Aperture 2 and green backdrop editing?

Does Aperture 2 allow editing of a green backdrop to change it to various colors or scenes?

No, Paintshop Pro is PC only.
If you're after lower cost editing programs for the Mac, there's Acorn, Pixelator, and Photoshop Elements 9.
They're more expensive than the free GIMP, but the learning curve is a bit less steep. All three are available thru the apps store, but I think you can also get trial versions from their websites direct.

Similar Messages

Aperture 3 and Round trip edits with Photoshop CS4

In Aperture 2, if I selected a Master or Version in my Aperture library and then right-clicked and edited in Photoshop. Made my changes in photoshop and then saved it, the changes would be created in a new version in the Aperture library. When viewing the PSD in Aperture, all my changes would be visible. In a sense it felt like a new "master".
In Aperture 3, if I duplicate those steps, save the edited photo in PS CS4, the resulting image in the Aperture library doesn't show my edited changes UNLESS I press 'M' to display the master. This feels like a bug. In other words, if I toggle back and forth between the original version (which I used to edit and send to PS) and the new Photoshop PSD file, they look identical until I toggle the Master and then I see all my photoshop edits. Very different behavior from Aperture 2--at least for me.
Can anyone explain what I am seeing? Is this an expected behavior? I hope I was clear enough.

i havent pressed M, but I have noticed that it takes aperture a longer time in AP3 to display the edits on an image that has been roundtripped to CS4. If you jump to full screen from browser view it should show the edits immediately, but sometimes when i go back into browser mode it switches back to an unedited view. however after a minute (sometimes more) the changes will be noticable both in full-screen and browser view without any toggling. I think it's just taking longer to update the image..it doesnt necessarily require you to toggle M forever to see the edits.
at least not in my case.

Aperture, Photoshop, and Apple's possible direction for Image Editing

All,
After using Aperture now for several days, and reading many different forum topics, in particular this one which speaks of desired enhancements to Aperture:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=253594&tstart=0
there is one thing that really sticks out on my mind. While all of us photographers have slightly different specifics to our workflow, in general they are very similar. And with respect to Aperture, there is one huge area where most of us seem to be hitting the brick wall: image adjustments, and by extension, image file management. Let me explain what I mean.
I think it is a fair generalization to say that the vast majority of serious digital photographers are using Photoshop (or some other image editing app, but I'm just going to refer to Photoshop for convenience) for post-processing of some kind. In using Aperture, and figuring out how to fit it into workflow, we've got this situation of how to move from organization and image library management to the full gamut of image adjusting functionality (photoshop) and back again to library management. The need to use photoshop then exposes the issue of how files are stored on the filesystem, etc. Stay with me here...
I have found myself thinking, and it is pretty clearly demonstrated in the forum topic mentioned above where folks are making suggestions for improvements to Aperture, that there's this barrel people are over in knowing whether Photoshop and Aperture should live in the workflow together, or whether Aperture should (or is intended to) replace Photoshop in the workflow. This got me to thinking about the fundamental question -- what is the intent, i.e. the vision for Aperture? Is it meant to replace Photoshop, or restated, is Aperture meant to be the app in which all image adjustments are to be made, OR is Aperture meant to just ease workflow, and is it intended not to be the primary app for image adjustments, but rather integrate with the primary image adjustment app?
The reason I bring this up is that the answer to this question makes all the difference in what enhancement requests and what people should expect from Aperture now, and in future versions. If Aperture is the primary place for image adjustment, then its obvious that there are some very significant additions that need to take place to Aperture, and likewise, the issue of putting images on the filesystem becomes much less important. However, if Aperture is a workflow-easer, then such image adjustment improvements are minimally important if at all, and filesystem / Photoshop / PSD file integration becomes paramount.
I know what Aperture does, what features it provides, etc. But I can't help but realize that its not really that clear (or I just don't understand yet) what the full scope of Aperture now and in the future is intended to be, and the forum topics are pretty decent documentation of the fact that the user base at this point is fairly cloudy on that too.
I can't help thinking that in the midst of the Apple pro line of tools, where we have tools that edit: video, audio, DVD creation, text effects, and now digital photography workflow, that there's one glaring hole: static image editing, i.e. a direct Photoshop competitor. I went through the Aperture video demos before Aperture shipped, and watched these photo pros talk incessantly about how "now there's an app that addresses how I work -- Aperture". That's great, but Apple has to know the role that Photoshop plays in present photography workflow -- for those pros too. So I'm sitting here thinking to myself, why would Apple roll out such a product with some clear workflow hurdles to common Photoshop usage.
Ok, here's the punchline: does anyone else here have a sneaking suspicion that Apple is not to far off from releasing their own image editing application that's a direct Photoshop competitor? I mean come on, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Sountrack, and by extension of the CEO to Pixar, Renderman. How can you not have a static image adjustment application entering the scene at some point?
I'm curious what others think. I'm just trying to make sense of how to fit the neat stuff I see in Aperture into a workflow that doesn't play very nicely with Aperture at some points (because I'm using Photoshop).
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

So Apple adds curves adjustments,
we'll need noise reduction, greater sharpening
capability, etc., etc., and then when we have all
those features, surely we'll need masking and select
capability to perform those adjustments selectively,
etc. Where does it end?
Actually that could be a good cut-off point - add a few more/better 'global' adjustments but leave all mask, selection and layer based tasks to external editors. Personally, I used to swear by curves, but haven't really touched them in PS for a year since shooting more RAW and learning how to use the shadow/highlight adjustment properly. Sometimes for overall colour for JPEGs, but that bit can be done just as well in levels.
My workflow isn't particularly typical, but here goes.
Type of photography - stitched panoramas as a professional, plus general snapshots/nature/landscape as hobby. Single user with no network storage.
Currently I use a very organised folder structure in the Finder, along with aliases in DragThing docks for easy access to final stitched files, all with their own unique ID. RAW conversions are done in ACR/PSCS2, or Bibble if I'm in a hurry on the laptop. About 40% of the panos are shot in RAW, 40% are bracketed JPEG and the remaining 20% are 'single' JPEG. The panoramas go through quite a lot of post-processing in PS using a whole series of actions and AppleScripts.
I'm expecting my workflow to look something like this:
1) Download directly into Aperture, possibly with added help from Automator/Applescript when it comes to proper date-based names.
2) Divide download into a new album for each panorama.
2a) If it is a people pano there will be quite a lot of duplicate shots for each panohead position - make a stack for each position and choose picks - this bit will speed things up enormously by itself. Reorder stacks to fit correct order of images going around the scene.
3) Export to TIFF (sometimes JPEG) and stitch using PTMac (sometimes Realviz Stitcher). Oh, and any people who think Aperture is limited, buggy and bad value should go and look at Stitcher - it costs the same, has a far more limited feature set, is on version 5 and by comparison makes Aperture look bug-free.
4) Bring stitched panorama into Photoshop to adjust seams through layers if needed, flatten, final tone adjustments (usually using shadow/highlight), possibly some colour tweaks, sharpen. For bracketed shots I will blend together the three exposures at this point using a custom action - this kind of thing is unlikely ever to make it to Aperture.
5) Bring final print-ready file into Aperture for cataloguing/backup.
5a) If file is too big for Aperture, make a smaller version for cataloguing and store original file in Finder. This gives me a good file for 90% of purposes, with the huge file available with a bit more work.
Too big? I've found that Aperture gets sluggish with files over 18-20,000 pixels wide, and chokes totally somewhere between 25,000 and 32,000 pixels wide - 'image format unsupported'.
To summarise - organise and convert in Aperture, stitch in specialist software, do PS-specific stuff then bring final image back in to join the source images.
Ian

I am using Aperture 3 and I have just exported the edited picture to my desktop but the image which is now on my desktop appears to be unedited. Does anyone know why??

I am using Aperture 3 and I have just exported the edited picture to my desktop but the image which is now on my desktop appears to be unedited. Does anyone know why??

Did you export the master or version? Master will be unedited...
File > Export > Version

I updated the OS and now cannot edit pictures in Aperture because the program continuously jumps back to another picture

its super annoying and I have wasted hours today trying to fix it. Updated Aperture. Restarted and shut down computer. Deleted the /library/preferences as suggested

Sorry, mu iPod wasn't allowing me to type anything else. Not a good day for technology for me! Let me see if I can find that info...
I'm not sure which model. Purchased about 2 years ago. Using OS X Yosemite. Version 3.6 of Aperture. And another person had a similar question about jumping to other pictures on here and that was a suggestion.
When I go into Aperture, the first picture that shows up becomes the picture that it continuously jumps back to, once I edit it. Say I crop the first picture and move to the next one, it'll jump back to that first picture. Scroll 10 pictures down and the first picture will show up even though the picture highlighted is not the picture showing. This is leaving me unable to edit anything and quite frustrated.
Thanks

What is the difference between regular Aperture software and the app? If I were to buy an app or a software as a hobbyist, what should I buy??? Little confused between the two...Please advise.

Dear All,
I am a newbie to MAC world. Being an ex-PC guy, I am used to CDs and traditional software. I want to buy Aperture as my main photo editing software. I have been using DXO and Photoshop in the past. I downloaded Apeture trial version and I am comfortable with it. If I were to buy it, should I buy an app or traditional software CD. I edit approx. 4-5 pictures a day, just for personal use though. Please advise.
Regards,
Gurpreet.

That's a function of your Credit Card not of the Software
But you're right, I was vague. Whether you buy from the App Store or the Disk makes no difference to the functionality of the software. It's the same.
Regards
TD

I need your help with a decision to use iPhoto. I have been a PC user since the mid 1980's and more recently have used ACDSee to manage my photo images and Photoshop to edit them. I have used ProShow Gold to create slideshows. I am comfortable with my

I need your help with a decision to use iPhoto. I have been a PC user since the mid 1980’s and more recently have used ACDSee to manage my photo images and Photoshop to edit them. I have used ProShow Gold to create slideshows. I am comfortable with my own folder and file naming conventions. I currently have over 23,000 images of which around 60% are scans going back 75 years. Since I keep a copy of the originals, the storage requirements for over 46,000 images is huge. 180GB plus.
I now have a Macbook Pro and will add an iMac when the new models arrive. For my photos, I want to stay with Photoshop which also gives me the Bridge. The only obvious reason to use iPhoto is to take advantage of Faces and the link to iMovie to make slideshows. What am I missing and is using iPhoto worth the effort?
If I choose to use iPhoto, I am not certain whether I need to load the originals and the edited versions. I suspect that just the latter is sufficient. If I set PhotoShop as my external editor, I presume that iPhoto will keep track of all changes moving forward. However, over 23,000 images in iPhoto makes me twitchy and they are appear hidden within iPhoto. In the past, I have experienced syncing problems with, and database errors in, large databases. If I break up the images into a number of projects, I loose the value of Faces reaching back over time.
Some guidance and insight would be appreciated. I have a number of Faces questions which I will save for later.

Bridge and Photoshop is a common file-based management system. (Not sure why you'd have used ACDSEE as well as Bridge.) In any event, it's on the way out. You won't be using it in 5 years time.
Up to this the lack of processing power on your computer left no choice but to organise this way. But file based organisation is as sensible as organising a Shoe Warehouse based on the colour of the boxes. It's also ultimately data-destructive.
Modern systems are Database driven. Files are managed, Images imported, virtual versions, lossless processing and unlimited editing are the way forward.
For a Photographer Photoshop is overkill. It's an enormously powerful app, a staple of the Graphic Designers' trade. A Photographer uses maybe 15% to 20% of its capability.
Apps like iPhoto, Lightroom, Aperture are the way forward - for photographers. There's the 20% of Photoshop that shooters actually use, coupled with management and lossless processing. Pop over to the Aperture or Lightroom forums (on the Adobe site) and one comment shows up over and over again... "Since I started using Aperture/ Lightroom I hardly ever use Photoshop any more..." and if there is a job that these apps can do, then the (much) cheaper Elements will do it.
The change is not easy though, especially if you have a long-standing and well thought out filing system of your own. The first thing I would strongly advise is that you experiment before making any decisions. So I would create a Library, import 300 or 400 shots and play. You might as well do this in iPhoto to begin with - though if you’re a serious hobbyist or a Pro then you'll find yourself looking further afield pretty soon. iPhoto is good for the family snapper, taking shots at birthdays and sharing them with friends and family.
Next: If you're going to successfully use these apps you need to make a leap: Your files are not your Photos.
The illustration I use is as follows: In my iTunes Library I have a file called 'Let_it_Be_The_Beatles.mp3'. So what is that, exactly? It's not the song. The Beatles never wrote an mp3. They wrote a tune and lyrics. They recorded it and a copy of that recording is stored in the mp3 file. So the file is just a container for the recording. That container is designed in a specific way attuned to the characteristics and requirements of the data. Hence, mp3.
Similarly, that Jpeg is not your photo, it's a container designed to hold that kind of data. iPhoto is all about the data and not about the container. So, regardless of where you choose to store the file, iPhoto will manage the photo, edit the photo, add metadata to the Photo but never touch the file. If you choose to export - unless you specifically choose to export the original - iPhoto will export the Photo into a new container - a new file containing the photo.
When you process an image in iPhoto the file is never touched, instead your decisions are recorded in the database. When you view the image then the Master is presented with these decisions applied to it. That's why it's lossless. You can also have multiple versions and waste no disk space because they are all just listings in the database.
These apps replace the Finder (File Browser) for managing your Photos. They become the Go-To app for anything to do with your photos. They replace Bridge too as they become a front-end for Photoshop.
So, want to use a photo for something - Export it. Choose the format, size and quality you want and there it is. If you're emailing, uploading to websites then these apps have a "good enough for most things" version called the Preview - this will be missing some metadata.
So it's a big change from a file-based to Photo-based management, from editing files to processing Photos and it's worth thinking it through before you decide.

HT4259 I have been trying for hours to extend my Extreme Gen 5 network with an Express Gen 2. But no matter what I do or try, it doesn't work. What does happen is my internet gets block somehow when the Express looks like it's set up and 'green' - no in

I have been trying for hours to extend my Extreme Gen 5 network with an Express Gen 2. But no matter what I do or try, it doesn't work. What does happen is my internet gets blocked somehow when the Express is online and looks like it's set up perfect and 'green' - but no internet connection for anything even though the Extreme is green and the modem is good. Once I disconnect the Express, everything is good again.
I've tried LAN, WAN, though a switch, direct connect, Extreme set to Extend the network, the Express set to be an extension. Most of the time I get an error trying to update the Express. But when it seems to be set up perfect, the entire house can't get to the internet. Just when it looks right, it is so wrong.
If anyone can give me exact steps (e.g., "...from the Base Station menu, select the Restore Default Setting option" vice "...just restore the defaults..."), I would greatly appreciate it. I'm left to the conclusion that the Express is faulty. I've been using Airport Utility 6.2 from Mountain Lion on one computer and Airport Utility 5.6.1 from Snow Leopard on another computer (the latter give more control while the former just want you to 'forget' the Express).

I finally got it working. I was trying to set it up ethernet. My biggest mistake was when the new Express came on, I did not select 'Continue' - I went straight to manual thinking that I would get the most setup options in manual mode. So everything I initially tried always resulted in 'wireless'. Even when I would update or restore default settings, the Express would not completely restart. Or sometimes I would get an error. So most of the time I had to unplug it. So when it came back up, none of my changes were retained. But there were a lot of times when everything was green and appeared to be fine. But anytime the ethernet cable was plugged in, no more internet.
So here's the weird part. When I finally tried 'continue' (vice manual), I would get 4 options. One would be 'ethernet' extended. So I would select it, it gave me green lights, all looked good, and still the same problem. This is when I got frustrated. I thought I had exhausted all possible combinations.
But somehow when trying continue again after another restore, I only got 3 options. One was the same ethernet extended option (can't remember what the missing 4th one was). And this time it worked - it gave me the big green circle with the checkmark saying it was successful. I don't know what I did different, but I know now that it won't work if 4 options come up to choose from. It will work if only 3 options come up. And success if only verified by the big checkmark. Had anyone anywhere said the checkmark declaring success is validation, then maybe I wouldn't have gone down so many rabbit holes thinking it should have been successful.
As for which Airport Utility I prefer, 6.2 looks nice, but it would just ignore the Express and would want me to 'forget' it and would not let me edit it. Airport Utility 5.6.1 was the one that I ended up using the most and finally had success with. It still strikes me as odd that there is no manually way to pick ethernet, it can only be choosen following a 'restore defaults', and only from the 3-option list (the 4-option list had the same ethernet choice, but it no worky).
Thanks for the response. I really do appreciate it.
Aiport Extreme Gen5 - internet access and router
Airport Express Gen2 - connected via ethernet, extending my wireless
- configured while connect directly to the Extreme, but now on a switch (16-port hub)
Using Airport 5.6.1
1) Restore Defaults from Base Station menu
2) Following restart, Select Continue
3) Of the 3 option presented, select 'ethernet.... extend network...'
- if 4 options are present, may not work
4) Wait for the green circle with the big white checkmark.
5) Connected Express to the switch where a cable went to other end of house - works.
Dead-zone went from 2mbps to 24mbps.
I probably spent 4 hours chasing my tail in anger. The correct way took about 5 minutes total.
Thanks again.

Camera video preview - Random crashes and green screens

Hello everyone,
I am currently working on a Windows Phone 8.1 app and I need to preview video from the phone's back camera. For quite some time I've been struggling with random crashes and green screens. When these green screens appear, all camera apps become affected and
the device needs to be restarted. Occasionally the phone freezes and only recovers after battery removal. I test the app on my Lumia 620.
After some web search, I found references to the same problem by many users/developers of different apps. I'm really frustrated as I've tried many possible solutions with no avail.
Here is part of my code:
//in App.xaml.cs:
MediaCaptureInitializationSettings settings;
public static MediaCapture captureMgr;
public static bool UnableToInitializeCamera = false;
public async Task InitializeVideoCapture()
DeviceInformation backWebcam = await GetCameraDeviceInfoAsync(Windows.Devices.Enumeration.Panel.Back);
if(captureMgr!=null) captureMgr.Dispose();
captureMgr = new MediaCapture();
settings = new MediaCaptureInitializationSettings();
settings.StreamingCaptureMode = StreamingCaptureMode.Video;
settings.PhotoCaptureSource = PhotoCaptureSource.VideoPreview;
settings.AudioDeviceId = "";
if (backWebcam != null)
settings.VideoDeviceId = backWebcam.Id;
else
var _messageDialog = new MessageDialog("Back panel camera not found");
_messageDialog.Commands.Add(new UICommand("OK"));
_messageDialog.ShowAsync();
try
await captureMgr.InitializeAsync(settings);
captureMgr.SetPreviewRotation(VideoRotation.Clockwise90Degrees);
UnableToInitializeCamera = false;
catch
UnableToInitializeCamera = true;
Debug.WriteLine("HANDLED EXCEPTION: camera could not be initialized");
var _messageDialog = new MessageDialog("Unable to initialize camera");
_messageDialog.Commands.Add(new UICommand("OK"));
_messageDialog.ShowAsync();
protected override async void OnLaunched(LaunchActivatedEventArgs e)
//.... other app initialization code
await InitializeVideoCapture();
Window.Current.Activate();
private async void OnResuming(object sender, object e)
AppIsResuming = true;
FinishedCameraInitialize = false;
await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromSeconds(0.5));//this makes crashes less frequent
await InitializeVideoCapture();
FinishedCameraInitialize = true;
if(WasPreviewingCamera)
WasPreviewingCamera = false; //the following line allows time for SetupPage._captureElement to be assigned before video preview starts while (!SetupPage.CaptureElementSourceAssigned) await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(1));
SetupPage.CaptureElementSourceAssigned = false;
try
Debug.WriteLine("trying to restart video preview");
await captureMgr.StartPreviewAsync();
SetupPage.PreviewingCamera = true;
catch
Debug.WriteLine("HANDLED EXCEPTION: unable to start previewing");
SetupPage.PreviewingCamera = false;
GC.Collect();
AppIsResuming = false;
private async void OnSuspending(object sender, SuspendingEventArgs e)
var deferral = e.SuspendingOperation.GetDeferral();
while (AppIsResuming) await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(1));//prevents crash when app is suspended right after it is resumed
await CleanupCaptureResources();
TimeOfLastSuspend = DateTime.Now;
FinishedCameraInitialize = false;
GC.Collect();
deferral.Complete();
public async Task CleanupCaptureResources()
if (SetupPage.PreviewingCamera)
await captureMgr.StopPreviewAsync();
WasPreviewingCamera = true;
SetupPage.PreviewingCamera = false;
else WasPreviewingCamera = false;
if (captureMgr != null) captureMgr.Dispose();
//in SetupPage.xaml.cs
void OnSuspending(object sender, Windows.ApplicationModel.SuspendingEventArgs e)
var deferral = e.SuspendingOperation.GetDeferral();
_captureElement.Source = null;
CaptureElementSourceAssigned = false;
GC.Collect();
deferral.Complete();
private async void OnResuming(object sender, object e)
ProgressRing2.Visibility = Visibility.Visible;
ProgressRing2.IsActive = true;
while (!App.FinishedCameraInitialize) await Task.Delay(TimeSpan.FromMilliseconds(1));
App.FinishedCameraInitialize = false;
captureElement.Source = App.captureMgr;
CaptureElementSourceAssigned = true;
GC.Collect();
ProgressRing2.Visibility = Visibility.Collapsed;
ProgressRing2.IsActive = false;
Any help towards a solution will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you

I will also advice that you start by following the
Windows Store app sample.
Is this a Windows Phone app?
The crash/green screen only manifests itself when I suspend my app and switch to the default camera app (could be any other camera app perhaps). It happens roughly 1 out of 8 times. That's why I posted the suspension and resuming handlers, which I wrote
according to the msdn instructions.
I found
this page with a sample that demonstrates the MediaCapture API for Windows Phone. Some developers have reported problems similar as mine. Has Microsoft dealt with this issue?
I've spent quite a few weeks trying to investigate this problem, without actually knowing if it is my code that needs to be debugged. That's why I'm asking if other developers are facing similar problems.
Thank you
Edit: It seems that the crash/green screen can appear when suspending/switching to any app (regardless if it uses the camera or not). Also, all works fine when the app is running on the debugger.

How do I remove Aperture trial and go back to iPhoto (be kind, I'm new).

How do I remove the Aperture trial and go back to iPhoto. For my usage (just iPhone pics/movies) iPhoto is okay for me, but now I cannot figure out how to remove Aperture, when I drag to Trash I get a warning that Aperture is a system file.
Please help, but also, please go slow if you can help, I am new to my Mac.

Should be pretty easy as follows:
1 - Make sure you have copies of any pictures you want that are inside Aperture somewhere on your computer.
2 - Quit Aperture > Remove any Aperture icon from dock > drag the Aperture program (lens icon) from Applications folder to the Trash > proceed through any warning dialog (including entering password as required) to complete the process.
Note - new security features in OS X Lion may present those warning dialogs to prevent accidental deletion of Apple programs.
3 - Hold down the 'Option' key and use the 'Go' menu in menu bar and select the 'Library' option.
4 - In the Library folder, open the 'Application Support' folder and delete any Aperture folder found.
5 - While still in the Library folder, open the 'Preferences' folder and delete both the 'com.apple.Aperture.plist' and 'com.apple.Aperture.plist.lockfile' file.
6 - While still in the Library folder, open the 'Caches' folder and delete the 'com.apple.Aperture' folder.
7 - Go the your 'Pictures' folder and drag the 'Aperture Library' (may be named Aperture Trial Library or similar) to the Trash to delete it as well.
8 - Empty the Finder Trash to remove Aperture.
Note - there are some files and Aperture folders in the '/Library' folder (which is in the root of your system drive), but you don't really need to remove those. Since you are a beginner, it is probably better not to for now.
That should do it.
Additional edit: There are two Library folders I am referring to. The first is the one in your user account 'Home' folder which is the one you are going to by using the 'Go' menu. This is the one you are deleting files from in the steps listed. The second Library folder is the one in the root of your system drive and is not typically a location for beginners to work with (thus the final note above). Hope that is clear enough.
Message was edited by: CorkyO2 to add clarity concerning the 'Library' folder.

Aperture 2 and 3 and Snow Leopard

My system with Aperture 2 was perfect.
Then I believe that Snow Leopard killed Aperture 2.
When I first installed Snow Leopard my machine felt like new again but slowly and slowly over the last few months the whole system seems to feel less and less snappy.
I don't use many video-intensive applications - my main one is Aperture 2, so this is where I find my main cause for concern.
Painfully slow adjustments with lagging, beach-balling, CPU-hogging, and RAM theft.
The main culprits seem to be Highlights/Shadows, Straighten, Crop, and Retouching… although my open mind says that could simply be because they form the latter part of my tweaking process.
There seems to be a thumbnail generation issue. Every adjustment that is made generates a new thumbnail - as you work through your tweaks that process seems to get backed up and slow everything down.
There seems to also be a video issue. Tweaking horizontal photos in full screen causes twice as much lag as a vertical image. Why? Take a look - it's obvious - in full screen edit a vertical image is about half the size of a horizontal one.
There seems to be a memory issue. Aperture seems to use a large amount of processor and RAM and sometimes doesn't let go of it or it gets caught in some kind of a loop. I've no idea what I'm talking about here. All I know is when I look at Activity Monitor the numbers are going through the roof and I can barely concentrate on them because of the noise from my fans.
There have been various and quite diverse suggestions on this and other forums as to what the underlying problem is and I have done my best to look into those and see what can help.
I have an early-2008 MBP 4,1 - 2.6 Intel Core 2 Duo - 4GB (factory-fitted) RAM - GeForce 8600M (512MB) GT.
I have done everything possible: all software totally up-to-date, re-installed combo updates, rebuilt Aperture libraries, run consistency checks, fresh Aperture install, fresh Snow Leopard install, repaired permissions, booted in 32bit, booted in 64bit, run hardware tests, deleted plists, cleared caches, downloaded and run applications like Onyx and Snow Leopard Cache Cleaner (amongst others) to ensure everything is in ship-shape along with various test applications to gauge if components like my hard drive are dying.
I keep my system clean and tidy. I have now stripped out bloat. I even took out iPhoto in case its 'iLife' browser link to Aperture was an issue. I have 85GB free on a 200GB. All components are original as factory-fitted by Apple.
Everything that any seemingly intelligent person on any decent forum has suggested has been done - in particular I thank the many users here on the Apple forum for all their information sharing… I try to read them all.
From what I see on the forums, I am not alone.
Nothing has fixed this problem.
I (and no doubt many others) have fed this information back to Apple.
Aperture 2 and/or Snow Leopard has a problem that has not been fixed.
Aperture 3 got released and I trialled it and swiftly uninstalled it because the exact same problems are there - even with one single photo in it.
My concern is that Apple will not fix the cause of the problem which seems to lie outside of Aperture.
If Apple concentrate on making Aperture 3 work better inside a possibly shaky Snow Leopard then I will be very disappointed.
I'm not forking out for a new version of software just because Apple broke my current software. Don't get me wrong - I do actually WANT to buy Aperture 3 because it has functional improvements and advancements that I would love to be using providing it works properly - and for me (and it appears for 'quite a few' others as well) it just simply doesn't… and neither does Aperture 2 any more.
I am no technical expert (as you've probably noted already) but a MAJOR bug seems to lie in the relationship between Snow Leopard, graphics cards, and the way it handles memory - and so in turn graphically-intensive applications like Aperture are high-lighting these problems more than others.
I am sure there are people without these problems. Perhaps these problems relate to specific hardware configurations. My configuration is Apple standard. I really shouldn't have these problems.
Until Apple fix this major bug I cannot remotely consider Aperture 3.
Until Apple fix this major bug I could never buy Apple again.
Up until Snow Leopard you had a VERY happy camper. I had a perfect machine and I was shouting Mac from the rooftops to anyone that would listen.
And then it seems Snow Leopard broke my machine.
What a shame.
I really want to use Apple, I actually really like Snow Leopard, I really want to use Aperture, I really want to carry on telling people how wonderful the Apple Mac experience is (or was...) but Apple are currently making it very difficult for me to continue doing so.
Please fix Snow Leopard.
This will hopefully fix Aperture 2 and Aperture 3.
Unless anyone else has a fix?
Sincere apologies to all for banging on for so long !!

Thanks for your input setwart.
When I make adjustments I do want Aperture to provide me with a new version so that I can see the original image and also that I have a version which I have already adjusted. I've previously tried changing that preference before with no improvement in performance unfortunately, but it's not really what I was referring to.
Versions, thumbnails and previews were very confusing terms to me for a while… actually, in some ways, they still are but my understanding is 'a little' better now.
That said, I probably used the wrong term.
What I meant was that every time you make an adjustment Aperture seems to produce a 'record' or 'snap-shot' of your image including that latest adjustment. In so doing you have an entire history of each adjustment you have made. In my head I picture this like a movie film-strip with each frame differing slightly. You increase your saturation by a single point? Another snap-shot. Fancy another single point on your saturation? Another snap-shot… and so on.
It is typical that I will make a bare minimum of 20 adjustments on each image, and that's before even thinking about straightening, cropping, and retouching… and then maybe I'll go back and tweak everything again !!
Somehow, my system is having difficulty in keeping up to speed with all of those snap-shots of individual adjustments. Certain adjustments will drastically slow things down more than others, and then I get to play with the beach-balls.
But - it used to handle these things just fine and that's what I'm trying to get back to.
Thanks again for getting involved.

Aperture 3 and Photoshop workflow

I have recently been opening a lot of my RAW files in Photoshop (via external editor). However when I do so Aperture comes becomes quite sluggish when viewing the newly saved 256MB PSD with the context of Aperture.
I am just wondering what people use as a general workflow when combining the two applications...specifically to get around the speed issue.
Flatten the PSD that is linked to Aperture, and save a copy of the layered PSD elsewhere?
Export from Aperture and import into PSD manually?

Ernie: I should have been -- and need to be -- clearer. Thanks for sticking with this.
there is no "send as is" command. No image can be SENT to the external editor except a New Version created as either PSD or TIFF file, which will be flattened.
I realize there is no "send as is" command. The commands in question are (each from the context menu):
. "Edit with +{Name of External Editor}+, and
. "Edit with Plug-in"
The treatment of the image files for each of these commands is, afaict, the same. In an effort to indicate either of the two commands, I confusingly shortened it to "send as is".
I just tested this. I believe that there has been an important change since Ap3.0. The situation is improved, but still murky.
Here is what currently happens:
Adjust an image.
Send it to an external editor (a new Master is created, stacked with your original Master, and sent out)
Edit it
Save it
It comes back as a (sometimes layered) file. So far so good.
If you want to open that file again in the same plug-in, you can, and you can access all your layers.
But if you make adjustments to that file, and then send it using the exact same command as you sent it before, instead of (as before) creating a new Master with your adjustments baked-in, Aperture sends out +the current Master with NONE of your subsequent adjustments+.
You can edit this Master. When you save your changes, the new (now third Master) replaces the second Master, and your adjustments are applied to it.
The first time you use one of the external edit commands on an image, a new Master is created and all your adjustments are saved (by being baked into the image format file created).
The second time you use the +exact same command+, the Master is sent out for editing without your adjustments, and the edited Master ends up replacing the Master you sent out. +_That Master is, afaict, lost -- unrecoverable -- gone forever._+
That the same command does two different things is totally wrong. That it is possible to overwrite one of your Aperture Masters, is also wrong.
In practice, the commands to edit with an external editor, when applied to +an image+ which has already been edited with an external editor, is equal to "Edit Master". This might end up being slick, but currently it is very un-Aperturish.
Or -- and this is not unlikely -- there's something I'm missing.
Two additional anomalies I noticed when testing this today:
. After an image has been edited with an external editor, the Aperture command "New Version from Master" is unavailable for that image. This makes no sense. You can create a new Version from the Master by duplicating the Version and "Reset all Adjustments".
. Aperture makes no distinction which plug-in or external editor has been used. A file edited in PS can be then edited with Nik tools. The Master will the image and file format of whatever was the last external editor used. (IOW, invoking a second plug-in or external editor does not force Aperture to create and stack a new Master. It just creates a new Master and disappears the old one.)
I want to keep this as clear as our terms allow. Your statement:
No image can be SENT to the external editor except a New Version created as either PSD or TIFF file, which will be flattened.
is (sorry) doubly wrong. When you +"do a repeat open in Photoshop"+ you are in fact not creating a new Version. So in that case it CAN be sent NOT as a new Version. And the new file which is created by Aperture when it does create a new file prior to sending it out is not a Version -- It's a Master which is stacked with the original Master. (Versions are text files. Masters are image format files.)

How can I remove red and green lines from a footage?

I cannot remove red and green lines without removing the title graphics that I have in my footage. How can I solve the problem and keep the graphic there?

@Ann Benns
I will try to do that. Thank you!
@Bill Hunt
Well, the raw footage is an avi filmed with a handycam. This error occurred
the next day after I finished the editing in Adobe Premiere cs5. It might
be something wrong with the title graphics that I use, but still if there's
a solution I would like to find it out as this error occurred before.
Cristina

Aperture 2 and Lightroom 2

Hello everyone.
I know this question has been asked before, and I have read some previous threads about these two products. However, I was hoping to have a few things clarified for me that I was not to sure about.
I just recently started to really become involved with Digital Photograph. Purchased my first SLR (Nikon D80) and love it. I really found a hobby I enjoy.
With all the pictures I am taking and will be taking, I obviously need to find post processing software that suits my needs. Here is where Aperture 2 and Lightroom (and to a degree, CS3) come into play.
Let me ask some obvious questions first.
1.) Lightroom 2 is a organizing piece as well as editing software piece correct? lets you get into the photo, make adjustments. Pretty good editing from what I can tell.
Can it be said that LR2 and A2 do the same thing, just differently? A2 lets you organize your photos and edit them as well. They just do it differently correct? For example, A2 lets you edit in full mode.
I guess that is one of my main questions.
2.) Fundamentally, what are the main differences between L2 and A2?
Down the road, I am planning on using CS3 (or CS4) to take advantage of layers and do the really cool fun stuff. But that is down the road when I am more experienced.
I downloaded both LR2 and A2 and installed the trials and plan to use them over the next 30 days to 'test them out.'
A2 seems to 'plugin' better to the iMac, which I expected.
With LR2, from what I can see, I could use LR2 instead of iPhoto for my organizing/cataloging, and if I wanted to move photos from LR2 to iPhoto (to make books, calenders, etc. etc.), I would need to export it out of LR2 and import it into iphoto. That correct? Where as Aperture 'co-exists' easier with iPhoto?
Is there really anything that stands out and separates the two?
The other thing I need to consider is when I bring in CS3 down the road. What is the easier way to integrate everything.
Appreciate the help.
Cheers,
Jason

Hi,
I migrated to the iMac from PC around a month ago and was evaluating my photo options both before and after the migration. The difference with me is, I guess, that I haven't previously been much of a user or any version of Photoshop, so had no Adobe-centric preconceptions to colour my own evaluation of Lightroom and Aperture.
I guess I qualify as an enthusiastic amateur who finally migrated from film to digital 5 years ago, after 25 years of film. On the PC, my photo management comprised folders on the hard disk plus Picasa to provide some basic abstraction layer and album facility. Editing was very basic and relied on The Gimp if no addressed by Picaca's built-in adjustments. Then I started taking photos in RAW rather than jpeg, and it all went to custard as they say.
Picasa didn't cut it any more, RAW opened up a lot more options and my collection was becoming unmanageable. Tried ViewNX - limited manageability. Tried Lightroom 2 on the PC - wow, this is more like it. Didn't like ACDSee, iview. Migrated to Mac, and started comparing all over again.
Lightroom - given my previous try-out I was expecting Good Things, so left the start of this trial until after using Aperture for 2 weeks. Suddenly Lightroom felt clunky - very modal and constraining.
Aperture - didn't really know what to expect. Imported all of my photos as referenced and found my folder structure replicated by albums. Kind of disconcerting initially as I couldn't work out where the Masters were, nor the true behaviour of albums, projects and folders in Aperture. Then it clicked - great version control and cataloguing, non-destructive edits etc etc, logical collections of photos. It worked more like my thought processes, rather than my thought processes having to adjust to how the software worked.
For my uses, Lightroom's closer integration with Photoshop is a bit of a non-event as I don't chop up photos - just develop them. Anyhow, Photoshop Elements is there if I REALLY need it (so far not at all after a month).
I can see how previous experience with Photoshop or Lightroom would create a preference for continuing with Lightroom. For me, there's no business reason, emotional attachment or previous experience to consider, so Aperture won. Lightroom was uninstalled after 2 weeks.
Regards,
Calx
PS - I think from an interface design perspective, Aperture is an amazing piece of software, leaving aside other comparison aspects.
Message was edited by: CalxOddity

Aperture - Importing iphoto events - original & edited copies

Sorry if this has been asked before!
I'm going through each event in iphoto tossing out the bad photos and editing the good ones. Once I've finished with each event I'm trying to move them into Aperture one by one and then deleting the event from iphoto.
I'm doing this by going to File - Import - Show iphoto browser and importing the event as a new project. Problem is that every time I look at my new project I have two copies, the iphoto original and iphoto edited.
Obviously I only want one copy of each photo (the edited version). I therefore have several questions...
1) If I delete the iphoto original version what are the consequences?
2) I wish the library to use a 'managed' system rather than a referenced system. Will this still happen if I move the events one by one (it doesn't give me as many options as if I were to move the entire library, which I'm not ready to do yet)
3) The only way I've found to stop two copies importing is by copying the events from iphoto to the desktop and then importing them to Aperture - does this cause degradation of the photo?
Thanks in advance,
Janna

Janna,
the most efficient option to move from iPhoto to Aperture is indeed to import the whole iPhoto Library into Aperture at once: This way you will preserve most of the work you invested in setting up your iPhoto Library (albums, books, slideshows, keywords) and can avoid to import duplicates for many of your images, without having to decide if you want to keep the original or the edited version.
One of the big advantages of Aperture is the lossless workflow: When you edit an image the original master will remain as it is, and Aperture will only store the steps necessary to render the final version of the image - it does not actually create the edited image until it is needed on export. So you can have many different edited versions of the same image without needing much extra space. When you import your complete iPhoto lIbrary at once (after weeding it out), then Aperture will try to import your iPhoto originals and the edited versions exactly like this, as proper master image - version pairs, so that you keep your iPhoto edits, but can always revert to the original master, in a space saving fashion.
The way you are importing now forces you to decide if you rather want the edited version or the original master, and if you decide that you want both, then you will need twice as much storage space.
1) If I delete the iphoto original version what are the consequences?
You will never be able to revert to the original if you find that you made a mistake when editing your images; or when better algorithms/ raw processing become available. If you only want to keep one of the images I'd strongly suggest to keep the original and not the edited version.
2) I wish the library to use a 'managed' system rather than a referenced system. Will this still happen if I move the events one by one (it doesn't give me as many options as if I were to move the entire library, which I'm not ready to do yet)
No proble, even if you import initially als managed master files, you can always relocate the managed images to a folder of your choosing afterwards and thus turn your library into a referenced library.
3) The only way I've found to stop two copies importing is by copying the events from iphoto to the desktop and then importing them to Aperture - does this cause degradation of the photo?
That will depend on your export settings. If you export the original you will not loose any quality on export, but exporting the edited versions will depend on the quality setting for the versions.
If you import your whole iPhoto library at once, Aperture will mirror the structure of your iPhoto Library; iPhoto events will be mapped to projects, and you will keep your albums, books, etc.
All your work you are doing now to prepare for your transit you could do as easily in Aperture and the problems you asked about could be avoided.
Good Luck and welcome to Aperture!
Regards
Léonie

Aperture 2 and green backdrop editing?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for