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.)

Similar Messages

  • Newbie asks: Aperture and PhotoShop - why have both??

    Though this is more of a general question regarding photo editing, I'll post it here as this seems to be where most of the shutterbugs hang.
    I just bought my wife a Nikon D200 for Mother's Day. Though she's definitely not an expert photographer (she barely knows how to use her current Nikon N60 film camera), she seems to have a real knack for taking beatiful shots of the kids, vacation vistas, etc.. I bought the D200 not because I felt she needed all of it's features, but more because I wanted something that was built like a tank, and would hold up to years of use in a variety of outdoor/indoor environments. Though very expensive, I thought the D200 was worth it if it lasts longer than the more affordable offerings. ..I mention all this only to avoid being criticized for "over-buying".
    Anyway, what is the ONE essential picture editing software package that we should buy to take advantage of this wonderful camera?? I say one, because I don't think my wife will be too keen on moving images through three or four different applications to make fairly minor adjustments. ...She may take 30 pics/month, so were not talking huge project sizes. ..Perhaps a starting point would be if someone could briefly explain the differences between Aperture and Photoshop and why someone would have both. ..And if forced to pick just one of them, which would you chose? The iPhoto that came with our new iMac is outrageously cool! ..But it offers very limited adjustment tools.
    IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram
    IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram

    I'll relate how I use both Aperture and Photoshop and why I do what I do so you can come to your own conclusions. I have been using Aperture since it first came out and Photoshop for 10 years.
    Though Aperture was originally thought to be a Photoshop competitor (back when it was first released), it is not. Rather, it is a very good front-end to Photoshop. I use Aperture to read in my digital photos from my Nikon camera so I can easily go through them and pick out the ones I want. I should note that generally when I go out and do a "shoot", it is not uncommon for me to run through 200 or more pictures. So I have a significant sorting and selecting process when I get home to my computer. Photoshop is NOT good at this, that is why Adobe added Bridge a couple of years ago. Aperture is more of a competitor to Bridge (though Bridge comes free with Photoshop). I should note that though I like Bridge, Aperture has it beat hands down when it comes to letting me review my photos.
    As I have learned to use Aperture, it has taken over many of the front-end adjustments I used to make in Bridge and Photoshop. Things like adjusting the saturation, brightness, contrast, levels, cropping, leveling and sharpening were what I formerly did with my Adobe products, but now instead very easily do with Aperture. I prefer doing these adjustment in Aperture since they are non-destructive to my original file, and the adjustments are kept in a XML sidecar file so the adjusted image file is very small and saves me lots of disk space.
    If I like what I see in Aperture, then I can easily publish (books or web) or print from there. Aperture has some great web generation features in it. But, these features are not flexible with their format styles and are geared for use by professional photographers who want to show their work to their clients. But still, it is fun to easily create a web site. And if you have a .MAC account, there is a very nice fit between the two productions. (Note: you can also get this same functionality with more page creation flexibility with Apple's iWeb and to a certain degree with iPhoto).
    Aperture has also helped me organize my photo library so that I can easily find that one photo, or set of photos, I want, when I want them.
    So, if I'm using Aperture more-and-more, what am I using Photoshop for? As good as Aperture is, and it is getting better, it is no competitor for what Photoshop does best. I wouldn't think of using anything but Photoshop when I need to do "serious" work on my photos. Image repair and restoration, patching, touchups, very fine adjustments, special effects, application of filters, noise reduction, to name a few things, are (to me) Photoshop only. Also, for now, Photoshop has a much better zoom and image inspection feature than does Aperture. Though the loop in Aperture is useful, I find it to be a bit more klunky than the zoom feature in Photoshop.
    Both programs are pricey, though Apple has made Aperture a lot more attractive with the recent price reduction from $499 to $299.
    And, I agree. Elements is also an excellent choice, though I'm not sure if it supports RAW files the same way Photoshop does. I'm sure the Adobe site will have that information.
    Good luck, and congratulations on the new D200. Your wife will really like it.
    Jeff Weinberg

  • Leopard running Aperture and Photoshop really slow

    I just got Leopard and my Aperture and Photoshop are running slow and crashing, also when I run Pro Tools it won't boot up all the time. This is really frustrating. I keep loosing files images. This is running like Bill Gates made it.

    Have you checked what it going on, when Aperture becomes sluggish?
    I'd recommend to launch some diagnostic tools, if you have not already done so:
    Aperture's own "Activity Viewer": From the main menu bar: Window > Show Activity
    This will tell you, how Aperture is spending its time : rendering, previews, scanning for faces or places, raw processing. Inparticulur, check, if Aperture is hanging while processing one particular image or video over and over again.
    The Console window: Launch it from the Utilities folder in the Applications folder. Look, if you see error messages or warnings in this window, when Aperture starts to hang.
    The Activity Monitor: Launch it from the Utilities folder in the Applications folder. This window will tell you, which processes are using the cpu, the RAM, and doing page outs to the disk. You can see, if other processing are competing with Aperture and slowing it down, orif Aperture is starved for memory.
    How large are images? Do you have very large raw files or scans, or are your photos moderately sized?
    Is your library on the internal drive or an external drive?
    Do you see this slowness only with your main Aperture library, or also, if you create a new, small library with a few test images?
    Regards
    Léonie

  • Does aperture and photoshop migrate?

    When I migrate everything from my old 24" mac to my new 27" mac, will it migrate aperture and photoshop?

    They should, but if the new Mac is running Lion, any PPC apps you may have running under Rosetta now will not work on Lion.
    Check in System Profiler to see if you have any apps marked as PPC. There may be more than you realise.
    Edit:
    And do be sure to use Setup Assistant on first boot - not Migration Assistant later as that's fraught with permissions problems.
    Message was edited by: noondaywitch

  • Aperture and ACR workflow

    For those who find Aperture's Camera RAW conversion too primitive, the program can be used in a simple workflow that maximizes your productivity while insuring maximum quality conversion.
    1- IMPORT your RAW images into Aperture and add keywords and other tags.
    Aperture brings in the RAW image UNALTERED.
    2- COMPARE AND SORT your images using the EXCELLENT TOOLS in Aperture.
    You can also freely experiment with versions to test ideas for everything from exposure to B&W conversions.
    3- SELECT YOUR BEST IMAGES inside Aperture.
    Most of us working in the professional world are really only interested in using the top 1% or less of a typical shoot. It is only those that need to be converted as output for Giclee printing or as digital masters for retouching and CMYK printing.
    4- EXPORT THOSE BEST IMAGES using the export "DIGITAL MASTERS..." command.
    Many of us find Aperture's RAW conversion to be excellent but for those who don't, you can choose at this point all your selected images, which by now should be a very short list, and export them as UNALTERED RAW files to a folder outside of Aperture.
    5- CONVERT those exported camera RAW images using whatever conversion program you want, for many it will be ACR, and do any extra retouching in Photoshop.
    And for those worried about Aperture's filing system, you can store these exported "Best Images" exactly like you used to do, in old fashioned folders on your hard disk, in whatever categories make sense to you.
    For those of us producing professional work on always shorter deadlines, Aperture is an outstanding tool that makes our job much easier.
      Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    Tom, first allow me to congratulate you on starting a practical thread. Now that many of us own Aperture, and I'm not saying the issues threads aren't useful, figuring out where it fits in our workflow is a fine idea.
    Here is my (pre-Aperture) workflow, and some ideas for an interim (working with what we have) post-Aperture flow. I'd really appreciate any advice or suggestions.
    Pre: Conversion mostly in ACR/Bridge (occasionally in C1Pro-generally fleshtones). Color Space generaly set in camera as Adobe RGB, same for PS. Preliminary sharpening with PhotoKit, noise reduction if necessary with neat image or noise ninja, adjustments, aspect ratio crops, etc. Save as TIFF/16bit layered if necessary/add "Base" to filename when saving. Reopen in PS for output specific sharpening, save flattened copy. Open in ImagePrint-Print. Library has been on external HDs, backed up to duplicate HDs which are taken off premises. Current library size:700Gigs and growing fast.
    Post: Import into Aperture from Card, also backup RAWs to DVD. As suggested here, do sorts and picks in Aperture. Maybe do some crude adjusting for low res images for client proofs (web or contact sheets-sorry, haven't tried using Aperture with Epson drivers or tried the web posting). Export RAW picks for conversion and editing elsewhere (I have tested and the camera EXIFs are still there in PS (I'm not sure they will be on re-import?). So, now I've got a RAW with an attached .xmp, one or more Tiffs. I can reimport the TIFFs, but can I re-associate them with the Master? Is there any way that I can import the .xmp and associate it with the master? So, I can pick, web, go to printer and archive (although I'll hit a disk space issue-ideas there?)
    I tried to do this without asking for changes in Aperture, but not using Aperture where I felt it was immature. There are already enough discussions about conversion, editing and storage. The interface is promising and I would welcome any shortcuts you can come up with. Meanwhile, I'm going to try with new shoots, and a few existing shoots for experimanetation, but leave my old library intact. Then I'm going to put Aperture's library on an 800Gig external eSATA RAID0 -two disk; and back up to another. Wish me luck.

  • Aperture and Photoshop

    I am trying to get up and running with Aperture. But I am perplexed at how to put photoshop in my workflow and to have aperture keep track of my versions of images that are processed in PS and "saved as" .jpegs, or websized resolutions etc. Also, when I open a RAW file from Aperture in photoshop how do I get the RAW file to open in Camera RAW? Presently, I am not committed to using referenced or managed files. Please give me some guidance on this!

    To expand just slightly: Once you're in PS (if you got there from Aperture by choosing Open with External Editor), you have two paths, and they make a big difference in workflow:
    -- If you Save, your image with its PS edits will show up back in Aperture. (Note that it will be in the Ap Library even if you're using referenced images. You can then Relocate it to your referenced-image file tree if you prefer, but it won't go there automatically. Also, be careful of alpha channels -- search on this forum for details.)
    -- If you use Save As instead, the result will go wherever you indicate, but it won't go into the Aperture Library. Of course you can then Import it into Aperture by hand if you want.
    So if you're trying to keep all your image management inside Aperture, you want to use Save in PS. I'm pretty sure that also means that (after the choice of PSD or TIFF in Aperture's Preferences) you're leaving file-type up to Aperture. This implies that you can't do the combination you mentioned: having Aperture keep track of everything, but saving as JPGs etc from Photoshop. Of course you can export JPGs etc from Aperture, which makes more sense anyway if you're organizing all your work around Aperture.
    If the PS part of your work tends to be elaborate and full of big multilayered files, you might want to keep all that work separate from Aperture by using Save As. There are other options too, like (instead of Open with Exernal Editor) using Export Master or Export Version from Aperture to make a freestanding file you can edit in PS separately.

  • Different colors in Aperture and Photoshop - trying everything

    I'm having problems with color in PS CS2 looking a bit flat after doing "edit with" from Aperture. I shoot raw and do most processing in Aperture 2.0, where I have on-screen proofing turned off right now. I "edit with" PS, which exports to a 16-bit .psd file that opens in PS; I understand I have no control over the embedded color profile, which is always Adobe RGB, I believe.
    On the Photoshop side, I have selected "preserve embedded profiles" and turned on notification of mismatch, just in case. I have selected Adobe RGB 1998 as the RGB color setting in PS. I have Proof Colors turned off. I have also deselected "Desaturate Monitor Colors" in PS Advanced Color Settings.
    In Aperture, the adjusted raw and the managed psd file, sitting side by side, look identical in color. If I compare those two images to the same psd image I just opened in Photoshop, the one in the PS window is less saturated. I have the Aperture and PS windows open on the same Cinema monitor, so it's not a monitor difference.
    I'm no expert in color management, for sure...what else can I try? I’m going crazy!

    I'm no expert in color management
    An expert in colour management engineeri can fail in configuring any two ICC-enabled applications for compatible assumptions. Understanding the architecture is one thing and understanding the current conditions for configuration are another.
    In such situations as this, the best bet is to ask the Apple ColorSync Users List.
    /hh

  • Picture file handling between Aperture and Photoshop

    Hello
    I have transferred several photos via "edit in external editor" from aperture to photoshop.
    In photoshop I made different operations:
    a) just looking (no special manipulations) -> no saving
    b) manipulations on a particular photo -> saving via "save" in PS
    c) combination of different photos -> saving via "save as" in PS
    Meanwhile I have learned, that option C just saves the file in the file system, but does not update the database entry in aperture. I have also found different versions of photos in the file system, which I had just opened in PS (case a). "File system" means in that case, that they are under the folder "masters", when I drill down the Aperture Data File. Case b seems to work OK.
    I have now different questions:
    why are photos, which I have just opened in PS, still in the file system (even when I have deleted them) in Aperture? Seems that those versions are kept. Is'nt that blowing up my database? (case a)
    when I reimport pictures from case c, are they stored a second time in aperture or does the aperture database point to the particular file (because the file already is under the folder "masters")
    Any feedback to data handling between PS and Aperture?
    Thanks in advance,
    Vanillia

    IMO today you are very likely to be best served by the inexpensive Photoshop Elements. However, Adobe's world is changing at the end of this month (March 27) with official announcement of MacIntel versions. You may want to re-ask this question then, being careful of April Fool's Day wags.
    http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?RSS&newsID=17399
    Also, version 2 of Aperture is expected in the next few months, and I will be surprised if simple color tools such as you describe are not included.
    -Allen Wicks

  • Aperture and iPhoto workflow?

    The problem:
    I'm not happy with quality of previews used by aperture to display slideshows. Even at maximum resolution and quality setting they are too soft to my taste.
    The same photos exported as jpgs out of aperture are sharp. I guess there must be a different algorithm to generate jpg previews and jpg exports.
    I spend money and effort to produce sharp images but what I show with aperture's slideshows is soft.
    Do you have any ideas how to address this?
    The solution I consider is to use iPhoto alongside Aperture. i.e. I would do everything in Aperture but export final picks to iPhoto.
    Then I'd use iPhoto to show images.  The problem with that is that any new edits or changes in rating would require to manually reperform export/import process.
    Is there a way to automate it with automator/scripts/sync application?
    Any other suggestions?
    Andrzej

    If you're going to through the trouble of exporting images  out of Aperture and creating the slideshow externally I'd use  iMove or Final Cut rather then iPhoto. You'll have greater control over the final product.

  • Aperture to Photoshop Workflow

    I am a novice at Photoshop, but will start a beginners course in a couple of weeks. I would like my workflow to be : camera to Aperture (Nikon RAW) and to edit select images in Photoshop. Is thee a good source for learning more about the Aperture / Photoshop interface?
    Thanks.

    A key point to remember is to make all of your Aperture adjustments first, then go to Photoshop last for any remaining work. Aperture will take all of your adjustments and create a TIF or JPG for you to work on in Photoshop. If you make any Aperture adjustments to a file that has already gone to Photoshop, a brand new TIF or JPG will be created.
    Here is a link to more info on working with Photoshop:
    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302820

  • What is the different between Aperture and Photoshop

    Are these comparable programs? Can I do everything in Aperture I can do in Photoshop? I am trying to decide whether of get Aperture 3 now or await PS CS5/
    TIA,
    Bill

    Bill,
    Both previous posters to your question have more experience than I with Aperture, so I won't comment a lot on that one (although I really like Aperture because it can be a one stop shop for the casual photographer who just wants to get the best shots organized, touched-up and perhaps posted to a web site or printed in a book or to paper).
    I am not positive of how the adjustment brushes really work (but they seem to utilize 'masking' - something found and used in PS a great deal for artistic reasons). This would be a similarity, although Aperture appears to do masking on the fly while the user applies brushed in edits, where Photoshop is (in many cases) a manual mask created on a layer above the image (this takes more time but offers a bit more control).
    I can tell you a few things about Photoshop:
    1 - You would use 'Bridge' to ingest and organize your image files (this is not nearly as competent as Aperture for organization, but it will work well for someone organizing, keywording and rating up to a few hundred images per folder).
    2 - You would be using the 'Adobe Camera Raw' plug-in to veiw and edit any RAW files you plan to work with in your photography (it is also capable of working with .jpg and .tiff files). All work done inside this plug-in is 'non-destructive' and is not applied to anything but the preview until you save it out as a supported image file type (Aperture does the same).
    3 - Photoshop allows editing above and beyond the RAW edits due to layers and the ability to manipulate pixels on each layer. It also has all the tools you might need to create graphics from scratch with pen tools, brushes, text tool, etc.
    So in summation, your RAW workflow in PS would be 'Bridge > Adobe Camera Raw > Photoshop', compared to Aperture's 'all-in'one' RAW workflow design.
    I can't say a lot due to NDA, but we are now allowed to confirm PS CS5 and I can say that the beta performs at least as well as the current release of PS CS4 on my Mac Pro.
    You might use the trial of Aperture to get a feel for the program and then (assuming there will be a trial version of PS CS5 released soon after full release) - you could try that for 30 days and make a decision.
    Good luck with whatever decision you make.
    Peace.

  • Aperture and Photoshop Layers

    I did a test by importing some layered Photoshop files into Aperture. These were saved as PSD files using "maximum capability" yet when I "Export" or use "External Editor" from Aperture back to Photoshop, the files are flattened. I have heard that the layers should be retained so I must be overlooking something. I had low hopes for the export, but I thought using "external editor" would keep the layers, but it did not. Advice is appreciated.

    No problem. The first test I exported as a PSD.
    I just went back and tested again and I got it to work although I'm not sure what I did that fixed it. The one thing I did differently was to save as a layered tiff in PS rather than a PSD. I thought it would be safer to keep it as a PSD, but ??
    I am testing this because I'm working on a large project and I want to keep everything filed in my Aperture managed library. I tried this a while back and when everything became flattened it set my work back many hours so I cannot let it happen again. I will probably try this one more time just to be sure.

  • Conflict Between Aperture and Photoshop/Bridge CS2?

    Recently, I noticed a problem in Photoshop/Bridge CS2, that I think may be caused by Aperture.
    I shoot D2x .nef's that are fully supported by both programs.
    Here's what's happening.
    If I go into Bridge and go into a folder of images, some show up as images and others as generic .nef icons. They cannot be opened by either Bridge or ACR. Everything in the CS2 Suite is up-to-date.
    After purging all the Bridge caches, and finally reinstalling the entire CS2 suite, I noticed something:
    The files that were not working in ACR or Bridge were files that I had played with in Aperture. They are in my Aperture library (wherever that is).
    Is there any way that this can be the problem I am trying to solve? If so, how do I get Aperture to "let go of them"? To forget it ever touched them?
    I love Aperture, am loyal to Apple, am not unhappy that I invested in this program and am sure it will improve. But, I really need to be able to use all of my images in ACR. Right now, that is my priority.
    Thanks in advance for suggestions and help.
    sjh
    Dual G5 2.5, 12"PB   Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    I'm not sure I know enough to answer the question.
    The images are on my G5 on a second internal hard drive (not the boot drive).
    They are in a folder with a lot of images from the same shoot.
    That folder shows up in the Library in Aperture, also. I think I imported them. But, as best I can tell, they do not "only exist in Aperture" because I can see them, and their .xmp files in the original file on the second internal hard drive.
    Thank you so much for trying to help.
    sjh

  • Aperture and Photoshop Filters

    Photoshop CS2 is my external editor. When I open it from Aperture, all of the filters are not available (Artistic, Brush Strokes, Pixelate, Sketch, Texture are dimmed and not available). Is this normal when using with Aperture 1.0.1 of am I doing something wrong? Any help will be appreciated.

    I guess you exported in 16bit.
    Some filters in Photoshop are not available in 16bit.
    Quad 2.5 - PB 12" 1.5   Mac OS X (10.4.5)  

  • Using iPhoto, Aperture 3 and Photoshop Elements 9 together...

    Hi everyone,
    I recently upgraded from iPhoto to Aperture. It does almost everything I need but there are some much more advanced editing tools in Photoshop Elements that I need occasionally and also I like to be able to quickly create attractive template based e-mails using iPhoto, so I need all three apps.
    Currently I have my photo library in Aperture 3 but it's really clunky to create attractive photo emails using iPhoto because I have to click 'Show Aperture Library', which is very difficult to navigate and is pretty much unusable. My next attempt is going to be to see whether I keep all my pictures in an iPhoto library and then browse and edit them in Aperture and Photoshop Elements.
    Has anyone got any tips on this topic?
    Thanks,
    Jim

    Hi Ernie,
    Thanks for your post. I will try to explain in a little more detail what the problem I'm having is. If I want to create an iPhoto picture template e-mail, say a postcard, then I select File/Show Aperture Library. A browser window pops up. If I browse to 'Projects' then the previews of each project are huge - about 6 fit on a screen with the window maximised. I can't find a way of zooming out in order that I can browse the hundreds of projects in my Aperture library. Is there a way of doing this? Also, I can't seem to control the sort order. The options in View/Sort Order seem to sort the iPhoto album, not the Aperture library browser.
    If I select Photos from the navigation tree then I get previews of all my 13'000 pictures and about 100 fit on the screen. Again, I don't seem to be able to zoom in/out nor control the sort order.
    What surprised me this morning is that I finally deleted my old iPhoto library and then opened iPhoto to see how it would react. I selected whatever the default was (forgot already!) and now I see my iPhoto library as it was before I deleted it. However, I can't find the library in my Pictures folder. Could it be that iPhoto is reading it from the trash can??
    Finally - is there a way of adding pictures to my posts in this forum? Perhaps I could illustrate the views i'm getting in iPhoto's Aperture library browser.
    Yours,
    Jim

Maybe you are looking for