Aperture 3 and Whitebalance / kelvin

I'm testing Aperture 3 as a possible replacement for my Capture One 4.x and Lightroom combo.
The thing is i have some rather unusual needs in regards to whitebalance. I work with IR photography, and thus i need to do white balance below 2000K. Fortunately Aperture doesnt auto correct white balance as lightroom does, But since usually work with white balance in the 1700 Kelvin range, it would be preferable if aperture weren't artificially limited to 2000Kelvin or higher.
Are anyone aware of a plugin that takes over whitebalance or a place where you can change the 2000 Kelvin low limit

I have tried a large # of plug-ins, but I have not seen that particular options.
I would inquire of one of the major plug-in suppliers and see.
I'd alos put the request in to Apple as this may be a relatively easy option to put in place as a Preference.

Similar Messages

  • TS2518 Help, I had aperture open and working on a image and did not have a battery in and bumped the power off. As a result it will not open my master, it is locked. when I try to open that Library  it says There was an error opening the database for the

    Help, I had aperture open and working on a image and did not have a battery in and bumped the power off. As a result it will not open my master, it is locked. when I try to open that Library  it says There was an error opening the database for the library. I have tried every thing. I updated the other libr but now it will not open the main to update. What do I do?

    Try starting Aperture with the command and option keys held down.  You'll get 3 options.
    Try each, starting at the top, in order, checking after each to see if it fixes the issue.

  • How can I install Aperture on my new Macbook Pro. I am up to date with my Mac Pro, I have the Aperture 1 and installation disks but cant remember how I got to 3. Can anyone help?  Many thanks regards Alf

    I have an up to date version of Aperture on my Mac Pro, and I would like to install it on my new Mac book Pro. I have the original installation disks for Aperture 1 and 2. I cant remember how I got to Aperture 3, I think it was via a web download but not sure. I have checked my purchases in the App Store but there is no indication of me buying an upgrade to Aperture 3.
    Ive tried to download it from the App Store but it wants me to pay again.
    Can anyone help on how to install Aperture 3 on my new Macbook .
    Many thanks regards  Alf

    Then you can download the Trial version of Aperture 3 and unlock it with your serial numbers - you will need all three for all three versions: A current link to the Trial version is in this support document, also instructions on how to reinstall on different systems:
    Aperture 3.4: May quit unexpectedly on launch after updating
    Regards
    Léonie
    BTW: Your Aperture 3 serial number will be displayed in the "About" panel - the panel you see, when you use the command "About Aperture" from the Aperture menu in the main menu bar.

  • HT201070 I currently use OS 10.6.8 and Aperture 3, and just got a Nikon D600. It seems the the RAW Compatibility updates (4.01) are for use only with OS 10.7.5 or later, is that right? Do I need to update my whole OS to use this camera? Thank you!

    I currently use OS 10.6.8 and Aperture 3, and just got a Nikon D600. It seems the the RAW Compatibility updates (4.01) are for use only with OS 10.7.5 or later, is that right? Do I need to update my whole OS to use this camera? Thank you!

    Thanks to Bobthefisherman & Turbostar.  Turns out I've got a corrupted disk (which I found out via "verify disk" on Disk Utility First Aid.  Previously, I never thought to verify disk -- only to repair permissions -- so I never knew my HD had been corrupted.
    Wasn't able to do a clean install of OSX10.6 because my SuperDrive only sporadically will load discs, so I am taking it to the Apple Store to see if they can do a clean install, and depending upon costs, get the Superdrive replaced. 
    The HD wasn't partioned by the way.  And I did have just over 40GB of contiguous space. 
    Thanks again.

  • 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, 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

  • Aperture 3 and Mobile Me Gallaries

    I'm using the trial version of Aperture 3 and tried to create a Mobile Me Gallery. I created the gallery within Aperture and published it. However it seems to be published to: http://homepage.mac.com/username. As a result it doesn't show up in in the Mobile Me Gallery which has the domain: http://gallery.me.com/username. Is there any way to publish a Web Gallery/Journal directly to Mobile Me? If one selects a single photo, or a group of photos, and clicks the Mobile Me icon in Aperture's toolbar, it publishes correctly to Mobile Me. My settings for Mobile Me is System preferences are correct. Any ideas?
    Thanks

    Since there have been no replies to my original question, I'm thinking this is just the way Aperture works. It's easy to select a group of images and click on the Mobile Me icon to create a Mobile Me gallery containing the selected images. However if you first create a Web Page or Web Journal, and drag images into it, chose a theme, add text etc, and publish to Mobile Me it publishes as a web page to your iDisk in the Sites folder, I think. The problem as I see it is that if you don't remember the URL, it's hard to display the web page, and as far I know, you can't display the web page using Mobile Me. I mistakenly thought the web page would show up as a link within my Mobile Me galleries or be displayed there along with other galleries. This is obviously not the case. Is there a way to integrate web pages created in Aperture with iWeb? Has anyone done this? Or is it easier to publish web pages to other hosting sites?

  • KEEPING APERTURE 2 and 3 side-by-side

    Hi everyone...
    ...I was one of those whose Macbook Pros seized up for days when trying to upgrade to 3 from 2. In the end I reverted to 2 and restored from my backed up AP2 Library. All fine.
    QUESTION: Is a viable answer to buy AP3 complete, and run AP2 (having re-named it to avoid confusion) for the old library and AP3 for all new photos? Are there any dangers?
    I have read everything Kevin Doyle has written but I really cannot go to the lengths he does!
    John B

    Hi again everyone...
    ...and thanks for all the advice. I bought AP3 complete (not the upgrade this time) and followed this sequence and
    - re-named Aperture 2 to Aperture 2, and likewise AP Library to Aperture 2 Library
    - closed Time Capsule and all programs, EHDs etc
    - installed AP3
    - switched off Faces and GPS
    - downloaded Vers. 3.0.1 and 3.0.2
    - re-started
    - ran Disk Utility
    - imported the old AP2 Library (overnight)
    - checked this morning (fine)
    - re-started
    - re-ran Disk Utility etc
    - moved folders in the import-created 'Aperture 2 Library" in AP3 to Projects and Albums
    - deleted the now empty 'Aperture 2 Library' folder in AP3
    - re-ordered the folders via 'Keep folders...by name' etc to alphabetical order
    - quit AP3 and re-started
    After that I
    - opened AP3 again
    - checked every folder
    - connected the EHD with the AP2 Referenced files on it
    - checked that all the Referenced files re-connected with the new Library (they did)
    - quit AP3 again (leading to a lengthy 'upgrading' process - all fine
    - re-opened AP3 and checked again
    - quit AP3
    - moved AP2 and the Aperture 2 Library (already twice backed up on EHDs) to Trash
    - opened AP3...
    ...and everything now seems to work in Rolls-Royce fashion.
    I set great store by Kevin Doyle's posts, particularly the need to avoid filling up a drive. Thanks to him too!
    John B

  • 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

  • Importing masters from iPhoto to Aperture 3 and saving as referenced files on external drive

    I'm making the move from iPhoto to Aperture 3.I'm new to Aperture 3 and want o make sure I am importing and saving correctly. So far, I have imported my library of events from iphoto to Aperture 3. I understand that for the most part, it makes sense to house this library on an external drive as "referenced files" vs within Apeture as "managed files." I'm not clear on exactly how to accomplish this set-up. Is this something I should have set-up when doing the initial import or can I move the files now? Once this is done, when importing new files, how do I import to Aperture 3 but save on external drive?
    Thanks in advance for your help!

    A fabulous answer:
    In the olden days ( ) when hobbyists made their own telescopes from kits, everyone wanted a six-inch lens, and the kit makers shipped six-inch lens blanks.  Which the hobbyists used to learn lens grinding.  Which is arduous and requires skill.  Which the hobbyists didn't have until they'd ground that six-inch blank -- an expensive piece of high-quality material at the time -- into a lumpen flawed approximation of a good lens.  Then the hobbyists would contact the kit makers and ask for another lens-blank, so they could build their telescope.  At which point they would drop the project because the six-inch lens blank cost so much.  And much calumny was rained on the kit manufacturers.
    Now the kit manufacturers wanted to promote a hobby, and make, in addition to telescope kits, money (not calumny), so they together and separately hit upon the idea of supplying the hobbyist with _two_ lens blanks: a four-inch blank, and a six inch blank.  Nobody wanted a four-inch telescope -- but that's not what the blank was for.  The instructions read (I've shortened this part) "Grind the four-inch blank into the most perfect lens you can.  Check it and re-check it.  Now throw it out.  You likely now have the skill to grind the six-inch blank into a useable lens."
    Thus endeth our fable.
    The point, of course, is:  start small and gain skill before committing time and material to a task.  Port just a small sub-set of you photos into Aperture.  Experiment with it.  Try different workflows.  Think about how to best use the containers and organization tools Aperture provides.  Develop a long-term naming convention for files and Projects.  Work out a back-up strategy that is scalable and that you will stick with.  My specific recommendation for beginners is: don't worry about Referenced v. Managed at first.  Make all your Masters Managed.  When you have your four-inch Aperture Library all smooth and even, put the entire thing in the system trash -- and then you can start working on an Aperture Library fit for your photos -- one that will allow you to see far, and clear, for years.
    Good luck.

  • Can I make an aperture slideshow and use it in iweb?

    I need to know if I can make an aperture slideshow and use it in iweb (not making it a quicktime movie)? I don't want to use I photo (I know how to make one in Iphoto and put it in Iweb and I dont want to do this). (dont want a .mac gallery either) Please help. thank you!!!

    Aperture slide shows are just for review. They can not be output. TBMK
    Honestly, you've exhausted most of what iLife can do, and quicktime will probably be your output even if you go to Keynote to make your slide show.
    But with Keynote you'll have more control over how the Quicktime is compressed.
    Otherwise, you're looking at the expense AND the learning curve of Flash.
    Maybe someone else will chime in with a 3rd party solution.
    DLS
    Message was edited by: MacDLS

  • Aperture 3 and HDV Camcorder

    I've been messing around with Aperture 3 for a while now and decided it was time to try playing with the new HD video support.
    On Apple's Aperture "New Features" page http://www.apple.com/aperture/features/#video it states:
    "Video Support
    Import, browse, and play back video clips — including HD video — from digital SLR cameras, point-and-shoot cameras, and +digital camcorders+."
    Well, I plugged in my Sony HDV camcorder with it's Firewire cable and expected it to open right up in import. Nope, nada. Couldn't find any way for the camcorder to show up in Aperture. (This same camera and MacBook Pro work fine to import with Final Cut Pro.)
    Then I tried to import the .MOV video files into Aperture that I used Final Cut to capture. This sort of worked. Aperture did recognize and import them, but two things were seriously messed up. When Final Cut captures video from an HDV camcorder, it leaves it in the interlaced 1440x1080 amorphous pixel aspect ratio how it comes off the camera. When those clips are played back in Final Cut (or in Quicktime X) it somehow deinterlaces and displays the video in normal 1920x1080 so it looks good on the screen. Aperture 3 doesn't seem to do this. Once imported, the clips looked like crap when played back in Aperture.
    I found on this page http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4025 a very short list of DSLR cameras that Apple says Aperture supports, none of which are digital camcorders. How does Apple get away with claiming Aperture 3 supports HD video from "digital camcorders" when it doesn't have one listed on their supported list and Aperture doesn't even do a very good job of working with HD video files captured from another application?
    I've Googled around on this forum, the Aperture manual, and Apple's site and haven't found any other mention of Aperture working with HDV camcorders.
    Does anyone here have any better experiences?

    A quick look at the contents pages in the Aperture 3 PDF manual seems not to mention camcorders.
    Page 145 of the manual states-
    Aperture supports most image, audio, and video file formats captured by digital cameras. An example of the file types and formats that can be imported into your Aperture library are:
    • GIF • JPEG • JPEG2000 • PNG • PSD(8-and16-bit) • DNG • RAW files from a variety of supported digitalcameras • TIFF (8- and 16-bit) • AIF • WAV • MOV
    So digital camcorders recording in ACVHD are not stated as compatible with Aperture so need to have their movies converted to the supported formats first.

  • Migrating iPhoto to Aperture 3 and the case of missing photos

    I love the new Aperture 3 and am so excited to migrate from iPhoto. I have used the Aperture feature of importing an entire iPhoto library directly into a new Aperture library. This doesn't produce any errors (except for a handful of missing photos which aren't too important), but when I look at the resultant Aperture library (8 hours later), I am missing a LOT of photos. My iPhoto library has about 24,000 photos and my Aperture library only has about 16,000. Because of the differences in the way Aperture and iPhoto keep track of edits, my Aperture library should have considerably more photos than iPhoto and not less. Please help!

    In new iLife 09 (or iPhoto 09), some pics are now black in the Event, simply an outline of dotted lines. Yet, when I cursor fast, they appear, so I know there are still there.
    That doesn't mean that they are "still there". It means that a cached version of the image exists.
    I recall, when migrating photos it noted that the photos in iPhoto (old system) needed to be formatted to new iPhoto, so I allowed. Makes me wonder if something in a pic title or such is the issue.
    That's a standard procedure when you upgraded to the later version of iPhoto. Happens every time to up a version, and to everyone.
    With regard to Portrait. When I import from iPhoto to Aperture, any Portrait picture has a 2nd verson next to it, but in the Horizontal. All Horizontal pics, there is only the one version of the pic.
    Your camera has an Auto-Rotate feature. However, the camera does not actually rotate any pixels in the file, but instead flags it with an instruction: "Display me this way". iPhoto, seeing the flag, reads the intention and creates a modified version. Hence the second version of the Portrait pics and no second version of the Landscape ones. The landscape ones don't have an auto-rotate tag.
    For the dotted line problem, try rebuild your iPhoto Library: Back Up and try rebuild the library: hold down the command and option (or alt) keys while launching iPhoto. Use the resulting dialogue to rebuild.
    Regards
    TD

  • Aperture 3 and spinning wheel

    Hi all,
    just to add this strange behavior to the list of the new A3:
    - new library with just one project of 80 imported photos
    - created a new book
    - terminated the book, about 35 pages
    - now when I open Aperture, it open in the book view, but the first thing it's happening is that the colored spinning wheel appear for many seconds (about 20) before let me do anything. This repeat many times also I try to access any command/menu in Aperture. The wait is always about 20/30 seconds.
    Just to see if anyone is experiencing this problem...
    Bye,
    - Marco.

    It may be related to some issues I've noticed with Aperture 2 and the Magic Mouse-- all it takes is a slight mis-placed finger on the Magic Mouse and it jumps lots of images when you never intended it to. It will make changes to sliders if you forget to click-off the slider and then touch the Magic Mouse. And the list goes on. I really want a way to disable the scroll feature of the Magic Mouse while in Aperture and Photoshop to prevent unintentional adjustments or wild jumps around the library. Apple may have gotten feedback about this and decided to disable the scroll features in certain situations. Remember- the Magic Mouse is the mouse that ships with their computers.

Maybe you are looking for