AdobeRGB Jpegs rendering

Hello all!!
I recent install Lion and noticed something I've never noticed before:
I shoot some pictures in Raw + Jpeg (the camera was a Canon 1D mkIV and camera profile was adobe RGB) and imported them in aperture 3 as usual. Jpegs showed major color changes than Raw files and than Jpegs opened with PS CS5 and Canon DPP.
Master Jpegs opened with aperture 3, preview or iphoto '09 had the same different tones. Someone notided the same? It seems that Apple applications cannot recognize the color profile of jpegs.
Thanks in advance for your help.If you feel another post answers my question, feel free to link the post in your response.
Davide

If the entire video track is still images, go into your sequence settings and set field dominance to none; this should stop the flickering.

Similar Messages

TIFF & JPEG renders of RAW files appear different when viewed in Bridge

I am working with the demo of Photoshop CS6, with ACR 7.1. CS6 System Info will appear at the bottom of this post. Summary: AMD Phenom II x6 1090T, 16GB RAM, Win7-64bit, nVidia GTX 460 video w/1GB RAM, approx. 2.5 TB free space on multiple internal physical drives, Canon 50D, CR2 files. I have a camera profile generated through Profile Editor, and the monitor is calibrated with i-1 Match.
I have been practicing with the new Basic Panel controls (Process 2012). When I felt that I was getting the hang of them I started saving JPEG and TIFF files and noticed differences between what appears in Bridge and ACR. I worked on this for some time and searched out some other discussions in the Forum which seemed to talk about similar results. I have now tried Image Processor via Bridge, Save Image in ACR, and Open>Save manually in PS CS6. By whatever route, the TIFFs and JPEGs are different (lighter in the following examples, but this is not always the case), while PSD saves seem to be close, but not identical to the CR2 when viewed in Bridge or Photoshop. Here is a screen capture of Bridge thumbnails which show the differences.
I hope the labels come through legibly. The two images on the second row are CR2 and PSD respectively. What is really odd to me is that when I resaved the PSD file as a TIFF, the same sort of difference shows up in the TIFF. (See _MG_7960_via_PSD.tif above.) I have uploaded the CR2, its XMP, a TIFF and a JPEG on Sendspace (107 MB). I did this earlier in my experiments and regret that the file naming is not as informative as might be.
http://www.sendspace.com/file/t0lhko
I have run a few other ACR adjusted CR2 images through Image Processor and seen a variety of differences between the rendered files and the RAW versions. The differences seem to be in Exposure and Contrast. Most of these looked somewhat darker, unlike the examples above.
I will happily provide any other information on request. Thanks!
Photoshop System Info:
Adobe Photoshop Version: 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00) x64
Operating System: Windows 7 64-bit
Version: 6.1 Service Pack 1
System architecture: AMD CPU Family:15, Model:10, Stepping:0 with MMX, SSE Integer, SSE FP, SSE2, SSE3
Physical processor count: 6
Processor speed: 3511 MHz
Built-in memory: 16382 MB
Free memory: 13415 MB
Memory available to Photoshop: 14766 MB
Memory used by Photoshop: 71 %
Image tile size: 132K
Image cache levels: 4
OpenGL Drawing: Enabled.
OpenGL Drawing Mode: Advanced
OpenGL Allow Normal Mode: True.
OpenGL Allow Advanced Mode: True.
OpenGL Allow Old GPUs: Not Detected.
Video Card Vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
Video Card Renderer: GeForce GTX 460/PCIe/SSE2
Display: 1
Display Bounds:= top: 0, left: 0, bottom: 1200, right: 1920
Video Card Number: 1
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460
OpenCL Unavailable
Driver Version: 8.17.13.142
Driver Date: 20120515000000.000000-000
Video Card Driver: nvd3dumx.dll,nvwgf2umx.dll,nvwgf2umx.dll,nvd3dum,nvwgf2um,nvwgf2um
Video Mode: 1920 x 1200 x 4294967296 colors
Video Card Caption: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460
Video Card Memory: 1024 MB
Video Rect Texture Size: 16384
Serial number: Tryout Version
Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6 (64 Bit)\
Temporary file path: C:\Users\Kieren\AppData\Local\Temp\
Photoshop scratch has async I/O enabled
Scratch volume(s):
E:\, 770.4G, 644.1G free
K:\, 931.5G, 482.3G free
L:\, 1.82T, 854.4G free
H:\, 1.75T, 505.2G free
Required Plug-ins folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6 (64 Bit)\Required\
Primary Plug-ins folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop CS6 (64 Bit)\Plug-ins\
Additional Plug-ins folder: not set
Installed components:
   A3DLIBS.dll   A3DLIB Dynamic Link Library   9.2.0.112
   ACE.dll   ACE 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   adbeape.dll   Adobe APE 2012/01/25-10:04:55   66.1025012   66.1025012
   AdobeLinguistic.dll   Adobe Linguisitc Library   6.0.0
   AdobeOwl.dll   Adobe Owl 2012/02/09-16:00:02   4.0.93   66.496052
   AdobePDFL.dll   PDFL 2011/12/12-16:12:37   66.419471   66.419471
   AdobePIP.dll   Adobe Product Improvement Program   6.0.0.1654
   AdobeXMP.dll   Adobe XMP Core 2012/02/06-14:56:27   66.145661   66.145661
   AdobeXMPFiles.dll   Adobe XMP Files 2012/02/06-14:56:27   66.145661   66.145661
   AdobeXMPScript.dll   Adobe XMP Script 2012/02/06-14:56:27   66.145661   66.145661
   adobe_caps.dll   Adobe CAPS   6,0,29,0
   AGM.dll   AGM 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   ahclient.dll    AdobeHelp Dynamic Link Library   1,7,0,56
   aif_core.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   aif_ocl.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   aif_ogl.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   amtlib.dll   AMTLib (64 Bit)   6.0.0.75 (BuildVersion: 6.0; BuildDate: Mon Jan 16 2012 18:00:00)   1.000000
   ARE.dll   ARE 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   AXE8SharedExpat.dll   AXE8SharedExpat 2011/12/16-15:10:49   66.26830   66.26830
   AXEDOMCore.dll   AXEDOMCore 2011/12/16-15:10:49   66.26830   66.26830
   Bib.dll   BIB 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   BIBUtils.dll   BIBUtils 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   boost_date_time.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   boost_signals.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   boost_system.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   boost_threads.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   cg.dll   NVIDIA Cg Runtime   3.0.00007
   cgGL.dll   NVIDIA Cg Runtime   3.0.00007
   CIT.dll   Adobe CIT   2.0.5.19287   2.0.5.19287
   CoolType.dll   CoolType 2012/01/18-15:07:40   66.492997   66.492997
   data_flow.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   dvaaudiodevice.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvacore.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvamarshal.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvamediatypes.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvaplayer.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvatransport.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dvaunittesting.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   dynamiclink.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   ExtendScript.dll   ExtendScript 2011/12/14-15:08:46   66.490082   66.490082
   FileInfo.dll   Adobe XMP FileInfo 2012/01/17-15:11:19   66.145433   66.145433
   filter_graph.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   hydra_filters.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   icucnv40.dll   International Components for Unicode 2011/11/15-16:30:22    Build gtlib_3.0.16615
   icudt40.dll   International Components for Unicode 2011/11/15-16:30:22    Build gtlib_3.0.16615
   image_compiler.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   image_flow.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   image_runtime.dll   AIF   3.0   62.490293
   JP2KLib.dll   JP2KLib 2011/12/12-16:12:37   66.236923   66.236923
   libifcoremd.dll   Intel(r) Visual Fortran Compiler   10.0 (Update A)
   libmmd.dll   Intel(r) C Compiler, Intel(r) C++ Compiler, Intel(r) Fortran Compiler   10.0
   LogSession.dll   LogSession   2.1.2.1640
   mediacoreif.dll   DVA Product   6.0.0
   MPS.dll   MPS 2012/02/03-10:33:13   66.495174   66.495174
   msvcm80.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2005   8.00.50727.6195
   msvcm90.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2008   9.00.30729.1
   msvcp100.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2010   10.00.40219.1
   msvcp80.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2005   8.00.50727.6195
   msvcp90.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2008   9.00.30729.1
   msvcr100.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2010   10.00.40219.1
   msvcr80.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2005   8.00.50727.6195
   msvcr90.dll   Microsoft® Visual Studio® 2008   9.00.30729.1
   pdfsettings.dll   Adobe PDFSettings   1.04
   Photoshop.dll   Adobe Photoshop CS6   CS6
   Plugin.dll   Adobe Photoshop CS6   CS6
   PlugPlug.dll   Adobe(R) CSXS PlugPlug Standard Dll (64 bit)   3.0.0.383
   PSArt.dll   Adobe Photoshop CS6   CS6
   PSViews.dll   Adobe Photoshop CS6   CS6
   SCCore.dll   ScCore 2011/12/14-15:08:46   66.490082   66.490082
   ScriptUIFlex.dll   ScriptUIFlex 2011/12/14-15:08:46   66.490082   66.490082
   tbb.dll   Intel(R) Threading Building Blocks for Windows   3, 0, 2010, 0406
   tbbmalloc.dll   Intel(R) Threading Building Blocks for Windows   3, 0, 2010, 0406
   TfFontMgr.dll   FontMgr   9.3.0.113
   TfKernel.dll   Kernel   9.3.0.113
   TFKGEOM.dll   Kernel Geom   9.3.0.113
   TFUGEOM.dll   Adobe, UGeom©   9.3.0.113
   updaternotifications.dll   Adobe Updater Notifications Library   6.0.0.24 (BuildVersion: 1.0; BuildDate: BUILDDATETIME)   6.0.0.24
   WRServices.dll   WRServices Friday January 27 2012 13:22:12   Build 0.17112   0.17112
   wu3d.dll   U3D Writer   9.3.0.113
Required plug-ins:
   3D Studio 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Accented Edges 13.0
   Adaptive Wide Angle 13.0
   ADM 3.11x01
   Angled Strokes 13.0
   Average 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Bas Relief 13.0
   BMP 13.0
   Camera Raw 7.1
   Chalk & Charcoal 13.0
   Charcoal 13.0
   Chrome 13.0
   Cineon 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Clouds 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Collada 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Color Halftone 13.0
   Colored Pencil 13.0
   CompuServe GIF 13.0
   Conté Crayon 13.0
   Craquelure 13.0
   Crop and Straighten Photos 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Crop and Straighten Photos Filter 13.0
   Crosshatch 13.0
   Crystallize 13.0
   Cutout 13.0
   Dark Strokes 13.0
   De-Interlace 13.0
   Dicom 13.0
   Difference Clouds 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Diffuse Glow 13.0
   Displace 13.0
   Dry Brush 13.0
   Eazel Acquire 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Embed Watermark 4.0
   Entropy 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Extrude 13.0
   FastCore Routines 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Fibers 13.0
   Film Grain 13.0
   Filter Gallery 13.0
   Flash 3D 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Fresco 13.0
   Glass 13.0
   Glowing Edges 13.0
   Google Earth 4 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Grain 13.0
   Graphic Pen 13.0
   Halftone Pattern 13.0
   HDRMergeUI 13.0
   IFF Format 13.0
   Ink Outlines 13.0
   JPEG 2000 13.0
   Kurtosis 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Lens Blur 13.0
   Lens Correction 13.0
   Lens Flare 13.0
   Liquify 13.0
   Matlab Operation 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Maximum 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Mean 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Measurement Core 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Median 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Mezzotint 13.0
   Minimum 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   MMXCore Routines 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Mosaic Tiles 13.0
   Multiprocessor Support 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Neon Glow 13.0
   Note Paper 13.0
   NTSC Colors 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Ocean Ripple 13.0
   Oil Paint 13.0
   OpenEXR 13.0
   Paint Daubs 13.0
   Palette Knife 13.0
   Patchwork 13.0
   Paths to Illustrator 13.0
   PCX 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Photocopy 13.0
   Photoshop 3D Engine 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Picture Package Filter 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Pinch 13.0
   Pixar 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Plaster 13.0
   Plastic Wrap 13.0
   PNG 13.0
   Pointillize 13.0
   Polar Coordinates 13.0
   Portable Bit Map 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Poster Edges 13.0
   Radial Blur 13.0
   Radiance 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Range 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Read Watermark 4.0
   Reticulation 13.0
   Ripple 13.0
   Rough Pastels 13.0
   Save for Web 13.0
   ScriptingSupport 13.0
   Shear 13.0
   Skewness 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Smart Blur 13.0
   Smudge Stick 13.0
   Solarize 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Spatter 13.0
   Spherize 13.0
   Sponge 13.0
   Sprayed Strokes 13.0
   Stained Glass 13.0
   Stamp 13.0
   Standard Deviation 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Sumi-e 13.0
   Summation 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Targa 13.0
   Texturizer 13.0
   Tiles 13.0
   Torn Edges 13.0
   Twirl 13.0
   U3D 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Underpainting 13.0
   Vanishing Point 13.0
   Variance 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Variations 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Water Paper 13.0
   Watercolor 13.0
   Wave 13.0
   Wavefront|OBJ 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   WIA Support 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   Wind 13.0
   Wireless Bitmap 13.0 (13.0 20120315.r.428 2012/03/15:21:00:00)
   ZigZag 13.0
Optional and third party plug-ins: NONE
Plug-ins that failed to load: NONE
Flash:
   Mini Bridge
   Kuler
Installed TWAIN devices: NONE

Thanks very much for that lead, NormanPCN. I do have Auto Tone checked, though the rendered files in the example above do not have XMP sidecars. I will try unchecking Auto Tone even so, and post back when I see what happens.
Thanks again,
Kieren
EDIT: Bingo! I took Auto Tone off in ACR Preferences (in Bridge) and the non-RAW files immediately regenerated thumbs and previews. They now are indistinguishable from the PSD. There is still the very slight difference which I mentioned between the PSD and the CR2. While that seems odd, it is small enough to be relatively trivial.
Many thanks!
Thumbnail view w/o Auto:

Encoding JPEG renders "blurry"

I have created a java servlet that dynamically renders an image for use as a heading for each page. The servlets works fine, except for when a "background image" is used to go behind the text.
Here is what the result looks like:
http://www.mikelukenonline.com/servlets/lmp-framework?page_name=dynamicText&fontName=Old%20English%20Text%20MT&fontColor=168~167~167&shaddow=Y&fontSize=28&backgroundColor=white&text=Welcome%20to%20this%20site&width=500&x=11&y=21&height=34&backgroundImage=http://www.mikelukenonline.com/images/headings/titleblank2.jpg
One of the parameters in the URL is called "backgroundImage" which takes a URL of a jpg and draws that first. In this example, the background image is:
http://www.mikelukenonline.com/images/headings/titleblank2.jpg
Now if you look at the background image that I just listed, you see that it looks pretty clear. However, if you look at the full link above, you can see that the baclground image is "blurry" or "pixilated" - not sure the best work to describe it!
It is also worth noting that it is only when using the background image that it looks bad. If you remove the backgroundImage parameter, the text is rendered just fine:
http://www.mikelukenonline.com/servlets/lmp-framework?page_name=dynamicText&fontName=Old%20English%20Text%20MT&fontColor=168~167~167&shaddow=Y&fontSize=28&backgroundColor=white&text=Welcome%20to%20this%20site&width=500&x=11&y=21&height=34
I have tried everything I can think of and I can't get past this issue. Below are samples from the servlet. Any thoughts at all would be greatly appreciated!
This is the code that "draws" the final image:
private java.awt.Graphics.Graphics graphics = null;
private java.awt.Image.Image image = null;
private java.awt.Frame.Frame frame = null;
public Image getImage(){
     drawImage();
     if (image == null)
          image = getFrame().createImage(getWidth(), getHeight());
     return image;
private Frame getFrame() {
     frame = new Frame();
     frame.addNotify();
     return frame;
private Graphics getGraphics() {
     if ( image == null )
          image = getFrame().createImage(getWidth(), getHeight());
     if ( graphics == null )
          graphics = image.getGraphics();
     return graphics;
private void drawImage() {
     getGraphics().setColor(getBackgroundColor());
     getGraphics().fillRect(0, 0, getWidth(), getHeight());
     getGraphics().setColor(Color.white);
     if(getBackgroundImage() != null && getBackgroundImage().trim().length() > 0) {
          try {
               Frame f = new Frame();
               f.addNotify();
               Image im = Toolkit.getDefaultToolkit().createImage(new URL(getBackgroundImage()));
               MediaTracker mt = new MediaTracker(f);
               mt.addImage(im, 0);
               mt.waitForAll();
               getGraphics().drawImage(im,0,0,null);
               im.flush();
               im = null;
               f.removeNotify();
               frame = null;
          } catch (Exception e) {}
     Font f = null;
     try {
          f = new Font(getFontName(), Font.PLAIN, getFontSize());
     } catch (Exception e) {
          f = new Font("TimesRoman", Font.PLAIN, getFontSize());
     getGraphics().setFont(f);
     if(showShaddow()) {
          getGraphics().setColor(new Color(229, 229, 229));
          getGraphics().drawString(getText(),getXPos()+3,getYPos()+3);
     getGraphics().setColor(getFontColor());
     getGraphics().drawString(getText(),getXPos(),getYPos());
}This is part of a class later that takes this image and encodes it and renders it to the browser:
public void transform(HttpServletRequest request, HttpServletResponse response) {
     try {
          Frame frame = null;
          Graphics graphics = null;
          try {
               frame = new Frame();
               frame.addNotify();
               MediaTracker mt = new MediaTracker(frame);
               Image image = getImage(); // returns the image from the previous code
               mt.addImage(image, 0);
               mt.waitForAll();
               int w = image.getWidth(frame);
               int h = image.getHeight(frame);
               BufferedImage offscreen = new BufferedImage(w, h, BufferedImage.TYPE_INT_RGB);
               graphics = offscreen.getGraphics();
               graphics.drawImage(image, 0, 0, frame);
                     graphics.dispose();
               com.sun.image.codec.jpeg.JPEGImageEncoder encoder = com.sun.image.codec.jpeg.JPEGCodec.createJPEGEncoder(response.getOutputStream());
               com.sun.image.codec.jpeg.JPEGEncodeParam param = encoder.getDefaultJPEGEncodeParam(offscreen);
               param.setQuality(1, false);
               encoder.setJPEGEncodeParam(param);
               encoder.encode(offscreen);
          } catch (Exception e) {
          } finally {
               if (graphics != null) {
                    graphics.dispose();
               if (frame != null) {
                    frame.removeNotify();
               getImage().flush();
               response.flushBuffer();
     } catch (Exception e) {}
}

Hi,
Well, you could try fixing the memory leak in
JPEGAsyncDecoder. :)

Jpeg rendering problem

Hi there I have a problem I hope someone can help me with.
Im running INDesign Server and producing jpegs and pdfs through the soap interface.
With some images when they are imported into the IDD template and exported out again as JPEGs they seem to lose the middle of the image. It like somebody has cut half the image out with a pair of scissors.When exported as PDF there is no problem. I was wondering if anybody has experienced this problem and can offer tips.
I don't understand why some JPGs have the problem but others dont.

i have the same issue- i see you had this issue in 2008, can you tell me if you figured it out, i also posted a question but I don't have too much hope of getting it answered...

Where does Bridge 1.0.4.6 derive its color rendering of jpegs

The linked image below is a screencapture showing how my Pentax K100D AdobeRGB jpeg captures appear in Apple's color managed Preview and CS2 compared to Bridge. I realize this version of Bridge was not color managed but I can't figure out what color profile (it's not the display's, I checked) it's displaying through to arrive at the rendering depicted.
I happen to like it's rendering over what the color managed apps are producing to the extent I've created a custom curve to emulate Bridge's rendition. Just wondering where Bridge is getting its color ideas from.
http://xrl.us/oy69w
I searched on this and couldn't find anything on it.

This is a part of the larger MacBook Pro connectivity issue. There are several related threads dealing with the MBP's networking problems. If your unit is suffering from this type of difficulty, good luck ... (or a long ethernet cable)
(PS Everybody please make noise on this one so apple comes up with a solution.)
< Edited by Host >

Can Aperture make JPEG dupes of imported RAW automatically based on camera?

I have a specific DSLR which I shoot with. I guess most photographers might also have 2 or more DSLRs they shoot with as well. Usually one older than the other as a second body or back up.
When I import RAW images to Aperture 2.x, I would like Aperture (either automatically or triggered by me) to process the importing/imported images to a default JPEG duplicate copy of the RAW. In other words, rather than shooting JPEG+RAW, I would rather just shoot all RAW and when those RAWs enter Aperture, I would like it to make JPEG duplicates. I realize I may loose JPEG quality but this is not essential as if an image selected for use, I will custom process that image and convert to JPEG.
Obviously, I would like those dupes to not be strait dupes of the RAW but, on a basic level, when the conversion happens, also adjust them based on a basic set of color corrections, etc. like the camera might do when making a JPEG in camera. So the conversion is more specific to the RAW coming from the specific camera model.
Can Aperture do this? and how do I set this up? It seems like this ability should be built in or a plug in. It would be camera specific though. A setting for a Nikon D300 would do this "make JPEG dupes of RAW imports" different from a setting for a Sony A700 "make JPEG dupes of RAW imports".
I envision a plug in or free list of default import settings you can save for specific cameras. Something akin to color palettes for design programs based on specific printers. For Epson XYZ printer I can download the Pantone color palettes for that printer and install them in InDesign, etc. Plug in conversion settings for specific DSLR bodies.

I'm not aware of any way to have Aperture generate hi-quality jpegs automatically from the raw file. Maybe there is someway to script it, but I'm not that much of an expert to advise you on that. It will generate a jpeg as the other poster indicated, but it's not a hi-quality file. The jpegs rendered from the embedded raw file are only about 500k, so obviously they are not of the highest quality.
Regarding the metadata, everything is there; camera model, res, aperture, shutter, and a myriad of other things. What's not there is the Nikon specialized stuff like custom picture controls, custom white balance, d-lighting and some others. If you use these features and like the raw converter in NX, you will find it necessary to use either the hi-quality jpegs from the camera (assuming you create them when you shoot) or have NX or View render and save jpegs or Tiffs from the Nikon NEF's. I've decided to shoot Raw+JPEG, import to Aperture using referenced libraries, make a new master from the JPEG and this separates the JPEG from the NEF in Aperture allowing you to see and use either. If the JPEGS are satisfactory, use them. If not, you have options; tweak the NEF in Aperture, show the NEF in finder, and drop into NX and tweak the raw with Nikon's proprietary camera controls and raw features then save out as Tiff or JPEG and drop back into Aperture. If you like Aperture's raw renderer enough to forego Nikon's picture controls, custom white balance, d-lighting etc..., you can skip the whole Nikon thing and just import the raw files. Come up with some custom settings and stamp the lot. Batch export the project to jpeg and drop them back into Aperture when finished. I think it's best to just let the camera create the RAW-JPEG. If you get good files or just need minor tweak, fix-lift and stamp and you're done. If not you have lots of options. JMO

[AS CS3] Export JPEG options, setting, export selection

Hi all,
I am having trouble getting a JPEG export of a selected group of items to adhere to the export options I'm setting. I swear I've done the same thing with PDF export prefs and it works OK.
I need to export a group that is selected, not the whole page, using the options I specify. Every time it's 72 dpi, and probably medium quality.
thanks a million
PS if the only way is to use javascript I will consider that, but Applescript is best for me.
tell application "Adobe InDesign CS3"
tell JPEG export preferences
set resolution to 600
set JPEG Quality to maximum
set JPEG Rendering style to baseline encoding
end tell
set myJPEGPrefs to JPEG export preferences
export selection format JPG to "PREPCTRL-10:Users:chris.paveglio:Desktop:test.jpg"
end tell

>You can only export whole pages; exporting selections has been broken since
CS2.
I just ran into this, and I'm a bit confused.
In my testing, it appears that a page item cannot be exported to most of the export formats in that trying to do so will result in the entire page (or possibly it's the spread) being exported. However, I
am able to export a JPEG of a single page item, though setting the JPEG Export Preferences of the application seems to have no effect on the rendered JPEG which is always at 72 ppi and of a quality less than maximum as reported by the OP.
Are these two separate bugs? Is there no way to get the JPEG preferences to "stick"?

Getting RAW look like the embedded JPEG

This has been asked before, but I can't find the answer, so I will ask
again.
How do I get Lightroom to make the RAW file START it's adjustments with
the full in-camera adjustment settings, so the RAW initially looks
somewhat like it would if I had just shot JPEG?
When processing Canon RAW images (we use a mix of 10D, 20D and 5D
bodies), the initial 'unadjusted' image sometimes (often) looks VERY
different from the camera adjusted JPEG of the same photo. The reason
for the difference is that the JPEG has the camera adjustments applied,
but the RAW doesn't. You don't need to shoot RAW+JPEG to see the effect,
because the embedded preview in the RAW file is an adjusted JPEG, and
many programs use that to display previews.
The problem is that sometimes the JPEG looks darn nice because the
camera did a pretty darn good job processing the photo, but the RAW
looks flat, bland and lifeless. And it takes a whole lot of futzing
around to get it to look 'as good' as the dumbed down in-camera JPEG.
So is there some setting that I'm missing that reads in the full
'as-shot' settings of the camera, and correlates them to initial
settings for the RAW? It would be nice to be able to just tweak the
image from that point forward.

>Obviously cameras can vary in the particular model range, so doing the For (or similar) calibration will be specific to your camera.
Since the output of the default JPEG rendering pipeline of current DSLRs is anything but calorimetrically accurate (it is designed to be pleasant, not to be used in a metrology laboratory), calibrating for accuracy is going to do little to make LR RAW output and in-camera JPEG processing come closer.
And while the current incarnation of LR provides significant control over color, I still think it is not sufficient to reproduce some of the effects used in OEM RAW developers and in-camera JPEG processing.
In particular, I am not convinced it is possible to reproduce Canon's handling of reds within LR using presets that would reproduce canon "Normal" picture style.

Lightroom color cast question of JPEG image

Lightroom color cast question of JPEG image
Camera Canon MKII Color Matrix Adobe RGB
Photoshop CS Color Setting Adobe RGB (1998)
Lightroom 1.2 as new lightroom user I did not think that I needed to choose a color setting or color profile until I am ready to print my photos. I have not done any preset camera calibration.
Link to my website with example photo http://www.basecampphotos.com/color.jpg
My question is why is Lightroom displaying the images with a yellow color cast ? The image is a print screen from Lightroom on the left and Photoshop on the right The color cast problem can be seen in the white walls of the stairway. Also when viewing the image with Windows Picture and Fax viewer the walls are white as expected.
Any ideas or suggestions as to why Lightroom is displaying the images with the yellow color cast or what I need to do to correct the issue ?
Thanks
Jim

Almost definitely a corrupt monitor profile. Time and again this turns out to be the cause of such differences between PS and LR. You need to recalibrate the monitor or if you do not have a hardware calibrator, delete the profile from windows' monitor properties pane to test and then get a hardware calibrator.
P.S since you are using adobeRGB jpegs, Windows picture and Fax viewers cannot give you the correct colors even on a calibrated monitor. Those are not color managed programs (I believe picture viewer finally is in Vista but definitely not in XP which you appear to be using). Also, PS has to be correctly set up to always preserve embedded profiles and to ask when you have profile mismatches, otherwise even PS will give incorrect color. Make sure to set this up in Edit>Color settings.
P.S.2: Make sure you are not applying defaults in Lightroom to your images either on import or elsewhere. Sometimes people by accident define develop defaults that in this case might contain a white balance shift. Go to LR preferences and open the Presets tab. Here click on "Reset all default Develop settings" and make sure that only the auto grayscale checkbox is ticked. For images that it might have already happened to, make sure to hit the reset button.

JPEG export preferences problems

Hi.
I have indesig cs5.5 and tryed set export resolution and jpeg color space. But in my computer i can't because this properties don't existe.
In other computer this script read ok.
below the JPEG export preferences properties.
The script
tell application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5"
          tell JPEG export preferences
                    set JPEG export range to export range
                    set Exporting Spread to false
                    set Page String to "2"
                    set export resolution to 72
                    set jpeg color space to RGB
                    set JPEG Quality to low
          end tell
end tell
The properties
{«class jpEr»:72, JPEG Quality:low, Page String:"2", JPEG export range:export range, JPEG Rendering style:baseline encoding, Exporting Spread:false, parent:application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5", object reference:JPEG export preferences of application "Adobe InDesign CS5.5"}
Thanks

What was resolution in CS4 became exportResolution in CS5 (and CS5.5). Is it possible you mapped "Adobe InDesign CS5.5" to a CS4 installation on the machine it doesn't work on?
Also: I'm not an Applescript expert (or even really competent in it), so I'm probably going to embarrass myself, but... Have you tried copying and pasting the script's contents into a new file on the machine where it doesn't work rather than running the (compiled, or whatever) .scpt file?
Jeff

Color space conversion problem when importing JPEG's

Hi,
I'm currently playing with the trial version of LR. While importing JPEG's with different color spaces (sRGB and Adobe RGB) to LR I've noticed a strange effect: There is a small but noticable difference in color, depending if the JPEG was previously saved in AdobeRGB, or sRGB. All the images I've tested so far should not contain critical colors that exceed normal sRGB. When opened in CS2 both versions of a JPEG, AdobeRGB and sRGB, typically look perceptually identical, no matter if I leave the sRGB image to sRGB, or convert it to the working space (AdobeRGB). Also my color-managed image viewer behaves as it should. So I don't think it's a matter of the different color spaces.
Looking at the imported images in LR I would say that the AdobeRGB image is correctly converted while the sRGB image suffers from a slight reddish cast, most noticable in skin tones. The effect is not as strong as if I would load the sRGB image into CS2 and skip color conversion to my working space (AdobeRGB).
The sRGB versions of the JPEG's were obtained from the AdobeRGB JPEG's using CS2 for conversion.
Anyone else here experienced a similar problem? Is this a bug in the xRGB-to-ProPhotoRGB conversion of LR, or a feature?
/Steffen

Hi Uli,
thanks for pointing me to your thread. I followed the discussion with great interest. Actually, I think the effect I am describing here is of different nature and a LOT stronger, at least for the type of images I've tested.
I did some more experiments yesterday with interesting results:
1) When I export a processed RAW from LR to JPEG or PSD, no matter what Color Space (I tested AdobeRGB, sRGB and ProphotoRGB), and re-import those JPEG/PSD's to LR, they look absolutely identical to the RAW I started with. Also, at first glance, they look similar when opened in CS2, but only because I tested with color images. I can indeed see small differences when testing with B/W, as you described in your "Color management bug" thread.
2) When I change the color space of an PSD or JPEG inside CS2 (I used the default setting 'relative colorimetric') and save it to JPEG and then import this JPEG to LR, colors are far off. The strength of this mostly reddish color cast depends on the color space of the imported JPEG, strongest for Prophoto, less strong for Adobe and sRGB. Interestingly, when I convert the color space inside CS2 and save the result to PSD, it will display correctly when imported in LR. Another interesting side effect: the thumbnails of LR-exported JPEG's in the "Open" dialogs of CS2 and LR (I guess those are not color-managed) show the typical color-flatness for the Adobe and even more the ProPhoto version. For the CS2-converted JPEG's, all thumbnails look just a colorful as the thumbnail of the sRGB version.
3) Such an image which doesn't display correctly in LR will keep its color cast when exported again to a JPEG (not sure about PSD). So something goes wrong with the color conversion during the import of such CS2-converted images.
My explanation so far is that CS2 uses a slightly different way of coding the colorspace information in the metadata of JPEG's which somehow prevents LR to recognise the color space correctly.
Can you confirm this behaviour?
Steffen

RAW vs JPEG questions

2 Questions: Is there an advantage to importing raw vs jpeg into aperture?
If importing both, which to save as master? Why?
Thank you,
katy

It will depend at lot on the camera (possibly lens) and how much you like the JPEG rendering it delivers.
There are lots of thing to consider and the link Allan provided is a good background for understanding the different implications. But the landscape is changing and there are some areas that are perhaps a good subject for further discussion.
In general terms, there are three areas where raw may be the only way to salvage an image that was captured poorly:
Bad Exposure
Poor Choice of white balance
Excessive Noise Reduction
If your image suffers from any (or all) of these, then the JPEG is probably ruined and can't be recovered (although it may be made usable at lower resolutions). So if you or your camera are prone to producing images like these, raw is a safety net that can save your images.
Excessive noise reduction (which destroys detail) was the main reason I started using raw, as some premium compacts always threw away too much detail, even at their lowest noise reduction settings. Exposure and White balance were under my control, but not the noise reduction.
But in recent years, the JPEG processing of many cameras have improved enormously and it is creating a bit of a dilemma.
Sensor efficiency has led to lower noise, and camera JPEG engines (CJEs) have become more sophistocated, delivering excellent results straight out of camera.
With lower noise has come improved dynamic range, and CJEs have introduced dynamic range optimisation to allow more of the shadow and highlight data into the final image using custom tone curves for different scenes.
Colour procsessing is continually being tweaked with many cameras (Fuji and Olympus in particular have a very strong signature look that many people enjoy want to preserve).
For some users with good computer knowledge and image processing skills, there is still a motivation to use raw as they are able to use the tools to get the very best out of their images and produce superior renderings. Although even among these, I know of quite a few who admitted they were struggling to produce renderings from Fuji X100 raws that were as good as those from Fuji's CJE.
But for many people, being sat in front of the computer tweaking their images, and being expected to learn the tools and techniques to do so, is just not their idea of what photography is about. So these improved CJEs are offering them real benefits to get on with shooting, and use the computer primarily for organisation and publishing, with perhaps some of the more simple editing; crop, straighten, etc.
But in the last year or two, in some areas the CJEs havent just been catching up, they're actually moving ahead, at least over third party converters like Aperture, Lightroom, C1 etc (the manufactures own raw processing software should always be able to match and beat the CJE).
Most of these areas can be grouped under the heading "Lens based Optimisations". From automated removal of distortion, CA, vignetting and moire, to the new sophistocated sharpening algorithms that are based on the manufacturers actual lens performance data to apply exactly the right kind and amount of sharpening to each part of the image based on the lens used and the aperture setting.
Even if the converters provide all the tools to compete with this level of sophistocation, unless it can be fully automated, it still could become a case of more effort for less accurate results.
For my own workflow, I have recent found combinations of camera settings that deliver very pleasing out of camera JPEGs and so have begun shooting Raw + JPEG, importing both to Aperture with JPEG set as the master. This means many of my images are now near 'publish-ready' immediately on import, but for any images where I messed something up, or just don't like the JPEG results, I've still got the raw to fall back on.
Andy

Converting tiffs to jpegs

I have exported images from lightroom in tiff format, now I would like to get them printed. The printer I have spoken to only works with jpegs? This brings up several questions, will I loose image quality? If so maybe I should be looking for a different printer. If not can I convert these files or should I just re-export them again using jpeg settings?
Thanks !
Joe

You're right about the jpegs for Bay. I was confusing them with the lab I
used before. The quality of their prints from jpeg was better than that from
tiff I got at a previous lab.
To get good color in your prints you need two things. I. you need good
monitor calibration. You have that covered already which is more than most
folks. This allows you to make sure the color you see is what ends up in the
file. II. you need to use the correct color space in your output file.
Colors are defined within a certain standard and the same color will have
different values in different standards or vice versa, the same RGB values
describe completely different colors in different color spaces. The most
common of those color spaces is sRGB which is the standard for the web.
Other big standards are adobeRGB and prophotoRGB. Both can describe a much
wider array of colors than sRGB, but are less standard and often lead to
unexpected effects if your destination is not very savvy. If your lab is not
very good, they will not understand files in adobeRGB or any other space and
your prints will come back desaturated and or muddy looking. Bay understands
different color spaces than sRGB and I usually send them adobeRGB jpeg
files. This allows for slightly more saturated colors in the final print as
the file can describe more saturated colors. This is noticeable in things
like Neon colors, flowers, etc but for many subjects it doesn't matter an
awful lot and sRGB would be just fine.
Regarding output sharpening. This is a different step from the capture
sharpening you do in Develop. Output sharpening, which is indeed done in the
export module, allows you to compensate for the softening that is introduced
by the scaling and printing processes. It basically slightly oversharpens
your output file (they will look a little too crunchy if you look at the
output files) which will get softened for a very nice sharp result in the
final print that will be more like what you see on your screen. This needs
some experimentation. I usually use matte standard and I scale to the native
resolution of the printers (250 ppi for the photographic printers at Bay).
Note that this is a detail that allows you to eke out the final last bot of
possible quality. In my experience, your customers will not notice this at
all but it really looks much better to me. Your customer usually looks far
more at the color and contrast of the image than he/she will take out a
magnifying glass to check the microdetail on your print. If you print for
fine art purposes, this is different though and you would be best off really
paying attention to this detail (pun intended) too.
Hope this helps!

Getting the thumbnail of a LARGE jpeg

Here's the situation: I have a Swing Applet that needs to get the thumbnail of largish JPEGs. For example, a typical digital camera captures a 2000x2000 (or so) image these days. Applets don't get allocated that much memory and can't just load the entire thing in to scale it down.
Is there a good solution to this?
Ideally there would be something in ImageIO like "read scaled instance" that does the scaling as it reads in the data. I'm sure such a thing can be done within JAI. But this needs to be within a run-everywhere applet, so JAI is out of the question.
This seems like an oversight of the Java platform. It should be really simple to just say, "give me a scaled-down version of the image on disk". is there a way?
There's always Plan B which is to write my own JPEG renderer. I can do that but if there's some easier way, I would love to do it.

Lol, yeah, that is a bit large for 128x128. I meant to say I was scaling them to 128x128, but the images were 100K to 400K or so. I even had 3MB or more but no matter, it failed.
I would like to agree with you that ImageIcon can handle large images. It seems that it can't handle more than one or two being loaded at one time though, or there is some other issue going on.
Here is a "simple" bit of code that caused OutOfMemoryError problems for me:
File f = new File("some dir");
File[] files = f.listFiles();
// for the sake of brevity, there is a FileFilter attached to only list .jpeg/.jpg files
List l = new ArrayList(files.length);
for (int cntr = 0; cntr < files.length; cntr++){
l.add(new ImageIcon(files[cntr].toUrl());
}Run this, and you'll either see the same thing, or there is some odd issue on my machine. I saw this on two machines, but strangely, on another machine, there were no errors. JDKs were all 1.4.2_08 - _10, but I'd like to hope that the minor updates did not break this. It's possible I guess.

Shooting raw+jpeg and replicating treatment

If you shoot raw+jpeg and happen to like the jpeg treatment of a given shot, is there a way to precisely replicate or transfer the jpeg pp parameters to the raw? Not by eye, but precisely.

Jao vdL wrote:
The only way to get perfectly the same rendering is to use Canon's software.
While technically true, in practice, not so much...
The first and most important thing one must grasp (and accept) is there is no such thing as "correct" when it comes to rendering raw files...the raw sensor data is something that is subject to interpretation...it;s like shooting a color neg–the best interpretation may not be the most "accurate" nor "technically correct".
If you fall in love with the JPEG rendering, you will find life somewhat frustrating if you use Camera Raw or Lightroom because as pointed out above, if you are trying to "match"" (as in accurately replicating the exact tone and color) the rendering produced by Canon or Nikon, you're life will, essentially suck...because matching the EXACT rendering in ACR/LR is not going to be a pleasurable experience–it's doable but the question you gotta ask, is it worth it?
Shooting Raw & JPEG is an exercise in futility...you either get quick and easy JPEGs you can use (with zero chance matching them in ACR) or raw fles that you can control the rendering on (but pretty much forget matching the JPEG exactly)...
You would be better off shooting raw and learning how to render out JPEGs quickly that WILL match the raw files (cause they are based from the raw files).

AdobeRGB Jpegs rendering

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for