Any reason to use RAW+JPEG?

I'm curious as to the benefit to importing RAW+JPEG masters. With the support Aperture has for RAW, JPEG doesn't seem really necessary. I use a DMC-L1 and can't disable the JPEG, but I could separate them before importing. Can anyone come up with a reason to import the JPEG masters? In my case I've compared the EXIF data and there are no differences that I can see.
As for dealing with my library, after searching the archive it's clear there's no simple way to delete the JPEG masters.

I do shoot both, but I am re-thinking that now that I use Aperture. The reason that I shot both was to give me a reference image for colour and exposure, so that my RAW conversion would be similar to the jpeg image (if that was what I wanted). Also the jpeg could be used for web and email, with minimum effort on my part. The jpeg also showed how close I was in getting the exposure right in the first place. Now that I am using Aperture, I have not looked at the jpegs at all. Roger
MBP C2D 2.33 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Similar Messages

Is there any reason to use FCP text vs. Borris 3D?

Is there any reason to use FCP text vs. Borris 3D?
Thanks.

boris is vector based, and the basic fcp text is bitmapped. What that means is that you can resize and reposition your type in the control tab with boris without any loss in quality. You cannot do this with fcp text. Also, I think the dropshadow, kerning and leading options are more extensive with boris. Not positive about this as I abandoned the basic fcp titler a long time ago.

Any reason to use synchronize in jee world ?

Is there any reason why i should use synchronize method or statement in a jee application ?
would appreciate an example if yes .
thanks .

You use synchronize to prevent 2 or more threads accessing the same block of code of the same object (or class for static) at the same time. JEE wouldn't change that.
The question is, should one use synchronization in JEE apps or should one find a way to avoid needing it entirely to avoid multiple threads (usually requests) blocking. This does not necessarily mean to let threads into the same code in the same object without regard to state. Maybe each thread should have it's own object instance. It depends what you're doing.

Using RAW+JPEG stacking script, but can't get JPEG as default thumbnail for stack. Help!

I am currently using this script I found elsewhere on Adobe forums. However, doing this function only will stack everything with the raw files on top. I am using a 5D MKIII now and Bridge CS4 can't generate the CR2 previews, so I need JPEGs to see what a file is for general editing. How do I get this stack script to put the JPEGS on top instead of the raw files?
(script originally posted by Paul Riggot in another forum)
#target bridge
   if( BridgeTalk.appName == "bridge" ) {
AutoStack = MenuElement.create("command", "Auto Stack", "at the beginning of submenu/Stack", "zx1");
AutoStack.onSelect = function () {
   stackEm();
function stackEm(){
app.document.sorts = [{ name:"name",type:"string", reverse:false}];
var jpgs = Folder(app.document.presentationPath).getFiles ("*.jpg");
app.document.deselectAll();
for(var a in jpgs){
var Name = decodeURI(jpgs[a].name).replace(/\.[^\.]+$/, '');
var stacks = Folder(app.document.presentationPath).getFiles(Name+".*");
if(stacks.length < 2) continue;
for(var z in stacks){ app.document.select(new Thumbnail(stacks[z]));}
StackFiles();
app.document.deselectAll();
function StackFiles(){
app.document.chooseMenuItem('submenu/Stack');
app.document.chooseMenuItem('StackGroup');

I wonder if you have time if you could test this script for me please?
What it does (tries to do) is to create JPGs from the raw files in the same folder as the CR2 (raw) files.
N.B. IT WILL OVERWRITE ANY JPGS IN THE SAME FOLDER IF THE NAMES MATCH!
So please try it on a folder with raw files only.
The idea being it might be quicker to generate jpegs from the embedded thumbnail rather than shoot both raw/jpg?
T.I.A.
#target bridge
if( BridgeTalk.appName == "bridge" ) {
AutoStackJpgs = MenuElement.create("command", "Create Stack JPGs", "at the beginning of submenu/Stack", "sj1");
AutoStackJpgs .onSelect = function () {
app.document.deselectAll();
var items = app.document.getSelection("crw,cr2,tiff,raw,rw2,dng,nef,orf,erf,mos,dcr,raf,srf,pef,x3f");
for (var a =0; a<items.length;a++){
var JPEG = new File(items[a].path.substr(0,items[a].path.lastIndexOf ('.'))+".jpg");
tempFile=new File(items[a].path);
var fileString='';
tempFile.open('r');
tempFile.encoding = 'BINARY';
fileString=tempFile.read();
tempFile.close();
for(var w =0;w<6;w++){
var startJpg=fileString.search(/\xFF\xD8\xFF/);
if(startJpg != -1){
if(testJPG()){
var endJpg = fileString.search(/\xFF\xD9/);
fileString = fileString.substr(0,endJpg+2);
JPEG.open('w');
JPEG.encoding = 'BINARY';
JPEG.write(fileString);
JPEG.close();
var newThumb = new Thumbnail(JPEG);
newThumb.rotation = items[a].rotation;
break;
}else{
fileString = fileString.substr(20);
continue;
function testJPG(){
var result=false;
fileString = fileString.substr(startJpg);
var endTest = fileString.search(/\xFF\xD9/);
if(endTest > 204800 ? result= true : result= false);
return result;

Shared iPhoto Library - any reason to use disk image?

Having read:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1198
this article, and also:
https://discussions.apple.com/message/7734210#7734210
this answer, I have a question.
I am running iPhoto '11 on a MacBook Pro and have moved the iPhoto Library to the Users/Shared folder, where both my wife and I have full access to it. This hasn't been tested extensively since my wife is just learning to use the computer, but she is able at least to open it and view the same photos, events, albums, etc. that I do.
What I want to know is, having already set it up like this, is there any good reason to take the extra step mentioned in both of the above linked pages, and move the iPhoto Library to a disk image in that location? (Rather than storing the library in the Shared folder itself?)
Advantages/disadvantages? What difference would this make?

Some users - and I stress some, not all - can find they have Permissions issues using this form of sharing. In practise what it means is that if you import photos your wife may not be able to see them. So, putting the Library on a volume set to ignore permissions (which can also include an external disk, formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled) ) will avoid the issue - if it arises.
You can repair the permissions in a library as well: Back Up and try rebuild the library: hold down the command and option (or alt) keys while launching iPhoto. Use the resulting dialogue to rebuild. You'll see the option to check and repair library permissions.
Regards
TD

IPhoto 11 vs aperture - Any Reason to use Both?

Hello Forum - I have basically used iPhoto for my personal pictures and Aperture for my professional pictures for some years now. When iPhoto came out with Faces, I loved it and added a lot of old scans and new photos to that library. However, with Faces and Places and other functions now in Aperture, it seems like one library may be a better way to go. I have about 22K photos in iPhoto and 18K photos in Aperture.
Somehow, when I imported my pics into iPhoto, the setting for 'importing photos into the iPhoto Library' was unchecked, so I basically have 18K referenced photos in iPhoto. I had always used 'referenced files' in my Aperture anyways, so I suppose that's just as well - especially if I want to import those photos into Aperture. In fact, I was told by Apple tech support that they had never heard of anyone using referenced files in iPhoto who didn't have a problem with them. So far, I must have been lucky, because I didn't have any issues until recently, and then it was due to me editing some of the original masters in Photoshop and then iPhoto couldn't re-link them even when I pointed it to the right files. (getting iPhoto '11 fixed that - I was using '09)
I also have another 10-15K photos to import into one or both databases once I've made a final decision. As silly as it sounds, the one thing that iPhoto can do that Aperture can't is make calendars and cards. But my family really likes their calendars, so I don't want to give that up. Can I import everything into Aperture, then keep iPhoto and access the Aperture library just to create calenders and cards?
I'm seeking the advice of users who may have been there/done that. Are there any land mines I need to be aware of if I want to import my referenced iPhoto library into my referenced Aperture library? Is there a proceedure I need to follow? (other than described in the help section for importing libraries, etc.) I never vaulted my Aperture library, and I never used the editing tools in either Aperture or iPhoto. (I always use Photoshop for editing) Thanks for any feedback!
R Garside

From what I could discern, it sounded like she meant that the two libraries were shared - as opposed to all the data from iPhoto being imported into Aperture.
She could have meant the old scheme (before Aperture 3.3): Then the recommendation was to import referenced and the two libraries shared the original masters. But that approach has been very risky and was meant as a temperary solution while deciding if to switch to Aperture or not.
Or she meant, that the shared library format: each application can open the other programs libraries - they can both use the same libraries.
Do you know if there is a 'merge' option (which I will assume means Aperture shares the iPhoto library but doesn't actually import all the files)
Aperture has a "merge " option when importing libraries, but this is very restricted. If Aperture imports a library that already has been imported earlier and than changed, Aperture will try to recognize the changes and only import/update the changed images and projects or other library items, if you select to "merge" and not to "add". But when you are importing a library that Aperture has never seen, it will not be able to recognize duplicate images and you may end up with importing duplicates.
or if when I import an iPhoto library, all the info comes across into Aperture with no more technical need for the iPhoto library. (aside from viewing calendars, etc. created in iPhoto)
When you import a library as library, all metadata will come across, as far as possible.
After importing a library you could delete it, but keep a backup copy!
In my case, both my iPhoto and Aperture libraries are referenced, so I would want the images I'm bringing in to be referenced as well. Do you know if I have to handle the import differently?
Also, the images will be imported with the same file status they currently have: referenced files will stay referenced, managed files will be copied. There is no option to control the file status, when you import a library. If you want to import a library referenced, you have to make the source library referenced.
I can't find it in the help section and I'd hate to do the import and then discover that it did so by making the photos managed. There is very little info in the Aperture help regarding importing libraries - it only really talks about sharing libraries. Thanks for any light you can shed on the subject.
If you import a large managed library and want to import referenced, relocate the originals in the source librar. To do that for an iPhoto library you have to open t in Aperure and use the "relocate originals" command.
Regards
Léonie

Is there any reason to use iBank 4 if my bank does not support the Open Financial Exchange (OFX) protocol?

I just got iBank 4 only to find out it is not supported by my bank! What can I use for personal finance management on my Mac??

Do NOT do any banking on your computer in amounts your not willing to risk losing.
Mac's are better than Windows PC's, but they have been compromised in great amounts, in fact so was Apple's Cupertino HQ as well.
According to the Russian antivirus company Dr. Web, a modified version of the "BackDoor.Flashback.39" variant of the Flashback Trojan has infected over 600,000 Mac computers, forming a botnet that includes 274 bots located in Cupertino, California, the location of the headquarters of Apple Inc.[4][5] The findings were confirmed one day later by another computer security firm, Kaspersky Lab.[6] This variant of the malware was first detected in April 2012[7] by Finland-based computer security firm F-Secure.[8][9] Dr. Web estimated that in early April 2012, 56.6% of infected computers were located within the United States, 19.8% in Canada, 12.8% in the United Kingdom and 6.1% in Australia.[5]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trojan_BackDoor.Flashback
http://flashbackcheck.com/what-is-flashback.html
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT5244
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2402715,00.asp

Any reason to use "Manually manage music" over creating an iPhone playlist?

My new iPhone is my first iPod that's not big enough to hold all 319 of my albums. In fact, the limited capacity is the only reason it took me so long to buy one -- it's always seemed that the whole point of having an iPod is the ability to take it all with you.
Anyway, I just assumed that the way to choose 14GB or so worth of music was to create a playlist containing the albums I want to copy over, then sync that playlist with the new iPhone. It worked fine. But then I noticed the checkbox marked "Manually manage music and videos," and after some sleuthing it appears that it does the same thing.
Does it do anything that creating a playlist doesn't? If I switched to doing it that way, would the only upside be one fewer playlist?

Eric, if thats what you're more comfortable doing, i say, stick with it. i prefer to "manually manage" as i dont really use playlists. i'm one to just start a song and let the thing play at random. so i like it cuz when i obtain new mp3's, i can just drag and drop it into the phone. and the same the ohter way around, if theres a song i no longer want on the phone, i can delete it off the phone via itunes. all without having to set up playlists to sync.

Any reason to use aiff?

Hi. I'm creating a DVD of an HD movie from Final Cut Pro 5. When I export, I use this settin "DVD: Fastest encode 120 minutes 16:9". When I do, I create 3 files: mpeg-2, aiff & ac3. Then I import the assets I created into a DVD Studio Pro project. Do I need to use the aiff at all?
Thanks,
Ali

Thanks. I don't understand why it says "all" next to the quick setting. Why would anyone want 2 audio formats?
The movie is 97 minutes. It was shot on the Panasonic HD Varicam & the project is 23.98 full resolution. I'm not creating any menu, just the one movie for a screening. I'm creating SD only disks because most players won't play HD & creating both takes up too much space - I'd like to have all of it on one disk. Any advice on what I'm doing would be great. I'm new to DVD mastering - I'm used to outputting to tape.

A64's -- any reason to use CPUIDLE?

Slightly OT, admittedly.
Aside from Cool & Quiet (which I view as a separate temperature control method) do Athlon 64's authomatically implement the "HALT" command, or is in necessary to use CPUIDLE or similar programs for lowest temps, as is the case for Athlon XP's?
TIA

Great thing about Cool & Quiet is the power usage.. Socket 939 CPU's use only 21W (3500+ only 20W) when running at low speed.
I don't get why they didn't set the minimum speed to 100mhz or something, I mean, if it really shifts speed hundred times per second, would it matter.
And when will all hardware utilize this feature? Graphics cards, etc.

Is there any reasons to use Cryptix?

Actually Cryptix JCE provider has not been updated for more then one year (well, they released a signed jar for 1.4, but no changes in the functionality) and it is definetely not the best one in terms of the performance.
So, why someone still needed to use Cryptix?

I agree. I started working with Cryptix but also recognized soon that it's outdated. I switched to Bouncycastle now if I need functionality that is not in the SunJCE provider.
Michael

Any reason when use SSMS on SQL Azure, I cannot access Alter to, but only Create to?

It is annoying have to change create to alter all time.

Hi wyx2001,
Please see this link:
http://connect.microsoft.com/SQLServer/feedback/details/741947/ssms-alter-stored-procedure
"we have taken note of this internally, and when we revisit this functionality in the future, we will try and get this resolved.
Quick Note: The SSMS and SMO support for SQL Azure is limited and not all functionality is available. Our recommendation for operating with SQL Azure is via Web portal."
Iric Wen
TechNet Community Support

Aperture and shooting Raw+Jpeg

In camera Jpeg processing becomes better and better with each generation of cameras. One example is the dynamic range optimizer in my Sony A700. You often have a hard time to get similar results from the Raw. So for quite a lot of shots - especially the not so important ones - using just the Jpegs is a real time saver. Still it is good to have the Raw handy in case the camera processing went in the wrong direction, which still happens occasionally. With 8 or 16 GB cards it is not an issue meanwhile to shoot Raw+Jpeg. Unfortunately IMO there is no smooth Raw+Jpeg workflow within Aperture. Especially it is almost impossible to delete the Raw without loosing the Jpeg and vice versa in a managed library (see thread mentioned below).
Thus I just posted this to www.apple.com/feedback. If you think this is an important issue, that should be added in a future version of Aperture, you might sent your feedback as well:
It is nice, that Aperture already imports both pictures, if you shoot in Raw+Jpeg mode. But the further workflow of dealing with the Raw+Jpeg combo is not optimal:
The main reason to shoot Raw + Jpeg is, to save time in using the ready processed Jpegs for the less important shots or the ones, where the in-camera processing left not much to improve, but still having the safety-net of the Raw for a more advanced development, in case the picture asks for it.
So instead of showing the Raws and hiding the Jpegs by default it should be vice versa. If there is a Jpeg accompanying the Raw, the Jpeg should be displayed and the Raw should be hidden. At least you should be able to set in the preferences, whether you prefer to see the Raw or the Jpeg. If you realize while rating the picture or doing adjustments, that the Jpeg doesn't fit the bill, you should be able to give precedence to the Raw, aka showing the Raw and hiding the Jpeg.
After having finished the work, you should be able to either delete or archive the not used version (either Raw or Jpeg), without loosing any metadata or adjustments already applied to the other version.
Currently it is an extremely complex task, to get rid of the unused version. Workarounds are suggested in this thread: http://www.oreillynet.com/digitalmedia/blog/2007/09/gettingrid_of_unwanted_manage1.html
Peter

SierraDragon wrote:
I am unfamiliar with Sony DSLRs and do not know what might make a Sony JPEG visually equal to a Sony RAW image file.
What I refer to is the dynamic range optimizer, which is based on Apical’s IRIDIX image processing engine. I think it is used in recent Nikons as well, but as I have only a Sony DSLR I mentioned this.
Basically it is a kind of highlights and shadows adjustment, but it works very well and in many cases you have a hard time to generate similar good results with your RAW processor (aka. Aperture).
However, JPEG is still a lossy image format that IMO should only be used for low end usages. RAW converted by the camera vendor's software to non-lossy formats like TIFF should generally be quite superior to JPEG.
Of cause the RAW holds more information and carefully processed often leads to better results than the in-camera JPEGs. But not every picture will be printed in poster size. And although JPEG is a lossy format, with a low compression setting the artifacts are almost undetectable at least with my DSLR.
Shooting in RAW+Jpeg mode can be a real timesaver. You look at the Jpegs firsthand, rate them, make small adjustments, if neccessary. For the majority of the pictures you can use these Jpegs even for slideshows and prints. If you step over a picture, where the in-camera processing went wrong, like oversharpened, oversaturated picture with wrong WB etc., you can easily resort to the accompanying RAW and process it to your heart's content. The only drawback with this workflow is the increased temporary storage capacitiy you need. But with today's low memory card prices, the benefits outweigh the cost by far IMHO.
That said, the reason for my post was not to discuss the benefits of a RAW+Jpeg workflow, but Aperture's issues in dealing with it.
Peter

How do I delete the jpeg from raw+jpeg imported images?

Hi,
Back in the day, I shot lots of images using raw+jpeg and imported them into Lightroom. Now I realize those jpegs add no value and I'd like to recover the disk space that they're collectively occupying.
Is there a good way to:
1. Identify all images in a catalog which have raw+jpeg?
2. Remove just the jpeg for these images?
Thanks!

$$PhotoHobby wrote:
I'm very hesistant to take the chance on any 3rd party script.
Just so ya know, what the deletion feature in RawPlusJpeg does is ultra simple:
1. Identifies extraneous jpeg files.
2. Presents them for you to review.
3. Deletes the extraneous jpeg files, if you approve. (puts them in the recycle bin if possible).
It does nothing to the database nor anything else.
You sync folders with 'Treat JPEG files next to raw files separately' afterward, which is what sets the database right.
The only potential for trouble is the criteria for determining which jpegs are extraneous.
It has no direct access to the database, so what it does is check for jpegs with same base name as raw (which *must* be present in catalog, and on disk), that aren't in the catalog, which includes the jpegs associated with RAW+JPEG (imported as a unit), *and* any jpegs that were imported separately, but subsequently removed from the catalog, or had never been imported.
So, what it does will be the perfect thing to do, *if* you first synchronize folders (with 'Treat JPEG files next to raw files separately' checked) to pull any jpegs in to the catalog that were previously imported separately, but may have been inadvertently removed from the catalog (or had never been imported), before invoking the delete feature of the plugin.
Note: You must do that for any manual procedure too, or you will have the same problem, except in the manual case, you won't have the benefit of the plugin checking your work, and presenting the files to be deleted, before you commit.
It's your call, obviously, and to save Geoff the Kiwi from pointing this out: the plugin comes with no guarantee, warranty, or any other kind of tea.
Consider backing up catalog and photo files before doing this maintenance, whether manual, or plugin-assisted.
In my opinion, the plugin-assisted method is much safer than the manual method, which is the only reason it was written, *not* to save steps, although it does that too. For example, you can not, with the plugin, delete any jpegs that do not have a corresponding RAW in the catalog and on disk, period. - unless there is a bug of course, but there probably isn't , at least not one that would change the aforementioned assertion... - it wouldn't take much of a bug to cause it to barf, but it would take a big bug to cause it to delete files that weren't on the list, etc...
Seriously, I don't think you have to wait for Adobe on this one. I wouldn't (I didn't - my catalog is all clean now!...).
PS - there is *very* little recorded in the database about the jpeg sidecar - it's existence upon import (when "as a unit") - that's about it. Most of the funny business about updating that we were fumbling with above, stems from the software (and the person at the keyboard), *not* the database. Syncing folders with 'Treat JPEG files next to raw files separately' checked, once the jpeg sidecars have been cleaned up, *will* set the database straight!
Cheers,
Rob.

Different colors from RAW+JPEG mode of my camera

The same issue of always... color profile.
I shot my entire trip thru Europe using RAW + JPEG Basic mode of my Nikon D40 digital camera. Oddly, the JPEG files are looking MUCH MUCH better, because iPhoto assigned the correct color profile to the files, instead of signing all RAW files as Adobe RGB. (I have Adobe RGB option on my camera, but I shot as sRGB).
I tried installing Aperture trial to reprocess all RAW files and no success. Looking RAW and JPEG side by side makes me sad.
What should I do to make iPhoto recognize my RAW files as sRGB?
Sorry for posting this again... I read more than 20 threads about color issues and I didnt managed how to fix my problem.

Hi Dave,
yes, thats generally what i want to do.
I have the PEF-Files out of my camera and i convert them with the Adobe DNG converter to the DNG format. The old Pentax K100D is using uncompressed PEF, thats why the pictures are twice the size than the converted DNG
If i import these files for further processing into Lightroom, they are looking similar to the originals viewed with another application (e.g. the pentax development tool) for a second, after that Lightroom is changing the preview to the settings of the Adobe Profile. Colors are much more colder and less colorful. If i try to change the profile in the developement tab, there are no visible changes to the picture.
I've downloaded the DNG Converter and Camera RAW. There are several profiles included, but i don't know how to use them with Lightroom or Photoshop CS4 (with installed ACR).
I've created a screenshot of the differencies so you know what i mean.
Screenshot
On the left side you can see the developed JPEG via PEF out of the Pentax-Software (Silkypix), on the right is the developed JPEG out of the DNG via Lightroom. Both files are without any further changes to the development process.
The left picture corresponds to the original conditions.

Any reason to use RAW+JPEG?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for