It’s time to take postprocessing further in the new year.
Given the popularity of the photoshop and postprocessing videos, and the continual feedback for more of the same – I’ve decided to try an experiment for 2016. Every week, with the first instalment available on 3 Jan 2016, I’ll be putting out a new video. The concept is simple: it’s a classroom where submitted images are critiqued and postprocessed and subscriber questions answered. This is the closest I can get to a providing a consistent learning environment for a large audience.
- Subscribers can submit images of their own; I will try to critique all of them
- We select the most interesting to post process in ACR/photoshop using workflow II, with a discussion of the rationale behind it
- Any subscriber questions are answered
- In addition, I postprocess images of my own so you can see the complete workflow from capture and conception to completion – to see how the complete ‘idea’ comes together (i.e. capture with previsualized output)
Each weekly video will run for ~1h15min.
I also want to be transparent about my personal rationale behind offering this. In 2016, I want to spend more time pursuing writing and personal art projects, which means having to rebalance income. Furthermore, this site takes up a massive amount of time – and you’ll notice it isn’t supported by advertising or sponsorships. However, I figure if I can find 50-60 subscribers, I can free up a significant chunk of time towards that goal – and in the process, offer something of unique value to the photographic community. In the end, that means better content for the readers and improvement in your own images – sounds like a win-win all around. Thank you in advance for your patronage.
Here’s how it works:
- Each week, beginning 3 Jan, there will be a new video available. Links are valid for one month from the video release date.
- In the video, we cover three sections: critique of subscriber submissions, ACR treatment and Q&A from the week; optimal PS treatment of subscriber submissions to best highlight the subject and hold viewer attention, and processing of MT’s work.
- I will post process those images to completion in ACR/Photoshop. (In the interests of efficiency, we won’t be covering PS basics – that’s already been covered here and here.)
- It will be like peeking over my shoulder with commentary as I post process – I do hundreds of files a week as it is, so you will get a ‘peek inside the machine’ as it were.
- Subscribers can send me a download link with a raw file each week – I will pick the most interesting images to work on, both content-wise and from a postprocessing standpoint
- Subscribers may also submit questions with that file – I’ll again attempt to address the most interesting of these
- Videos average 1h15m-1h30m in length, and available to download for that week until the next video is ready. I will follow a 7 day cycle (or as close to it as I can manage)
- Subscription is just $9 per week, and you may choose to cancel at any time. Full refunds will of course be given for the week if I am unable to produce a video that week. The signup process is manual on the back end, so please excuse any delays in responding – though I will get back to you in under a day.
Today’s photographic tools are incredibly powerful – but ultimately, still bound by the skills of the user. For the price of a coffee or two, you can learn to consistently maximise the potential of your images by unlocking the power of postprocessing – and do it in an efficient way that leaves you more time to shoot. What’s not to like? MT
You can subscribe to MT’s Weekly Photoshop Workflow here, effective immediately. The series has now come to an end after 90 episodes and 21 months – thank you all for your support.
__________________
Feedback and testimonials so far:
Björn Carlén: I really enjoy following your weekly PS workflow! It’s very efficient teaching and learning – very well spent time and money, the way I see it. Thank you!
Chris Valas: I remember a couple of years ago when you were contemplating how to move forward. I thought at the time (and think I commented on the blog) that training and education would resonate, at least with me. And they have. The videos have absolutely transformed my photography. When I have the money I’m going to try to make it to one of the city visits. Thank you for your vision, your effort, and your results.
Ryan Kimball: Just received and viewed my first episodes last night. Definitely worth the price of admission. I like that there is no needless chatter or product plugging, you dive right in and its pretty much nonstop solid content throughout the video. I also really enjoy your commentary as you edit covering composition, why certain things work and why you are making the adjustments you do. I learned a lot and am very much looking forward to future installments. I am also amazed at how efficiently you work through the images, if your workflow is a Ferrari by comparison mine is an 18 wheeler with 16 flat tires! Keep up the good work and thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Al Figuccio: I am very pleased so far with the photoshop sessions. Although I reviewed all of session 2 and part of session 3, I can already see the value of the sessions. You employ a mentoring style rather than a simple tutorial. I am able to see you as master photographer sharing your thought process and rationale for the processing steps you take. I do not have questions as yet since I am able to see your photoshop screen and figure out the answers to questions as they arise, albeit I pause the video and study some steps in detail. I have already reworked two of my photo files which I had thought were good and complete but I was able to improve them using some of what I’ve already learned. This is good and I look forward to upcoming sessions.
Johannes Weigl: Thank you for your fabulous videos and inspiring articles. What I like most about your work? The pictures are so natural (in contrast to the majority of other work you can find on the net), but so compelling perfect with respect to light rendition and composition. You have sent me on a long journey 🙂
Pieter van der Velden: Quick feedback on the first instalment of the PS Workflow tutorial: absolutely great! I really like to concept and your explanations are excellent – as I have also seen in your other tutorials. Already looking forward to the next PS video this week! Hope many more episodes will follow.
BJ Thompson: Thanks so much for these videos. I’m relatively new to photography as a serious hobby, so I’ve enjoyed watching you walk through the photos and discuss your approach. My goal this year is to push myself to share more photos (as evidenced by my sparse Flickr). I’ve been happily firing away, but by limiting my output I think I’m missing out on (or fearfully avoiding) critiques and criticism that will help me improve.
Raoul Diez: Oh my. I’m so grateful and humbled when I found out that you worked on my submission file, the Yosemite. A totally different result using your approach and needless to say that I’m honored to have you worked on it, not only one version but the unexpected “Black and White” which is great! I’ll be filling my glass with so much fun and learning in the weeks to follow.
Gerner Christensen: This is excellent education Ming. I keep finding hints and tips each time I watch you process photos. The artistic value of your PS work for the final presentation of the image cannot be overrated, it’s worth gold to me.
Todd Lawton: Enjoyed it very much… as did my non-photography-obsessive girlfriend, who began passively watching bits over my shoulder and ended up quite hooked, hehe. That’s got to be a good sign! 😎
Tilmann Regula: This is a very interesting course for me, as I expected, because of being able to exchange image ideas via different developing approaches, sort of dialogue…I am very happy with your weekly PS video idea, and I am looking forward to the next one 🙂
Ian Marsh: I’ve just watched the first set of videos and they were well worth the (very short) wait. Many thanks for this training.
Caleb Clapp: Ming, received and watched your 1st installment. Here’s my review: Best $8 I ever spent on photography!! Looking forward to next week’s. Thanks!
Tarmo Aura: …for the price it’s a steal. The format obviously works very well for PS tutorials and the video gives a lot of additional insight into shooting good photos, especially the subscriber images that don’t always contain the necessary elements. I found it very useful to contrast them with MT’s photos that always meet certain criteria (whether or not you subjectively like each one).
Richard Ang: +1 from me. Excellent format. I’ll hopefully submit some images in soon too.
Guido Gloor: …for me, this weekly installment allows me to mix-and-match the things I see and like about your workflow with the few things I was able to pick up from the workflows of others through books, articles and indeed, very rarely even videos 😛 Either way, I’m really looking forward to the next weeks. Great quality indeed, and the personal touch of the “looking over your shoulder” approach really makes this something special.
__________________
The Lisbon Masterclass (9-14 Mar 2016) is now open for booking
__________________
Visit the Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including workshop and Photoshop Workflow videos and the customized Email School of Photography. You can also support the site by purchasing from B&H and Amazon – thanks!
We are also on Facebook and there is a curated reader Flickr pool.
Images and content copyright Ming Thein | mingthein.com 2012 onwards. All rights reserved
Ming Thein | Photographer 
What level of student would you say this is intended for? I’ve been useing the methods in your work flow one video on my Nikon A and em5 . My concern is think after a couple sharping passes and one or two curves I sometimes end up with an oversaturated image, or hue shifts in certain areas, I usually just start over and MOST of the time I’m able to figure it out to some degree(of course this depends a great deal on how well the image was recorded in the first place). I know this is addressed in the video but I feel like more examples might help, or am I better served by more practice, before seeking further instructions?
I’d say if you’ve seen Workflow I and II, you’re good to go – this series goes further by a) providing regular compositional and execution feedback, then b) showing a wide range of application examples. I think if you can’t figure out why something is not working the way you expect, the answer may not actually be that obvious… 🙂
Well I am in, whether I am ready or not! Honestly I think part of my issue is simply not being able to fit the tonal ranges of the scene into the dynamic range of the camera. But, I Don’t see myself going FF any time soon.
🙂 Let’s see what we can do! Don’t forget to submit a couple of your problem images, too.
In the meantime: this might help.
Hello, I am so curious — why do you prefer editing in Photoshop over Lightroom? I usually edit in LR and export into PS for touchups, what is the difference? Also, do you still use LR for cataloging?
Thanks!
All explained in this post.
I too am very fond of MF film. You haven’t included the Leaf Credo stuff in this discussion: I assume you haven’t had the chance to use it? Generally, the seem to have staked out the higher price ranges. The Mamiya 645 is a very nice film camera, although I don’t know how the legacy lenses hold up with digital.
Anybody know if Mamiya Leaf is making money?
In any case, a digital version of the Mamiya 7 (or 6) would be really nice. Can’t tell if the 7 is still being made.
Oops. posted in the wrong place. Please delete.
Impossible to get hold of in my part of the world…and it doesn’t look like it’s fall into the ‘possible’ price range anyway. I think Mamiya Leaf got bought over by Phase One…
https://www.flickr.com/photos/139023571@N06/with/24734156546/
Another question before I race headlong into Photoshop, having to do with printing. So when I leave LR and export to PS with a “rendered” RAW file, I’ve created new image file, right? I can as easily print that via LR as PS, is that right? So the only additional file to track is the file that comes out of PS and back into LR. Do I have that right? (I’m hoping for a simple, “yes” or “no”).
Yes
…and if you brought if from LR to PS via the “Edit In…Photoshop” LR shortcut, and then do a simple save (NOT save as “copy” or “save-as”, just “save”) in PS after working on the file and choose tif/jpg/psd/etc, the rendered file will automatically be imported and added to your LR database in the same location as the raw as a stacked (but not hidden) file with the same name and a suffix of “edit”, e.g FileXYZ_edit. This is VERY handy!. I do not recall if it grabs the star rating of the original or not.
Assuming you save the PS file after you’re done, yes. You can then print that finished file via LR.
The one thing that really can’t be done in Lightroom that your workflow includes as a rather central aspect are free transformations. Even multiple curves are possible, by using both the simpler / more constrained and the free-form version. Dodging and burning is different, too, but I’m just more used to the (maybe slightly less flexible indeed) Lightroom version.
I added a suggestion to the Adobe forums about free transformations in Lightroom, because they’d be really handy for getting everything straight really quickly. If anybody would like to support it, here’s the link:
http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/free-transform-in-lightroom
Guys, in the two sets of comments directly below there is miscommunication and confusion. Let me try to clarify I know this for certain:
1) If we are talking about light room and ACR (Photoshop’s camera raw processor), there is virtually no difference between the two. For all intents and purposes they are identical (there is one tiny difference: in ACR you can select an area for a white balance but in light room you can only select a dot for white balance. Most everyone should ignore this fine point because it will be more confusing than helpful. Just consider the rock processing in both light room and ACR 100% identical)
2) has to the steps in Photoshop after the raw processing (ACR or light room) 100% of that are completely additional steps by definition. At this point you have moved out of raw processing and into working on a rendered image. Light room does not work on rendered images. ACR in Photoshop does not work on rendered images. Regardless of how you do your raw processing (ACR or light room) you have to export out of raw and into Photoshop. If you’re in ACR you push a button and that happens if your light room you push a button and that happens. in both cases you land in Photoshop to do the post rendered steps. Think of it this way: Photoshop has two parts it’s raw engine which is identical to light room and a engine for a rendered image.
3) Mings workflow has two parts to it: A) the raw processing (which can be done equally in light room or Photoshop ACR) And B) working on the rendered image, which can only be done in Photoshop. What makes Mings workflow different from most others is the way he handles his rendered image portion of the workflow. That aspect is critical to the way he works and teaches. That can only be done in Photoshop regardless of what you used for your raw processing.
Given the above, there is absolutely no reason to stop using light room but if you do use light room (or Photoshop ACR) you still have to go into Photoshop for the rendered portion of the work. That rendered image portion of the work is the special sauce of Ming 😉
Is this clear?
…adding further to my comment above:
I thought my comment would be above the one above it as it was intended to clarify that comment too. Transformations/Free Transformations cannot be done in ACR or Lightroom. Again whether you use Photoshop’s ACR or lightroom for the raw processing makes zero difference. In either case you need to use photoshop for transformations and other things Ming shows in “Part B” of his workflow, ie the work on the rendered images (after raw work is complete).
…and finally:
Possibly the following is part of the confusion:
Some people may simply be saying: “Even if you only work in RAW (be it lightroom or Photoshop ACR) and never use “Part B” of Ming’s workflow (the post-raw portion), you can still learn a lot from his weekly videos”.
My opinion is yes and no:
Yes:
Seeing how he works in both RAW (LR or ACR) and what he then does to the rendered file (what I’ve been calling “Part B”) does teach you an enormous amount about post processing and even the whole approach to capture and photog as a whole. I believe is it also true that one can attempt to replicate his “Part B” by going further in RAW than he does and never using photoshop for rendered image work. I believe this still is very valuable and will significantly improve your images. The raw processors (lightroom or ACR) have come a long way and one can make great images without going further. You can use all of the concepts Ming shows and stay in raw only.
No:
However, you will not get as far with your images in you do not do “Part B” (the photoshop-only rendered image work) vs trying to mimic it in raw-only. the raw processors handle some things very differently than the post-raw photoshp engine. They may both be round fruit, but they are still apples and oranges. Both may taste good, but an apple is not an orange. In Ming’s opinion and the basis of his workflow is that you need to eat the orange too. As a former lightroom-only user (and still a lightroom for cataloging and all raw processing) and after two weeks of his master classes, this series and all of his PS full length videos, it is total clear to me he is right.
The above is not to say there is anything wrong with staying in raw only (LR or PS). If you do, yes, you will get a lot from his series. But, no, you will not get as much and your images will not be as fine as doing Part B in photoshop.
For what its worth, in my own case, I do raw-only workflow for many, many images. For ones I care about, I do his full workflow and use PS for Part B. My raw-only results are MUCH better that before studying him. My full-workflow images are MUCH better than those.
I am an avid lightroom user/devotee and nothing about that or my use of it has changed (and Ming is not saying it should).
PS: I hope the above does not sound like I am an expert or a better photographer than anyone else here, I am not. However there is confusion about LR/PS Raw/Rendered post processing and what and why Ming’s workflow entails. This is only intended to remove confusion.
PPS: I know my terminology in the three posts above is technically incorrect: I believe technically the image does not become “rendered” until actually saved in PS. Just heading off any silly correction 😉
Ming please correct me if I misspoke 😉
Caleb: one more small note: you can use ACR or LR to get you to the right starting point for the PS manipulations, but you can’t use LR to take you all the way because there are no real equivalents to some of those PS operations. However, the starting point for PS is very different to what most people would use LR for – perhaps this is what causes some of the confusion…
I think all of this is clear to me 🙂 Ming switches to Photoshop for part B, and there are absolutely advantages to doing it this way for more elaborate processing. There’s the finer-grained control over local adjustments in PS, LAB colors, sequential edits and thus predictable results, and many other advantages. I’m absolutely aware and certain that taking the time to learn these tools would improve my images.
To me, what the workflow as demonstrated mostly consists of at its core is:
1) Working for the highlights in ACR, getting a flat image starting point, and often applying some gradients for visual flow
2) Working for the shadows with curves in PS
3) Working for the details in PS with dodging, burning, and filters
Ming switches from ACR to PS between steps 1 and 2. Replicating the essentials (not the exact workflow) with LR alone means that I work for the highlights with the Basic tab, then use the curves for shadows, and then apply local adjustments (which can also dodge and burn just the highlights, or shadows, etc.).
Certainly those local adjustments will be less powerful than the Photoshop ones, and I’ll miss a tool or two, and I have to trust LR to remember the order of my inputs. But the steps Ming does in PS aren’t impossible in LR, just maybe harder (with PS practice and a tablet), less exact and / or less powerful.
…with the exception of one thing: There is no equivalent to free transformation. Thus my suggestion to Adobe 😉
Yes and no: the other huge difference between LR and PS is that PS operations are sequential, but LR are additive. Tonal/luminance transforms are not linear, which means that even if you replicate a similar sequence of steps in #2 and #3, the tonal transitions won’t quite look right with LR. On top of that, you’ll have color correction issues because LR works in an RGB-based color space; so you’re going to have to add back the color correction step from Workflow I – except you still need to profile the camera for accurate starting color, and there’s only one HSL panel in LR…
Like I’ve always said: you can get close, but the problem is you’re always going to know something is missing. 🙂
Hi Ming. May I make a suggestion: I think when you say XYZ is different in Lightroom than in Phososhop this confuses people. Wouldn’t it be clearer and more accurate to say “XYZ is different in RAW processing (whether LR or PS’s ACR) than by adding post-RAW processing in PS”. The question/important point is not with differences between LR/PS raw processing. It is that your workflow goes past RAW processing. Clearly PS offers post-raw processing, where LR does not, but nothing is lost by those who prefer LR’s many features, as long as they move the file into PS for post-raw processing. Just a thought to possibly be more clear. Thanks for all you do!
Good point – I suppose the boundary between the raw conversion and further processing is blurry though, especially given there’s a lot of overlap between the two (even if not necessarily in the way one would wish).
Thanks a lot for the clarification 🙂 Yeah, I was close to buying the Workflow videos yesterday evening. But then I realized that I really want the entire “Outstanding Images” series, too, and then things suddenly cost more than a new lens 😀
I have a strong feeling you’ll get far more out of the videos than a new lens though – after all, hardware is only as good as the skill of the operator 🙂
Multiple curves are only possible if you export then do another set of adjustments to the exported image. You can’t do dodging and burning properly, either. And colours go out the window with heavy tonal adjustment because you’re not working in LAB, either.
I was really surprised when I found this, but as you know, the one curve tool in Lightroom has two modes, toggled by the small curve icon in the bottom right. The same two modes are called “Parametric” and “Point” in ACR’s curve tab.
When you make adjustments in one mode and then switch to the other, you get a second curve to play with. Adjustments from both curves will actually be applied to the image.
Or am I misunderstanding something here?
It does indeed appear that you get two, but they are not sequential in application – they’re additive. This means the tonal output still doesn’t look quite right…
I’ve gone through the current episode and I enjoyed watching you think. It puts me back into my quandary about whether to focus on learning Photoshop and letting go of Lightroom. Some history: started digital processing 15 years ago in PS version whatever and switched to LR with v1 and have been using it ever since with less and less time/energy in PS.
I am reminded of the benefits you outline of PS over LR but with a catalog of almost 20,000 images, the notion of letting go of LR is daunting. So my question: is there a hybrid workflow that incorporates both products? In other word, import into LR, do minimal processing, and off to PS. I just can’t visualize how that would work. Can Bridge take the place of (or convert) an existing LR catalog with keywords and color coding, etc.?
My use of PS was always with teeth clenched, trying to remember how to do whatever needed done – it wasn’t a frequent enough journey to have mastered the terrain. Perhaps now is the time to do some exploring.
If you’ve addressed this on your site, do please just point me in the right direction!
All best,
Marco
Thanks. Sure: you do your import in LR, the portion I do in ACR (‘flat file’) then export to finish local adjustments in PS. I think that would work.
I never really made a workflow like this because I felt it to be the worst of both worlds – tied to the LR catalog and without the full flexibility of PS, but if you have a huge existing library, it makes sense (and one of the reasons I can never move to LR – there are over a million images in mine…)
LR and ACR are identical in function (including all image adjustments, as long as you use the same version), with some differences in the user interface and of course LR’s catalogue. That’s how I’m creeping towards PS workflow: keeping everything in LR and practicing MT style workflow by exporting images from LR to PS. It also means that ACR is in fact easy to learn – differences are in the workflow and how PS operates.
Thanks, that’s helpful to hear. No reason not to give it a shot – other than time and money 😉
Marco
Just received and viewed my first episodes last night. Definitely worth the price of admission. I like that there is no needless chatter or product plugging, you dive right in and its pretty much nonstop solid content throughout the video. I also really enjoy your commentary as you edit covering composition, why certain things work and why you are making the adjustments you do. I learned a lot and am very much looking forward to future installments. I am also amazed at how efficiently you work through the images, if your workflow is a Ferrari by comparison mine is an 18 wheeler with 16 flat tires! Keep up the good work and thank you for sharing your knowledge.
Thanks Ryan! There is often this expectation that good PS must use lots of tools and be layer-intensive…I think it’s the opposite; the less the better, the faster the bette,r and the more time we can spend shooting 🙂
I am trying to sign up for your weekly photoshop workflow, but I apparently had a Paypal account (which I haven’t used in years), and it is blocked up (I can’t get it to reset my password), and since you won’t accept a credit card if I have a Paypal account, I seem to be up a blind alley. Can you give me a work around?
David Craven (david.craven@lamrc.com)
Hi David, I’ve sent you an email.
Not to beat a dead horse, but… I was wondering whether you would reconsider doing a Lightroom version of this sometime in the future. In my humble opinion you should, for two simple reasons. First, the instructional material available on the web on post-processing with Lightroom is almost without exception (I actually haven’t find the exception yet) quite crass and tasteless, whose ultimate goal seems to be the production of HDR-ish or garish images. Second, there is a huge user base that does not really want to deal with Photoshop and works solely in Lightroom. In other words, to use a marketing parlance, there is here a virtually void market niche with an enormous demand.
I have read your article about the reasons for *not* using Lightroom, and I understand that (a) the workflow is more difficult (or sometimes impossible) to control precisely because of non-linear interactions of the processing modules, and (b) you can achieve better results with Photoshop. Being aware of such limitations, however, what I am thinking of is something like “What would Ming Thein’s workflow be, if he could use only Lightroom”. Even though the end results would not be as good as the one achieved with Photoshop, I bet that they would be more than satisfying for most users, and miles above the current alternatives.
What I find particularly appealing in your processing, apart from the obvious technical competence, is a sort of ego-less or agnostic stance, in the sense of letting the qualities and peculiarities of the image emerge by their own virtues, rather than fattening the photo up with the photographer’s own tropes and preconceived notions. I am not sure I am explaining it clearly, but this seems to me a very valuable approach and one that, somewhat paradoxically, allows most room for each individual to develop their original vision.
hopeful 🙂
There’s probably a reason for that: you can’t get the same results in LR. People want to see how I work to get the same results. I can’t do that in LR, which means I don’t use it myself, and makes the whole exercise rather pointless because you can’t achieve the goals you wanted…
Well, that settles it then. I erroneously assumed that you could get somewhere-in-the-ballpark results with LR, even though not as good as those achieved with PS. Thank you for the quick reply.
Sorry about that!
This is excellent education Ming. I keep finding hints and tips each time I watch you process photos. The artistic value of your PS work for the final presentation of the image cannot be overrated, it’s worth gold to me.
Thanks Gerner! Glad to hear it’s working out for you 🙂
Quick feedback on the first instalment of the PS Workflow tutorial: absolutely great! I really like to concept and your explanations are excellent – as I have also seen in your other tutorials. Already looking forward to the next PS video this week! Hope many more episodes will follow.
Pieter.
Thanks Pieter – great to hear! I’ll keep it running as long as people are happy 🙂
I haven’t purchased the Introduction to Photoshop or Workflow videos yet, so I’m not sure if there is any immediate incentive for me to subscribe to the weekly videos. So let’s say I were to subscribe later on, say in March or April, would it be possible to ‘backorder’ the videos from January or February?
On that note, would it be worthwhile to ‘backorder’ the older videos? Would there be any particular focus every week?
I guess what I’m saying is, would I be missing out on a lot if I do not subscribe immediately? (I’m guessing the other commenters will say yes :D)
Short answer: it depends on your proficiency with Photoshop. Given that it takes about 4 hours of content to explain the tools and logic behind the basic workflow in detail, I have to start running every week for this in order to explore as many practical application scenarios as possible.
You could backorder the videos but it would probably be better not to as we’d have to upload/download tens of gigabytes or more…:)
Dear Ming,
I bought many of your videos last year and I have just subscribed to this. How long do you expect this to run? I need to start saving up! 🙂
(I know I can terminate anytime but that’s not my intention for now.)
Thank you and Happy New Year!
As long as there is demand 🙂
Ming, received and watched your 1st installment. Here’s my review:
Best $8 I ever spent on photography!! Looking forward to next week’s.
Thanks!
How did you receive your first video – by email? I purchased it last night I haven’t gotten anything yet but am looking forward to it.
Hello William, I have to process the orders manually so there’s a bit of a delay. Everything up to this morning is taken care of – if you didn’t receive something from me yet, could you let me know which email address you paid/registered with, and I’ll look into it ASAP? Thanks.
I agree – for the price it’s a steal. The format obviously works very well for PS tutorials and the video gives a lot of additional insight into shooting good photos, especially the subscriber images that don’t always contain the necessary elements. I found it very useful to contrast them with MT’s photos that always meet certain criteria (whether or not you subjectively like each one). It’s almost an annoying reminder that the photos need to be good to begin with, and relatively easy to process if you had a clear idea in mind at the time of capture (and shot technique, but that’s another story).
Also, whoever submitted the B&W scene, very good job with the original processing!
+1 from me. Excellent format. I’ll hopefully submit some images in soon too.
Thanks Richard!
That was actually Caleb’s image 😉
Thanks, Tarmo. If so, it was only due to having learned in Ming’s class.
Glad to hear it – thanks Caleb! 😀
Like the idea very much und would love to join in! Do you think you could show your workflow for images taken with Sigma cameras as well (perhaps with a TIFF file pre-processed with SPP)? Most of my work is done with those.
I don’t use SPP or Sigma cameras because I’ve got other hardware that fits my requirements better and the current SPP workflow is a bit of a disaster: very slow and not color managed. No problems processing a ‘flat’ TIFF through the PS workflow though – or if you can get a DNG out of Kalpanika, then I could use that (and would do so if I shot Sigma).
Sounds good, thank you!
I have bought ALL your videos (well not quite … as I haven’t owned an M yet 8>). But i will definitely subscribed to that. When will you make a stop in Canada?
🙂 Thanks for the support. Canada is a seriously long haul…I don’t have any clients there, though I suppose if there’s enough demand I don’t see why a workshop in say Montreal might not happen…
Ming, I am totally in! I have gone through all your PS videos, and I am definitely looking forward for more. There’s something I missed in the PS videos; and it was preparation the of the images for printing. Would be interesting to go through that. Happy new year!
Thanks Hector. There reason there was no print prep stage in the workflow is because the output is already ready for print – we don’t alter the files in any way before printing (other than paper/printer specific color profiling, which is impossible to demonstrate in a video).
Very interesting idea. I’ve subscribed. Really looking forward to this 🙂
One question: will I be able to view the video from the iPad, or it will be MOV or MP4 file that I have to download to PC/laptop first? Sometimes I will be on the business trip and will have no access to my personal laptop for a long time. And definitely I do not want to miss these weekly videos 🙂
Happy new year to you too, Ming!
Thank you – you’ll have to download them to a PC first, but links will be available for a month so you can always download at once when you return. 🙂
I’ve thought about buying the Workflow videos (I’ve bought all the rest really), but haven’t because all I use is Lightroom. My question is how much of a background in Photoshop would I need to be able to use and understand the processing videos? Do you take a stark novice through “how to use Photoshop” or should get up to speed first elsewhere before delving into them? Thanks
Ike
I’d get up to speed first with Intro to PS or PS Workflow II. Looking at the audience of subscribers I have now and their previous experience level, we’ll be diving straight in to make the most of things…
That said, the ACR part will be familiar to LR users. It’s the local adjustments in PS that won’t be, and the logic of using multiple passes of curves, LAB mode etc. which are not really available in LR.
Thank you. Will look into buying the videos then. I’ll be keeping on eye on this. In the Filter heavy world of processing these days, your work stands out for the stunning clarity you bring to the page (or screen as the case may be)
Thanks!
Ming – I would love to subscribe as this is a great idea.i hope this hasn’t been asked yet, but I use Lightroom – is there a lot of info that can be applied even though you use Photoshop? I assume general concepts could be done with a different flow. Let me know if you feel it would be worth it. Thanks!
Short answer – you can get about 90% of the way there because the ACR panel is essentially the same as the LR develop module, but some things like local adjustments, multiple curves and LAB editing will be impossible because those functions do not exist in LR. It means tonality won’t be quite as subtle, and you will have to do color correction on every image.
Clark, and anyone else with Lightroom considering this: I use LR 90% of the time, and have found Ming’s previous workflow videos extremely useful/pertinent. If you have access to Photoshop you’ll likely end up at least experimenting with doing things this way; if not, there’s still much to be learned, both from the ACR/LR commonalities and overall gestalt 🙂
Hi
As a LR user, who’s attended 2 of Ming’s master classes ( where 1/2 of each last day is him doing live curation and post processing on his work from the week) Im adding a touch more detail to mings answer above ( Ming, correct me if I misspeak):
His postprocessing workflow consists of two fundamental parts: 1) raw workflow, 2) Photoshop. In both cases his approach is very straightforward and efficient yielding excellent results IN COMBINATION. As to lightroom, the raw process in LR and ACR (Photoshop’s camera raw) are the same raw processing engine and 99% the same as to interface with only very minor differences. Ming prefers Bridge and ACR many others prefer LR. It’s just personal preference with no meaningful difference. I’m sure you’ll have no issue using LR rather than Photoshop’s ACR. As to #2, there is no getting around this, you must use Photoshop to follow his workflow. This part is post-raw processing which is intentionally done to a rendered (post-raw) file. Mings raw workflow yields a fairly flat somewhat bright finished raw file that is specifically treated for his final Photoshop steps. Those final Photoshop steps are incredibly efficient and effective. They are unlike anything you would have seen both in terms of simplicity and impact. I believe using both programs is fundamental to what you will learn.
Ming, forgive me if I have describe this incorrectly. I was replying based on what others have asked in our classes.
Thanks Caleb and Ming. Very helpful and informative. I think I can get a lot of helpful information from the subscription that will transfer. The price is so fair that it’s worth trying for a few weeks regardless.
Thanks Clark!
Spot on, Caleb 🙂 Thank you.
I have only used Lightroom so far and would agree with previous replies: the videos are still worth it and you can improvise a LR workflow based on them. A big problem for me was to establish a good routine for using the complex software, and the videos definitely help to focus on essential adjustments. You’ll also start noticing where LR’s weaknesses are and how to mitigate them (or what could be gained by moving to PS, and even alternative converters such as RawTherapee).
At the very least, I recommend “Processing for style” which gives you a good idea of how the workflow and various methods work in practice. Of course the cheapest entry would be to subscribe to the weekly videos and cancel if you’re not happy.
Actually, before you go that far, this article might help. And I think PS is $9.95 monthly or something, too – which isn’t so bad in the grand scheme of things when we’re talking about making the most of thousands in equipment…
I think for that price you get the cc subscription both for Photoshop and lightroom, which keeps you up-to-date on both. As always, you can also try Photoshop for 30 days for free
Happy Christmas Ming, and good to see this idea, hope it leads to another successful revenue stream for you. I’ll be subscribing too, once the chaos of the Christmas period has died down a bit and I can concentrate on photography – I have some new year’s resolutions regarding areas I need to improve and PP is one of them, so it’s well timed.
PS: I remember you taking that photo, shame I didn’t get the timing right for my shot, but better luck for me next time 🙂
Thanks JJ – yes, that was during our session 🙂
Happy holidays Ming! May I ask where was the photo above taken in Tokyo? I will be planning a trip early 2016 and the street looks wonderful
Thanks, same to you. I thought I replied this one already – it was down one of the alleyways around Nakano Broadway.
Great idea! I haven’t taken the plunge on your videos yet, but I´ll definitely subscribe. $9 a week is the cost of a pint over here, anyway, so I´ll save the pint for some knowledge instead.
Thanks Ørjan! That’d better be a good pint 🙂
Hi Ming, may I just ask where in Tokyo was that photo taken. It’s wonderful and I will be planning a street shooting trip early 2016.
Down one of the alleyways around Nakano Broadway.
Hi Ming,
Really great idea! I’ve signed up! I really enjoyed this part of the MOI workshop in Chicago and always refer back to your Photoshop videos before I work on any big output projects where I really want to make a set of images shine. I’ll be waiting for these each week and will try and submit some images as well! Thanks! Mike O’Rourke
Great, thanks for your support, Mike! 🙂
Very interesting, already signed up. I have a couple of images I will try to submit.
Thanks Erling!
This is extremely creative, Ming. I will definitely be subscribing!
Thanks for your support! 🙂
I own Photoshop Elements 14. Will you use Photoshop functions not available in Elements version?
Difficult to say, not being familiar with Elements 14. I would imagine yes given previous versions had rudimentary dodging and burning at best, and this is quite a mission critical function.
Very happy to see this! I was always a bit hesitant to jump into buying your larger video packages, and in fact never did, because I have no clue whether they’re any good and whether they’d help me improve my own workflow and if so, which videos actually would. And I’m wary of videos in general, I often prefer text. I subscribed to some reputable Udemy courses from other authors, but never got through one in its entirety.
But I’m really looking forward to these bite-sized packages. Looking over your shoulders and learning from you will be a real pleasure, I’m sure!
Thanks for your support. I think the hundreds of testimonials on the video packages would answer the ‘are they any good’ question 😉 – and you can always see the HTS5: Havana free video. Please note though due to the short video nature, it’s impossible to cover the functionality of PS in full each time – I highly recommend getting the Intro to PS Workflow and PS Workflow II package as a primer, too.
Ah, but of course your videos are good – I didn’t mean to doubt that 😛 I was rather wondering whether they’re what *I’m* looking for, since I’d rather build and improve my own workflow and my own style than copy somebody else’s. So for me, this weekly installment allows me to mix-and-match the things I see and like about your workflow with the few things I was able to pick up from the workflows of others through books, articles and indeed, very rarely even videos 😛
Either way, I’m really looking forward to the next weeks. Great quality indeed, and the personal touch of the “looking over your shoulder” approach really makes this something special.
Glad to hear it – thank you! 🙂
Guido, I can only speak for myself, but I have two of Ming’s photoshop videos (the new workflow and the monochrome video), and they are well produced, well explained and immediately applicable. They’ve cut my post processing time considerably and (I haven’t figured out why yet) the pictures also load faster on my iPad. The older pictures take a while to render fully, but the pictures which I run through Ming’s workflow render almost instantly without any delay. Basically it teaches a quick (once you get the hang of it) and effective process which gives consistent results.
I’ve used Udemy as well, and there’s some good stuff on there, but you don’t have to make it a “one or the other” choice.
If you enjoy this new small-scale series, I think you’d also get quite a lot of benefit from the longer videos.
Thanks for the recommendation, Mark! 🙂
What a great idea, I’m in! Happy holidays Ming and wishing you and your family a happy, healthy and prosperous 2016!
Thanks Richard, all the best to you too!
I’m glad you’re going further with your teaching here. I have a question: am I correct in interpreting this as your videos will have a one-week download window? If so, if a week passes and I miss the window to download a particular video, how might we handle that?
Thank you again for your work, and good fortune to you.
I am interested in the answer to that. I know I am scheduled to be traveling for several weeks throughout the year (without a fast internet link, or a computer at times). I would hate to have to remember to start and stop the subscription every time (and miss the weeks in between).
No problem. I realized this might be an issue too, so subscribers can access the previous four videos (one month), from the date of their subscription (so if you only started last week, then you get last week and this week – only fair to other subscribers). And of course we can make exceptions if necessary.
I realized this might be an issue too, so subscribers can access the previous four videos (one month), from the date of their subscription (so if you only started last week, then you get last week and this week – only fair to other subscribers). And of course we can make exceptions if necessary. 🙂
The reason I can’t keep the complete archive online is because the server costs would exceed the subscription revenue 😛
Ah, thank you. Yes, that sounds eminently reasonable. Thank you. The organic kind of path your series is likely to tend toward with the frequency and the audience involvement will be quite interesting, I look forward to it.
This is exciting. However, every week? Goodness, that seems like a lot of work. How many of you are there?
An entire army of clones 🙂
In all seriousness, I want to do more personal projects next year, which means freeing up time from commercial and finding alternate sources of income. I’m hoping this patronage model might help, and allow me to give back something unique in return. Given that I already chunk through a huge number of files in a week, it’s more like peeking over my shoulder with commentary whilst I do it. 🙂
Looking forward to this!
Thank you for your support! 🙂
I am VERY interested but have tons of travel – so I will be a subscriber who shows up a bit later – if that is OK. Thanks for the opportunity!
No problem – you can jump in any time you want 🙂
This is a very exciting idea and a new breath of fresh air and possibilities to all of us. I am in of course.
Thanks Ming for working this concept out.
Thanks Gerner!
This is a cool idea! Just the right thing for absorbing a lot of expertise over time while basically being entertained. Count me in.
Idea: Why not share subscribers’ files (raw and processed) with everyone IF the photographer specifically wants to. I can imagine a few preferring to do that, even if it doesn’t affect your selection.
Another thought: it may be interesting if participants have processed the file themselves, for them to include a processed JPEG so we can see the users processing and intent compared to Ming’s. Just a thought. Possibly Ming would include this in his video a before/after and user processed.
Oops, that was part of your suggestion already
Not really, I was thinking MT’s processed jpeg. But maybe the video is good enough for that, I don’t see a huge need to closely inspect sharpening results..
You’d see that when I go to 100% to determining how much sharpening to use anyway 🙂
Happy to do this, too.
Happy to do it if the submitter wishes to. I probably will not do it for my own files as I may be processing client work too, and there are licensing issues of course…
Maybe this has been mentioned already, but is it too much work to post the selected image that will be processed for a particular week somewhere on the homepage? Or a page like this where the main photo above changes every week. Just so we can get an idea on the types of photos being processed. If I like a particular image and want to know how its processed I can subscribe for that week? Can we even subscribe for oarticular week instead of continuous? Anyhow just a thought.
Actually, I process about a dozen with a selection that’s 50-50 between my own images shot that week and a pick fro, those submitted by subscribers – the short answer is I don’t know what I’m going to process til I process it. It also takes up too much screen real estate when viewing the page. I’ll post a highlight image to the Facebook page though.
Individual videos: the course is meant to be a continuous process that does somewhat build on previous weeks, so single videos are of less value. I also do not cover the basics in each video because it would take too long – Intro to PS and PS Workflow II cover that – and they’re about 5 hours in total…
Thank you for the clarification. I do have PS Workflow II. Will consider this offering.
Why stop now? I’m in and looking forward to it…
FYI, to anyone who is not attended a master class and witnessed/participated in the last day of post processing of Ming’s work, you are missing an amazing learning experience. From the sound of it this is that on a weekly basis. You have no idea how valuable this is. Thanks, Ming!
Merry X-mas, etc
Thanks Caleb, happy holidays to you too!