New DSLR owner, storage/editing questions?

[Wadecool]

Now that I have a new DSLR and will obviously be taking a lot more pictures, I have a couple questions regarding storage and editing. First, what is the best method for storage, a cloud based system (like Carbonite) or an external hard drive or something else? I'm pretty sure I want to keep my photos separate from my PC drives, but not sure what the best method is. Second question, from what I've learned so far it seems that Photoshop is the best program for editing but there are several versions. Which version of Photoshop would work best for me, keeping in mind, my photos will be mostly of family? Thanks.

[Gianna'sPapa]

You will probably get a bunch of different answers on this one. I keep my pics on two different external hard drives. I have a lot of my PP and vacation photos also on Flickr. The plan is to have them in multiple places should a drive fail. I had this happen. Fortunately, I had duplicate files on another hard drive and the DW had just bought me a new one. I easily duplicated the copies and did not lose a picture. When on vacation, I empty my cards each day onto my laptop hard drive and a portable hard drive, again they are always stored in at least two places.

As far PP software, I use Photoshop Elements (currently I use version 8. Version 9 was recently released). I have no need for the more expensive full version of photoshop. Many also swear by Lightroom and Corel's Paint Shop Pro (the DW likes it better that Photoshop. Of course, she found that out after I had upgraded to ver 8 from 6 at her insistence!).

[bradisgoofy]

I use Carbonite in addition to the the PC harddrive and an external harddrive. If your house should burn or flood, the external will be lost too. Plus, with Carbonite, you can back up other things beside your pictures.

[Raindown]

I use two external drives. Each gets a fresh transfer directly from the card. One gets worked on while the other remains a back up. I am looking for an additional online solution though.

[SrisonS]

I back-up my pics to 2 1TB external hard drives. I keep one in a fireproof safe, and the other just out and about (because it won't fit in my 2nd fireproof safe).

As far as software, Lightroom is a great program to use. Not only can you do a lot of editing there, but it's great for organization too. But you can download trial versions of the different Adobe products from their site.

[Groucho]

I use Mozy for my backups. I have not personally used Carbonite, but I have heard from multiple people first-hand within the past couple months who have dumped Carbonite in favor of Mozy and have gotten better performance. Carbonite offers a trial, Mozy offers 2gb totally free. I personally would recommend setting up a free 2tb version just to get a feel of it. I use that on my wife's laptop; it's plenty big enough to back that up. My own backup is right about 1tb now; it will be more than that when it finishes backing up the photos from my latest trip!

I am a big fan of online backups because hard drives are so unreliable, and they can often develop bad sectors which you would never notice unless you tried to pull data off them. In other words, you may connect your external drive and it looks fine and you can copy data to it, but meanwhile some of your existing data is gone. The only way to know for sure is to do a full sector scan on it, which is time-consuming, especially on an external drive. Plus, with external drives, you need some form of backup software or at least a folder sync program. Free/cheap backup software often tends to be a little bit flaky so you need to keep an eye on it.

That being said, Mozy/Carbonite are not places to keep photos to work on them - they are strictly for backup. The originals you can keep on an internal or external drive. There's little reason not to store them on your internal drive, unless you're running out of space or you want portability. (This is a good time to put in a plug for shooting in Raw mode - even if you don't want to process the photos now, you may want that ability later and shooting Raw now lets you go back in the future to edit today's photos.)

For editing software, definitely try a trial of Lightroom, and it may not hurt to check for some basic training videos (there are probably some on YouTube and on Adobe's site)... it's extremely good as managing your photos as well as "processing" them. By procesing, I mean cropping, rotating, adjusting colors, brightless, that kind of thing - you'll need Photoshop to cut someone's head off and put it on another body, but Photoshop can't manage your photos like Lightroom can.

[Wadecool]

I will admit that I am still learning my new DSLR but I do have a question regarding shooting in RAW. My camera has the ability to shoot in RAW only, or in RAW+JPEG. Which form is the best to get the most quality photos?
Can I purchase Lightroom without Photoshop, or is it just a supplement to Photoshop? Thanks for the insight.

[Raindown]

I will admit that I am still learning my new DSLR but I do have a question regarding shooting in RAW. My camera has the ability to shoot in RAW only, or in RAW+JPEG. Which form is the best to get the most quality photos?
Can I purchase Lightroom without Photoshop, or is it just a supplement to Photoshop? Thanks for the insight.

Lightroom is a stand alone product. As far as RAM versus RAW+JPEG it really depends. I shoot raw only for the increased editing flexibility later. I don't find having that extra JPEG right away is suitable for my purposes, it may be for yours. It just makes my importing easier and usually my photos get some sort of correction done.

[Groucho]

Raw is the format that will give you more flexibility to edit it. Jpg is what you normally get if you don't shoot Raw. Raw+jpg means that the camera will make two files each time you take a picture; one Raw and one jpg. This may be a good way to go if you don't want to convert the Raw files yourself yet, but it will use up more space on your memory card, and take a tiny bit longer to write each picture to the card.

Lightroom does not require Photoshop. Check Adobe's website to get a trial version to try it out.

[Wadecool]

Thanks for the valuable info. It is much appreciated.

[emcclay]

I have a 1TB WD external HD that I store my pictures on. They have become so much more affordable. I also have galleries on SmugMug and flickr. As far as editing, I highly recommend using a combination of Photoshop and Lightroom. Lightroom can do great things for your pictures if you use it right!

[Revan]

Most of my post-processing is done in Lightroom, I had Aperature 2.0 and never connected with it. Part of the reason I never liked Aperature (and iPhoto) is the way they store your files.

I have two hard drives one syncs all changes from the other. I also use Backblaze, I have more than 100GB of photos, I may also start backing up to DVD . . .


SrisonS I back-up my pics to 2 1TB external hard drives. I keep one in a fireproof safe, and the other just out and about (because it won't fit in my 2nd fireproof safe).

Would a hard drive in a fireproof safe warp and melt from the heat?

[photo_chick]

Storage... on my desktop, on my laptop, a backup on my NAS, a backup online (Carbonite and some on Smugmug), a backup on disc....you get the picture, I've got copies stashed everywhere. I've had too many hard drives fail. LOL

As far as software... Lightroom is great for image management and RAW processing. Photoshop comes in for heavier image editing. Photoshop can do the RAW processing with Adobe Camera RAW, but to me it's a pain in the workflow.

[Wadecool]

Honestly, I'm still having trouble deciding whether to use RAW or JPG or both. Since I'm only shooting family stuff and the JPG's from this camera are going to way better than what my old p&s could do, I'm tempted to stick with that format, but I don't know. You can still do some minor editing with jpg files, right?

[photo_chick]

Honestly, I'm still having trouble deciding whether to use RAW or JPG or both. Since I'm only shooting family stuff and the JPG's from this camera are going to way better than what my old p&s could do, I'm tempted to stick with that format, but I don't know. You can still do some minor editing with jpg files, right?

You can actually do some pretty major editing with jpeg files if you know how, but it's more difficult to pull it off and have it look good. RAW files are much easier to work with in this respect for major changes to exposure, contrast, recovery, etc... And even if you don't know how to process RAW files now, you can use the standard defaults, which can get you what your camera does, then come back in a few years when you understand more and process again for even better results.

It is a personal choice though. If you have the editing skills for jpeg, or don't plan to make any major changes, jpeg might be for you. But if you don't have advanced editing skills and want to be able to easily adjust things RAW might be a better choice.

[SrisonS]

Most of my post-processing is done in Lightroom, I had Aperature 2.0 and never connected with it. Part of the reason I never liked Aperature (and iPhoto) is the way they store your files.

I have two hard drives one syncs all changes from the other. I also use Backblaze, I have more than 100GB of photos, I may also start backing up to DVD . . .


SrisonS

Would a hard drive in a fireproof safe warp and melt from the heat?

What program do you use to sync your hard drives??? I've made so many changes to my main HD after already backing up a lot of it. And I bought my 2nd backup at at totally different time; so not everything is backed up to there.

And good question about the safe. I have no idea though. But at least if the fire instantly hits that area, I'm hoping I can grab the safe in time; without having to worry about a non-fireproof one instantly feeling the damage. And yes, I'm trying to think like a superhero. ;)

[Revan]

What program do you use to sync your hard drives??? I've made so many changes to my main HD after already backing up a lot of it. And I bought my 2nd backup at at totally different time; so not everything is backed up to there.

I use Carbon Copy Cloner, I'm on a Mac - not sure if they have it for PC. It's awesome - if I have a drive unplugged, it will see when I plug it back in and scan/sync

I found an article about firesafe's and I guess there are some that are rated for digital media by UL (underwriters laboratory), but not all are safe to store hard drives and DVDs.

[Experiment_626]

even if you don't know how to process RAW files now, you can use the standard defaults, which can get you what your camera does, then come back in a few years when you understand more and process again for even better results.That's an excellent point. I think it's a good idea to shoot in RAW just on general principles. In the future, if you stick with photography and keep practicing, two things will almost certainly happen. First, software to process RAW files will improve, likely dramatically. And second, your shooting and editing skills will also improve -- again, probably quite a bit. There's a high likelihood you could then go back and revisit some of your earlier images and get better results by reprocessing them at that point. I know that I regret having shot in JPEG mode for the first year or two after I got my first digital camera (a Nikon D100). In particular, one of my all-time favorite photos was shot as JPEG. Though I can tweak it somewhat in Lightroom now (and more effectively than I could back in 2003 when it was originally shot), I really wish it were a RAW file, because I know I could improve it even more.

Shoot RAW from the get-go and save those files -- if not for now, for the future.

Scott

[Wadecool]

From what I'm reading, after shooting in RAW, I'd need to do some post processing just to even view those photos, right? What is the advantage of shooting in RAW+JPG?

[SrisonS]

From what I'm reading, after shooting in RAW, I'd need to do some post processing just to even view those photos, right? What is the advantage of shooting in RAW+JPG?

You are correct about the RAW. Although you won't have to do major work to them, you'll have to make a couple of quick adjustments (I.e. Contrast, saturation, sharpening). Using a program with presets will help to speed up that process. Shooting in RAW+Jpeg will produce jpegs that are processed with the camera's settings. So it'll have a decent contrast, saturation and sharpening. The RAW files will sometimes look a little flat and unsharpened.

Some people like that setting so they can instantly share/use the jpeg versions. I've heard of sport/event photographers using it to instantly get those photos to their clients, so that they can immediately be used for publication.

[Groucho]

What program do you use to sync your hard drives??? I've made so many changes to my main HD after already backing up a lot of it. And I bought my 2nd backup at at totally different time; so not everything is backed up to there.

And good question about the safe. I have no idea though. But at least if the fire instantly hits that area, I'm hoping I can grab the safe in time; without having to worry about a non-fireproof one instantly feeling the damage. And yes, I'm trying to think like a superhero. ;)
In the PC world, you may want to give Microsoft's free SyncToy a look - it's a pretty competent and easy-to-use program to keep folders in sync.

You are correct about the RAW. Although you won't have to do major work to them, you'll have to make a couple of quick adjustments (I.e. Contrast, saturation, sharpening). Using a program with presets will help to speed up that process. Shooting in RAW+Jpeg will produce jpegs that are processed with the camera's settings. So it'll have a decent contrast, saturation and sharpening. The RAW files will sometimes look a little flat and unsharpened.
Some of that depends on the raw software you use. If your camera came bundled with software, it will often recognize the information that your camera saved in terms of the in-camera settings. In the Pentax world, their bundled software is a modified version of Silkypix and produces output pretty close to what you'd get by shooting JPG in the first place, reading the proprietary makernotes that all the OEMs put in their RAWs. If you're using Lightroom, you can set the import preset to be fairly similar to how you would in the camera (ie, adjust sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc like you would on the camera) and that way everything is already fairly "punchy" or however you like it without needing to tweak anything.

Of course, there's always something that you may want to tweak... then something else... it's dangerous to your free time!

[SrisonS]

In the PC world, you may want to give Microsoft's free SyncToy a look - it's a pretty competent and easy-to-use program to keep folders in sync.


Some of that depends on the raw software you use. If your camera came bundled with software, it will often recognize the information that your camera saved in terms of the in-camera settings. In the Pentax world, their bundled software is a modified version of Silkypix and produces output pretty close to what you'd get by shooting JPG in the first place, reading the proprietary makernotes that all the OEMs put in their RAWs. If you're using Lightroom, you can set the import preset to be fairly similar to how you would in the camera (ie, adjust sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc like you would on the camera) and that way everything is already fairly "punchy" or however you like it without needing to tweak anything.

Of course, there's always something that you may want to tweak... then something else... it's dangerous to your free time!


Thanks for the suggestion.

And you are definitely right about the type of PP software affecting what you need to do with your RAW shots. I used to use Canon's software, and the RAW pics would look pretty decent. But then I started using Lightroom, and it was just like "what the H??? These don't look too good." And with Lightroom, you can import your pictures to have them somewhat already calibrated to your camera settings. But I still don't care for the Canon ones. They're not bad, but they don't look too much better than the Adobe default setting. So I haven't even bothered with them.

[Wadecool]

In the PC world, you may want to give Microsoft's free SyncToy a look - it's a pretty competent and easy-to-use program to keep folders in sync.


Some of that depends on the raw software you use. If your camera came bundled with software, it will often recognize the information that your camera saved in terms of the in-camera settings. In the Pentax world, their bundled software is a modified version of Silkypix and produces output pretty close to what you'd get by shooting JPG in the first place, reading the proprietary makernotes that all the OEMs put in their RAWs. If you're using Lightroom, you can set the import preset to be fairly similar to how you would in the camera (ie, adjust sharpness, contrast, saturation, etc like you would on the camera) and that way everything is already fairly "punchy" or however you like it without needing to tweak anything.

Of course, there's always something that you may want to tweak... then
something else... it's dangerous to your free time!

My Nikon D3100 did come with bundled software, its called ViewNX2 but I have yet to figure it out. Do any other Nikon owners out there have this software, and is it any good? Do I even need to buy another processing program?