOR is magic :-)
--Dupe layer, equalize for dust spot removal
--Remove dupe layer when done and dupe base layer again.

SHARPENING:

Unless the image needs special sharpening, like when the nose is softer than the tail or similar (large logos next to small text for example) only one layer of sharpening.

--USM 200,0.2,0 x 2 or 3 depending on aircraft and details etc. This is VERY subjective so don;t beat yourself up too much if someone else does not like it. It is absolutely subjective how far you go. HOWEVER, there are boundaries on the soft and overdone sides. But there definitely is NOT a single sharpened level you can get that will please everyone. Plain and simple, stay in the zone... don;t underdo it or overdo it.

OUTPUT:

--Convert to sRGB and reduce to 8 bits.
--Save As... JPG, 12, NOT optimized.

========

Also, START with a perfect image. Be a good editor and DELETE often. Unless it is an image of the Space Shuttle landing at JFK, there is no reason to keep a poor picture. Editing is a good way to improve your skills. Your image of the KLM which I will give a shot on editing ( thank you :cool: ) is a bit softer on the nose than the tail and looks like a distant shot... it also has a bit of noise so it will be a more challenging edit than if the original was sharper, less noisy and had more detail. That is MY opinion and not for you to take it in any other way than what it is... By no means am I trying to say the image is poor or otherwise... I promise you I mean well.

So, let me see what I can do with your samples above ... hope you like em. But I bet Cary and Brandon will come up with better edits! hahahaa.

Don't forget to RIGHT-CLICK | VIEW IMAGE as this site resizes images

http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/1168852349_bHBpt-O.jpg

http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/1168852350_9U46Q-O.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seahawks7757

For me I use the canon program,
change white balance, contrast, shadows/highlights, saturation and sharpness. Then once it is converted drop it in to photoshop, level, resize, look for dust spots, then USM .2,0,200-450 1 coat. Save w/out watermark then apply watermark and save again.

---

Thanks Brandon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cary

Are you saying you resize it 3 times, and also unsharp mask it 3-5 times? Have you just tried one resize and one pass of USM? The test images you posted should be plenty sharp not to get a soft rejection at 1024px. My usual workflow is:

1) crop in LR, export to PS
2) check for dust
3) resize to 1200px
4) USM .2, 0, 300-400
5) save for web

---

Thanks Cary. Yes I do resize and sharpen in multiple steps :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gonzalu

Don't forget to RIGHT-CLICK | VIEW IMAGE as this site resizes images

---

Thanks Manny for the insight and through workflow!

I apprecieate all the feedback and tips. I have a bunch of photos from last weekend and will upload them with the "new" workflow. Stay tuned for the results.

I wanted to add that my workflow above, while it seems complicated, is COMPLETELY automated for the most part. my DEFAULT settings are used 99% of the time in Lightroom as soon as images are ingested. I ONLY play with WB and Exposure once I export to Photoshop for final output for web or A.net/JP.net. Beauty of RAW is also that I can automate much of the stuff.

I have different presets for Cloudy, Sunny, etc. weather/conditions.