Well, when you have more than 2 or 3 thousand photos* (I can't imagine professionals with 100 thousand!), it's time to trim the fat, so to speak, and sort the photos to designate the keepers from the non-keepers.
I went to this site and—I don't know if it's a he or she so I'll use "they"—they set up a bunch of articles and one is about sorting. Aperture has a 5 star system and, honestly, I find it hard to rate my own photos honestly since I have the emotional attachment to my photos. Factor that into trying to rate a photo with 5 (or 6 if you count deletion) different possibilities makes it almost crippling.
When you are staring at a keeper, is it really 5 stars? 4 stars? 4 1/2? (where's the half star key?)
I sat here and split hairs. It was so demotivating.
Well, this site had an article about sorting photos. It basically told you to unemotionally skim through and rate from 1 star to 3—forget the 4th and 5th. 1 star was "internal/don't show, 2 stars=good/show, and 3 stars=great/show.
The 'ol sort and process 2 or more stars!
I whipped through a project and yeah, it was maybe 400 photos, but I got it down to about 80 "keepers". Then I went to work on processing them. That saved a lot of time! Holy crap!
So...I am a bit better sorted and my perspective on sharing photos has been changed a bit. I mean: who wants to see my duds? I am going to try this workflow from now on and I hope that it gives me more time to do other things like, oh, taking photos??
*I have about 4400 photos but most of them are not good enough to share. I'd say maybe 1% are truly good exposures.
No comments:
Post a Comment