Aperture 3 brushes

Just upgraded to Aperture 3 and am struggling with brushes to add color. Regardless of what I do, the fill color is a weird peachy orange. The manual and videos seem to gloss over how to correct the color. Sliders don't do anything. Any advice? Thanks

Another great place for info on "how to" is the Lynda.com site
http://www.lynda.com/home/DisplayCourse.aspx?lpk2=59221
great tutorials from Derrick Story.
Using the colour brick to brush colour in or out requires you to adjust the colour settings in the brick, a new brick for each colour adjustment.
Tony

Similar Messages

Some Aperture Brushes stop working??

I have recently upgraded my iMac (i5 with 12GB RAM) from 10.8.5 to 10.9.3, upgraded Aperture to 3.5.1. Pretty much my first editing session, and I discover that about half the Aperture brushes have stopped working. This happens on previously unedited images, both JPG and RAW. All referenced images.
These brushes seem to work fine:
Retouch
Skin Smoothing
Burn
Tint
Definition
Vibrancy
Halo Reduction
Highlights and Shadows
Sharpen
These brushes don't work - the brush menu comes up, I can change the setting, but the brush does not show, and I can't brush anything:
Dodge
Polarise
Intensify Contrast
Contrast
Saturation
Blur
Sharpen
Noise reduction
Curves
Enhance
Levels
I tried changing various brush settings, doesn't seem to help. I have submitted an a bug report to Apple.
Any ideas from the forum, has anyone run into this?

A reboot seems to have fixed it.

Aperture Brush-in is "off" while working, correct on export?

I have a photo where the subject needs to be "lightened" as she was in shadows, while the background needs to remain at the current exposure. I've done this on several other photos in the set using a Curves block, brushing over the subject entirely, and adjusting the exposure on the subject that way.
On this picture, however, I notice that if I am brushing in WYSIWYG mode, when I brush something "on", the brushed area "shifts" over a few pixels. It is very possible that this is also happening on my other pictures, but due to the level of adjustment I'm doing with this particular photo it's most apparent here, ending up with a dark/light halo all around her.
This is very hard to deal with, as it then looks like my brushes are including too much or too little. If I use the "Color Overlay" the brush appears to match up perfectly, but, again, if I switch from the perfectly-matched overlay into WYSIWYG mode (or deselect the brush-in block altogether), what is shown on screen is again "shifted" but just in the brushed-in areas. However, if I export the photo to JPEG, it uses what I see with "Color Overlay" and the output is perfect. I also notice that areas where I've used the brush-smoothing tool to smooth out the transition from brushed to not brushed show up as 100% brushed on in the "zoomed out" on-screen preview, and at any of the predefined views (Command-+) they draw correctly.
As it stands, I can't use the Aperture view of this photo to show the client, as it looks like she's been cut out by a kindergartner and pasted in again. I also can't give this picture my standard level of attention as each adjustment requires making an export-check-try again round-trip to get it right!
Are these graphics glitches normal? I've tried this on my 27" iMac as well as my year-old 15" MacBook Pro, and while the specific offsets differ, I am seeing the same effect.
I've tried deleting and regenerating the preview, but it remains just as ghastly after regenerating it.
Help!

Thanks for the suggestions.
I've been brushing in at 100, 200, and 300%; this is the only way for my not-fit-for-surgery hands to get a pixel-perfect mask brushed on! Yes, the worst visual glitches show up when the images is just "fit to screen" (when the "smoothed" area all turns to 100% brushed on).
My system's the top-of-the-line (this April) 27" iMac i7 with Radeon 4850 graphics and 8GB of RAM. I suppose I could be over-taxing it with a brushed-on curves block, but that seems like a lot of system for such a small adjustment.
That having been said, I'll try doing the same brushes on less system-taxing adjustments like dodge/burn instead of a full Curves and see if that's the cause (I can't do what I'm trying to do with these pictures with a straight dodge/burn adjustment, though, so I'll have to go back to using the Curves and just live with Aperture not being WYSIWYG for it, or try out Lightroom to see if that can handle a Curves adjustment better even though I really don't like the rest of the Lightroom interface or workflow!)
Again, thanks for the suggestions, it at least gives me something to try!

Aperture brush/preview problems?

I've been using Aperture 3.4 for a while with no problems. Today when uploading and editing my latest batch of pictures, I find the thumbnails look a little weird. They have pink lines and static where I used brushes. Originally, it looked like it was just from when I used the intensify contrast brush but now if I used the polarizer, contrast or intensify contrast, there's static and lines from it. Using the dodge brush was fine.
However, no matter how the thumbnails look, when I open the image, after the initial 'Loading . . .', the image looks fine and just how I intended after editing. I uploaded them to Flickr to see what would happen and in place of the pink static is black blotches where I used the brushes (example: http://flickr.com/gp/hightidedc/U5LFq0).
How do I go about fixing this? None of my other photos are having any issues, and I used a Kingston 8 GB card on my Nikon D3200. They were RAW files, which is what I usually use. I've already tried generate new thumbnail and it's resulted in the static changing to cyan color or horizontal stripes covering the entire image or another variation. Also tried repairing permissions, didn't do anything.
Thanks in advance!

I'm not sure, sorry! After I finished editing/tagging I uploaded to Flickr through Aperture, if that helps any, sorry!
I held down option and went Photos-Generate Thumbnails.
I tried a few photos and the black effect that was on the Flickr images is what I see when I open it in Preview.
I tried that on a few different photos and the static effect changed. One grey static image turned bright magenta, one turned white. Another turned bright magenta into cyan.
Edit: I do have the memory card with all the originals on it still. Would it be worth it to just start from scratch and re edit the photos, or is it likely there's something wrong with the memory card? Only about 140 in total.

Aperture Brushes - mouse/pointer is jumping/skipping/delayed

I'm having an issue using the brushes in aperture 3. The mouse slows down and speeds up rapidly while I'm trying to brush.
An example - I add the black and white adjustment, and then start to brush black & white away, leaving one area in color. The first stroke works great, but I can tell it's processing the image and takes a few moments to show the result. Not big deal there. I got do a few more stokes, and suddenly the mouse jumps to another area of the screen when i start to move my mouse, as if the tracking was turned up 1000% (not exaggerating, a tiny motion flies the pointer from the left to the right side of the screen.)
I'm using a trackpad, but I plugged in a plain 'ol USB mouse and it did the same thing. Only happens in Aperture. Editing Canon 40D raws.
Ideas? Anyone else experience this?
Message was edited by: Vengance

Exact same thing here, using my Macbook Pro… it's been driving me crazy while editing.
But for me the issue didn't start with Aperture 3 - it actually began happening a few weeks ago while using Aperture 2.1.4, just randomly during any type of edit. Aperture has been installed since this machine was brand new, 16 months ago, and on previous Macbook Pros before this one, and this is the first time I've ever had such an issue... which makes me think it's either related to some other relatively recent software update (Mac OS X 10.6.2, perhaps?) or that my Macbook Pro has reached an age (16 months) where its trackpad has decided to malfunction just a little.
I'm really hoping that it isn't the latter. The issue only shows up in Aperture (2 or 3), and only on my Macbook Pro; no mouse-jumping so far in Aperture or any other software on my iMac.

Aperture Brushes still slow on maxed out imac i7 will it ever change

Why are brushes still slow to No Go. I have an imac 3.4 i7 with 32G ram and 2g video card but still brushes are a major issue and can't be used in any professional manner because of the time involved in waiting and waiting.
Does anyone know what's going on and if it will ever be addressed by apple?
thanks

skye27,
there must be a reason for the slowness in your setup.
As long as we do not know more about your versions, the location of the Aperture library, the location of any referenced files, the image file format of your original master images, it is hard to suggest anything.
Slowness can be caused ack of space on your drive, a corruption of your Aperture library, by network access, etc.
Check, if you are having the same problem when using a new Aperture library or working from a different user account.
This will narrow down the problem a bit for easier trouble shooting.
Regards
Léonie

Are brushed adjustments in Aperture worth it?

It would be interesting to know if people have a different approach.
I often use Silver FX Pro and Color FX Pro, but I'm not sure if they are the best.
Also, I use Photshop mostly for brushing, cropping, and masking, but Aperture is for
making uniform changes in brightness, contrast, black & white vs. color, and some of those add-ons and funky filters.
Is there anyone here that thinks Aperture brushes are better than Photoshop brushes?

Thank you for illustrating, Kirby.
I agree that Photoshop is ideal for combining graphics with photography. It's a no-brainer, really.
I did just that, yesterday... an attempt at humoring certain people (it worked):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mycophagia
Even Illustrator can be used for such purposes if you know too much about it. (That was a joke on how elaborate it is)
Me, I see Photoshop as the halfway point between Illustrator and Aperture, with Illustrator being the grand-daddy of all "graphics from scratch" apps, and Aperture the ideal tool for a photographer. But everything that can be done in Aperture can also be done in Photoshop, sometimes better. The biggest downside is that I get .psd files accumulating, inside folders littered all over my hard drive.
My use of Photoshop is done as quickly as possible (I prefer it simple) by working in only two layers. My brain cannot handle the concept of complex things like 'layer masks' and 'smart objects'. I just clone one layer, put the better, adjusted layer underneath it, and then erase what doesnt look good on the top layer... change the opacity or the softness of your tools and you have yourself whatever kind of "brush" you need. Of course, this does not always work without the assistance of the "marching ants", but it's easy to put them in.
The biggest problem in photography I have (and the chief reason I export to Photoshop) is washed out skies and skies with no blue in them. Without using a polarized filter (i dont like them), skies are captured more often than not, as white and washed out, especially on an overcast day. This is the bane of my existence. I'm surpised I havent figure this one out yet. Underexpose the picture? Sure, maybe, but I think it sounds like a horrible plan.

How to copy brush masks from one adjustment to another

Thought the readers of this forum might like to read my recent blog post on the aforementioned subject, with complete step-by-step instructions. I've been successfully using the technique outlined in the post for quite some time and finally got around to writing up a little tutorial.
http://johnpurlia.wordpress.com/2011/06/06/and-now-a-short-venture-into-technolo gy-—-aperture-brushes-unmasked/
Comments welcomed, of course.
Enjoy!!

Hi Tina,
To copy either a Script or a Smartform fron one client to another client i.e from reference client 000 to any client say 010 follow instructions as given below:
Go to Tcode SE71->Give Form name MEDRUCK then go to Menu path Utilities->Copy From Client, give
Form Name: MEDRUCK
SOURCE:000 (it will be already there)
Target Form: Zmedruck(here give ur form zname)
Execute
It will be copied into all languages.
Then come back to SE71
Give your form name Zmedruck
Language:: de then goto change mode
then menu path->utilities->convert original languge to En and enter you will get a message original language of form zmedruck converted from de to en,
now change language de to en in se71 main screen and then do what ever changes you want to do , this is how you can copy a script or smartform from one client to another client.
If this answer is useful reward points any queries revert me back.

Is it possible to clone an object from one image and paste it on another image?

Is it possible to clone an object from one image and paste it on another image in Aperture?

As Frank said,
but Aperture has a nice clone tool - the drawback is, that it only works within one image.
What I sometimes do - as a workaroud, when I want to use the clone brush, is to combine the image I want to clone from and the image I want to clone into, into one single image by printing them together to pdf as jpeg. Then I can clone from the second to the first, for example, to be able to add an fairy to a flower: Picking up the head of the fairy in the right image and brushing it into the left one. Occasionally I prefer the Aperture brush to the Photoshop lasso.

Interesting Approach to Referenced Masters

With the usual caveat that your mileage may vary, would like to share the results of an experiment in using referenced masters.
My son in law is a very talented photographer who, for family reasons, prefers to edit on a laptop (17" MacBookPro) rather than a desk top set up.
He has upgraded to a 500 GB HD, but is running out of room. Time to relocate some masters to be sure that the has lots of space on his HD for system ops, caching, etc.
He has his old HD, now mounted in a cheap USB 2.0 case. I pointed out to him that as masters are write once/read many, and not even used that often in normal Aperture operations, putting the masters on the HD would probably incur very little loss of speed, and, with enough RAM, even that would be a one time only pause when loading.
So he moved a project or two and all was well. The difference in loading time was barely noticeable.
Then he got clever, and noted that he had a Time Capsule. What would happen if he hung the USB HD off of the Time Capsule so that:
-- It did not clutter up his lap or desk and,
-- The masters would still be accusable anywhere in the house.
The short answer was that there was no noticeable drop in performance. I was surprised.
For the record, the files in question are Nikon D90 NEF. Part of this effort is to clear up space on the existing HD to make ready for the arrival of a D800. Obviously, the D800 NEF will be larger, but I doubt that there will be much performance change as we are still talking about a very linear read of an unfragmented file.
Some small evidence that the time to load a RAW master into memory may be limited as much by bus speed and rendering speed as it is by HD performance. Clearly, HD read/write is very important for updating the versions/previews/etc., but probably the least important consideration for where you place your masters.
Offered for your consideration. Would be hearing the experiences of others.
DiploStrat

Kirby,
He doesn't do much/any brushing; most of his heavy editing is with the NIK suite.
As I understand Aperture, brushing will hammer the GPU and the Version file, but it ignores the Master, once it is loaded. This all makes sense. I also run Aperture 3 on a 2006 MBP with 2 GB of RAM and a 240 GB SSD. I can brush, edit, etc. but when working at full res with so little RAM there are definite pauses, some as long as 30 seconds, in the work flow. The short answer here is that even a fast SSD can't catch up to a real shortage of RAM and an older generation of GPU, only two cores, etc.
If you have enough RAM to get the entire Master into RAM and keep it there without it paging out, then the fact that the Master was initially on a slow drive should have no impact on your working speed.
Léonie,
This was all done under Snow Leopard. Most interesting links. Leaving aside all of the screaming and shouting, it seems silly that Lion should actively shut off this feature. Indeed, given all of Apple's push for iClouds, etc., you would think that this is exactly the kind of "bonus" feature that they would be touting. Referenced Masters require a bit of extra work on the part of the user, keeping track of whether the drive is direct connected, or networked shouldn't be that much extra. If anything, and given that Aperture can challenge even the healthiest Macs in a way that Lightroom doesn't seem to, the fact that you can sometimes gain speed by putting your Masters on slower hardware is actually a plus.
There is a small possibility that this is related to the idea that Aperture is a single user, not a collaborative system. But then, if I were releasing Aperture 4 tomorrow, I would come up with a multi-user version. There is a small, but vocal group of Aperture users who really want/need a multi-user, or at least a multi-computer workflow. Couple that with iCloud and the potential for newsies, sports shooters, and others, are amazing.
DiploStrat

Does Aperture support the use of Filters or Brushes?

I want to be able to have more control over the final print versions of my photos using Aperture (instead of having to spend hundreds on the latest Photoshop)... Does Aperture support any type of filtering or brushwork? Any freeware out there that dovetails with Aperture?

Steve Weller wrote:
No, but...
I poked around inside Aperture a while ago and there are some icons and other images that suggest it is coming one day. My guess is that there is insufficient hardware or OS support for it right now and so it ha not been enabled.
And if you look in the .plist file you'll see preferences for "brushes" labeled Dodge, Burn, Saturate, Desaturate, Warmer and Cooler. Brushes also appear to have Size, Softness and Strength attributes - does this indicate future drawing pad support??!!

Aperture dodge /burn brush very slow

I have a 15" late 2011 MBP with 16GB Ram, SSD, high res screen and when I try to use dodge / burn on photos from either my Canon 7D or 5D MKII sometimes the adjustment brush takes 5 seconds to process the brush marks. I am using aperture 3.2.2 raw 3.9 , lion 10.7.2 with all the updates.
I can process the exact same files from Lightroom or photoshop without any slowness whatsoever. I have tried everything under the sun that i can think of, repair permissions, trying files from different drives etc and I get the same result every time its crazy slow. Some of the brushes work faster than others but every one of them have delays. I have tried it on different photos from different cameras but all with the same result.
any ideas? I have run out

I just tried all of those things, even ran all 3 of the repairs and no difference
I even created a new libary and tried totally different pictures and had the same results
if anyone has any other suggestions I am open to hearing them

Aperture 3.1 + 10.6.5 + brushing = crash

Hi,
after installing 10.6.5 I get crashes very often when using brush in Aperture. Is this happening to anyone else as well?

The common denominator seems to be the processing time that is required for every brush stroke. So brushing on a large image in 100% zoom that has a lot of "heavy" adjustments on it already, with color overlay on and using the feather brush (worst case?) will always crash AP3.1. AP3.0 would hang under the same circumstances. I know this because I have been wrestling with this bug since 3.0.0, as I am doing a lot of panorama work where the images are always large (>500MB). I am not sure if I prefer a hang or a crash or a memory runaway. A Forced Quit in 3.0 would sometimes damage the library and I have not seen that happen with 3.1 (yet).
My work around has been to add RAM and install a better GPU, which helped in as much that it postpones the problem. Also, when I feel I am getting in the danger zone, I will switch of the other expensive adjustments on the image while brushing, especially when zoom is required. Zoom is the real performance killer on large images.
Still I am not ungrateful, AP2 could not edit large images at all (no retouch and no export at original size). Just use a stress ball...

Aperture 3.5.1 undid any adjustment I brushed on many pictures

I am facing a major issue.
This morning went back to a two years old picture and I noticed it missed some adjustments, turns out all the Dodge and Burn I brushed on some elements of the picture are gone. They do still appear in the adjustments tab, they are selected and I can brush the same adjustment on the picture if I try to but the painting I did in the past is gone
I tried to restore my library from a couple of days ago and while the preview still has the adjustments (if I enlarge the picture it pops up with those dodge and burn adjustments) as soon as Aperture updates the preview, the images changes and loses the adjustments.
The problem is this does not applies on all my pictures, looks like only the older behave that way. Is there anything I can do to save those adjustments?

Ok here's what I discovered. The TIFFs in that subfolders are readable and many of them show actual brushing...some don't.
I found an all black TIFF with a very wide aspect ratio and I could instantly tell which picture it was referred to, it's one of those reporting the problem, the pixel resolution matches perfectly.
This picture had two separate "Intensify Contrast" masks applied. I tried to draw two symbols to see if one would show up in the file inside the 8 > 82 folder. It did not, instead they showed up in two other files
The blank file in 8 > 82 is not present in the backup library from 2 days ago. It almost looks like as Aperture forgot my adjustments for those pictures and then once I open up the picture in aperture he creates brand new tiffs because it can't find the references old ones...right?
I'll check this theory opening the picture in a copy of the backup library and seeing if Aperture creates the blank TIFF there too...
EDIT: There it goes, in a different folder but it did create it once I opened the pic in Aperture (it was not there before I checked)
Looks like a mess to me, I starting to think to move to a new library and copy the old pictures later once I get time...since the TIFFs with my old work are not here.

Aperture 3.6: Disappearing Brush Cursor

I experience the following issue with brushes in Aperture:
In full-screen mode the brush only gets bigger to a certain amount, than does not visibly get bigger any more. If I try to paint with it, I can only see the standard mouse-pointer. The brush though, paints in the selected size. This is of course out of control, cause I can't really see what I am doing there. The brush works fine to a rather small brush size.
My config:
iMac 5K, AMD Radeon R9 M295X, OS X Yosemite 10.10, Aperture 3.6
Any help is appreciated.
Rainer

Hi,
the problem is solved - or maybe it disappeared just so. I made two changes to my machine:
First I got rid of x-rite profiling software and the running services wich came w/ the calibration software. I just did this, because the services caused lots of dumps and console messages.
Then I changed the preview size in Aperture preferences to "don't limit"; I had them limited to "half-size". I just guessed that using my library from a machine with a much bigger resolution (imac 5K) could have anything to do w/ my problem.
I did NOT generate new previews or had my originals newly developed. At least I did not tell Aperture to do so.
I do not know if all of the above has anything todo with the brush-cursor in Aperture, but it simply works now. Brushes size from zero to 200 and back flawlessly.
Cheers,
Rainer

Brushes = Aperture crash

Hey all,
I am currently running a trial version of A3 (updated to latest version) on an Imac 27" late 2010 edition (I5, 4GB). I really like the program and it's features, but the program seems very unstable to me. Using brushes will make A3 crash very frequently. When you reopen A3, all adjustments for the given picture is lost.
The only workaround I have found to this is to make dublicate versions very often, but this really shouldn't be the way to go.
I find this a real shame, as this will keep me from going from trial to buying. A3 is the only program where I have experienced crashes like this.
I am fairly new to Mac, but I really had higher expectations of the stability of apps coming directly from Apple itself.
/Hlynge

The app is stable. We need to troubleshoot your setup and workflow.
Aperture is a heavy pro graphics app that is very demanding of hardware. Your Mac's GPU, i/o and RAM are all limiting to Aperture so we need to do what we can to optimize.
Some generic advice I posted in another thread:
• Set Previews to only be built manually, and only tell Aperture to build Previews when you are not otherwise editing in Aperture.
• Keep the internal drive underfilled for speed, which sooner or later usually requires using a Referenced-Masters-Library with Masters on external drives. Back up originals before importing into Aperture or any other images app.
• The Aperture Library should be on an internal drive.
• Turn off Share Previews with iLife and iWork.
• Remember that HDs slow as they fill and keep the internal drive underfilled. Approx. 70% full maximum is a good guideline.
• If page outs increase significantly during operation try to run Aperture by itself. On my C2D MBP with its max of 3 GB RAM I always did a restart prior to a heavy Aperture session to clear any memory leaks and make sure no other apps were open. Browsers in particular will often suck RAM Aperture would otherwise be using.
IMO all Aperture users who can should routinely bump RAM to at least 8 GB.
• Some users have observed that it can take a new Aperture installation time (weeks) to stabilize. So do not panic; and allow Aperture to continue background work by not fully shutting down the computer. Personally I never fully shut down Macs except during electrical storms.
Activity Monitor's RAM reporting can be misleading. On Activity monitor check Page Outs before and after a work session. If the number of Page Outs increases significantly, you would benefit from more RAM.
HTH
-Allen

Aperture 3 brushes

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for