Hot answers tagged apple-aperture
8
There is nothing wrong with your Aperture setup. RAW files are like film negatives, they need to be processed so they can be viewed/displayed as intended. Your camera does not show the RAW file when you press play and preview the image but rather a JPEG image that has been processed in-camera. This is known as a sidecar file.
The software that came with ...
5
You have to do the imports. The systems need to set up all of their information about the images somehow, after all.
So, start the imports and go do something else for a while. You're not required to sit and watch the imports. Let the computer do its thing, and then come back later when it's done.
4
Although storing your photos in folders is fast and simple, you can't place one photo into two folders without making file duplicates. And thus locating the necessary images might require more time.
So economy in a stage of image library classification will leads in loosing time in finding images later.
4
I'm not sure why you awarded that answer. It's absolutely fixable easily with aperture. I've spent less than 5 minutes on this and already got decent result.
This is your exposure -2EV:
This is what I got to (different from above but it's even better imo):
All I did was brush in levels set to:
Followed by setting recovery to 0.14 (because some ...
3
Command line solution
In your terminal try to run this command:
sips -s format tiff /Path/To/Image/bla.CR2 --out bla.tiff
Now you can easily create a Shell Script and do your batch conversion. Credits to this solution goes to this comment.
Automator solution
I came up with another solution that utilize the very nice feature of Mac OS X: Automator!
...
3
The big point of raw files is that it is the original unprocessed and unmodified data from the sensor - the minute you do any processing what so ever on the file (for example, distortion correction) it's no longer the unmodified sensor data - even if you export it into a "raw file".
So, exporting to an high bit depth TIFF is just fine, the data loss is ...
3
I use Lightroom, but that is because I like the integration with other adobe products. It is really easy to open a photo in Lightroom in Photoshop from light room and then send the updated file back. I have considered switching to Aperture, but I felt like the time to move my photo library and learn a new system wasn't worth it.
That being said, from what ...
2
The best way from my experience is to upgrade your memory. My iMac has almost the exact configuration as yours, except that I recently upgraded from 8GB to 32GB. The result is much more impressive than I could have imagined - navigating in Aperture is now instant. It seems as if the entire database is cached.
I have also tested Aperture on an SSD-based Mac, ...
2
As Jukka mentions in a comment, you can use the "Primary only" button:
This button is located just below the bottom-right of the main viewer window.
This ensures that any amendments are only done to the image you have selected (with a grey border). I've tested this and it works fine for me in Aperture 3.
2
This behaviour is not normal. Aperture should write the assosiated source file(s) to the directory you specify in the export dialog, depending on the options probably in a subfolder named by the project.
So something goes severly wrong. For troubleshooting I suggest you check the following things:
Does this happen to all photos or only to one/some?
Is the ...
2
I am with you entirely. I hate having to do an import. I don't mind pointing an application at a folder that I have laid out. I can further sort within the app, add tagging, etc. But it had better not move my photos around.
I don't know of any way to do what you want with iPhoto.
Lightroom does indeed support a "folder" approach where that folder and ...
2
Emiel's answer on this question explains how Aperture stores modified versions of images. Since the biggest concern is the large original images there are two things that might help.
First, when importing you can tell Aperture to store images in the Library, in the photo's current location, or in a specific location. Perhaps that would help for new ...
2
From what I can read this isn't currently possible without the help of a 3rd party plugin.
The "Metadata > Write IPTC Metadata to Original" command within Aperture is the closest I can find but the definition that Aperture 3 uses for IPTC metadata does not include GPS information unfortunately.
There's more discussion on this in Apple's discussion forums ...
2
An exported RAW is not RAW. I have no idea what it is but even if it were encoded exactly the same way, it has lost a ton of information due to the resampling needed to perform distortion correction.
Exporting as TIFF (16 bits or more per-channel) you get the same bit-depth as your original RAW file except that that you have full color information. ...
2
Excuse me if I'm far off, but when was the last time you updated your Mac through Software Update?
Apple keeps releasing "Digital RAW Compatibility Updates" that add support for new cameras.
The 7D got support in "Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 2.7."
Check http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1475.
1
There are two approaches that work for this image:
Go to Highlights/Shadows. Enter "150" as the highlights value (or
drag it there by dragging over the number, not using the slider
handle), probably also increase Mid Contrast to about 20. Brush in
that adjustment on just the sign. This looks much like the negative
exposure adjustment.
Open Levels ...
1
I'm not an Aperture user, but it appears that if, instead of opening Aperture and having that load your default library, you can instead double-click on that external library (while holding Command and Option keys) and it should open that library with first aid.
That's what I gather from this article - Repairing and Rebuilding Your Aperture Library
1
You simply got misguided advice. It sounds like the person you were talking to didn't realize that Aperture is RAW conversion software. The issue of color demosaicing (with your camera, as with most, it's not really layers, but rather side-by-side in a Bayer pattern) would hold if you were going to a traditional raster editor like Photoshop or Gimp, but if ...
1
There's a few ways to do black & white adjustments. Here are three that may be helpful. They're all essentially the same, but with slightly different control over how the image or individual colours within it are adjusted.
Black & White Adjustment
Aperture has a Black & White adjustment for very simple B&W conversion. It lets you choose how ...
1
If you want to remove all color, just slide the saturation slider all the way to the left. If the stripe is showing regardless of color, then you would have to repair the photo in something like Photoshop.
You can reference page 65 of the manual for more info on this particular feature - ...
1
This is probably due to differences in conversion algorithms between the two programs. Since Raw photos need to be converted to a JPG to be viewed, the program (or the camera) does a simple conversion preview. PictureStyleEditor probably uses a more sophisticated algorithm that is closer to your camera's. OS X probably has less focus on RAW images and thus ...
1
Normally, when Aperture imports the image, it uses the same white balance as set in the camera.
But what you see on the preview screen on the camera is the raw image post-processed using the selected picture style. This normally gives a boost to saturation and sharpness.
Therefore, if you haven't selected any adjustment presets when importing the image, it ...
1
Aperture is a great program, used by many pros. And it supports new cameras fairly quickly. I expect that Apple will (or may have already) made the port for the Retina display, after all its an Apple MacBook Pro.
Aperture is really inexpensive when you buy it from the Apple AppStore.
Some professionals, for example the famously grumpy Scott Bourne, have ...
1
The reason it takes so long is that it's super complex and specific to each photo. In my experience most of my metadata is broad across many photos (location, event, people, etc.)
Making that subjective description you have after returning from shooting photos something easily repeatable sounds difficult to make simple, but we can try!
If your metadata ...
1
I am currently using a NAS for sharing storage accross all my Macs. Since I do not need concurrent collaboration, I stored my Aperture library inside a sparsebundle image disk on the NAS.
Whoever needs to work with the library first mounts the sparsebundle and open the library directly in Aperture. Note that storing the library inside a sparsebundle image ...
1
If you want to see the precise temperature and tint, you can see that in the White Balance adjustment. When importing a raw image file, even though the adjustment is not active, the sliders will default to the actual white balance set by the camera.
This can be handy when the camera has an Auto white balance.
1
I shared your concerns before I started using management software as well. I have tried several of them, but ultimately I find the functionality in Aperture to be the best match for me.
When you initially start Aperture, it will default to storing all your originals inside Apterture library. While the Library looks like a monolithic data structure, it is ...
1
For your thumbnails/previews, an SSD is going to help a lot, so if you can install an SSD that will speed up the browsing/management side of things (though I'd max out your RAM first).
If you can't afford an SSD of sufficient size, then you won't lose too much performance by having the Masters on an external Firewire/eSATA drive (in fact this may be faster ...
1
You cannot do this inside Aperture. If you solve it with a plugin, a copy of your image will be created, wrecking havoc on a non-destructive workflow.
In Lightroom there are separate controls for noise reduction of luminance and chroma channels. Lightroom also gives more control overall over the de-noising process. This feature was one of the two (the other ...
Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible
