Just to clarify, you are adding floating text in the page editor, and then exiting the page editor and saving the job, and when the dialog asks if you want to save the job or just the settings, you select job?

Maybe you could post one or two here? (I realize we wouldn't see that print quality)

Try this for at least a starting point if all of the images are similarly under exposed.

Select all images and add all to queue.  Then adjust the lighting on one, and when you save, tick the box that says apply the filter to all images in the queue.

Love it.  Thanks Fred

Sure - send it to you tomorrow when I get back on my QU computer downstairs.  Love to see what you do with it. I have used ODR, but not for something like this so here's a chance for me to learn  a little technique. Also note - that I will definitely twiddle with this some more before I print it.  What I normally do with these is a first quick and dirty edit and crop of the best half dozen or so to decide which ones to print after doing an initial rating via select all/preview add to queue.

No - I didn't refine the raw at all. Used the image editor and cranked the contrast up but that is the only thing in the flt.  Nothing else (except of course the crop)

No sooner had I written the above about how raw saves me from the underexposed or overexposed jpeg, than I created a great example the very next day.

Doing some informal portraits of the grandchildren in my Rube Goldberg (now outdoors) studio. For most of the pictures, the out of the camera pegs are great, but one or two, as I mentioned were not.  See the first snap below.  On the left is the out of camera jpg, on the right, the raw with the default QU processing settings.  The second snap shows the jpeg i cropped and created from the raw

So my two cents worth on both topics.  I do occasionally use PS elements. (BTW, what does PS do that you can’t do with elements?)  Mainly use if I think I need to do something where I really need layers, or when I need to do something – not to demean anyone or anything – but something I would call gimmicky.  Like I did a cute toddler portrait a few years back and was asked to add heart shapes to the background.

As to raw, a couple of years ago, I was doing almost exclusively raw.  But Mr. Hoffman is right, for a properly exposed photo, I can’t match whatever Nikon does to create their Jpegs. But – there’s the rub.  When I have a photo that’s overexposed or underexposed – and I am really skilled at doing both of these – even at the default settings, the QU raw will bring it in for me if it’s only one or two stops in either direction. If it’s badly out of whack, I can still sometimes recover with the many selective exposure options in the raw editor.  So right now I am using raw for about 25-35% of photos.

OK - so here's my contribution.  My absolutely favorite check box - that I used for years without realizing how powerful it really is.  While it says, "Save crop for this image/size" it should say "Save crop for this image/aspect ratio."  So if I load 2x3, 4x6, 8x12, 12x18, I get the same crop, and for me, more importantly, if I had rotated the image, I get that as well.

Of course - as always - I see that your 100 are better than my 100 - but anyway - the first time i did this was before any of the intelli-space options were there, but I do remember that since the photos were from a one to two year span, I just created an album, went through the folders and added to the album until I had 100 in the album, then opened the album added all to the queue.  I think I had to adjust the crops on a few, but that was not a major issue.

Which brings me to mention another great Qimage feature that doesn't get mentioned a lot.  The other day I was thinking about the 100 postage stamp size photo sheet as something to give to my oldest grandchild for her bulletin board as she heads off for her freshman college year.  It's so great that you can recall any job that you have ever printed - ever printed!  And of course now you can even search for a job containing a specific photo, but in this case, all I had to do was open the automatic job log, and click the Number of Phts column to sort on that, and there they all were, from 2011, 2012, 2015, 2016 and 2018! Needless to say, I did not have any jobs with more than 100 prints

Here's another idea to break Fred's "all quiet."

About seven or eight years ago, when one of my grandchildren was in Pre-K, they were trying to give the kids a grasp of how big a number 100 is.  I put 100 family snapshots on a 13x19 sheet of photo paper.  Use 1.2x1.75 inches.  Fits perfectly.  The kids all loved it and since then I have done it quite a few times. Sometimes they just leave it on the sheet, last time they cut them up and used them to play their own version of some kind of Pokemon game (using photo of me as an evil guy called Darkrai I think)

QU makes this really easy. Just a thought if you are getting bored.

Really a great lesson.  Because my first instinct would have been to add a little fill and then select an ODR spot - but that would probably have blown out the shirt completely.  Thank you.

Fred - I really like the result.  What did you do in the second box just to the right of the ear in 052?

For portraits, my personal taste for most - but especially women and children - I like the eyes to be sharply defined.  So I will use the dropper to select the facial flesh tone and then Sharpen All Except.  This is of course very subjective, and I sometimes have to fiddle with the actual DFS values and/or slider, especially if the hair gets overdone. 

OK – I promise this will be my last off topic post as I’m sure Mike doesn’t want us to fill this forum with baseball talk, but it is a passion of mine as well, the game itself even more than my love of any one team.

About 30 years ago I was at a sports card event with my (then teenage) son.  And there sitting at a table together, signing autographs (for a fee of course) were Bobby Thomson and Ralph Branca. To meet and talk to them really was a thrill. October 3 1951, one of the great days in baseball history, and even in the small sleepy Maryland town where I grew up, it was all anyone could talk about.  On that same day, in St. Paull Minnesota, a baby was born – his name – Dave Winfield.