Why does Fw 9 lighten raster images upon import?

Every time i import, open, cut and paste, or drag and drop, a
raster image from photoshop or from it's original file into
Fireworks it is lighter when it gets to fireworks? optimizing does
nothing. i have to adjust the levels on any raster image once it is
in fireworks and this is costing me a lot of time since i have
already perfected the images in photoshop.
Anyone have this problem?

goatmud wrote:
> the colors shifted in fireworks and then shifted back
when i exported them into
> photoshop. How do make the profiles match in both
programs? In photoshop i used
> working RGB: sRGB IEC61966-2.1. I can't even find a
color proflie option in
> fireworks.
>
Fireworks does not understand color profiles.
Read this:
http://kb.adobe.com/selfservice/viewContent.do?externalId=tn_13364
It should help.
Jim Babbage - .:Community MX:. & .:Adobe Community
Expert:.
http://www.communityMX.com/
CommunityMX - Free Resources:
http://www.communitymx.com/free.cfm
.:Adobe Community Expert for Fireworks:.
Adobe Community Expert
http://tinyurl.com/2a7dyp
See my work on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jim_babbage/

Similar Messages

Does iPhoto automatically downsize an image on import?

I am new to Mac. I attended a workshop at an Apple store and was told iPhoto will automatically downsize all images upon import. I use CS3/Bridge to manage my image library but really love iPhotos ability to find images quickly. If I import my existing image files into iPhoto will they ever be resized without my knowledge? I don't want that to happen. I have tried a few tests and all the imported images are the same size in iPhoto as the originals in my old folder structure outside of iPhoto. At the moment I tell iPhoto to "not copy folders to the iPhoto library". Thanks.
Jerry

Jerry1635
Welcome to the Apple Discussions.
If you’re new to Macs then I’ll bet you’re using iPhoto 08 (iPhoto Menu -> About iPhoto). You’ve posted on the v5 forum and the problem there is that there are many differences between the versions.
However here’s one thing that is *absolutely constant*
and was told iPhoto will automatically downsize all images upon import.
*This is utterly untrue*.
Iphoto simply copies the file - a straight byte by byte copy of the actual photo. It makes no changes whatever to the file unless you tell it to.
It has no facility to resize on import, so you can’t even tell it to do that.
What it does do is create a thumbnail of the image for faster display in the iPhoto Window.
At the moment I tell iPhoto to "not copy folders to the iPhoto library".
This is called a Referenced Library and - especially with folks new to Macs - I do not recommend running a Referenced Library
You need to be aware of a number of potential pitfalls using this system.
1. Import and deleting pics are more complex procedures
2. You cannot move or rename the files on your system or iPhoto will lose track of them on systems prior to 10.5 and iPhoto 08. Even with the later versions issues can still arise if you move the referenced files to new volumes or between volumes.
3. Most importantly, migrating to a new disk or computer can be much more complex.
Always allowing for personal preference, I've yet to see a good reason to run iPhoto in referenced mode unless you're using two photo organisers.
If disk space is an issue, you can run an entire iPhoto Library from an external disk:
1. Quit iPhoto
2. Copy the iPhoto Library as an entity from your Pictures Folder to the External Disk.
3. Hold down the option (or alt) key while launching iPhoto. From the resulting menu select 'Choose Library' and navigate to the new location. From that point on this will be the default location of your library.
4. Test the library and when you're sure all is well, trash the one on your internal HD to free up space.
If you're concerned about accessing the files, there are many, many ways to access your files in iPhoto:
For 10.5 users: You can use any Open / Attach / Browse dialogue. On the left there's a Media heading, your pics can be accessed there. Apple-Click for selecting multiple pics.
Uploaded with plasq's Skitch!
To upload to a site that does not have an iPhoto Export Plug-in the recommended way is to Select the Pic in the iPhoto Window and go File -> Export and export the pic to the desktop, then upload from there. After the upload you can trash the pic on the desktop. It's only a copy and your original is safe in iPhoto.
This is also true for emailing with Web-based services. If you're using Gmail you can use iPhoto2GMail
If you use Apple's Mail, Entourage, AOL or Eudora you can email from within iPhoto.
If you use a Cocoa-based Browser such as Safari, you can drag the pics from the iPhoto Window to the Attach window in the browser.
Or, if you want to access the files with iPhoto not running, then create a Media Browser using Automator (takes about 10 seconds) or use THIS
Other options include:
1. *Drag and Drop*: Drag a photo from the iPhoto Window to the desktop, there iPhoto will make a full-sized copy of the pic.
2. *File -> Export*: Select the files in the iPhoto Window and go File -> Export. The dialogue will give you various options, including altering the format, naming the files and changing the size. Again, producing a copy.
3. *Show File*: Right- (or Control-) Click on a pic and in the resulting dialogue choose 'Show File'. A Finder window will pop open with the file already selected.
Your choice, obviously, but best to be aware of all the ramifications. By all means post back if you require more info.
Regards
TD

All I want is all my contacts on my phone and the same on my iMac, but no, that's too much to ask, instead I get everything doubled up on the phone and everything doubled up (triple in some cases) on the iMac, why does it do this? and more importantly how

All I want is all my contacts on my phone and the same on my iMac, but no, that's too much to ask, instead I get everything doubled up on the phone and everything doubled up (triple in some cases) on the iMac, why does it do this? and more importantly how can I stop it? Thanks

Look under system preferences on the mac at what is be controlled? Look at Mail, Contacts, Calendars. How many accounts are managing contacts? Just the cloud? the cloud and gmail? or cloud, gmail, yahoo, and exchange? If you have more than one contact account, then you will have different contact lists, if John Smith shows up in more than one of your contact lists, you will have multiple entries.
Pick a contact list that is your master, (I use iCloud), only turn on contact syncing for it. The same for your phone. Spend some time on the iCloud webset (www.icloud.com) and work on your contact list there. Clean it up, remove duplicates, etc...Changes will auto sync back to all your devices. Life gets much simplier.
Just remember, if you sync different contacts lists and a large number of people appear in your different lists, then they will appear as duplicates.

Why does it take iTunes along time to imports CD'S ?

Hi
I was wondering why does it take iTunes along time to import CD's I am using iTunes version 7.02 . Does anyone else have this problem and how do I fix it?
I would appreciate any help,
lizabler
Fifth Generation iPod Windows XP

Hey lizabler!
Here's a sugestion someone found to be a "workaround" for this issue with iTunes 7:
Don't leave iTunes showing the CD screen, which shows the track names and the importing progress. Click on the library, or iTunes store, as not to leave iTunes on the CD importing screen.
After doing this, your importing speed might increase to a good level once more.
I hope that helps you.
-Kylene

Apply settings to images upon import

I am using LR 5. Is there a way to apply settings to images upon import? For example, I want to set noise reduction to X if an imported image has a ISO setting between 1000 to 1250, from camera A with lens B. Right now I am applying the changes manually by using the metadata filter, but it will be great if the same settings can be applied upon import (to save time)

To set detail settings based on ISO, it's best to use a plugin (in my opinion), otherwise you have to mastermind which ISO's your camera is capable of having, and save a default for each, then if you want to change you have to go through the process again.
Some cameras can have dozens of different auto-ISO values, and it's best if you don't skip any of them.. granted it's not so bad if you never shoot auto-ISO .
Consider:
* ISO Detailer (author: me), or
* Bulk Develop (author: Jeffrey Friedl)
instead - both plugins are essentially free.
Rob

Why does iMovie stretch my images upon importing?

I've got some footage that I'm trying to import, but iMovie stretches out the video horizontally. I shot the footage using my Panasonic Widescreen mode, but why does iMovie take that footage and stretch it out further? Anyone have any thoughts?

If AppleMan1958's suggestion does not resolve your problem, and if iMovie is the ONLY app that is giving problems, your iMovie preferences file may be corrupted.
To check this out, quit all applications. Then throw away your iMovie Preferences file (com.apple.iMovie8.plist) from your Home (user) / Library / Preferences folder.
A new preferences folder will be generated when you restart iMovie to test whether iMovie imports properly now, but you will need to reset any preference settings you want different from the default values.
EZ Jim
G5 DP 1.8GHz w/Mac OS X (10.5.7) PowerBook 1.67GHz (10.4.11) iBookSE 366MHz (10.3.9) External iSight

Envelope Distort does not work on raster images

From "The Repro Kid" on
this forum post.
"What's happening is that Illustrator cannot perform the "distortion" on the masked area alone. It has to take into account the image itself, which is a big rectangle that extends beyond the bounds of the mask. The image and the mask together is object that gets distorted and that is the only way it can be processed by Illustrator."
My repsonse:
But this seems in direct contradiction to Adobe's description of what is happening:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/Illustrator/14.0/WS714a382cdf7d304e7e07d0100196cbc5f-6463a.htm l
Here is the problem with that: (clipping) masks are presumed to be only a portion of an image, and not the whole image. There are other uses, but it makes absolutely no sense to have a checkbox that says "Preserve shape using: Clipping Mask" under "Envelope settings" unless that is actually what it does. If, instead, it uses the clipping mask's bounding box, then besides being mostly useless feature, it also has a misleading name. Likewise, why bother having a checkbox that says "Preserve shape using: Transparency"?
These options are intended to deal with images (rasters), so to default to the bounding box of the image means that these checkboxes actually have no use whatsoever, since they are never less than the image bounding box.
I am only trying to work with linked raster images - I have no interest in making other objects deform.

I think what it is, is that FILL defaults back to transparent and the glow
does not show up. I figured that out 2 seconds after I posted.
Isn't that always the case?
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 12:28 PM, mac_heibu <[email protected]>

Why does lightroom 2.7 keep making me import a folder?

Every time I sync my Nikon Transfer folder to import my new pictures that I just loaded from my camera, a folder that I have already imported is included in the import. This folder and its contents are already in there. And lightroom agrees by telling me that it didn't import that folder because it already exsists. Why does lightroom try to import that folder in the first place?

Beat,
I'm not sure what you mean by that. I thought the folders viewed in Explorer and in Lightroom were one and the same. I think I see what you are getting at though. Perhaps if you were to change the name via Lightroom, the metadata gets changed in a way that causes Lightroom to think it needs to re-import. I don't change the names from the auto-generated sub folder that Nikon Transfer creates - which is the date and time using all numerals.
I think I am just going to copy this sub folder to somewhere else, delete the original, re-import it and see what happens. I will might lose all my raw edits in the process, but I have already delivered the finished jpegs to my client.

Does iPhoto change a RAW file upon import or export?

Hi! New Mac user here. Trying to get my workflows and backups going.
I created an iPhoto library from multiple sources: migration from PC, folders from backup HD, new photos from iPhone and camera memory card.
So I have one consolidated library that is almost 300Gb but I want to go through and remove and archive many of these, leaving only a much smaller working library with the archive copies of some originals stored somewhere else. These archive copies will not be referenced files, my plan is to export them from iPhoto, back them up to an external HD, and then delete them from the iPhoto library. If I ever decided to look at them again, I would import them from the archive HD.
Ideally, I should have imported all the files to my iMac desktop and then imported only what I wanted into iPhoto, but because everything is now consolidated (and the photos from the iPhone and camera memory card are erased), I don't want to wipe out my iPhoto library and start over. So I'm starting with this huge managed library and want to export a good part of it to what I will call "the archive" to cull it down.
My questions: Upon import, did iPhoto change the RAW master files, or will those be the same when I export them (assuming I made no edits)? Did iPhoto change the JPEGs or will those also be the same when I export them?
How do I export the files I want to save to the archive before deleting them from the iPhoto library?
Alternatively, I think I will use Aperture going forward for editing. Should I use that instead for trying to export these files?
Thank you for any assistance you can provide.
LCA
iMac 4 GB, 2.7 GHz, Intel Core i5
OS X 10.7.4
iPhoto 9.3.1
Aperture 3.3.1

File -> Export and in the resulting dialogue set the Kind to Original
That will export a byte by byte copy of the file you imported, unchanged in any way.
Can I suggest another way of working. Why not have two Libraries? An archive and a working one?
The principle advantage is that you won't have to import pics to review them again later, just open the other library.
Make sure the drive is formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
1. Quit iPhoto
2. Copy the iPhoto Library from your Pictures Folder to the External Disk.
Now you have two full versions of the Library.
3. On the Internal library, trash the Events you don't want there
Now you have a full copy of the Library on the External and a smaller subset on the Internal
Some Notes:
As a general rule: when deleting photos do them in batches of about 100 at a time. iPhoto can baulk at trashing large numbers at one go.
You can choose which Library to open: Hold down the option (or alt) key key and launch iPhoto. From the resulting menu select 'Choose Library'
You can keep the Library on the external updated with new imports using iPhoto Library Manager

Why does CS6 no longer export images out at their boundary/artboard size? Am I missing something?

I recently upgraded to Illustrator CS6, and suddenly clients have been remarking that the file sizes are wrong or there's "a ton of white space around the logo." I checked it out, and sure enough, it appears that whenever I export a file, it does not crop it to the image boundary like it used to, even if I had manually adjusted the artboard to fit closely around it. After a bit of trial and error, I discovered that I have to click "Use Artboards" on the Export dialog each time. The super annoying part is that it doesn't STAY checked, AND it adds a number to the end of the file name. So I often forget to check it (not used to the extra step in workflow), and if I make a modification to the file, I can't just export over the previous version. It requires me to export it, go find it in finder, and manually delete the extra number off the file name. Ugh! The extra steps are adding way too much time when I'm saving out many files. I'm about ready to go back to my previous version just from this alone.
Help! Am I totally missing something? Is there an easier way to do this? It seems like the addition of this feature would only cause extra problems...

I did a quick test of this, and my CS6 Ai does indeed export to the exact size of the artboard, even if there are elements outside this boundary. Imo, this is an improvement over earlier versions: if you had some art hanging over the artboard edge in CS5, the export size would be larger than the artboard, to include even hidden paths. But CS6 is an improvement in this regard. Yes, it would be nice if your choice of "use artboard" was remembered or a choice in the prefs, but this is a small inconvenience, imo. Regarding the addition of -01, etc. to each successive export, why not just send the latest export to your client? You can delete the earlier versions later.
Another plus: if you run in 64-bit, CS5 is slow on opening each file, which is thankfully not so with CS6.
DS

Why does ppi matter for web images?

Hello
When placing an image in my (web/pixel) project the resolution is dependent from the set ppi.
When I create a new document for web, then logically only the pixels matter. Nonetheless there's a ppi field, why? And depending what value it has, placed pictures (file > place or drag&drop from Windows' explorer) get resized instead of the wanted 1:1 resolution.
1 pixel should remain 1 pixel when working with in pixels.
Try it out:
Create a new document with Full HD resolution (1920x1080 pixels), set ppi to 10.
Import a Full HD picture (Blu-Ray screenshot whatever) and it's mini-sized.
My screen resolution is 59 ppi (I use my 39" TV as monitor) and this is set in the Photoshop preferences (in case I do some print stuff that I get a 1:1 view if wanted). If there was any logic behind the pixel-ppi-placing thing, then this set standard monitor ppi should bring me a 100% sized picture... but it doesn't. Only when the ppi is set to the fantasy value of 72 I get a 100% sized placing.
This can be disturbing and is very annoying when starting a new project by opening an image that does not come with 72 ppi by default (my Canon camera makes 180 ppi JPEG photos) and placing new pictures in this project. They get opened in wrong sizes, in my case largely upscaled, with no way to correct it but guess-scaling it down.
Bug?
Pls pls fix it.
Ppi has nothing lost in pixels-only projects.
The only way that works is to open all single images in Photoshop as tabs, and then drag&drop from within Ps. -.-
Regards
Mopsi
Example screenshot: http://www.m-i-u.de/images-i83580bxvogj.jpg
The yellow framed layer is a image from my camera, opened in Photoshop CS6 extended. 3264x2448 pixels (180 ppi).
The green framed layer is a screenshot from a movie, drag&drop from the explorer. 1920x1080 (normally) unwanted upscaled here.
The red framed layer is a screensot as well, but drag&dropped from a tab within Photoshop. It remains in its original resolution of 1920x1080.

I'm wrong and your right. I just did some testing and Photoshop does indeed interpolate the lower resolution 600x400 72DPI image is up size to match the higher resolution document document size during the place process. I just assumed Photoshop would preserve image quality and not interpolate the image.    As you have shown it does interpolate the image which greatly lowers the image quality of re-sized low resolution image.
This shows you should not use Photoshop to merge images into a composite if they have greatly different resolutions. I don't have a problem there for I never use "save for web" to save images to be displayed on displays from the web or my machine. I use Fit Image and save as, or a Image Processor script that uses Fit Image to re-size and uses save as. The leave all my images files resolution setting unchanged.   For some reason Save for Web changes all jpeg files it saves resolution setting to 72 DPI even if they are 8MP images for high resolution displays..
During testing I also tried using Photoshop's script Load Files into Stack instead of using Place. That script works the way I assumed Photoshop Place would work. Images layer are not interpolated they remain the correct number of pixels and the image quality is not is not changed.. The image layer are normal layers but can be converted to smart object layers however the object would be normal layer not an image file.
When you use Place you get
It also possible to undo Photoshop's Place scaling with a simple calculation. Divide the image layer's original dpi by the document's dpi here there are three layer that did not start at 300dpi. two started out as 74dpi image file the other a 500dpi image file. 72/300=.24 = 24% the other 500/300=1.66666 = 166.66%
all you need do is change the associated layer's image transform width and height scale from 100% to the calculated percents
The only time I set document to 72DPI resolution is in Photoshop Scripts so I can calculate a font size for a charter sting so it will fit the canvas size. Photoshop Text Tools seem to be tied to 72DPI resolution. Once I add the text layer I restore the document DPI resolution back to its original setting.
So when it comes to Photoshop all files use in a project should have identical DPI resolution for best result when making composites.    My image files are either RAW files which have no DPI for they are not RGB image files. Or RGB Image files that have a high DPI resolution. I process images for print. Image files DPI resolution is meaningless when if comes to Display Screens. All that matters is the number of pixels a display can display and the number of pixels in the image. Even images I re-size for display screens DPI are high for I do not use "Save for Web". I see no good reason to strip metadata and change resolution to 72DPI. I tend not to interpolate image except the ones I save to be displayed on a display. I change Print size by changing the DPI setting without resample. My Epson 4800 inkjet printer has no problem printing high resolution pixel I see no reason resample my camera 16MP image down in size just to print at 300dpi. If I want to a single 6"x4" print I see nothing wrong printing it at 816DPI. My eyes can not resolve down there the printer can. However when Printing on Roll Paper many 6"x4" the composite document I create via a script has a 300DPI resolution and the image layers are resized to be 6" x 4".

Why does my high res photoshop image appear blurry when placed in InDesign and Exported as PDF?

Hi there,
I have a problem I've been trying to solve for days but just can't find the answer anywhere on the internet.
I have a large, good quality photoshop file (2268 x 979 pixels, resolution 300 pixels per inch). When I place it into InDesign, the image appears OK (I've changed my display settings to HIGH) - I then resize it in InDesign to 10% and the file still looks great! Then, when I export it as PDF (high quality print) it looks blurry.
Does anybody know why? The strangest thing is, I've placed other photoshop images in the same InDesign file and they look crystal clear. It is just this one I am having trouble with. I've saved it in the same folder as the other pictures, I've tried placing it as psd. , jpg. , photoshop pdf, png. everything...
The image looks great in both photoshop and indesign, only when exported as pdf it looks awful.
Any help will be greatly appreciated,
Many thanks in advance!
Weronika

It's probably the extreme reduction -- you're throwing away 90% of the image pixels and interpolating, and then using jpeg compression on top.

Why does Photo Booth provide 'mirror' images?

I took a number of pictures of my friends with Photo Booth and realised that something was wrong. When I looked closer I noticed that all the photos had been reversed and were in fact mirror images of the actual person. Why is this? I had to use the "Flip Photo" command to make them normal. I would suppose this is how the original iSight works as well although I have never tried it.
Then I noticed that there is an "Auto flip all photos" command, which of course is what I choose. But it is beyond me why this is not the default in the first place.
When you use a camera with a timer on it to take your picture, it does not give you a mirror image, it provides you with the true image. iSight should also IMHO.
Griff

It's because it's more natural for people to see themselves in a mirror while getting ready for the picture. Thus if they lift their right hand the hand on the right side of the screen would appear to rise. If the picture suddenly flipped after taking the picture, this could be confusing, which is why it isn't the default, but simply an option.

Why does camera raw change my image?

I have had this issue a while now and can't figure out how to change this. When I upload my images from the camera they are exactly how I wnat them in Bridge. Then when I zoom in on the image or open in ACR the image seems blown out and orange or has magenta tones in it. Because the image changes so much Iend up spending lots of time fixing in ACR rather than inhancing in ACR. Can someone please help me. I am using PS CS4, Windows7 and I shoot in RAW.

First, I only have CS5 so I may have given some preferences to look at that you don’t have or are available via a different set of clicks in CS4; however, from your responses, the situation seems relatively clear: the image in Bridge is the camera-rendered JPG thumbnail/preview while the image in ACR is the Adobe-rendering and is all you’ll ever be able to produce.
There are two issues:
1) Bridge is not showing you the Adobe Rendering for some reason. Perhaps Bridge CS4 still has a setting of whether to show high-quality thumbnails/previews or not and if you set this, then you’ll see the Adobe-rendering in Bridge as well.
2) You expect the Adobe-rendering to be the same as the camera-rendering, which it can never be. This is the main issue, although if item 1 was working, you wouldn't be distracted by the in-camera rendering.
How to produce the camera-rendering is known only to the manufacturer of the camera and anyone who has licensed their technology. Adobe is a separate corporate entity with no access to the camera-manufacturer’s intellectual property governing how they produce their JPGs, so Adobe has no way to produce the camera-rendering, nor do they want to. Adobe wants to produce similar output from different cameras. Presumably you are using the Adobe Standard camera profile. If your camera is a Canon or Nikon or one of a few others, then besides Adobe’s standard camera-profile there are others that you can choose from where Adobe has attempted to approximate the in-camera rendering via a profile, although this may or may not be that close, it will be closer than using Adobe Standard as your profile. You can find the camera profiles in ACR using the tab that looks like a black camera, 3rd from the right. If you find a different camera profile more to your liking, then you can set that as your ACR default so newly processed images will have that new profile. Besides chaning the profile, you can also dial back the saturation or vibrance and save that as your new ACR defaults.
I should warn you that the images in your screen-shot from Bridge have a slight greenish tinge and is quite pale-looking to my eyes, and the ACR view looks more natural. It may be that your monitor, being uncalibrated, is distorting the colors and so your processing produces colors that everyone else will see as odd if they are viewed on different computers. If you only ever use your processing to create prints and those prints look ok, then perhaps this is not a problem, but if you produce web galleries for outsiders to view on their own computers, then it could be a problem. It also could be that you and I are seeing the same thing and just differ in our preference for natural skintones. If I had to guess, I'd say the screen-capture you have opened in Photoshop was done with an sRGB profile assigned as your monitor profile, but your color-settings in Photoshop assigned an Adobe RGB profile without doing the profile conversion and so the screen-capture as displayed in Photoshop does not actually look like the original screen in Bridge.

Why does iPhoto keep corrupting my images?

For the past year, iPhoto 11 has been tremendously buggy on my early 2011 15" MacBook Pro. It started under Lion and has continued apace under Mountain Lion. It first started going haywire and crashing every time I tried opening it after any premature removals or disk use of my camera card in July 2011. After starting in safe mode and having to rebuild my library several times, it seemed to settle down, and would generally work as long as I restarted the computer after a crash. However, many of my photos ceased to show up properly--either they wouldn't be there at all, or the pictures and/or their thumbnails would be rotated the wrong way, sometimes with the display dimensions reversed so they appeared improperly squashed or stretched. This issue mostly affected photos from c. 2001-2005, which I'd brought over from my iMac to save space on the older desktop computer. (The iMac is backed up with my Time Capsule, but I haven't yet tried to see how that works within iPhoto, nor from my MBP.)
In the past few months, both before and after the installation of Mountain Lion and some updates to iPhoto itself, iPhoto has been acting strangely again. Whether or not there's any "misuse" of a camera card that precipitates iPhoto's misbehavior, it's often been saying that thumbnails are corrupt and need to be rebuilt, but instead of fixing them it makes even more of them look worse than they did before. Especially annoying, it seems to have permanently squashed, stretched, and/or rotated most of the images I'd chosen as Event preview images--i.e., it's done the most damage to a lot of the best pictures in each event, and it's been hitting a lot of the more recent photos than the first set of bugs did. In addition, it quits itself spontaneously at least once per day, and gives an error message when it does so.
I used to love iPhoto, but its behavior lately, and the way it's been corrupting or failing to properly display thousands of my pictures, have been frustrating beyond words. Has anyone else had problems similar to mine with iPhoto lately? I really wish I'd never "upgraded" to the current version, because the new functions shouldn't come at the expense of losing or having to manually rebuild and tweak thousands of photos. Can anyone recommend a solution to stop this from happening further, and to get things back to normal?
Regards,
Brian Green

Where is your Library stored?
What rebuild did you do? iPhoto's own?
As a Test:
Hold down the option (or alt) key and launch iPhoto. From the resulting menu select 'Create Library'
Import a few pics into this new, blank library. Is the Problem repeated there?

Why does Fw 9 lighten raster images upon import?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for