Interim files

[LoungeLizard]

How many of you save interim files? What I mean by this is, if you shoot RAW, how many of you save a layered PSD or TIFF file with the processing you've applied in Photoshop?

[engstrom]

Jesus, there are a few pictures where I keep interim PSD files but mostly I just keep the RAW and the output JPEG. Then again, mostly my PP is pretty simple.

[srwatters]

I keep RAW, 8 bit tif (aRGB), and web sized jpg.

No layers on the 8bit tiff. I'm a one shot edit kind of guy at my low volume.

[Hogleg 44]

Only the Raw and jpg here

[PeteQ]

For anything other than snaps I burn a disk (Master NEF's) as soon as I copy all images to my HD before I touch anything. Then when I am complete with my editing I burn a second disk (Edits) that contains the NEF, PSD, and output JPG/TIFF of any file I have worked on. I figure this way I have at least one if not two of any images that I really liked. A lot of the NEF's on the master may got into the trash during editing, but I always have a NEF copy of them...just in case. Anal, yeah that's me...

[swanny338]

I keep RAW and 16 bit TIFF, after I upload jpg web versions to my server I delete them.

[suzyjazz]

Mostly I keep RAW and small JPG of all "keepers" (and even some not so much keepers), bust for select files I save unlayered 8 bit TIFs. I keep TIFs mostly for files that had some cloning and exposure adjustments that I do not want to do over, but that I may want to print various ways in the near future. Or I will think that I want to do something with them and I don't so 6 months later the TIF is deleted, or perhaps backed up on DVD before I delete from had drive. Very rarely I do extensive PS work on something and get tired and thus need to save a PSD.

[Gordon]

I used to just keep RAW and JPG. Used to think that 1/ the next time I needed the file I'd know more about photoshop,so do a better job and 2/ think that the next time I needed the file, I could quickly just reprocess it.

Then I got a request for 40 images to be published and could I provide them without sharpening and resize them to XxY. I had to turn that opportunity down, because I didn't have enough time to recreate each of the images, even with the minimal amount of photoshop work that I typically do. I've also had to start going back through all of my past images and re-editing them all to submit for stock, again with different requirements than the original 'final' images that I saved. Major PITA and actually costing me potentially a significant amount of money as an 'opportunity' cost.

Since then, I've changed my workflow. I keep the RAW files. I keep the PSD files, up to just before I apply the final output sizing/sharpening. All edits, adjustment layers, dodging, burning and any cloning are kept, along with the initial capture sharpening. But I don't bother keeping the output files now. So I just save the RAW and PSD files and throw away the JPG or printable versions after I've used them (in fact I have some clean-up scripts that run through and zap all of those files when I need to reclaim disk space)

This way, if I need a version of image <X> or images X1 through X100 in a particular format, I know all of the PSD files are ready to go. All I need to do is a batch resize and output sharpen, along with any colour space conversion and I'm done. These are steps that are easily batchable and allows me to retarget images as needed.

[johnastovall]

I currently only archive Raw and PSD but I'm thinking about also doing DNG. Wish Canon would offer RAW or DNG in camera rather than RAW and JPEG or DNG and JPEG or TIFF. I'm hoping the Leica digital M will do DNG like the R8 Digital back. I think DNG should be come the standard.

[Gordon]

The problem with DNG is the same as the problem with TIFF. As standards they are both just 'bags' that define where you can put things. They don't go far enough in terms of defining what you actually put in the files, to be really that useful at all. DNG has a space for general propritary information, so effectively you could conform to DNG as a manufacturer and still have your tools be far superior than say Photoshop. This also obviates any advantage that DNG might claim for archival usage - it still has all the issues of bitrot that potentially plague CRW or NEF formats.

This is in addition to the option with DNG format to store a complete bit copy of the original CRW/NEF file. So currently you can convert to DNG and maybe get something that is reusable, from Photoshop, But if the camera makers buy in to it in a big way, it'll be just as bad as before. (well marginally better, but no real improvement).

E.g., from page 12 of the DNG format overview

Proprietary Data
Camera manufacturers often want to include proprietary data in a raw file for use by their own raw converter. DNG allows proprietary data to be stored using private tags, private IFDs, and/or a private MakerNote. It is recommended that manufacturers use the DNGPrivateData and MakerNoteSafety tags to ensure that programs that edit DNG files preserve this proprietary data. See Chapter 4, DNG Tags on page 17 for more information on the DNGPrivateData and MakerNoteSafety tags.


So DNG is a necessary step towards a useful format, but it is currently not sufficient to provide a useable standard.

[Clint_Smith]

I keep everything....storage is cheap.

Telling a client I don't have something is too expensive.

After shoot I make a DVD of all RAW files.
I make a CD or DVD of Proof files.
I make a CD or DVD any composites or artwork and files ordered by the client for prints.

[Silvernic]

I thought I was lazy (pushing save twice requires too much effort) but, it looks like at least I'm not the only one.

[Terrancelee]

Since I don't do anything for $$, they are just shots for me. I've yet to even burn a disc, have several hundred on my internal HD still.

[LoungeLizard]

Originally Posted by Terrancelee

Since I don't do anything for $$, they are just shots for me. I've yet to even burn a disc, have several hundred on my internal HD still.

Well, just remember that even for you - that's the ONLY place they exist. Just had a friend who paid well over $600 to a recovery service to retrieve her digital photos from the ONLY hard drive she had them on after it crashed!

Backup is cheap - the alternative is not.