Adding adjustments in Aperture 2.0

Hi, when editing my pictures in Aperture I often want to include a sharpen and/or vignette tool to my pictures but I always seem to have to manually select them with the little plus box as they are not in my default adjustments list, is there a way to save them in my adjustments list so I don't have to manually apply them on each individual picture?
Cheers
(Aperture version 2.1.1)

Hi back Saddact,
This is an easy one: click the little gear icon at the top right of the brick you want to keep in your adjustments (Vignette for instance) and select +Add to Default Set+ - done!

Similar Messages

  • Image Disappears when Adding Adjustments in Aperture 3

    I am experiencing odd behavior when using the adjustment tools in Aperture 3. I tried to crop an image and instead of staying on screen for me to finish the adjustment, the image disappeared. I was able to save it by undoing. I created a version of the image and I could crop that OK. I have Add New Version when Making Adjustments checked but it does not seem to be working.

    I've had a similar "disappearing" image problem when trying to apply the retouch tool. I don't have the "create version when applying adjustments" preference checked though. Hopefully these issues are additional 3.0 bugs that will get fixed in 3.0.1. Be sure to report the issue to Apple using the "Aperture > Provide Aperture Feedback" menu item.

  • Skin tone adjustments in Aperture

    I normally use Photoshop for editing, and Aperture as an "image management" and output system. However, I just did a shoot of my brother's baby and I have 200+ pictures to correct so PS is not an option this time. My nephew's skin is very red, so I'm wondering what the best way to correct that is in Aperture. I normally use selective color or curves in PS, but neither of those are available in Aperture.
    Thanks,
    Chris

    Hi there,
    Sounds like we use the same prcedure for similar reasons.
    Yes and no to your question, and sadly, a bigger NO that there isn't a true workflow. We're into the best workaround FOR YOU. Mine is FOR ME, and (as my wife will tell you, I'm unique .... which I take as a compliment, errrrr).
    Yes, the time to batch export and then import may be faster, technically, possibly, maybe, who knows?
    No, the issue of getting the photos tagged back into the stacks (if this is of use to you) becomes manual activity and is unsupported by the system outside of sort conditions.
    You can easily overwhelm memory with CS2 loading images and Aperture there as well, so I tend to do 10 or a dozen at a time ... more if image size and memory permits. Run an Action in CS2 unless masks are needed, Save and Close. On Save, the image is placed back into Aperture without any further work on your (i.e. MINE since I am LAAAZY).
    BTW, somebody else mentioned this. I am a big fan, but have ghad to learn to work with quarter tone Levels. If the color shift is most needful on the skin tones, and less objectionable elsewhere, you may be able to use the quarter tone adjusts in combination with exposure and white balance adjustments within Aperture. Oh, how I would like selection and masks!!!!

  • Srange behaviour when adding adjustments

    In Aperture 2 when I add some adjustments to a raw file automatically was there made a version 2 of that raw file with the changes I made.
    example:
    original file name: FRA_8765
    adjusted file name: FRA_8765 version 2
    What I noticed now in Aperture 3 is that when I add some adjustments to a raw file there is made a version 2 but the orignal raw file is now called version 2 and the adjusted file has the name of the original file name.
    example:
    adjusted file name: FRA_8765
    original file name: FRA_8765 version 2
    Is there anybody who can help me with this?

    Thank you, John.
    We have also been pondering the possibility of giving a new use to the Version dimension instead of adding a new one, since we are not really using versions (we only manage one version and the users are not interested in having more than one).
    What we need is to create the following metrics within the model:
    Price
    Quantity
    Amount (whichs is Price x Quantity)
    Given the particularities of the Version dimension, would you advise to use it as a metrics dimension? Anyway, we understand this implies it won't be possible to keep different versions --or that it will become more tricky. But is there something about model integrity we have to fear if we do so?
    Many thanks,
    G.S.Feliu

  • File adjustments in aperture and bridge

    Why are mey aperture adjustments won't follow when I open them in bridge camera raw
    Thanks

    hello, barto
    quote: "Why are mey aperture adjustments won't follow when I open them in bridge camera raw"
    Because you're opening a RAW file instead of an adjusted Aperture photograph.
    What is your workflow?
    How are you exporting them? Are you exporting a Master or Version?
    victor

  • RAW adjustments in Aperture vs adjusting a JPEG

    In Aperture their is a pull down menue for "RAW fine tuning". Other than those 4 or 5 adjustments am I correct that their is no difference in terms of adjusting a RAW or JPEG file in terms of exposure, contrast, levels, shadows and highlights, etc..? I understand that a RAW file is non-destructive but have not actually ever been able to see the advantage of adjusting RAW images over JPEG images. What am I missing?
    Thanks.

    I understand that a RAW file is non-destructive but have not actually ever been able to see the advantage of adjusting RAW images over JPEG images. What am I missing?
    In analog colour correction, the original is a viewable graphic which is preprocessed in the sense that the make and model of film introduces a look. The original is colour managed through capturing an IT8 target for the look of the make and model of film.
    In digital colour correction, the original is not a viewable graphic. Instead of applying preprocessing in the film medium, it is applied in the camera which incorporates a kind of colour preprocessing which is dependent on the camera manufacturer.
    There is no one RAW preprocessing any more than there is one film preprocessing, e.g. see Wikipedia. Image data and the colour preprocessing is coupled in the RAW file format, so to speak replacing the analog original as it is before exposure correction / colour correction.
    RAW can be considered the equivalent of the high bit image data captured in a drum scanner before exposure correction in the scanner software, application of the corrections to the capture, saving of corrected and downsampled to 8-bit to disk.
    There were intermediary implementations of non-destructive colour correction, the best known of which was Live Picture for which Apple's former John Sculley was in turn CEO. Live Picture started with 8-bit scans and converted into a tiered image data format.
    Layers and edits were stored in a resolution independent format that was independent of the image data format. One could manipulate 1Gb image data on a Quadra with a NuBus card, beating Photoshop by many miles.
    When one was done with editing, the resolution independent edit file was applied to the resolution dependent image data file in a high-bit calculation using Apple ColorSync 2 as calculation and conversion engine and ICC profiles as device characterisations.
    Essentially, Aperture is an implementation of this idea to digital cameras.
    With regard to JPEG, then JPEG is a final export format and NOT an editing format. It is not simply a change in the bit, but a change in the colourant data. Internally, the channels are rotated to a CIE-like model and the chroma channels are crushed. Saving to JPEG once for output is workable, saving to JPEG twice in the course of colour correction should always be avoided.
    /hh

  • Adjustments in Aperture reduplicate

    Dear All,
    here is the latestes Aperture Installation (from Mac App Store) on this MacBookPro 6,2 (i5, 2,4GHz, 4GB) , 10.6.8.
    Some Images that I add and do adjustments to it - these adjustments duplicate itselfe and even double the effect. If I add 25% of Contrast, the second adjustment also adds another 25%. Here's a picture of the Adjustmenttab:
    System is used with Germany language settings. But I have no clue how to solve this. I repaired the Library, reinstalled Aperture. Anyone else is having this behavoir in Aperture?
    Regards,
    Nils   

    Hello Nils,
    That is exactly as it should be - a feature, not a bug . You can define multiple instances of the same adjustment to layer them and to use them with different settings in different regions of the same image - it is most useful with brushes - anything that creates a mask.
    You create these duplicate instances from the "Presets" menu ("Voreinstellungen") and selecting "Edit (Bearbeiten?)".
    This will bring up the "Edit" panel, there,  using the cogwheel, you can edit, add, and delete these preset groups.
    P.S: Your screenshot shows several cogwheels to the right; these you can use to add and to remove these adjustments from the default set.
    Hummel Hummel aus Hamburg
    Léonie

  • "Create new versions when making adjustments" - Lion, Aperture 3.1.3

    I recently upgraded to Lion, and then shortly thereafter to Aperture 3.1.3.
    While I don't seem to share everybody else's issues with Lion nor with Aperture, I do have one of my own.
    In Preferences -> Advanced, I have a box titled "Create new versiont when making adjustment."  It is checked.
    My expectation, (and the way things have always worked under Snow Leopard) is that if I select a master image and begin to make adjustments to it from _any_ feature int he adjustments pallette, that I new version will be created, stacked next to the original, and that the changes I am making will be made to the new version.  This is _not_ what is happening.
    Instead, the changes are applied directly to the master image.  This is annoying, and will probably be fixed in an update...    I thought the work around would be to manually create the version for the time being, until Apple sorts this out.  That didn't work either.
    If I manually create a version, and then proceed to make adjustments to the version, Aperture dows what I would have expected in the first place.  It creates a new version and applies the changes to that.
    For example, I right click on a master image and select "New Version form Master"  A new version, titled "... - Version 2" is created.  When I begin to modify Version 2, a new version is created titled "... - Version 3" and my changes are applied to this version... leaving me with the master and Version 2 which are now duplicates of each other.
    Even more interesting is this:
    Images that were imported into Aperture prior to the Lion upgrade, and the 3.1.3 patch behave as expected, in that a new version is created when adjustments are applied to a master image.
    Images that were imported into Aperture _after_ the upgrade to Lion and the 3.1.3 patch act as describd above, in that no new version is created when adjustments are applied to a master image.
    So...  Here are the questions:
    1. Is anybody else experiencing this?
    2. Does anybody know how to restore the correct behavior?

    Alright,   I have solved the problem.
    Some time ago, I thought it might be neat to import pictures with the Auto Exposure adjustment in place.  What I didn't realize was that if the master image is in the library with adjustments on it, it downs't create a new version when you add additional adjustments.
    As soon as I disabled that, and imported some new imges the probelm went away.
    Also... I went back to the six or seven project that I had imported while use Auto Exposure and removed that adjustment from those images...  
    All is resolved.

  • Performing any adjustments in Aperture corrupts image/viewer..HELP

    I did an update on my mac today and Aperture was one of the programs receiving an update. This update brought me to 2.1.2.
    Since the update I'm unable to perform any kind of "adjustments" on my photos. Moving any slider or making ANY change causes the image to go strait to black, or the image "breaks" and just turns into garbled noise. A quick "undo" with bring the photo back, but of course I lose any changes I just made.
    Please, can someone help? I haven't had this problem at all until I did the update earlier. Very weird.
    Here's my specs...
    MacBook Pro
    Intel Core 2 Duo, 2.4 GHz
    4GB Memory
    GeForce 8600M GT
    Message was edited by: ericwebb

    Eric
    try trashing the preferences, could be that in the update process something has corrupted.
    users/user/library/preferences/com.apple.Aperture.plist
    Tony

  • IPhone Photos edited with iOS 7 losing adjustments in Aperture

    I shot a few photos with iOS 7 this weekend while at the cottage and was importing them into Aperture (which I use to manage my rather large collection). I noticed that for some reason some of the adjustments were now missing. Yes my crops and auto enchancements were there but the colour effects I applied were not.
    Just curious if anyone knows how to work around this? I figured I could always open the edited photos in another app like Camera+ and save them out again but that seems to be poor form as it'd result in generation loss.
    Any suggestions?

    Could you give more details please, so we can compare notes?
    How are you editing and transfering your photos - editing directly in the Camera.app, the Photos.app, iPhoto IOS?
    And what kind of IOS device? iPad, iPod, iPhone?
    And how have the photos been transferred to your Mac? Photo Stream? Import by connecting the device?
    I just made a test on my iPad with IOS 7 and all edits transferred:
    Taking the pictures with the Camera.app
    Editing them in the Camera.app and saving the edited version to the camera roll.
    The edited version with all edits appeared in the Photo Stream (a few hours later ) and all edits were there.
    But if you edited in the Photos.app and not in the Camera.app, it is harder to get the edited version to the Camera Roll. I use iPhoto to save an edited copy of the photo to the camera Roll (from the "Share" menu in iPhoto). That adds them to the Photo Stream as well.
    But the biggest problem with this is, that saving back to the Camera Roll after editing in iPhoto appears to be changing all dates and the lens information anad Camera Make is now missing from the EXIF..
    The photo I took yesterday should show the dates like this:  Sept. 23,
    But it is showing Sept. 24 for all dates:
    So my suggestion would be to do basic edits in the Camera.app before the photos will be saved to the Camera Roll for the first time, and to postpone all further edits, until the photos are in Aperture. Or, to keep both versions in the camera roll, the original and the edited version.

  • Adjustments in Aperture first, or Photoshop?

    So you're looking at your new image in Aperture.
    Do you start adjusting it in Aperture first, or Photoshop (via Edit With... command)?
    Why?
    I'm looking for the least destructive, most flexible method.

    Once you commit an image to an external editor, you give up all the flexibility that RAW files provide, the workflow becomes destructive and the image takes the additional disk space required for a new master.
    Aperture is your RAW processor, and as many adjustments as possible should be done in your RAW processor before moving on. This is the most flexible way to work. You won't be going to PS with every image anyway so you should only convert your RAW image- and create a new master- when necessary.
    Also, If you work on an image in PS first, then return it to A3 and make more adjustments- in addition to those adjustments being less effective- when you return it to PS the A3 adjustments will not show up until you return to A3.
    DLS
    Message was edited by: DLScreative

  • How do I start storing photos on a new external hard drive without adding a new aperture library?

    I have used up all my storage on one of my external hard drives.  I want to start storing on another.  How do I do it so I do not have to make a new Aperture library.  I think having multiple libraries gets too confusing.
    Thanks!

    Keep your Aperture library on that external drive, but relocate original image files to another drive.
    See:  Aperture 3 User Manual: Working with Referenced Images

  • Problem Adding Vaults in Aperture

    Hi - I recently upgraded to Snow Leopard (from Tiger) and to Aperture 2.1.4 (from Aperture 1x). Although my existing vault appears to be working I would like to create a new vault on an new external drive. When I click on file/vault/add vault nothing happens. Nor does anything happen when I try to open the vault pane. I just recently enabled Time Machine. Is that conflicting in some way? What am I missing here? Thanks!

    Tony Gay wrote:
    You start by saying that your existing vault appears to be working, yet a sentence later say that the vault pane is not working. I interpret this as the vault pane is working but the "Add Vault" option within the pane is not working.
    I am experiencing a problem that sounds similar, so maybe I can clarify. When Aperture first opens, the vault pane is collapsed. All that is visible is the word Vault and the three icons: sync, expand/collapse vault pane, and vault preferences (the gear icon). I can click the sync icon and successfully backup to an existing vault. When I click the icon to expand/collapse the vault pane, nothing happens. When I click the gear icon and choose either Add Vault or Restore Library, nothing happens.
    Is your library managed or referenced?
    Are you using time machine to backup your library and all of its files or have you told time machine to ignore the folder the library resides in?
    I've got one library that's managed and one that is not. Problem happens with both. Time Machine is configured to ignore the libraries.
    Is it possible that your new external drive is not Mac formatted and Aperture is thinking that there are no suitable drives to use for a vault. Though having said this I am able to create a duplicate vault on the same drive as my first vault.
    The drive is formatted for Mac OS Extended (Journaled) with a GUID Partition Table.
    The problem happens on 10.6.1 and 10.6.2, but I don't recall if it happened on prior versions.
    - Leon

  • Missing adjustments in aperture photos

    Photos in certain my albums/projects have lost all flags, adjustments and captions (but not keywords).  Others, including adjustments created earlier and later, are fine.  I tried rebuilding permissions but no success.  Help!!

    I'm not actually sure as I haen't used stacks (at least knowingly) - and I have a referenced library.  The point is, why can I see adjustments in otyher projects/albums and not these?  Wouldn't it be all or nothing?
    Thanks!

  • Are brushed adjustments in Aperture worth it?

    It would be interesting to know if people have a different approach.
    I often use Silver FX Pro and Color FX Pro, but I'm not sure if they are the best.
    Also, I use Photshop mostly for brushing, cropping, and masking, but Aperture is for
    making uniform changes in brightness, contrast, black & white vs. color, and some of those add-ons and funky filters.
    Is there anyone here that thinks Aperture brushes are better than Photoshop brushes?

    Thank you for illustrating, Kirby.
    I agree that Photoshop is ideal for combining graphics with photography.  It's a no-brainer, really.
    I did just that, yesterday... an attempt at humoring certain people (it worked):
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mycophagia
    Even Illustrator can be used for such purposes if you know too much about it. (That was a joke on how elaborate it is)
    Me, I see Photoshop as the halfway point between Illustrator and Aperture, with Illustrator being the grand-daddy of all "graphics from scratch" apps, and Aperture the ideal tool for a photographer.  But everything that can be done in Aperture can also be done in Photoshop, sometimes better.  The biggest downside is that I get .psd files accumulating, inside folders littered all over my hard drive.
    My use of Photoshop is done as quickly as possible (I prefer it simple) by working in only two layers.  My brain cannot handle the concept of complex things like 'layer masks' and 'smart objects'.  I just clone one layer, put the better, adjusted layer underneath it, and then erase what doesnt look good on the top layer... change the opacity or the softness of your tools and you have yourself whatever kind of "brush" you need.  Of course, this does not always work without the assistance of the "marching ants", but it's easy to put them in.
    The biggest problem in photography I have (and the chief reason I  export to Photoshop) is washed out skies and skies with no blue in them.  Without using a polarized filter (i dont like them), skies are captured more often than not, as white and washed out, especially on an overcast day.  This is the bane of my existence.  I'm surpised I havent figure this one out yet.  Underexpose the picture?  Sure, maybe, but I think it sounds like a horrible plan.

Maybe you are looking for