| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
1 playoff game, 3 photographers, 9 cameras and a deadline.
Craig Mitchelldyer, Photographer, Assistant
 |
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 1:19 AM on 05.01.10 |
->> Thomas Boyd posted a pretty interesting article about the Oregonian's workflow during Game 6 of the Blazers/Suns series.
http://aperture.maccreate.com/2010/04/30/aperture-3-03-editing-three-photog.../
Boyd was working his tail off, got 30 images out before a 9:15 deadline (on a 7:50 start time) using 3 powerbooks and editing the work of the shooters on the floor. Good stuff, even though he was crowding my personal space a bit in the workroom with his setup... |
|
Rafael Agustin Delgado, Student/Intern, Photographer
|
currently Orange | Ca | USA | Posted: 2:47 AM on 05.01.10 |
->> Cool read on the logistics, thanks for posting Craig. The shear numbers on the job at hand is great insight.
I found it interesting that the Oregonian shoots RAW for such an event. SI is the only other company I know that shoots RAW from my experience, at such a sporting event.
Speed is everything and to convert the file to jpeg is not desired, from my field experience with Reuters.
I am lowly PC user however Aperature sure seems like a solid way to edit on deadline. |
|
Thomas Boyd, Photographer
|
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 12:04 PM on 05.01.10 |
->> It's up to the photographer's at The Oregonian whether we shoot raw or not. In this case, we followed Bruce Ely's lead who's been shooting raw all season.
The Trail Blazers are a big deal in Portland. It's currently the only major professional sports franchise. It's a big deal to The Oregonian. The photos are used for huge prints for marketing, books, posters, etc.
A contributing factor for us shooting raw was the fact that we were using so many different models of cameras. Even though all the cameras were set at the same white balance, they were all over the map. Plus, the photographers exposed differently. This is something I will be on top of next time. One photographer was a bit under and another was a bit over, and one photographer was right on the money. Of course this, is a bit subjective, but next time I will figure out the best exposure for every camera based on what I see on histograms.
As for the workflow, shooting raw actually speeds things up. Since Aperture 3 allows the user to work on the photos before they're off the card, and I had one computer with four card readers and one computer with three card readers, the download time was irrelevant. Since I had a card runner bringing me cards every 10-15 minutes, there wasn't a high number of frames on the cards so the download time was pretty quick anyway.
As far as converting the raw to jpeg for transmitting, that's as fast as it would be to save a photo in Photoshop. It does that when the photo is exported. In this case, to a folder on the third laptop that Photo Mechanic looks at. I sent to ftp from Photo Mechanic. That part of the workflow was practically instant.
Plus, the way I understand it, Aperture uses the embedded jpeg inside a raw image for the previews. If jpegs are imported, it must render a new preview. With jpegs you get a little more lag time in the rendering. It's probably about a wash when you balance copy time against rendering time with raw vs. jpeg. I suspect that's true for LR3 as well.
That's probably more than you wanted to know, but that's the story behind us shooting raw. |
|
Keith Allison, Photographer, Assistant
|
Kinston | NC | USA | Posted: 1:22 AM on 05.04.10 |
| ->> Thanks for posting this level of detail. This is the type of thread that makes SS a useful site. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|