Being new to digital after many years of film, I'm not clear as to how much/little work is required before submitting images for publication. I shoot RAW and make any necessary adjustments to exposure etc. If the file is then going direct to a publisher, as much of my work does, should I be applying any sharpening at all (especially as I don't know at what size the image will be used)? I assume that the boys and girls in repro will take care of this and would prefer not to work with pre-sharpened files.

The other issue is that unsharpened TIFFs don't necessarily look great, and if my pics are being viewed by a potential client I'd rather they saw them at their best. What do other people do?

Occasionally nostalgic for transparency

Ask the client how they want the files prepared. Some know, some will not. If they don't do some minimal sharpening. Some will want full CMYK conversion (which really should be done by the pre-press people as most photographers are poorly skilled at it). It really varies tremendously depending on the size and sophistication of the publication.

Best not go near CMYK unless you are working very closely with printer who's ICC compliant and who can provide press profile. As stated you must know what you are doing.
My general approach is
a/convert from raw with basic exposure and col. temp correction. No sharpening or noise reduction.
Use colour space appropriate to out put. If in doubt use Adobe RGB.
b/ file as TIFF
c/rotate if required
d/ dump dogs
e/ Use shadow recovery if required
f/ Enough sharpening to make image look OK on screen , but in seperate layer that can be dumped.
Note that this has been done on DVD and contact designer etc to make this clear.
I will sharpen for output if I know size and resolution of output.
g/Burn folders with index sheets to archival DVD.

If am required to fully prepare file I charge accordingly.

The sharpening approach for individual clients must be resolved. Many do it poorly , not having a clue beyond applying some sort of USM globally , with a similar setting for any output, which is often a disaster. Obviously if compositing etc is to be done by design dpt. then they must have access to unsharpened file. Temporary sharpening is only for benefit of image selectors/editors who often believe they only get what they see. There are a lot like that.
Cheers,
Brian
www.pharoseditions.com.au

Thanks for your advice, both of you. I'm still slightly shocked by the additional amount of work involved in shooting digital; for example, my current project. 20 days location shooting for a how-to garden book, including step by step pics, so about 1000 images all told for the designer to select from. So that's 1000 RAW files each to be individually corrected, converted etc. Then they need to be individually captioned according to the client's requirements. Then make low-res jpgs for use as positionals (at least this can be done as a batch) and finally burn to CD (many CDs) and deliver. And the day rate is still the same as for film. Oh well, I'll get used to it in the end.

Incidentally, at least two of the leading architectural style magazines here are known to prefer film for their main features . . .

Alex

This is a mad way of doing it

Either

A)

You need to produce a contact sheet (or web gallery) of roughly corrected images and then get the client to come back to you with an order of the images that they want

Different softwares offer different solutions but for a 1000 images you still could have run a computer overnight to produce contacts

B ) Deliver them your edit

----------------

How you quote to deliver jobs is most important nowadays

I tend to have a dayrate that includes delivery of contact sheets and the post on 20 images

With aditional charges for further delivered images

Some will howl about giving any delivered images in the dayrate fee - it is a balance of finding what your customers can ride

Top level guys will charge for every image delivered
-----------------

You will help yourself developing skills in consistent exposure and in camera correcting so if you shoot RAW and jpg you cam make a decent contact sheet off the jpgs and NOT over shooting - a camera is not a video camera

And there should be a higher day rate for shooting digital - you are saving the client film costs and more importantly scanning fees - you are now doing the work of two people

For a book size project this is not critical it is extra extra critical

SMM

Can I give you some advice from working with magazine and book publishers for 28 years? I don't want to be taken as mean spirited here, but..........

1)Submitting 1000 images for a how-to book is evidence of someone who is not adequately editing their work. never show them an image that you have to apologize for or you you are not happy with.

2)Even if you are working at a day rate. On top of that should be a "capture fee" per image to cover your basic capture computer time. That runs from $25.00 to
$200.00 and up depending on many things). 1000x.........you see how this does not add up?