Sport's post processing tutorial (RAW)

Associate
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Posts
1,940
First part, constructed in todays lunch break.

Step 1)
Import all of your photos - [card reader advised] and if you wish apply a preset to make things prettier (make sure not to clip any highlights or shadows - I'd advise something like the following on an average day) sync this to all photos.

83242818.jpg


Step 2)
Use [Shift + P] to mark your best photos, [Shift + x] to mark the rest. View rejected photo's and delete them. You should probably only have about 30-35 photos left. Mark the best 12 photo's as a 3. These 12 are you primary goal. Leave the others on the HDD untill you leave the circuit.

28015508.jpg


Step 3)
Crop the 12 [r]

11879247.jpg


Step 4)
Open in photoshop and use Auto-Tone (if auto tone doesn't work (football pitches or athletics tracks) use auto contrast)

98305380.jpg


Step 5)

Add a hint of vibrance, too much and the picture editors will bite your head off. (+20 MAX!)

72286111.jpg


Step 6)
Sharpen the file - not too much though. Oh and never use an OOF/blurred shot. Even if it's out by 10 or 15 cm. Don't.

23461005.jpg


Step 7)

The most important part. CAPTIONING. If you don't how's the photo editor supposed to know whats going on! Make sure the captions are detailed.

14505498.jpg


Step 8)

Save a copy to lightroom.

91129947.jpg


Step 9)

Resize to specs. (2600pixels is what I usually use - but sometimes your asked for 3000/fullsize/2000 or even 1000!) or if your saving to web, use your standard size (800px longest side?).


95645539.jpg


Step 10)

Use save to web at quality of about 70-80.

Final Result

84701473.jpg



I'd advise you to turn much of this into keyboard shortcut's, actions and presets. I can usually get 12 FTP'd in under 10 mins (around 40 seconds per shot on average), fully PP'd and captioned.

Now this is RAW. But tbh you shouldn't be shooting RAW here. So in tommorow's lunch break... Sport's post processing tutorial (JPEGs)

Hope this helps some people,
p0ss3s3d

EDITED: Neater layout now I thinks.
 
Last edited:
Why do you go into Photoshop when you can do every single one of the things that you've done in Photoshop without leaving Lightroom?
 
Why do you go into Photoshop when you can do every single one of the things that you've done in Photoshop without leaving Lightroom?

It's just what I've always used (Ps).

The sharpening tools are much more advanced than Lightrooms tool and there no auto tone feature in Lightroom (comparable one anaway)
 
It's just what I've always used (Ps).

The sharpening tools are much more advanced than Lightrooms tool and there no auto tone feature in Lightroom (comparable one anaway)

Lightroom 3 has improved quite a bit - if you are using that?
 
Lightroom 3 has improved quite a bit - if you are using that?

No, I'll look into it but I think I'll stick with photoshop. It's even better with jpeg...

Why the angle?

Why not? ;)

It's just becuase I fancied doing one on an angle. It's the only one from that set on an angle. (and to be fair it's nothing but a boring pan, so in some ways I'm trying to inject a little drama but generally I'd say an angle detracts from a photo. But used sparingly, I think they can work quite well.
 
You can also process shot's that are straight too using this method.... :p:p

s6o4816.jpg


s6o4906.jpg


Before I get picked on for choosing panning shots, you can also do it on non panning shots too... - :p

s6o4924.jpg


Its a tree :eek:

I mean the white part also, not just the small black triangle.


I see what you mean, but I've sold tilted and non tilted photos. It just depends on the usage/viewer I guess. Most of my stuff is straight, but sometimes adding an angle turns a barrier into an interesting line running across the image, and if thats what the publication want - GREAT - if not, 90% of the time they look through the other stuff I sent them and pick out another shot.
 
^
This makes for an interesting comparison Rojin...

Sorry about the lack of contrast - shot through a fence killing all contrast.


RAW from the camera > resized

s6o4962.jpg

CS4 - RAW > auto tone > rezied bicubic sharper when saved for web

cs4.jpg

Lightroom 2 - RAW > Auto tone > Export to 800px

60584403.jpg

CS4's sharper and IMO has more pop, it's darkened the blacks a little, corrected the slight blue cast and raised the upper mid tones a tad. Lightroom's darkened everything - still got the cast. OOC has a slight cast and no contrast.

But it's personal preference. I'm sure some prefer the deeper tone of Lightroom, I prefer the pop of CS4!
 
I dont know if its my monitor but i think your pics look better unprocessed. It looks to me like you go a bit OTT on the shadows / contrast.

Alternativy disregard the above and just shoot with Nikon in jpeg :p
 
Back
Top Bottom