Irene McC
Legend
- Location
- CPT, South Africa
Either rename them all to 'Camaro' so they can be selected together via search function etc for each group of cars by name, or again colour code for different cars
You need to cull AND sort. What I might try is a first pass to cull obvious bad ones and add a keyword that identifies the car. Later you can search by the keyword to gather all the instances of a particular car.What if I could find a way to pull them all together so I can view as a group, and cull down to those one or two shots in one step?
Either rename them all to 'Camaro' so they can be selected together via search function etc for each group of cars by name, or again colour code for different cars
Right but now we're back to what I'm trying to avoid, which is time.You need to cull AND sort. What I might try is a first pass to cull obvious bad ones and add a keyword that identifies the car. Later you can search by the keyword to gather all the instances of a particular car.
If Darktable supports keywording.
I've looked at Photo Mechanic but remain undecided. It looks like the biggest advantage it has is speed in opening and reviewing the files, but since it depends on rankings and colors it doesn't offer much in sorting over a manual application of the same idea.I would use a single word but I suppose 100+ words would be hard to keep track of. No matter how you approach it, it's still a lot of photos to sort out. Photo Mechanic is designed specifically for high volume. The new Photo Mechanic Plus has now added a database. If you're planning on selling prints or files $230 might be a good investment.
Pressing the "a" key when the embedded image is displayed will display the full size RAW in FastStone Viewer.Something to be aware of with Faststone (great software) is that I believe by default it displays embedded preview images from RAWs. Not a huge deal for a culling scenario and it is of course much faster than asking it to decode RAWs. If you do want to change it there is an option in Settings.
The Adobe Photography plan is cheaper and more powerful than either of them.I have been mulling switching editors since Capture One's pricing fiascos over the last six months. I could not quite get used to the Darktable UI but it does seem pretty capable. Maybe I need to give it another look. I have been seriously considering going with DXO PhotoLab, but it has quirks of its own (don't they all). Or maybe I will just continue with C1 as familiarity is a strong attractor, lol.
I just use it for culling/sorting/ comparing.Something to be aware of with Faststone (great software) is that I believe by default it displays embedded preview images from RAWs. Not a huge deal for a culling scenario and it is of course much faster than asking it to decode RAWs. If you do want to change it there is an option in Settings.
I have been mulling switching editors since Capture One's pricing fiascos over the last six months. I could not quite get used to the Darktable UI but it does seem pretty capable. Maybe I need to give it another look. I have been seriously considering going with DXO PhotoLab, but it has quirks of its own (don't they all). Or maybe I will just continue with C1 as familiarity is a strong attractor, lol.
And there are professionals, Kevin Mullins for example, who recommend JPEGs, and using the camera set to P mode. Pretty much how I use my camera! My 'editing' generally consists of crop to suit subject on my iPad. Job done!I have never been a fan of LR, but maybe the UI has evolved and I should give it another chance. I havve looked at Affinity too, mixed feelings on that one. Also checked out Luminar, ACDSee, RawTherapee/ART, GIMP, and probably some others I have already forgotten. They all do global controls pretty well - exposure, contrast, saturation, etc. I also want to be able to exert fine control over an area when I want it, and here they vary a lot. And there is the UI in general, which seems either crazy complex and hard to grok or oversimplified. And then there is the push to add AI to everything.
If I am honest with myself, a lot of post-processing I do is because the camera/lens recorded an image differently than I thought it did at the time. With the better color and image quality of recent bodies, I have actually toyed with the idea of getting a new body, dumping the whole RAW workflow and go JPEGs. There are full-time professionals whose work I enjoy who do JPEGs, so I know it can work, but I would be looking at pretty expensive-to-me bodies so I am not sure I want to jump off that cliff.
It took me many years to learn how to take a photo of what I was seeing, rather than what I was looking at. Freeman Patterson "Photography and the Art of Seeing", along with Michael Freeman's "The Photographer's Eye" and Harald Mante's "The Photograph Colour Composition and Design", among others, and my wife's observations, helped greatly.I have never been a fan of LR, but maybe the UI has evolved and I should give it another chance. I havve looked at Affinity too, mixed feelings on that one. Also checked out Luminar, ACDSee, RawTherapee/ART, GIMP, and probably some others I have already forgotten. They all do global controls pretty well - exposure, contrast, saturation, etc. I also want to be able to exert fine control over an area when I want it, and here they vary a lot. And there is the UI in general, which seems either crazy complex and hard to grok or oversimplified. And then there is the push to add AI to everything.
If I am honest with myself, a lot of post-processing I do is because the camera/lens recorded an image differently than I thought it did at the time. With the better color and image quality of recent bodies, I have actually toyed with the idea of getting a new body, dumping the whole RAW workflow and go JPEGs. There are full-time professionals whose work I enjoy who do JPEGs, so I know it can work, but I would be looking at pretty expensive-to-me bodies so I am not sure I want to jump off that cliff.