- Messages
- 18,695
- Name
- LongLensPhotography
- Edit My Images
- No
As a Lightroom and OSX user how would I ever go to changing fields such as f stop value or flash on / off setting ideally in the most automated way possible?
The reason is about as strange as the request itself. Well till now the client was happy with no EXIF data but this is looking to change if I have to take it at face value. They clearly show examples using obvious fill flash (so I must presume they pretty much expect it) but then also ask not to use it. Sometimes it is just inevitable and can be done very subtly except for the exif tag. I get it that you don't shouldn't overuse it and keep an eye on nasty shadows or hotspots. That's what they used to say before. You know I'd probably prefer to save my flashes for other things and just keep it simple. I'm just not sure it can work in every single case. I was just editing such image for another client and that's a HDR base exposure and 2 flash exposures combined to one. It looks awful without this, but it was so much hassle and time I may as well just work at Tesco. Turn on some bloody lamp like a nuke going off in the corner? Well that is surely going to make it look awful in many cases!
On one hand I don't want complaints for poor exposure and HDR look, but on the other I don't want to be seen openly disregarding the checklist and I'm sure there will be plenty of other things going amiss like crappy weather exteriors for half a year and so on. They even think tripod can't hold it all still for more than 1s so this may need edited out too. In winter it is as bad as 30s sometimes to get close enough exposure! At least no more renaming of HDR files to remove that label...
Hopefully I am just too paranoid and they will not check any of it until they come across some very bad photo looking for the reasons. Or maybe some automated thing is coming. Who knows. Maybe no exif is still OK. For sure I want the option to have a safe EXIF to present.
Of course if you merge a few files in photoshop and one of them has the "right" settings you just base the output on that. It is just a lot of hassle if that isn't necessary for the final image.
The reason is about as strange as the request itself. Well till now the client was happy with no EXIF data but this is looking to change if I have to take it at face value. They clearly show examples using obvious fill flash (so I must presume they pretty much expect it) but then also ask not to use it. Sometimes it is just inevitable and can be done very subtly except for the exif tag. I get it that you don't shouldn't overuse it and keep an eye on nasty shadows or hotspots. That's what they used to say before. You know I'd probably prefer to save my flashes for other things and just keep it simple. I'm just not sure it can work in every single case. I was just editing such image for another client and that's a HDR base exposure and 2 flash exposures combined to one. It looks awful without this, but it was so much hassle and time I may as well just work at Tesco. Turn on some bloody lamp like a nuke going off in the corner? Well that is surely going to make it look awful in many cases!
On one hand I don't want complaints for poor exposure and HDR look, but on the other I don't want to be seen openly disregarding the checklist and I'm sure there will be plenty of other things going amiss like crappy weather exteriors for half a year and so on. They even think tripod can't hold it all still for more than 1s so this may need edited out too. In winter it is as bad as 30s sometimes to get close enough exposure! At least no more renaming of HDR files to remove that label...
Hopefully I am just too paranoid and they will not check any of it until they come across some very bad photo looking for the reasons. Or maybe some automated thing is coming. Who knows. Maybe no exif is still OK. For sure I want the option to have a safe EXIF to present.
Of course if you merge a few files in photoshop and one of them has the "right" settings you just base the output on that. It is just a lot of hassle if that isn't necessary for the final image.
