FA+
Shop
Why does it take so long?
9 years ago
General
Hello everyone! Today I thought I'd talk a little bit about my photos. Specifically, I wanted to talk about the process of editing photos for my Flickr gallery, and while doing so explain what makes this process take so long. Before I go on, I should say that nobody has ever directly asked me this question, or even implied it. But, I'm also not completely oblivious either. I know I've seen people happily announce that they have their entire photo galleries up mere days after the convention. That's a stark contrast to myself, where today I had to tell someone on Twitter that it might be a while before I get to their photos.
That made me stop and think about it, and I don't think I've ever really described what I do with a photo. Before I write any further, I already know that this is going to be long. Read strictly if you're curious.
Note: I don't do these in this precise order. I do each edit in the order that I feel it necessary for each photo
Step 1: typically, choose one photo out of a series.
I will take anywhere between 3-5 photos of a suiter in rapid succession if I have the chance. It's for good reason; sometimes the light balancing sensor will pick up on the wrong part of the image, often the focus isn't exactly where it needs to be, and there's constantly people moving in and out of frame in the background. All that, plus subtle differences in fursuiter pose, mean that I have to weigh the merits of each photo in a quick series to decide which one of the bunch I'll push up for editing. No lie, this step alone can take some time.
Sometimes it's a tough decision between "well the lighting is perfect in this one, but someone is directly behind the suit and gesturing - the suit looks like it has a human arm growing out of the side", and the other, "well, there's no distracting background elements in this one, but the focus is a just a tad off...will it be noticeable when I downsize it? And the lighting is off, which means heavier editing, but I think I can make it work".
Step 2: dark levels.
Okay, so either there's only one photo to use, or I've chosen the one out of the set. There's a good chance the particular photo is from indoors with inadequate lighting, meaning I'll have to mess with a lot of dark light levels. This is, without a doubt, the most time-consuming step in the process (and the reason I can pump out more "outside" photos, verses "indoor" photos in a given time frame). There's a few tools I have to work with that help with dark areas, and all of them have different consequences on the photo at large when I employ them.
Some of those consequences I can dial down with further edits, some are unavoidable. Sometimes I can get away with using just one tool, sometimes I have to use all of them and deal with the fallout of all of the combined problems that brings about. These edits can have complications on sharpness, grain, other light levels, color, saturation, etc. And I have to manage and balance the basic visibility of the subjects in the photo, against all these problems which detract from the photo.
Step 3: mid levels
Now I have my photo, and I bounced the lighting in the darkest areas of the photo so that the subject is entirely visible, instead of partially obscured by shadow. Now, the photo might still have general lighting problems where the overall image may be visible, but still a little dark. Luckily, this is easier to deal with than strict shadows, but still requires some finesse. Again, I have a couple tools at my disposal, but the consequences are easier to deal with. They're mostly the same problems, just less severe. However the one new problem that comes about is...
Step 4: highlight levels
After getting a photo selected, bumping the dark levels, and bringing the mid levels up, I've created a new problem. The uppermost light levels are now too strong in some segments of the photo. I have one specific tool, and one tool alone, that deals with this. "Highlights" levels slider bar (and it's cousin, but that doesn't really count). This takes down those ultra-bright segments of the photo, but can sometimes not be enough if I've had to boost too much light. That means I have to decide whether or not to just leave it as-is, or make the picture darker until the highlights are acceptable even when max damped. This doesn't happen often, but when it does, it's decided on a case-by-case basis which direction the picture looks better in.
Step 5: white balancing.
Once I get the light levels where I need them, it's time to start thinking color! And of course, the cornerstone of color is white balancing. Outdoor midday shots are typically perfectly balanced or need minimal work. Afternoon shots can be way too yellowed or orange. Indoor shots are vulnerable to the lighting of the immediate vicinity. This may or may not get overpowered by my white flash, depending on distance between target and camera, flash potency, etc.
This usually isn't too hard, but there can be some nuance to it. True white balance often looks the best, but not always. Sometimes the yellowing of the late afternoon sun really brings out the best colors of a fursuit, and true-ing up the white balance just doesn't look as good, so the yellowing stays in (to an extent). Sometimes it's a hard decision. Yellow and a blue noodle dragon in the lobby? True white balance pales the yellow one, leaving the yellow in puts a tinge of yellow highlight on the blue one in the bright spots. Choices, choices.
Step 6: basic color balancing.
With the white balance where I need it, all of the rest of the colors in the photo fall in line to their respective states. Usually it's a gentle shift. My typical rule of thumb is to start with a 10% bump to general saturation, since my camera tends to rob a bit of color out of each shot. So 10% gets it around where it is equal to what was seen through the naked eye. Sometimes the photo doesn't need it. Sometimes it needs more.
Step 7: individual color balancing (optional).
At this point, I'll make a decision. "Does this one go further?" I don't think it's a secret that I find fursuits to be magnificent and beautiful, and I feel that my job isn't just to show you the suits- but to show you suits as beautifully as I see them. Often, but not always, this translates into "more vibrant colors". If I have the opportunity to really make the fursuit pop out of the picture via colors, I tend to take it. I can get away with this if the suit has colors distinct from the background, otherwise bumping colors on both accomplishes nothing. Typically I only boost between 10-15% if I go that route.
This involves both individual color saturation, and color luminosity. You'd be surprised at the effects you can get from boosting the luminance of a color.
Step 8: clarity, contrast, noise reduction.
Those are three different tools that effect different parts of the image all towards one goal - making the image look sharp and clear by enhancing details. But again, each tool can have some consequences that I have to manage. I may use none of them, or all of them in any given image. Some of those consequences though, push me back a few steps...
Step 9: go back to step 2 and re-tweak as necessary:
This is especially true if I have to mess with contrast, but even aside from it, sometimes I've edited myself to a point where there's now too much or too little of something I balanced back in an earlier step. That's the nature of consequences, sometimes earlier edits get pushed too far or negated as a side-effect from a later step. That means going back and rebalancing everything again. At this stage, it doesn't usually need much tweaking to get it back to where it was, but I might have to re-address every other step at least once more.
Step 10: crop
Easiest step to take, really needs no explanation. Sometimes I have to do it due to distracting background elements, mostly I do it to center a subject in the photo (unless artistically off-centered).
Step 11: imperfections.
Use of tools at disposal to mask or cover up problems from dust particles hovering in the air or on the lens itself. Sometimes slight marks on the suit too. This is rarely done, I'll admit, but it does come up from time to time.
Step???: do everything tens of times
Each edit in this process isn't a given. Nothing is easy. Each part has levels, percentages, problems that crop up and have to be closely examined, or simply results that need to be closely examined and tweaked until they're at desired levels. This means something (for example: bumping light levels), say 10%, then going back and forth with "undo/redo" dozens of times. Is that 10% enough? Do I need more? Okay, now I've bumped up to 15%...is 10% or 15% better? Undo/redo, undo/redo, undo/redo. Is 15% too much? What distortions/artifacts/problems come up when I boost this much? Can I overcome those problems?
Back when I used my old computer, I used to do even more editing. That computer came with software that was very newbie-friendly for editing photos, and I often took the liberty of cleaning up things like dirty footpaws. With a decent paintbrush and transparency settings, I was able to really polish up suits. But I have a different computer now and I don't have access to that program. I could probably get this to work with Gimp, but I honestly have a lot of trouble figuring out how to do anything in Gimp.
I won't lie, I agonize over these details. I agonize over every dark patch in the photo I can't get reasonably brightened, I agonize over every color distortion I fight to fix, I agonize over poses and angles and all that. Even when I get a great photo to look absolutely fantastic, I still fret over things I could have done differently when taking the shot.
That's why posting photos takes so long for me. On a good day where I can sit down and dedicate a few hours after work, I can pump out 5-10 that day. For reference, I have a total of 2,604 photos to process. But as explained in step 1, I'm only posting roughly 1 out of every 5. So I'm estimating around 520 photos that will end up posted, that's roughly 50-100 working days. And I do have other obligations, so I can't do this every day. When I say it might be months before I get to your photo, that's why.
I've come a long way in taking better pictures from the get-go, but it's an art not a science. Having to work quickly and rapidly switch dozens of settings for each new shot with sometimes-impatient suiters can leave some photos lacking. And sometimes there's a huge disparity/disconnect between what my "image preview" shows me on my camera when I'm taking shots (and adjusting settings as necessary), and what my PC shows me when I get home. That makes improvising the shots a lot more difficult, since I can't rely on my instant feedback to be honest. In the future, I want to upgrade my camera to one with better low-light capabilities (my biggest issue right now). A friend of mine pointed me in a direction of a better Nikon camera which I might be able to afford if I skip MFF this year. Since MFF isn't looking likely anyway, that might be what I do.
That made me stop and think about it, and I don't think I've ever really described what I do with a photo. Before I write any further, I already know that this is going to be long. Read strictly if you're curious.
Note: I don't do these in this precise order. I do each edit in the order that I feel it necessary for each photo
Step 1: typically, choose one photo out of a series.
I will take anywhere between 3-5 photos of a suiter in rapid succession if I have the chance. It's for good reason; sometimes the light balancing sensor will pick up on the wrong part of the image, often the focus isn't exactly where it needs to be, and there's constantly people moving in and out of frame in the background. All that, plus subtle differences in fursuiter pose, mean that I have to weigh the merits of each photo in a quick series to decide which one of the bunch I'll push up for editing. No lie, this step alone can take some time.
Sometimes it's a tough decision between "well the lighting is perfect in this one, but someone is directly behind the suit and gesturing - the suit looks like it has a human arm growing out of the side", and the other, "well, there's no distracting background elements in this one, but the focus is a just a tad off...will it be noticeable when I downsize it? And the lighting is off, which means heavier editing, but I think I can make it work".
Step 2: dark levels.
Okay, so either there's only one photo to use, or I've chosen the one out of the set. There's a good chance the particular photo is from indoors with inadequate lighting, meaning I'll have to mess with a lot of dark light levels. This is, without a doubt, the most time-consuming step in the process (and the reason I can pump out more "outside" photos, verses "indoor" photos in a given time frame). There's a few tools I have to work with that help with dark areas, and all of them have different consequences on the photo at large when I employ them.
Some of those consequences I can dial down with further edits, some are unavoidable. Sometimes I can get away with using just one tool, sometimes I have to use all of them and deal with the fallout of all of the combined problems that brings about. These edits can have complications on sharpness, grain, other light levels, color, saturation, etc. And I have to manage and balance the basic visibility of the subjects in the photo, against all these problems which detract from the photo.
Step 3: mid levels
Now I have my photo, and I bounced the lighting in the darkest areas of the photo so that the subject is entirely visible, instead of partially obscured by shadow. Now, the photo might still have general lighting problems where the overall image may be visible, but still a little dark. Luckily, this is easier to deal with than strict shadows, but still requires some finesse. Again, I have a couple tools at my disposal, but the consequences are easier to deal with. They're mostly the same problems, just less severe. However the one new problem that comes about is...
Step 4: highlight levels
After getting a photo selected, bumping the dark levels, and bringing the mid levels up, I've created a new problem. The uppermost light levels are now too strong in some segments of the photo. I have one specific tool, and one tool alone, that deals with this. "Highlights" levels slider bar (and it's cousin, but that doesn't really count). This takes down those ultra-bright segments of the photo, but can sometimes not be enough if I've had to boost too much light. That means I have to decide whether or not to just leave it as-is, or make the picture darker until the highlights are acceptable even when max damped. This doesn't happen often, but when it does, it's decided on a case-by-case basis which direction the picture looks better in.
Step 5: white balancing.
Once I get the light levels where I need them, it's time to start thinking color! And of course, the cornerstone of color is white balancing. Outdoor midday shots are typically perfectly balanced or need minimal work. Afternoon shots can be way too yellowed or orange. Indoor shots are vulnerable to the lighting of the immediate vicinity. This may or may not get overpowered by my white flash, depending on distance between target and camera, flash potency, etc.
This usually isn't too hard, but there can be some nuance to it. True white balance often looks the best, but not always. Sometimes the yellowing of the late afternoon sun really brings out the best colors of a fursuit, and true-ing up the white balance just doesn't look as good, so the yellowing stays in (to an extent). Sometimes it's a hard decision. Yellow and a blue noodle dragon in the lobby? True white balance pales the yellow one, leaving the yellow in puts a tinge of yellow highlight on the blue one in the bright spots. Choices, choices.
Step 6: basic color balancing.
With the white balance where I need it, all of the rest of the colors in the photo fall in line to their respective states. Usually it's a gentle shift. My typical rule of thumb is to start with a 10% bump to general saturation, since my camera tends to rob a bit of color out of each shot. So 10% gets it around where it is equal to what was seen through the naked eye. Sometimes the photo doesn't need it. Sometimes it needs more.
Step 7: individual color balancing (optional).
At this point, I'll make a decision. "Does this one go further?" I don't think it's a secret that I find fursuits to be magnificent and beautiful, and I feel that my job isn't just to show you the suits- but to show you suits as beautifully as I see them. Often, but not always, this translates into "more vibrant colors". If I have the opportunity to really make the fursuit pop out of the picture via colors, I tend to take it. I can get away with this if the suit has colors distinct from the background, otherwise bumping colors on both accomplishes nothing. Typically I only boost between 10-15% if I go that route.
This involves both individual color saturation, and color luminosity. You'd be surprised at the effects you can get from boosting the luminance of a color.
Step 8: clarity, contrast, noise reduction.
Those are three different tools that effect different parts of the image all towards one goal - making the image look sharp and clear by enhancing details. But again, each tool can have some consequences that I have to manage. I may use none of them, or all of them in any given image. Some of those consequences though, push me back a few steps...
Step 9: go back to step 2 and re-tweak as necessary:
This is especially true if I have to mess with contrast, but even aside from it, sometimes I've edited myself to a point where there's now too much or too little of something I balanced back in an earlier step. That's the nature of consequences, sometimes earlier edits get pushed too far or negated as a side-effect from a later step. That means going back and rebalancing everything again. At this stage, it doesn't usually need much tweaking to get it back to where it was, but I might have to re-address every other step at least once more.
Step 10: crop
Easiest step to take, really needs no explanation. Sometimes I have to do it due to distracting background elements, mostly I do it to center a subject in the photo (unless artistically off-centered).
Step 11: imperfections.
Use of tools at disposal to mask or cover up problems from dust particles hovering in the air or on the lens itself. Sometimes slight marks on the suit too. This is rarely done, I'll admit, but it does come up from time to time.
Step???: do everything tens of times
Each edit in this process isn't a given. Nothing is easy. Each part has levels, percentages, problems that crop up and have to be closely examined, or simply results that need to be closely examined and tweaked until they're at desired levels. This means something (for example: bumping light levels), say 10%, then going back and forth with "undo/redo" dozens of times. Is that 10% enough? Do I need more? Okay, now I've bumped up to 15%...is 10% or 15% better? Undo/redo, undo/redo, undo/redo. Is 15% too much? What distortions/artifacts/problems come up when I boost this much? Can I overcome those problems?
Back when I used my old computer, I used to do even more editing. That computer came with software that was very newbie-friendly for editing photos, and I often took the liberty of cleaning up things like dirty footpaws. With a decent paintbrush and transparency settings, I was able to really polish up suits. But I have a different computer now and I don't have access to that program. I could probably get this to work with Gimp, but I honestly have a lot of trouble figuring out how to do anything in Gimp.
I won't lie, I agonize over these details. I agonize over every dark patch in the photo I can't get reasonably brightened, I agonize over every color distortion I fight to fix, I agonize over poses and angles and all that. Even when I get a great photo to look absolutely fantastic, I still fret over things I could have done differently when taking the shot.
That's why posting photos takes so long for me. On a good day where I can sit down and dedicate a few hours after work, I can pump out 5-10 that day. For reference, I have a total of 2,604 photos to process. But as explained in step 1, I'm only posting roughly 1 out of every 5. So I'm estimating around 520 photos that will end up posted, that's roughly 50-100 working days. And I do have other obligations, so I can't do this every day. When I say it might be months before I get to your photo, that's why.
I've come a long way in taking better pictures from the get-go, but it's an art not a science. Having to work quickly and rapidly switch dozens of settings for each new shot with sometimes-impatient suiters can leave some photos lacking. And sometimes there's a huge disparity/disconnect between what my "image preview" shows me on my camera when I'm taking shots (and adjusting settings as necessary), and what my PC shows me when I get home. That makes improvising the shots a lot more difficult, since I can't rely on my instant feedback to be honest. In the future, I want to upgrade my camera to one with better low-light capabilities (my biggest issue right now). A friend of mine pointed me in a direction of a better Nikon camera which I might be able to afford if I skip MFF this year. Since MFF isn't looking likely anyway, that might be what I do.
Most people whip up quick snap shots and post them online for the eye pleasure of the general masses. Great for instant gratification..
Thank you for all the time you take to preserve our memories. Believe me, I need all the help I can get!