Size matters - what do you do to your photos after editing

[Iwan Bogels]

Hi everybody,

A current discussion on this forum made me wonder what we do with our photos do after we edit our images. I know you can do a million things with them, but I'm trying to find out the three most used resizing options per person. Therefor I have limited the number of options per person to three.

Curious regards,
Iwan

[DJdeRidder]

I selected 'None of the Above' because I only resize (or should I say 'export') images whenever I need them for a specific purpose. When I upload photos to forums I just export them from Lightroom at 900x600 and a copyright text will automatically be added. If I submit them to Airliners.net they are exported at 1200x800. If I need to send them to a magazine I will export them fullsize at 300dpi. All these export sizes and settings are stored in presets, so it's just a one-click process (no matter how many photos).

Why would I want to have resized copies of my images scattered around my computer? I only have my originals, plus Lightroom's develop settings (so I do have some 2000 images ready to be used for whatever purpose)..

[Erik_7Xi]

I just keep the PSDs without any resizing. When I need JPEGs, I just run one of my actions which either create a high res JPEG @ 300 dpi or creates smaller thumbnails for emailing out.

[Flyboy]

First I keep all the RAW's as well as TIFF slide scans.
The edited pictures will be cropped and or resized to 2700 x 1800 px to allow use in the future (as screen saver..) without need for re-editting when screens get bigger... They are also sufficient in size for printing.

[EHAM]

I selected "none of the above" too. I save my edited photos as a 3000x2000 pixels TIF-image (or less in case of photos taken with my 6 mp Nikon D70S camera, which I don't resize at all). This resolution is high enough for publication in magazines 99,9% of the time. I don't see any reason to save the TIFs at a higher resolution. In my opinion it's just a waste of memory space (and yes I do have a reasonable harddisk size of 1,2 TB). In the very unlikely event that I need a photo full size, I just edit the RAW again. No big deal.
When I want to publish a photo on Airliners.net/my website/forums/etc, I grab the TIF-image and save it as a 1200x800 JPEG (while keeping the 3000x2000 TIF of course).

[ReneHenckens]

I save all the original RAW files.
When I edit a photo I save it as a 1280x853px (=3:2) .jpg file.
Sometimes I save the .psd files as well, however this is rare.

[Pancake]

I save all the original RAW files.
When I edit a photo I save it as a 1280x853px (=3:2) .jpg file.
Sometimes I save the .psd files as well, however this is rare.

The same for me, but i always save the PSD- files.
Regards,
Johan

[SquAdmin]

I selected 'None of the Above' because I only resize (or should I say 'export') images whenever I need them for a specific purpose. Why would I want to have resized copies of my images scattered around my computer?

[DJdeRidder]

I'm quite surprised to see how many people still save edited copies of their photos. How many of these shoot JPEG and save their copy in JPEG format? Do you realize that when you take this "high resolution" copy to resize them further that your image quality is degraded three times due to JPEG compression (once in-camera, twice in Photoshop)? Or does everyone store them as PSD's and TIFF's?

And now that I come to think of it.. If you need a 1200x800 pixel photo, is there really no difference in the final result if you take an edited and resized PSD/TIFF as opposed to the original? I know PSD/TIFF does not compress data, but you definitely lose pixels after resizing. If you resize twice, pixels are lost twice. Will this have any influence on the final result, or is it negligible?

[Bjorn1979]

Selected "None of the above" as i edit and keep the original jpeg or raw (raw for nightshots) saved on HD. The edited one is uploaded to jetphotos in different sizes from 1024*687 till 1600*1067. I also keep the edited one saved on HD.

[EHAM]

I'm quite surprised to see how many people still save edited copies of their photos.

How come you're surprised? If you were photographing analogue, you wouldn't keep only the negatives, right? Or am I missing something here?

[Erik_7Xi]

I'm quite surprised to see how many people still save edited copies of their photos.

Well I do need my photos multiple times, for multiple purposes and I can't be bothered to re-edit them every single time

[Iwan Bogels]

I'm quite surprised to see how many people still save edited copies of their photos.

How come you're surprised? If you were photographing analogue, you wouldn't keep only the negatives, right? Or am I missing something here?

It my be interesting to know that when you have edited your photos in Lightroom, you can save them in all kind of formats, at any time you want, with one push of a button. Like a 3000x2000 TIFF in Adobe1998, 900x600 JPG in sRGB, 4425x3950 PSD in ProPhoto or any other image you need.

DJ is an expert on this (see his book Lightroom for Aviation Photographers at http://www.milaviapress.com/lightroom/book.php). His “trick” is relatively simple. He edits his photos in Lightroom, all the way until he is happy with the final result. Instead of saving his work as a JPG, he leaves it in Lightroom.

Lightroom did not really change his photo, but it only showed him a preview of what his actions would look like if applied to the photo. Instead of applying the actions, Lightroom creates a small “instructions file” and attaches it to the photo. This “instructions file” contains all things he did to achieve his final result, like lighting + 0,25, contrast -2, crop 5%, remove dustspot at X and Y, sharpness 70% at 0,7 radius, whitebalance 5125 etc.

Now when DJ needs his photo for his website, he just exports it from Lightroom. All he need to do is click the export button and tell Lightroom he needs it as a 900x600 JPG in sRGB. Lightroom then reads the original file, makes a copy of it and applies the instructions file, and resizes it to 900x600 JPG in sRGB. The original file will not be affected at all, and a copy of it will come out as the requested 900x600 JPG in sRGB. If DJ wants he can click the export button again and create a 1200x800 TIFF in the same way. And if he needs a 3000x2000 PSD tomorrow, he only needs to click export once more.

Why save all kind of formats, taking up so much space, if you can get any kind of file by just one click of a button ?

Right DJ ?

Cheers,
Iwan

[Flyboy]

Why save all kind of formats, taking up so much space, if you can get any kind of file by just one click of a button ?...
Iwan

Iwan, I don't think that in the digital era ' space' is an isseu. You but space by the terrabite nowadays...

Marc

[Iwan Bogels]

Why save all kind of formats, taking up so much space, if you can get any kind of file by just one click of a button ?...
Iwan

Iwan, I don't think that in the digital era ' space' is an isseu. You but space by the terrabite nowadays...

True, but why keep so many copies of the same shot all over your computer if you can have one of each in one big library? As DJ also uses his Lightroom as his database, he can view every shot in his archives by using the right keyword(s). If he needs ir as a file for something or somebody, he just exports it with one click.


Iwan