Aperture Exporting JPEG's from RAW: file size and quality questions?

Hey Everyone,
So, I'm using Aperture 2 and I've got some questions about exporting from RAW to JPEG. I shoot with a Nikon D70 so original RAW files are 5-6mb in size. After doing some basic post processing when I export the pics at "full size" with picture quality of 11 out of 12 then the resulting JPEG is about half the file size of the original RAW file. For example a 5.6mb RAW becomes a 2.6mb JPEG. The resolution in pixels per inch and and the overall image size remain unchanged. Have I lost picture quality due to the exporting JPEG being smaller in file size?
My friend who works with me prefers to edit in Photoshop and when he follows the same workflow his saved JPEG from the identical RAW file in Photoshop is minimally smaller in file size, say 5.6mb to 5.3mb. He's telling me that my Aperture edited photos are losing quality and resolution.
Is he right, are my pics of lesser quality due to being a smaller file size? I've always been told that the quality of a picture is not in the mbs, but the pixel density.
I've bee told that Aperture has a better compression engine and that the resulting files are of the exact same quality because the PPI and image size are the same. Is that what explains the much smaller file sizes in Aperture?
I tried changing the picture quality in the export menu to 12 out of 12, but the resulting JPEG then becomes larger than the original RAW at over 7mbs.
Can someone please help me understand this better? I don't want to lose picture quality if that is indeed what is happening.
Thanks in advance for your help.

mscriv wrote:
So, I'm using Aperture 2 and I've got some questions about exporting from RAW to JPEG. I shoot with a Nikon D70 so original RAW files are 5-6mb in size. After doing some basic post processing when I export the pics at "full size" with picture quality of 11 out of 12 then the resulting JPEG is about half the file size of the original RAW file. For example a 5.6mb RAW becomes a 2.6mb JPEG. The resolution in pixels per inch and and the overall image size remain unchanged. Have I lost picture quality due to the exporting JPEG being smaller in file size?
JPEG is a "lossy" file compression algorithm. Whether Aperture or PS, *every time a JPEG is saved some loss occurs*, albeit minimal at the 11 or 12 level of save, huge losses at low save levels. Some images (sky, straight diagonal lines, etc.) are more vulnerable to showing visible jpeg artifacts.
My friend who works with me prefers to edit in Photoshop and when he follows the same workflow his saved JPEG from the identical RAW file in Photoshop is minimally smaller in file size, say 5.6mb to 5.3mb. He's telling me that my Aperture edited photos are losing quality and resolution.
*Both of you are losing image data when you save to jpeg.* IMO the differences between the apps is probably just how the apps work rather than actually losing significantly more data. The real image data loss is in using JPEG at all!
Is he right, are my pics of lesser quality due to being a smaller file size?
I doubt it.
I've always been told that the quality of a picture is not in the mbs, but the pixel density.
The issue here is not how many pixels (because you are not varying that) but how much data each pixel contains. In this case once you avoid lossy JPEG the quality mostly has to do with different RAW conversion algorithms. Apple and Adobe both guess what Nikon is up to with the proprietary RAW NEF files and the results are different from ACR to Apple to Nikon. For my D2x pix I like Nikon's conversions the best (but Nikon software is hard to use), Aperture second and Adobe ACR (what Photoshop/Bridge uses) third. I 98% use Aperture.
I tried changing the picture quality in the export menu to 12 out of 12, but the resulting JPEG then becomes larger than the original RAW at over 7mbs. Can someone please help me understand this better? I don't want to lose picture quality if that is indeed what is happening.
JPEG is a useful format but lossy. Only use it as a _last step_ when you must save files size for some reason and are willing to accept the by-definition loss of image data to obtain smaller files (such as for web work or other on-screen viewing). Otherwise (especially for printing) save as TIFF or PSD which are non-lossy file types, but larger.
As to the Aperture vs. ACR argument, RAW-convert the same original both ways, save as TIFF and see if your eyes/brain significantly prefer one over the other. Nikon, Canon etc. keep proprietary original image capture data algorithms secret and each individual camera's RAW conversion is different.
HTH
-Allen

Similar Messages

Nikon D1x - raw file size and sharpening in Aperture

Good day all:
I have looked for several hours but can't find the answer to two questions:
1) How to set Aperture to use the full file size for the D1x, approx. 10.7 MB, vs the smaller Raw file size of 7.7 MB. The Nikon software all allows this function. Can aperture do it?
2)Aperture greys out the shrapening buttons for my D1x files, but allows it for my D100. I have tried every permutation I can think of, no luck. I wonder if it might be related to question #1? Thanks so much. I really need to do some sharpening!
Randy

Good day all:
I have looked for several hours but can't find the answer to two questions:
1) How to set Aperture to use the full file size for the D1x, approx. 10.7 MB, vs the smaller Raw file size of 7.7 MB. The Nikon software all allows this function. Can aperture do it?
2)Aperture greys out the shrapening buttons for my D1x files, but allows it for my D100. I have tried every permutation I can think of, no luck. I wonder if it might be related to question #1? Thanks so much. I really need to do some sharpening!
Randy

File size and quality of images from iphone to mac to exported jpeg

there is a lot of good info on this forum regarding jpeg compression, iphoto export etc but i want to confirm a couple things..
i have 'my photo stream' enabled so that i can upload my iphone photos to my mac and my plan is to use iphoto (im just starting to do this)...
yes, i understand that the 'image' taken by iphone is stored as 'data' and some of that data (and potentially pic detail/quality) can be lost/reduced/discarded when you ask an application to export a .jpeg with a high, med, low compression applied.
am i correct that this 'my photo stream' process is not removing any image data?
e.g. i can export a 'full size' jpeg from the iphone and i see a 3.2MB file. if i look at that photo in Iphoto and export original.. i get a 3.2MB file. i assume that the original image was only compressed once?.. when it was originally stored on my camera roll in the iphone?
If i just want to use iphoto to add tags, description... i am required to recompress the image into a file and my choice of MAX compression yields 10MB (which is more space but no more detail vs HIGH compression which yields a 1.9MB file (which most likely is less image detail). there is no way to get the same original 3.2MB amount of data but with the appropriate text fields added into the new jpg file ? would it be much better, at least in theory, if i could get the goldilocks file size, ie just enough compression to have a similar file size as the original ... seems like my choice is 50% less or 300% more ?!?

am i correct that this 'my photo stream' process is not removing any image data?
Yes, as long as you have iPhoto's iCloud preference pane configures as follows:
You're be getting the full image file, pixel dimensions, etc. which is essentially a bit by bit copy of the photo on the Phone.
When you add tags and other metadata and export the file out of iPhoto as a jpeg with the checkboxes selected to include that metadata there will be some image compression. However, if one chooses High or even Medium JPEG Quality one will be hard pressed to detect any image degradation unless printing very, large prints or otherwise displaying the image at a very, large size.
I ran a test on a 1.4 MB photo from my iPhone and compared the original to two exports, one at High and the other at Medium JPEG Quality and got these results:

Need to export Movie to Quicktime Movie w/ similar file size and quality.

Let me preface in that I am not in the video editing profession. Many times I have exported my work to the professionals. I'm sure knowing what you're doing is half of the battle. Here is my dilemma. First, I'm using Quicktime pro just to add a text track to the movie. I then save the file as what Quicktime pro calls Movie .mov. This looks good and has the quality of the original .mov and the small data size. However, no other player than quicktime will recognize the text track. I then tried exporting from Movie to quicktime movie format (still .mov, can anyone explain the difference of the two .mov types???), but I find that the image quality is poor. Yet, in the quicktime format other players (except windows media player) recognize the text track. By poor quality I mean that I think what I have is the blocking effect. I assume that this is due to the bitrate being to low. Again, I would like to keep the file size low and managable for data storage and downloading purposes. I was hoping that in the end all video players would be able to have no issues.
My current file sized are all less than 1MB and are of good quality.
Just adding a small test track the Movie .mov is still less than 1MB
The size of the image is 512x512
I should also say that I'm a PC user with a quicktime pro windows version. I'm sure that doesn't help me one bit!! However, I believe my issues are more with the fact that I'm not experienced in compressing files and knowing exactly the right settings.
Here is what I've tried thus far. Movie to quicktime movie
H264 codec
Current for fps (Which is in the original is 8fps)
Key frames automatic
frame reordering checked
I've tried Automatic data rate and setting the bit rate, even at 2000kbps (the quality is low). My original movie with the highest kbps is only 1151kbps and has no artifacts
encoding Best quality multi-pass
custom size 512x512
deinterlace checked

am i correct that this 'my photo stream' process is not removing any image data?
Yes, as long as you have iPhoto's iCloud preference pane configures as follows:
You're be getting the full image file, pixel dimensions, etc. which is essentially a bit by bit copy of the photo on the Phone.
When you add tags and other metadata and export the file out of iPhoto as a jpeg with the checkboxes selected to include that metadata there will be some image compression. However, if one chooses High or even Medium JPEG Quality one will be hard pressed to detect any image degradation unless printing very, large prints or otherwise displaying the image at a very, large size.
I ran a test on a 1.4 MB photo from my iPhone and compared the original to two exports, one at High and the other at Medium JPEG Quality and got these results:

Export QuickTime file with new audio and maintain the file size and quality as the original.

I shot some footage for a client yesterday and ran into an issue. To make a long story short I have QuickTime mov files shot with my Panasonic GH4 that have a buzzing sound in the audio track. I have clean audio from a recorder that can be sync'd. Is there a way for me to do this for the client and deliver them as the same QuickTime file but with the clean audio and keep the file size close to the original and not have quality loss in the image?
If so I will probably put all of the spanned clips together from each interview and sync the audio before delivery. I am just not sure which codec will give the client the same quality footage compared to the originals and not have a massive difference in the overall file size. They did request that they be Quicktime MOV files though so that is a must.
I don't see this as an option in the codecs in the export settings in PP, but is there a way to export as ProRes or another MAC native codec that will save them from having to convert it on their end? I am on a PC with Adobe CS5.5 so I am not too familiar with MACs, but from what I understand they would need to convert the files if I sent them straight out of the camera.
I found some related search results for this but they pertained to "Best quality" for export. I am not sure how the varying options work but I don't want to create files that are considerably larger, just not less quality.
If anyone has experience with this it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Cole

Here's the workflow: I imported the video footage into iMovie '08 and did my edits. Then I exported it (share) to my desktop with compression set @ 740 X 480. Then I used QuickTime Pro to fix the audio track. The file plays perfectly with both audio tracks working. It's a QuickTime file (.mov).
I hope this jars any replies as to why the file when uploaded to my iWeb gallery drops the second audio track.
Hmm,
Jack

Movie export size not available/balance between size and quality

Hi,
I imported some film into iMovie 08 from my Canon HD camcorder, at full 1920 x 1080 size. After I finished editing it, I wanted to export the final movie at 960 x 540. This size is not available under the "standard" share options ("large" is 1280 x 720 and "medium" is I can't remember what exact size but smaller than 960 x 540). Similarly, when I go into "Export using QuickTime" and try to create an H.264 movie there, the 960 x 540 option simply isn't available. What gives?
The reason I wanted to use this size was to try to cut down on file size. I exported the movie at 1280 x 720 and got a 380Mb file. So I wanted to try it at 960 x 540 and see what difference that made to the file size and quality. Since I couldn't seem to do it using iMovie, I ended up taking the 1280 x 720 video and using ffmpegx to convert it to 960 x 540. The problem is that I ended up with a file that was, bizarrely, even bigger (384Mb), and that had a thin green line across the bottom of the video.
So, in summary, my three questions are:
1. Why can't I export from iMovie in 960 x 540?
2. Why does my ffmpegx conversion result in an even bigger file?
3. What's the best way for me to get the optimum balance between file size and quality? (For viewing on Apple TV/HD television).
Thanks in advance,
Rob

Another very good 3rd party slideshow application is PhotoPresenter. It has some of the nicest themes I've seen in any slideshow application (including the Apple TV introduction theme) and will export to a variety of sizes up to 720 x 480 which is DV-DVDCPRO - NTSC.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Aperture exports jpeg files larger than original RAW files

Can anyone tell me why a RAW file (10.6mb), when exported as a jpeg (10.8mb) from Aperture ends up larger than the original RAW file. The same RAW file when opened and then saved as a jpeg (6.4mb) in Photoshop is a lot smaller. The photo dimensions and resolution are the same in both saved files (34.5mb open file 300dpi 4256 x 2831 pix). I have tried this on several photos, all with similar results. For information I am saving the photos in both Photoshop and Aperture at 300dpi, original size and at a quality setting of 12. In these examples/tests I have done no work to the photos, obviously the file sizes increase after work has been carried out on the photos (in both Ps & Aperture)
Almost doubling the size of saved jpegs has a massive implication on my library and may be one reason to consider Adobe Lightroom as this gives similar jpeg file sizes as Photoshop, i.e. almost half the size of the original RAW file
Reducing the quality setting on saved jpegs is an obvious way to reduce file size, but not answering the question of the considerable discrepancy when saving to the same quality in different software
Is this a feature of Aperture and nothing can be done about it ? I would prefer to use Aperture but cannot cope with the large jpeg sizes !
Any comments would be much appreciated - thank you
Nick

Think you might be right Allen - The 12 quality saved jpegs seem to be pretty high quality, closer to the original than maybe the files saved in Ps at quality 12. I have just run an identical set of processing actions on all the files in Photoshop and the jpegs previously saved in Aperture at 12, 11 and even 8 quality settings seem to be better than the same files saved at 12 in Ps
Bizarrely the file size drops from 10.6mb at quality setting 12 in Aperture, to 3.2mb when saved just one notch down at quality setting 11 in Aperture. That is a massive drop, esp considering the next one down, saving at quality 10 results in a 2.8mb file
rw just ran some checks and tests on the file export settings and file sizes in Aperture, on a file I sent him, and we get the same results. So at least my version of Aperture is not up the wall !!
Would be useful to have the explanations from Apple as to the vast variance in settings and file sizes, but I guess we will just have to keep guessing - and buying more and more hard drives for all the large files
I am considering keeping the RAW originals in future, and I suppose in this case I need only save smaller jpegs, and issue at whatever size they are needed at the time - just needs a bit of planning to look after an ever increasing collection, which is about to have two sets of images added at a time now. Added to the already amassed 80 000 images at last count !)
Thanks
Nick

Aperture refuse to open the RAW files from my new Nikon D7100.

Aperture refuse to open the RAW files from my new Nikon D7100. What can I do? Thanks for help!

the raw support of new cameras will be made with a Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update not with a aperture update. But when the new RAW- Update will arrive is not sure.
And that usually can only be installed with newer Aperture versions. You cannot use the latest raw support with Aperture 3.2.4, unless you are able to update to Aperture 3.4. And earlier raw support versions cannot be used with Aperture 2.
See the footnotes on the Raw Support page http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/raw.html. That is why asked for the Aperture version.
** Requires Aperture 3 or later.
*** Requires Aperture 3.4 or later.

I need to export a photo at around 1meg file size,and dont seem to be able to do it in the presets can anyone help please ,I shoot on a canon 5d

I need to export a photo at around 1meg file size,and dont seem to be able to do it in the presets can anyone help please ,I shoot on a canon 5d

I believe Frank is referring to the end use (e.g., for print or on-screen use).
Until he returns, I can tell you that I ran a quick test using an image from the Aperture 3 training book library which was as follows:
Camera = Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Master resolution = 5616 x 3744 (21 MP)
I was able to export to a JPEG with end file size of 1 MB as follows:
Export Presets drop-down > select 'Edit' option
Selected preset name 'JPEG - 50% of Original Size' > change percentage value to 40% > change DPI value to '300' > click OK to set as current default > Export version to desktop.
The exported JPEG has a resolution of 2246 x 1498 and appears on screen to have the same image quality of the original in Aperture.
Note - I did not change the default Image Quality slider in the Export Preset dialog (which left it at 10).
Basically, you will need to play around with the settings until you find the appropriate values to arrive at an image version you want.

Why Aperture doesn't send the RAW file to Photoshop

I've seen the complaint about Aperture not passing the original RAW file to Photoshop in several places in this forum. I think I have a reason for why Aperture doesn't work this way.
The reason has to do with the 1st law of digital RAW photography. "Never, ever, overwrite the original RAW data from a camera's RAW format file."
Because of the above rule, both Aperture and Photoshop do not actually work on the original RAW file. They transform the RAW image data into a usable image using user specified settings (which may be the camera's default setting for that image). The original RAW file is left untouched.
When you open a RAW file in Photoshop and try to save it, you'll be prompted for a new file name. You wouldn't want to overwrite the original RAW file by writing the edited image data back to it.
When you edit an Aperture RAW file using Photoshop as the external editor, Aperture first creates a TIFF or PSD version image file in its library and then passes that file name to Photoshop. Photoshop opens the TIFF or PSD file and directly edits it. Since this version file is already in Aperture's library, when Photoshop is finished editing it, Aperture automatically sees the edited file because its already in the library.
If Aperture were to send the RAW file name to Photoshop, Photoshop would open the RAW file and create a new PSD file. When it came time to save your edits, where would you save it. In order to get it back into Aperture's library, you would need some form of Photoshop to Aperture communication so that Photoshop would know where to save the edited file and Aperture would know to add it to the library. This would require collaboration between both Adobe and Apple and doesn't seem likely.
I have a couple of ideas someone can try. These are only ideas and completely untested. I'd do it myself but I don't own Aperture (see my computer info below for the reason).
1. Create two folders with automator actions. You export your RAW files from Aperture to a "Photoshop-IN" folder. Any new RAW image found in this folder will be automatically opened in Photoshop by the Automator action. Then you save the edited Photoshop file into a 2nd folder "Aperture-IN". Another Automator action imports this into Aperture.
2. In iPhoto, if you try to edit a RAW image with an external editor, iPhoto creates an intermediate image file (JPEG I think) which it passes to Photoshop. But, if you drag the original RAW image thumbnail from iPhotos library window to the Photoshop icon in the dock, the original RAW image file is passed to Photoshop. You only have the problem of getting the saved Photoshop file back into iPhoto's library. Maybe this same thing would work in Aperture by dragging the Master image to the Photoshop icon in the dock.
PowerMac G4 Dual 1.25GHz Mac OS X (10.4.3) FW800, 4 internal HD - 550GB

This is all well and good. I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of keeping the "master" sacrosanct. What I object to is not being able to do the conversion in Photoshop (or elsewhere)
What I want is for Aperture to send the raw over to photoshop when I select "open in external editor", and then follow the current workflow (I do my edits, hit save, and a second master is added to Aperture's db.)
It's totally possible for them to do this, and it wouldn't break anything in the system, or the philosophy. Of course it's a workaround that wouldn't be necessary if Aperture's converter were up to snuff. But it isn't, and I bet it would be easier to implement the workaround than to fix the fundamental defects in the converter itself.

Printing from Raw files?

I have been trying to print directly from Aperture to an Epson 4000 using the adjusted RAW files (Canon 1DMK2). I have the files looking great on the screen, I choose the printer and all of the correct printer settings but the prints are totally blue. If I export the RAW files to jpegs, then bring those jpegs into Aperture and print them using the same print settings they print just fine. Likewise if I use Adobe Bridge to adjust the raw files, then have them printed thru Photoshop using Contact Sheet, they print fine. It's only when trying to print from the RAW files within Aperture that I have problems.
Does anyone have success printing from RAW files to a printer?

The most likely answer to this question lies in a bug
apparently introduced in Aperture 1.5.1. Supposedly
1.5.0 was OK in this respect.
Anyway, if you print RAW using a Contact sheet
profile, the colors are messed up. Any printer. Any
OS. Any camera.
Print that same picture in RAW using single photo on
a page and it will work fine.
Any other format besides RAW works fine in contact
sheets. Many of us are waiting for Apple to fix this
bug. In the meantime, you will indeed need to either
convert the picture to tiff or jpeg OR send it to
some other program to print (Photoshop, etc.)
Interestingly, if you hit print preview, a picture
will get created and loaded into Preview and it will
show you just how badly this is going to print.
Compare some RAWs in single and contact print
profiles to see how the same picture would be printed
very differently. (without wasting ink)
It looks like GeneTucc had it right. I got the latest update that was released today (December 11) and the contact sheets print much better. Still have a long ways to go, but that's just the normal color mgmt issues.

When round tripping with photoshop cc, i get a saved psd file with my original raw,the problem is these are high file sizes and taking a lot of space,can i stop this?

when round tripping with photoshop cc, i get a saved psd file with my original raw,the problem is these are high file sizes and taking a lot of space,can i stop this?

That's not the workflow that I use. I have my Lightroom preferences set to create TIF images when going to Photoshop. I keep the original raw file and the TIF image (usually reduced to an 8-bit image) and only export JPEG's when they are needed to send to a lab or to send to someone over the Internet. JPEG files are highly compressed. I only create them when they are needed, and they are discarded as soon as they have been used for their intended purpose. I keep the raw file and the Photoshop-created TIF in my library. This requires extra disk space. But I always have the highest quality files available.

HT4757 When will Aperture support Fujifilm X-Pro1 raw files?

When will Aperture support Fujifilm X-Pro1 raw files?

I firmly disencourage people to purchase Aperture these days.
To everyone asking me for advise as a Pro photographer.
Apple attitude on this issue is of abandonement and ignorance of users needs.
Unfortunately, the feeling is that this is going to be the permanent standard.
They are not providing translations, not providing support to models such as X-Pro1 that has received inmediate reaction from major developers, neither do care for users that openly claim for RAW support for an extended model as X-10.
This is somehow another sign of apple arrogance in term of market predominant coompany.
If Apple do not begin to lose sales and an importan market share this is going to be worse and worse.
Best way: Ignore Aperture.
Adobe is nowadays the ONLY option for photographers.
I don't like Lightroom so I must select my shots with Photo Mechanic, or Xnview and then go to photoshop.
Sick of Apple.

How to Create a OLAP Cube in DEV using SSAS from Raw file system backup from Production?

How to Create a OLAP Cube in DEV using SSAS from Raw file system backup from Production? I dont have a .abf file available. Two paritions in production are missing data. We were able to get back file system backup which contains the files for these two paritions.
How do I create a cube in Dev using this file system backup.
we are on SQL Server 2008R2.
Thanks,

How to Create a OLAP Cube in DEV using SSAS from Raw file system backup from Production? I dont have a .abf file available. Two paritions in production are missing data. We were able to get back file system backup which contains the files for these two paritions.
How do I create a cube in Dev using this file system backup.
we are on SQL Server 2008R2.
Thanks,

Get Total DB size , Total DB free space , Total Data & Log File Sizes and Total Data & Log File free Sizes from a list of server

how to get SQL server Total DB size , Total DB free space , Total Data & Log File Sizes and Total Data & Log File free Sizes from a list of server

Hi Shivanq,
To get a list of databases, their sizes and the space available in each on the local SQL instance.
dir SQLSERVER:\SQL\localhost\default\databases | Select Name, Size, SpaceAvailable | ft -auto
This article is also helpful for you to get DB and Log File size information:
Checking Database Space With PowerShell
I hope this helps.

Aperture Exporting JPEG's from RAW: file size and quality questions?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for