Dust spots are an unfortunate fact of life when shooting with a DSLR. Thankfully, Lightroom has tools that help to remove ‘dust bunnies’ from your images. However, dust is not the only enemy, especially for underwater photographers. We also have to contend with backscatter.
Original image, with backscatter
In the (rather ordinary) image of a nudibranch above, we can clearly see lots of spots and speckles. These spots are not dust spots, they are backscatter – the light from my strobes hitting some of the tiny particles suspended in the water, reflecting the light back into the camera
Hopefully, if you use Lightroom (and you really should be as it is a great all-in-one image editing and management package) then you already know about the spot healing brush (Shortcut Q)? As the name suggests, this is the tool to use if you are trying to clone out or heal parts of an image, maybe due to dust spots, backscatter, or even a piece of rubbish spoiling a pristine beach (although it would be better to actually remove the offending item before taking the photo)
Lightroom’s visualise spots option selected
Whilst working on this spotty image I remembered an additional option that is often overlooked when using the healing brush. Visualise spots (Shortcut A, when the clone brush is activated – or use the tickbox that is highlighted in red in the above image) presents a very basic black and white image, where dust spots show up as white specks on a black background, making them glaringly obvious.
As can be seen in the image above, finding the blemishes is much easier when the image is in such a contrasty black and white format.
Visualise spots set to maximum
The strength of this negative style image can be adjusted simply by moving the slider, highlighted in red in the above image. This helps to find the smaller specks that were not so obvious with a lower setting. It is down to you as to how far you go with spot removal.
I hope this post helps you with the thankless task that is dust removal.
You can buy (for instant download) Lightroom 6 from Amazon here
My first hard drive failure occurred this week and was, as is to be expected, quite unexpected.
It wasn’t even a total failure – I was skimming through my Lightroom catalogue to find an image, and noticed some coloured banding showing on images.
Corrupted nudibranch image
Naturally, I was a little concerned, so I clicked through to explorer and opened the NEF (raw) file directly using Photoshop, and the banding was still there.
This ruled out a corrupt Lightroom catalogue, and as it only affected images in 1 folder, I can only assume it is a bad sector. Unfortunately I have no idea when this occurred, so have copied the corrupt file to both of my backup drives.
At this point in time, there is seemingly nothing I can do, so I just have to accept the loss of 14 files. Thankfully none of these files were part of my better work.
I have stopped using the drive, and a replacement is already on order from Amazon.
In the meantime, I have reviewed my backup software and from now on will accept the slower backup but greater security given by data validation.
I am thankful that only a few fairly unimportant images were lost, as I have now been forced into a thorough review of my backup procedures.
As ever, I am open to suggestions for ways to improve the backup process – such as what software are you using?
Lightroom is my primary software for image management and editing, it is a superb piece of software. Whilst you can have multiple catalogues, I do not. I have a single catalogue, called LR_MASTER, which contains all of my images. I do not want to bring all of my images with me, so I use Lightrooms ‘import from catalogue’ feature to bring over any new images, along with any metadata, previews and collections I may have created out on the road.
First step when travelling is that I create a new Lightroom catalogue on the laptop, and call this LR_TRAVEL.
Image files are downloaded, often using Downloader Pro (DLPro), which is set to rename the files it downloads, adding the camera model at the front of the filename (in case I am shooting with multiple bodies). These are downloaded into dated folders, which are automatically created by DLPro. I use dated folders when travelling as I often only want to review that days files. I do not use individual dated subfolders on my desktop machine, having instead just a master folder for each outing.
Once images are downloaded, and backed up, I may do some very light work on that days images, where details are fresh in my mind. I try to get titles done, any special locations, and even basic keywords, to help reduce the workload when I return to my desktop. However, I am mindful of the fact that if I am working, I am not out shooting, so try to only use what is truly downtime to do some metadata.
When I get back home, I import LR_TRAVEL into my main Lightroom catalogue (LR_MASTER), point Lightroom to the location of the trip folders on one of the external drives and copy over all of the images from that trip. I backup everything to a second internal drive, and 2 external drives, 1 of which lives off site.
Currently I have 3 of these 1TB drives – Samsung M3 1TB on Amazon
Once I am happy that everything has transferred and been backed up then I will wipe the external travel drives, and delete the LR_TRAVEL catalogue and it’s previews from the laptop, ready for the next trip.
I am always looking for ways to improve my workflow, so please do leave a comment, or a suggestion.
This is a scheduled post, as I am in Swaziland and South Africa until 7th March, and will probably have no internet access. If you do comment, please don’t think I am ignoring you by not replying!
Online, debate still rages about the best way to organise images, and one of these debates usually boils down to whether to let your catalogue software (such as Lightroom) handle everything about your images, or to use some sort of a date or event based system.
I am somewhere in the middle. I use Lightroom for cataloguing, and do enter keywords and metadata, but I also like my file and folder names to be logical, as I am sure that one day I will unfortunately have to move away from Lightroom.
I only really shoot for myself, so don’t have a vast stock library to maintain, and I don’t shoot multiple clients in a short time frame. I feel my naming conventions are more aligned to those who shoot on occasion, rather than every day.
This has the benefit of being placed in date order by default, when you look at the folder, but the disadvantage that unless you know the exact date something was taken, then it makes it harder to find an image (outside of the catalogue software). One benefit of date based is that Lightroom (and other software) can create date based folders on import, thus removing one step from the ingestion process.
I will use date based folders when on a long trip, as the software I use for image ingestion when there are large volumes of images (Downloader Pro) makes it trivial to split downloaded images into not just dated folders, but folders based on shooting info such as camera model, file format etc.
These folders have the advantage that it is immediately clear that in a folder called CLAIRES BIRTHDAY you will find images relating to just that. However, what happens if there are 2 Claire’s? Then what happens when you go to the same 2 parties next year, and the day after. You will end up putting dates on stuff anyway, so it is much better, in my opinion, to start folder names with dates.
As a result of combining the above 2 methods, we end up with what I currently use. The method I use enables the folders to list in date order, but also for me to see at a glance what is within them.
E.g.
Of course, for those who allow their catalogue software to manage everything, there is nothing to stop you just putting every single image in a folder called PHOTOS, and use keywords and metadata to sort and search within the software. The main 2 disadvantages with this are;
As with folder naming, there are several ways to go with file naming.
Whilst in theory you could leave the file names as they are when they come out of the camera, I urge you to change them to something at least vaguely intelligible. Searching through a folder with 10000 images, all starting with DSC_ is not going to be fun. Of course, good image management software, such as Lightroom, takes this sort of thing in its stride by reading the metadata and EXIF info to let it sort via the hidden file information.
CLAIRE.jpeg, CLAIRE AND HANNAH.jpeg work for some people, but as soon as you have multiple images in the same folder, then you need some sort of numbering system as well. Of course, if you combine English names with non-dated folders, you need to start thinking about having dates on the filenames, which leads me nicely on to how I name my files.
Date is self-explanatory, in the format YYYYMMDD it will enable any file I have taken to list in the correct date order, no matter how many other files happen to be in that folder.
Sequence ensures that all images shot on a certain date will display in the order they were shot, even if there were multiple images taken on the same second (using continuous shutter).
Subject allows for searching by subject, and enables me to ensure I am looking at the right images before opening them. I keep it very basic.
It is trivial to have Lightroom rename my files like this, I have the setup saved as a default. I ensure no spaces, and use underscores as a separator.
I feel that my file and folder naming offers me the best of both worlds.
I normally manage my images from within Lightroom, so make sure I use all the great features available within the software, such as smart collections, to make managing and grouping images a breeze.
However, by utilising dates and subjects within my folder and file names, I am also able to narrow down what I am looking for outside of the catalogue.
It may seem overkill having dated filenames within dated folders, but the dated folders are for locating a set of images, and the dated filenames ensure filenames are unique, and independent of being in a folder.
This is a scheduled post, as I am in Swaziland and South Africa until 7th March, and will probably have no internet access. If you do comment, please don’t think I am ignoring you by not replying!
My Nikon D7100 is the first camera I have owned which has dual memory card slots, and I will now only consider a primary camera if it has this feature, which I now consider an important part of my backup strategy.
The reason I am so enthusiastic about dual slots are because of the options available in terms of backup and file handling.
Quite simply, when Card 1 is full images will be written to Card 2. This is the same as shooting with a single card as there is no inbuilt backup, but if a camera is being left for a long time to do time-lapse, then the possibility of having 2 of the largest SDHC cards currently produced installed to give a 1TB capacity may well appeal to some.
More interesting, and providing some backup immediately after shooting, is to set slot 1 to NEF (raw files) and slot 2 to JPEG. By shooting RAW+JPEG on the camera, you instantly have a backup, and by setting the format to JPEG Large & Fine, the JPEG produced is of good enough quality for 95% of people.
I know wedding photographers will often do this, changing the RAW card as it fills, and leave the JPEG card in place until after the shoot. Instant backup, and a pile of JPEGs ready for immediate sending out (assuming colour, contrast etc. is OK)
Every single file written to the card in slot 1 is simultaneously written to the card in slot 2, so you have an instant backup in whatever file format you are using. It may be overkill for those not getting paid for their images, but I would hate to have an amazing shot in the bag and see a card error, knowing it is the only copy of my image.
In short, dual slots give me more options when it comes to backup and workflow, often meaning I can travel without a laptop or tablet.
In future, I would struggle to consider a camera for use as my primary camera without this feature.
My review of the D7100 can be found here – D7100 review.
You can also take a look at the Nikon D7100 on Amazon
© www.arrowpix.com : Sean Arrowsmith
