Aperture 2.0 Questions

Some issues I had in Aperture 1.5.6 still exist in 2.0 :
1. When making exposure adjustments, my image in my viewer goes black. Only resizing the viewer makes it come back. Alternatively, I can switch to Full Screen (or move out of Full Screen) to see the image.
2. When I click on a RAW (Canon EOS 5D File), my Histogram doesn't show. Once I start moving sliders, it shows. But the minute I stop using the sliders, it goes away. Is there a trick to see the histogram all the time?
I'm using two 7300GT Video cards with a total of four monitors.
Toine

I'd be curious to know if this problem exists with one or two monitors. Two video cards and four monitors sounds like it would cause problems.

Similar Messages

  • Aperture with iPhoto questions

    Hi gang,
    The new integration of iPhoto and Aperture 1.5 sounds very appealing. I have a couple of questions regarding functionality. Let's assume that I have Aperture set to use my iPhoto library in referenced file mode.
    1) Will Aperture keep the two libraries in sync automatically? If I add photos to iPhoto, will they show up in Aperture?
    2) If I tag photos with keywords or ratings in Aperture, do those changes show up in iPhoto?
    3) If I make changes to a photo with Aperture, do those changes show up in iPhoto?
    Cheers!

    Hi gang,
    The new integration of iPhoto and Aperture 1.5 sounds
    very appealing. I have a couple of questions
    regarding functionality. Let's assume that I have
    Aperture set to use my iPhoto library in referenced
    file mode.
    1) Will Aperture keep the two libraries in sync
    automatically? If I add photos to iPhoto, will they
    show up in Aperture?
    2) If I tag photos with keywords or ratings in
    Aperture, do those changes show up in iPhoto?
    3) If I make changes to a photo with Aperture, do
    those changes show up in iPhoto?
    Cheers!
    I asked this same question and got total silence. I have/use Aperture and I don't see a way to make this work, that is the answer to all your questions is: No. While I praise the changes made in Aperture 1.5 I am surprised and disappointed that while Apple added iPhoto/Aperture integration they missed this most obvious requirement (to keep the Aperture and iPhoto databases in sync).
    Copying the entire library in Aperture everytime you add a few photos to iPhoto (for example) is ridiculous.
    -Tom

  • Aperture - a few questions

    Hi there
    I've been doing lot of reading but struggling to find (or understand!) answers to a few questions.
    I have decided that the simplest way to do things is to import files straight from camera into aperture (although one forum member mentioned somewhere one shouldn't do this?).
    Then use the images as managed images, and back up via vault to an external hard drive.
    1)So if I do this will I still have 'managed' libraries, or will my libraries be 'referenced' (to the external hard disk). Because presumably then if that's the case I'll have to have the hard drive connected to work with the images
    2)If I back up to hard drive after editing, will those edits be saved on hard drive too, or will it just be 'master' images.
    3) I have been playing around trying to find the best way to do things - so currently I have photos stored in iphoto, aperture and on my internal drive (in a pictures folder) - this is obviously not ideal, is there any way I can easily get them all stored in aperture as I think most my aperture library is probably referenced? (I tried consoildate images and now it looks like half the images are still in the folder on theinternal disk drive and half aren't!)
    4) so is there some way of checking whether the images in Aperture are Masters or referenced?
    Sorry about all the questions, any help would be greatly appreciated!!

    christie locke wrote:
    Hi there
    I've been doing lot of reading but struggling to find (or understand!) answers to a few questions.
    I have decided that the simplest way to do things is to import files straight from camera into aperture (although one forum member mentioned somewhere one shouldn't do this?).
    Then use the images as managed images, and back up via vault to an external hard drive.
    It depends. If you use referenced master files, using a card reader and placing the new images/folder into storage location first would be better, but if you are letting Aperture manage your master files, it really does not make a difference at all.
    Personally, I only use referenced master file scheme so I use a card reader and files are moved/stored on external drive to be referenced.
    1)So if I do this will I still have 'managed' libraries, or will my libraries be 'referenced' (to the external hard disk). Because presumably then if that's the case I'll have to have the hard drive connected to work with the images
    If your question is about Vault, you will have managed masters in the Aperture Library and the Library content will be backed up to the Vault. They are two different entities - one original and other being compressed backup of the original library.
    2)If I back up to hard drive after editing, will those edits be saved on hard drive too, or will it just be 'master' images.
    Every action taken within Aperture will be backed up into the Vault. As I indicated earlier that I use referenced master files, but my edit steps are all kept in Aperture Library, along with previews, thumbnails and any data associated with the image. So I back up my Aperture Library to Vault, and I also backup my referenced master files independently, outside of Aperture.
    3) I have been playing around trying to find the best way to do things - so currently I have photos stored in iphoto, aperture and on my internal drive (in a pictures folder) - this is obviously not ideal, is there any way I can easily get them all stored in aperture as I think most my aperture library is probably referenced? (I tried consoildate images and now it looks like half the images are still in the folder on theinternal disk drive and half aren't!)
    If you reference all the existing images as you bring them into Aperture environment, then it really does not matter if you consolidate or not. Aperture will keep track of where the files are located, once you associate the file within Aperture (by selecting leave files in original location).
    If you like to have Aperture manage the files, then simply select managed master during import and you're done.
    4) so is there some way of checking whether the images in Aperture are Masters or referenced?
    You mean managed or referenced, I think. Master simply means the original image file (raw, jpeg or tif file). Yes I think this answer was already given in above post.
    Since I access the image directly without the use of Aperture, having managed master does not work for me nor for my setup. I use a MBP with limited storage but I do want to carry the entire library with me. The only way that can work is to have previews on, and Aperture Library on the notebook, while the actual image master files stays on external drive.
    There are tutorial videos on Aperture site (Apple) as well as video podcast on Aperture How-to Series in iTunes that will help you on this and other subjects.
    Cheers

  • Iphoto/aperture unified library question

    I have just bought a new iMac to replace an ageing one.  I succesfully copied my iphoto library to the new machine (via a separte hard drive).  I checked the library opened fine in iPhoto and everything was there (all fine).  I then bought and installed Aperture on the new machine and pointed it the the iphoto library which it opened (after first upgrading it) with no problem.  So I now effectively have a "unified" iPhoto and Aperture library, although in practice I do not intend to use iPhoto any more, I will always be working in Aperture.
    I now have a simple question,  my photo library in the Finder (sits in the Pictures folder) is still identified as "iPhoto Library", does this matter?.
    Now I believe I can (if I want) simply rename this to "Aperture Libary" or whatever else I want to call it but this made me wonder whether there is any distinction between a unified library that began life as an iPhoto library (as in my case) or a unifed library which began life as a Aperture library.  Specifically, is there any change I could or should make to my library given I only ever intending using it with Aperture - or once you have a unified library is there really no differance at al between a library labelled as an  "iPhoto Library" and a library labelled as an  "Aperture Library" - other than in name?
    Thanks for your help.

    No it makes no difference.
    Regards
    TD

  • Considering an aperture purchase, quick question......?

    i was considering an upgrade from iphoto to aperture,
    can someone please tell me very briefly the main differences between them (i.e the advantages of aperture over iphoto) from what ive read it seems that aperture is more of a pro version of iphoto, it does everything iphoto does plus more?
    if this is the case, that leads me to my second question, will having aperture make iphoto completely obsolete? i used to use iphoto on my last macbook but if i were to get it on my air will iphoto be completely redundant as aperture does everything iphoto does plus more?
    thanks

    IMO generally most useful to help keep drives underfilled and fast (drives slow as they fill) is to manage by Reference ("referenced images") as in the workflow outline below where Master images can live anywhere.
    I feel pretty strongly that card-to-Aperture or even camera-to-Aperture handling of original images puts originals at unnecessary risk. I suggest this workflow, first using the Finder (not Aperture) to copy images from CF card to computer hard drive:
    • Remove the CF card from the camera and insert it into a CF card reader. Faster readers and faster cards are preferable, and Firewire is much preferable to USB2.
    • Finder-copy images from CF to a labeled folder on the intended permanent Masters location hard drive.
    • Eject CF.
    • Burn backup hard drive or DVD copies of the original images (optional recommended backup step).
    • Eject backup hard drive(s) or DVDs (optional recommended backup step).
    • From within Aperture, import images from the hard drive folder into Aperture selecting "Store files in their current location." This is called "referenced images."
    • Review pix for completeness (e.g. a 500-pic shoot has 500 valid images showing).
    • Reformat CF in camera, and archive DVDs of originals off site.
    Note that the "eject" steps above are important in order to avoid mistakenly working on removable media.
    It works equally well to allow Aperture to keep Masters in the Library itself ("managed images"), but at the cost of a rapidly growing Library size that ultimately outgrows the fast capacity of a single hard drive. The difference is that with managed images Vault backups include the Masters, while with referenced images Masters are maintained outside of Aperture and are not backed up in Vaults.
    The Aperture Help Menu has more on this if you search on managed images and on referenced images.
    -Allen Wicks

  • Aperture book copyright question!

    Hey...I was wondering if it would be allowed to make Aperture books and resell them....obviously if I do not own the copyright then I a cannot...but let's say I take a bunch of pics of my hometown and make a book and ask Apple for copies of this book...would I be allowed to sell it then?

    Your images, your work, your creation -> your copyright. Aperture is just a tool and the printing service is just a service. If you write a novel using Microsoft Word, you still own the copyright and Microsoft has no rights over your work, no matter how many fancy fonts and formatting features you use. Aperture is no different.
    I'm sure Apple would love you to sell as many copies as you can - especially if you are using their printing service. At worst, they sell more printing services to you as you buy more books. At best, your customers are so impressed that they use Aperture or iPhoto to print books themselves, and Apple sells lots more books.

  • Working with RAW and JPEG Images in Aperture (2 part question)

    I just edited a RAW file and stamped the adjustments into the JPEG file. Then applied some RAW fine tuning to the RAW image. For the life of me I cannot tell the difference between the two images and I will not blow up beyond 8 x 10. So is shooting RAW a waste?
    Secondly do JPEG degrade every time you open and close them or only if you open them, edit them and then close?
    Thanks

    Working on JPGs in Aperture does not degrade JPGs at all because the original JPGs are not ever re-saved, and therefore are not ever re-compressed.
    As for shooting RAW vs. JPG - I usually shoot both at the same time using RAW+JPG, I have never ever been in a position where I shot RAW and wished I had shot JPG. I have been in positions where I shot JPG that I wish I had shot RAW.
    [Why shoot RAW|http://photo.rwboyer.com/2009/01/why-shoot-raw>
    RB

  • There is not enough free space on your Aperture Library Volume Question

    When importing more images to Aperture I get this:
    There is not enough free space on your Aperture Library Volume to import the selected items
    Why is this? I am a big time newbee and I am trying to take a crash coarse in Aperture. How do I bring in more photos. I only have a few hundred in there now.
    Thanks for any help
    Mark

    Lots more and very specific info is necessary for troubleshooting. Probably your hard drives is too full.
    -Allen Wicks

  • Noise Reduction question for Aperture

    I recently purchased my first iMac (after years of being a windows user) and decided to try out Aperture (to use with Photoshop Elements 10 as an outside editor). I am basically an Olympus user and like the way Aperture handles the Olympus ORF RAW files a bit better than Lightroom (which I have used since it was released).
    Anyway, I do think that Lightroom did a better job of handling/adjusting the noise in the higher ISO Olympus RAW files than Aperture - again just starting with Aperture.
    2 Questions:
    (1) Am I missing something or is the only Noise Reduction controls in Aperture the two sliders that come up in the Inspector column?
    (2) What is a good plug in for noise reduction that works with Aperture?
    Thanks, Steve

    People like Noise Ninja.

  • Using Adobe Bridge as Aperture 3 External Editor

    I have a problem that I can't seem to solve and I'm hopeful that a post here can get me closer to some resolution.  I recently started using Bridge for noise reduction and PS for high pass sharpening.  The downside is my work flow is now shot full of holes!  I have Bridge as my external editor; I make the edits in Bridge then do a high pass sharpen as well as any other edits I might choose to make in PS.  If I need to, I flatten the image if I have layers.  It is here that my problem begins. 
    Aperture creates the new tiff version within it's program as soon as I choose to edit in Bridge, but I don't know the exact process to save that image while in Bridge or Photoshop to reflect the changes in Aperture.  Another question I have is which version of the image in Bridge I should be editing the jpeg or tiff?  any help here would be greatly appreciated! 

    I use Bridge as editor because once there, I go into "camera raw" to process images.
    So now you're bringing a third app into the equation. Bridge, ACR and Photoshop are all individual applications. If you're not using an app like Aperture then Bridge might be the front end for the other two, but in the case you describe it has no role.
    Another thing to think about: ACR ("camera Raw") is for processing Raws - which job you are currently doing with Aperture. You're not sending Raws to Bridge/ACR... You're sending tiffs.
    I think you need to rethink your workflow somewhat. I'm not sure you've grasped what the various tools actually do.
    Regards
    TD

  • Aperture and iPhoto should use the same library

    Hi all,
    It seems that there is a lot of conversation about moving photos between Aperture and iPhoto. For example, some like iPhotos slideshow better but still require Apertures adjustment options. Still others have tried, to no avail, to use Aperture as iPhoto's external editor.
    Personally, I have a large iPhoto library with most photos tagged with keywords. I have just started using Aperture and am yet to decide if its extra features are useful for a novice photographer like myself. Other than the price, I see no reason not to use Aperture instead of iPhoto but I would want to import my entire iPhoto library into Aperture.
    My question, however, is why we need to 'import' from one app to the other. Without understanding how the aperture / iphoto databases work, I would assume there is no fundamental reason why Aperture could not simply open an existing iPhoto library and visa versa. They both support RAW, keywords, books etc. And while I am sure there are some deviations in the databases, surely each app could simply ignore the features it does not understand.
    Is this something that anyone else has considered or think would be good. I would imagine that the easier it is for customers to upgrade from iPhoto to Aperture the better. Does Apple plan on supporting this in the future or is the import option 'good enough'.
    Cheers

    Can I and if so how do I best set up Aperture as main app. (master) with iPhoto as sub app that accesses the same library to sort through, look at, order books, etc.
    Simply set the Preferences to 'Share Previews with iLife Applications' in Aperture. Then go to iPhoto -> File -> Show Aperture Library. A media browser will open and you can drag the pics from the Browser to the iPhoto Window. Note: You're getting the Aperture Previews not Masters. Note too that if you set iPhoto to Referenced mode (iPhoto -> Preferences -> Advanced) then you won't use double the disk space.
    +Remember though, you are not accessing the Aperture Library. If you make changes in the Aperture Library (Re-edit the shots) after bringing pics to iPhoto, those changes are not reflected in iPhoto.+
    This is what William means when he says the iPhoto does not access the Aperture Library.
    Regards
    TD

  • How to change print size and DPI setting in Aperture

    If I import a raw image from my camera (D2X) to Aperture and print the image at about 8"x10" through Aperture, it prints at about 300 DPI, if I change to size of the same image to 12"x18", in Aperture, it prints the image at about 166 DPI. I do not believe there is a way to change this in Aperture.
    My question is, can I open the image at 8"x10" in PS, change the size and resolution to 12"x18" and 300 DPI then save it, open it again in Aperture and print it. If I do these things, will the image printed in Aperture still be 300 DPI and how can I check it to see if that is the case?
    I have not been able to find the DPI setting anywhere in Aperture to confirm that it is what I want or need.

    "You can make the pixels bigger by making the image larger but you can't add any more pixels without running some kind of interpolation filtration like GenuineFractals or a recomputation like bicubic."
    Thank you for your explanation and that brings me exactly to the point of my question.
    Can I interpolate my original NEF raw image after conversion by Aperture to a much larger image for print using something similar to what Photoshop does with it's bicubic smoother or as is done in genuine fractals or must I go out of Aperture and back if I want to print with Aperture. I am hoping you will tell me that Aperture is or will be capable of interpolating an image to a larger one with more than just the pixels supplied by the camera. I do not belive that these are not enough by themselves to print a quality image in a much larger size.
    I may be wrong, but I believe that it is somewhat common practice to interpolate an image to get a greater resolution printed image at a size larger that what is possible with a resolution provided by the (D2x in my case) DSLR camera.
    Or is this just a tempest in a teapot. In other words, will I be able to take the image out of the D2x (12.5 megapixels) and print a 13x 19" image with the same quality in Aperture (uninterpolated but enlarged) as an interpolated image in PS or Genuine Fractals and then in PS?
    Thank you

  • Aperture and iPhoto - do they co-exist?

    I have been using iPhotos to import all pictures/videos from Digital Camera, iPhones, iPads for over year, although I never knew where the files were stored. In the past I could only email photos within the iPhotos 11 s/w itself, but I could not attach an file in Gmail/Ymail etc.
    Until last night I installed Aperture 3. I selected a folder "Pictures" and clicked Import from iPhoto Library, then I was shocked ....my Macbook HDD space shrinks from 40GB free to 1.29GB and still keep shrinking....Was Aperture copying my picture files and double-occupy my HDD space? The import runs for over 4 hours, and during that time I have to remove some of my music, videos, TV shows in Tunes to trash (to free up another 20 GB of space). Until Aperture finished importing all photos, I had only 2.5GB free
    This morning I checked iPhoto, and it seems that all pictures were still there. I tried to delete a picture in iPhoto, but it still shows up in Aperture 3.
    Questions -
    1). How to avoid "duplication" of pictures on my MacBook Pro (i.e. iPhotos + Aperture)
    2). Now all my pictures were "copied" to user/Pictures/ folder. I deleted an image (actually a sub-folder) but it seems show up in Aperture (until I delete that project). For housekeeping purposes, do I have to delete TWICE for a single file?
    Any other suggestions for my scenario?
    Thanks!

    Thanks everyone.
    I need one more clarifications - regarding how Aperture stores/index pictures.
    When I "import from iPhoto Library" in Aperture, I selected save pictures to myusername/Pictures/ folder. Now whenever I deleted a project (or an image) within Aperture, and clicked on "Aperture -> Empty Aperture Trash". However, if I open Finder, I will still see the folders (and files) of the images.
    Do I have  duplication of my photos? Does it imply I can delete the folder "Pictures" in Finder?

  • Aperture, good cataloger for Photoshop,but is there more?

    Hi,
    I am trying to maximize the benefits of Aperture, but there is still confusion. Aperture obviously is great at storing, cataloging, comparing, retrieving and opening images. The books and web tools are convenient and work quite well also. My problem is that I still have to go to photoshop for extrapolating my images to a larger size, resolution, then while there, I use Noise Ninja and Photokit Sharpener since it is convenient and the results are good. If I could at least extrapolate my image in Aperture for sharpening, I don't think I would need to go to Photoshop and that would be the ideal way to maximize Aperture.
    My question is, why use Aperture for these things at all? I don't mean to sound negative. What Aperture does do, it does it quite well. I would just like to have it be the one stop shopping place for my images from camera to printer.
    I can open, catalogue, compare, store, retrieve by metadata, and more in Photoshop already. I want to be told that Aperture is better for some reason than Photoshop, but I am not seeing it. What am I missing? Should I just interpolate in Photoshop, bring it back to Aperture and then print out of Aperture and then store it? It seems like an extra step for little benefit, especially when I can do this on my laptop and my desktop computers which I can not do with Aperture. (Don't really need the laptop for editing, but it would be nice to have)
    I assume most who have Aperture are still using Photoshop for some things, but when does Aperture become indespensible as compared to being just a very nice looking raw image editor/cataloger?

    Aperture's core strength is its integrated workflow, specifically in getting you from "lots of images" to "the images you really care about" quickly and efficiently. It doesn't have all the functionality of Photoshop (no true layers, no masking, many fewer 3rd party plug-ins), but it's great in getting you from 1000 shops to 25 "selects" in 30-60 minutes, when you've done some simple color correction and shadows/highlights to them.
    If you need that, great. If you're a fine art photographer who is used to working with 4x5 or 8x10, maybe not so great, as you will need photoshop for every photo you work on.
    Did you watch the videos on the Aperture site? If nothing those folks rave about meshes with how you work, perhaps it is a bad fit. Aperture isn't trying to be everything for everybody... which, based on the learning curve I went through with Photoshop, is a good thing. A very good thing

  • Using Aperture 2 to Edit Iphoto 08 Library

    I imported my Iphoto 08 library into Aperture 2 as reference images so I can still view my iphoto library on my HD Samsung through my PS3 using Medialink, after I edit the images with Aperture. My question is will there be any problems if I edit / delete / change images in my iphoto using Aperture ? Are there any tricks or things to be careful about ? I don't want to corrupt my library. I am a recent convert to mac (SR Macbook) and iphoto 08 did a great job with importing and initial organizing the mess of photo from all my windows machines. Aperture 2 seems to have better editing and file management of my resultant 25000 + library. I'd like to use both iphoto and Aperture together.

    I import into Iphoto first for a couple of reasons. If I have some videos on my camera, which i usually do, Iphoto will capture them for viewing or editing later. Aperture won't. Second, Time Machine works with Iphoto, not with Aperture. So backups are automatic with Iphoto. With Aperture, you can backup with vaults. I import all my images into Aperture (as referenced images) mostly so I can manage them, IE, organize using metadata, and place into folders by year / month, etc. Also, when you do edit in Aperture, no extra copies are made, like in Iphoto, because, Aperture takes the master from the iphoto library and applies your edits on the fly. You can continually edit and change the image in Aperture and it only will render and make a new image / master when you want to export.
    As far as keeping track of various version of images, after organizing and editing in Aperture, you can place a rating on images, or place them in an album of good stuff (which is just a link to the real image), to then export into a new iphoto event of good stuff, etc
    Alternately, you could import the images into Aperture as masters, and Aperture will make another copy, which means you'll have two of each image taking up twice as much space. Depending how many images and how much hard drive space you have will determine if this works. You could keep either or both Aperture and / or Iphoto libraries on external hard drives. You could import directly into Aperture and only export good stuff into iphoto, if you don't have any videos to manage and you're willing to backup with Aperture vault.
    I setup the external editor in Aperture to use CS3 PS. When you select edit in external editor, Aperture renders a new master which you edit in PS and end up with a new master in Aperture.
    Good luck. I went through several workflows with Aperture trial and almost gave up. In the end though, after I saw what Aperture can do, Iphoto along wasn't good enough and I came up with something that works for me.

Maybe you are looking for