Faster culling tools that actually saved time

Confession: I used to cull in Lightroom, but FastRawViewer works better. on last weekend’s 1,200-frame dance floor set, my first-pass picks dropped from about 60 minutes to 20 because I can check true RAW exposure, fine focus, and motion blur at 1:1 without waiting.

One way to start: think of culling as speed-reading a messy contact sheet with a loupe,FastRawViewer is the loupe that actually resolves the grain, so on runs like your 1,200-frame dance floor set it trims the slog, taking a first pass from roughly 60 minutes to 20 and letting your eyes stay picky instead of numb. the keep/reject rhythm stays smooth because frames pop in with real data instead of mushy previews. Short version: less waiting, more deciding. Would a simple checklist help?

Same here - turning on Auto-Advance on rating in FastRawViewer plus focus peaking made receptions painless: I tap 3 on the sharp frame in each burst at 1:1 and it jumps to the next, and those stars carry into Lightroom via XMP.

‍‌‌⁠‍‌​‍‍⁠​​​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌‌‍‍⁠​⁠​​‍⁠​‌​‍‌‍‍‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌‍​‌⁠‍‌​‍‌⁠‌‍​‍‌‍⁠‍​‍‍‍⁠​‍​⁠​‌⁠⁠‍​⁠‌‌​‍‌‍‍‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌‍​‌‌‌⁠‌​‌‍‍‌​⁠⁠‍‍‍‍​⁠⁠‍​​⁠‍⁠‍‍‌​‌⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍‍‍‍⁠​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌​⁠‌‍‍‍​​‌⁠‍‌​⁠‍‌‌​​​‌⁠‌‌​⁠‌‌‌​‌‌‌‍‍‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍‍‍⁠⁠​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌‌‌‍‍⁠‍‍⁠⁠⁠​⁠‍​⁠‌‍​‌​‍‍⁠‍‌‌‍​‌⁠​⁠‍​‌‌​⁠‍‍⁠‍‍‍​‌‍​‌‍‍‍⁠‍‍⁠​​​⁠‌‌⁠‍‍‌​‍‍⁠‍‌

One tweak that shaved minutes for me: I keep the RAW highlight warnings and the Exposure Stats panel up - if Overex spikes on skin I skip without zooming. I also bumped Read‑ahead to 2 in Preferences so 1:1 loads instantly when I punch.

‍‌‌⁠‍‌​‍‍⁠​​​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌‌‍‍⁠​⁠​​‍⁠​‌​‍‌‍‍‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌‍​‌⁠‍‌​‍‌⁠‌‍​‍‌‍⁠‍​‍‍‍⁠​‍​⁠​‌⁠⁠‍​⁠‌‌​‍‌‍‍‌⁠‌⁠‍‍‌‍​‌‌‌⁠‌​‌‍‍‌​⁠⁠‍‍‍‍​⁠⁠‍​​⁠‍⁠‍‍‌​‌⁠​‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍‍‍‍⁠​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌​⁠‌‍‍‍​​‌⁠‍‌​⁠‍‌‌​​​‌⁠‌‌​⁠‌‌‌​‍​⁠‍‍‌​⁠​​​⁠​‍‍‍⁠⁠​‍‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠‍‍‌‌​‌⁠​‍​‍‍⁠​‍‍​‍‍⁠‍​​‍​⁠‌‍‌​⁠‍‍‌​‍⁠​⁠‌‍‍‍‍⁠⁠​‌​⁠‌‌​‍​‌​‌​‌⁠‌⁠‌‍​⁠‍‌​‍‍⁠‍‌

I shaved a ton by setting FastRawViewer to keep the same zoom/position between files and mapping Space to toggle 1:1, so I park on the eyes once and just arrow through the burst without re-centering — have you tried that?

‌⁠‍⁠​‍​‍‌⁠‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌‍‌⁠‌⁠​​‌‍‍‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍⁠​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‍‌‌‌⁠​​‌‍⁠​‌⁠‍‌​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍‌‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​⁠‌⁠​⁠​‌​⁠‌⁠​⁠‌​​⁠‌‌​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‌​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍​⁠​‍​⁠​​​⁠​‍​⁠‌‌​⁠​​​⁠‍‌​⁠​‍​⁠​‍​‍​‍​‍⁠​​‍​‍‌‍‍​​‍​‍​⁠‍‍​‍​‍‌⁠​‍‌‌‍​‌⁠‌⁠‌​‌​‌‍‌​​⁠‌​‌‌‌​‌‍‌‍‌​‍‌‌⁠‌⁠‌​​‌‌‍‍​‌⁠‌⁠​⁠‍​‌‌‍​‌‌​‌​‍​‍‌⁠⁠‌