PSD or TIFF? Workflow question....

Marcel

Marcel

Kim Jong Bod
Admin
Messages
29,411
Name
Marcel
Edit My Images
Yes
Right, my workflow is as follows :

I have an HD strictly for Photography stuff.

I have folders, named by date and location, to store the RAW files in.
I also have 4 folders.

1. Processing
2. Processed
3. WEB
4. Backup TIFFs

So a RAW file might be located at :

L:\2005\12.29 Manchester City Centre\051229_3314.CR2

I open this in RSE, tinker with it, and convert to a 300DPI, 16 Bit Tiff, in folder 1 above.
I then open this file in Photoshop and resave as a PSD (deleting the tiff).

I edit, tinker, and work on it, with no sharpening.
I then save the PSD, moving it into folder 2 to note that's it's final.
I drop the image to 8 bit, before flattening the layers, and saving as a TIFF in folder 4 (8 bit and flattening purely for filesize reasons).
I then sharpen, resize, border and save for web with an action script of mine.

So with that workflow in mind, the original working image, should I be keeping it as a TIFF all the way through, and not bothering with PSD files?


Sorry to waffle, hope you all understand me :)
 
It seems a bit long winded to me and also that you are adding in an extra step?

This is what I would do…

Save your raw files in the folder named as you do, then process in Rawshooter which will automatically make a subfolder called “Processed” and tell it to save them as 16bit tiffs at 300dpi.

Any other editing you now do can be done in PS (cloning etc) and then save the files back into the “Processed” folder using the same names, overwriting the originals.

From there I would create one subfolder called web, here I would use the tiff files and reduce them, border them and sharpen them for web display (I usually do this at the same time as processing the .tiff to remove smeg/level etc as it’s easy and quick (really just one or two more steps). These web size versions are also easy to use a reference files for quick browsing ;)

To back up everything including your raw files you can just copy the main folder.
To print, you just take any full size .tiff and apply any changes that you want just for prints.

This way you only do work that is required, your file system is logical and easy to follow and has the added advantage of being easy to back up as well.

The only time I work in PSD is when I have many layers in an image and I can’t complete the work in one “sitting”. I will then save as a PSD until I have finished then on last save convert to a tiff, deleting the left over psd.

Does that make any sense?
 
It does make sense.

I do pretty much what you do there, but with different folders really, rather than the normal subfolders for processed.

The extra step of saving the 8bit TIFF, I forgot to mention, is to plonk them all on a separate backup DVD just incase. I could copy the full 16 bit versions, but drop it to 8bit for the second backup just to save space really.
As you know a 16 bit tiff from my camera is a good 50 megs, more if its more complex, yet an 8 bit can be as low as a few meg.
 
Steve said:
From there I would create one subfolder called web, here I would use the tiff files and reduce them, border them and sharpen them for web display (I usually do this at the same time as processing the .tiff to remove smeg/level etc as it’s easy and quick (really just one or two more steps). These web size versions are also easy to use a reference files for quick browsing
Click to expand...

I think I need to clarify that step a little more...it’s not the best written paragraph I have ever read ;)

Once I have my converted full size 16 bit tiff file open in Photoshop, I do any required work to the image then when completed I save it back over the original file in the “processed” folder but I don’t close the image. I then reduce the image size to what I want for web, apply sharpening and a border, then save that version into my “Web” subfolder. This way I have the raw files in the dated folder, the processed full size 16bit tiffs in a subfolder called “processed” and another subfolder called “web” with my small versions.

Hopefully that’s a bit clearer now :)

I don't see the point of you backing up 8 bit versions though, if you need two backups I would keep the second still as a 16 bit tiff and just add in another hd if you are running out of space, for the costs it would be worth it in the long run.
 
I'll have to give this a go as I miss out the tiff step completely.....basically straight from raw prcoessing into PS & then save finished item as JPG. Am I losing quality due to this, or does it just help post processing quality ?
 
You are doing neither as I can see it but assuming you do extra work in PS other than the raw convertion and then save that as a jpg, should you want to revist that picture at a later date, you will have to do all the work again to get a tiff file otherwise you are working on and resaving a jpg which will lose you quality, especially if you start saving it several times.

Marcel's and my workflow allow us to work on an edited tiff that is basically a lossless file.
 
Ah, cheers Steve.....makes sense now.
 
The other potential problem that you may hit Dave is if you start submitting to agecies and they request a large file version of one of your images, you won't have it. You will then have to process the raw file again, trying to get exactly the same result and save that as a 16bit tiff.

Just a thought ;)
 
Good point....one step at a time though...have to get good enough to sell shots first ;) Arkadys sorting that in Feb though :whistle2:
 
Steve said:
The other potential problem that you may hit Dave is if you start submitting to agecies and they request a large file version of one of your images, you won't have it. You will then have to process the raw file again, trying to get exactly the same result and save that as a 16bit tiff.

Just a thought ;)
Click to expand...

That's exactly my reason for keeping the PSD in the middle, and also for not saving it sharpened.
I did read that publications/agencies etc usually request shots get to them unsharpened, so I have been only sharpening for the web (unless it's *really* needed in the full size).
 
DJW said:
Good point....one step at a time though...have to get good enough to sell shots first ;) Arkadys sorting that in Feb though :whistle2:
Click to expand...

Well, he'll be trying.:banghead:
 
DJW said:
Good point....one step at a time though...have to get good enough to sell shots first ;) Arkadys sorting that in Feb though :whistle2:
Click to expand...

Have you had a look at some of the images on image libraries?
I think your already there Dave.
 
Agreed - some of the stuff up on those places is....ummmm....well....:embarasse
 
Hard to tell sometimes - depends what buyers want. Some stuff that sells very well is utter dross artistically - look at my pictures :D
It's all about picking the right market. If you're producing work for money, you tailor it to the requirements of the customer, which may not necessarily be the same thing that you would do if you were taking the images for yourself.
 
cant really offer advice here, but thanks for an insight into your workflows, im still trying to establish one that doesnt take 10 hours for a series of images.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top