![]() What you see in Lightroom is the histogram of the converted image, not of JPEG changing conversion parameters will change the histogram. Now, what I see on lightroom histogram is jpeg histogram. FRV shows RAW histogram, very goood! Now, after selecting the photo (often based on focus and composition rather histogram), I load the photo into lightroom (for already loaded, I just reload the xmp or relaunch lightroom). Now, I'm getting confused whether to use RAW-histogram to cull or not !ġ. Lr shows histogram based on embedded-jpeg. It can also show jpeg histogram (from embedded-jpeg). LR shows the correct histogram for the exported image under the export constraints (bit depth, color space, white balance, etc.), thus the real life result you'd get when not editing further. It's FRV that shows the wrong histogram - it's the one that shows the editing potential. So how do you handle this when lightroom histogram is trying to fool ? If I do not have to do further edits, it is fine but it is not going to be the case. I have a huge catalogue in lightroom that I wish to reduce by using FRV.ġ. Let's see if it fits in my work-flow or not. I'm currently using trial version of FRV. Thank you all for sharing your experiences. I still haven't settled on a final workflow. ![]() I wish I could merge the two into one package. In a nutshell, FastRawViewer is better at quickly identifying problem images - missed focus, excessive noise, and blown highlights - and Photo Mechanic is better at dealing with metadata. I have been tinkering with FastRawViewer and Photo Mechanic Plus a lot recently as I rethink my workflow after having used LR almost exclusively for years. I understand it is a personal method but would be helpful to know if you benefitted from this software and how easily you integrated in your lightroom work-flow. I really struggle with lightroom to cull RAW images (1:1 takes a lot of time and disk space), and often I lose interest in looking at the pictures. ![]() I would like to know your opinion on this work-flow. I downloaded the trial version and so far look okay. I could not find enough material on youtube. This is not quite on topic but just what I have noticed dealing with a few hundred photographers every summer.I recently came to know (from dpreview forum) about fastrawviewer for culling RAW images and to emulate the RAW-editor's outcome. I'm guilty of this sometimes too but have figured out that if you know your subject and are quick on the shutter, a lot of the spray and pray isn't necessary. It just means more time and effort culling later on. I see many of my quests still holding down the shutter button after the whale has disappeared. A four or five shot series of a whale fluking up (not sure this is a real word) and diving deep is plenty to still choose the zinger from, but it's so easy to shoot ten or twelve or more shots that most people way over do it. I see this 'over shooting' on my whale watching tours all the time. ![]() BTW, I noticed that since I got a mirrorless camera, I am taking more shots than I usually do. This is why I am asking about Aftershoot. Based upon what the reviews say, using an AI powered culling program, I would have faced the task with a lot more joy. After several weeks of mind numbing work (working off & on), they were down to under 500. I came home from Kenya with almost 8000 shots.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |