Aperture JPEG export observations

I exported 3 jpegs full-size with the following compression quality number (1-12):
10 resulted in a file of ~ 2.5 MB
11 resulted in a file of ~ 3.5 MB
12 resulted in a file of (incredibly!) 10.5 MB !!
Why is there such a big jump from 11 to 12?
And yes there is default noise reduction enabled and no changes were made between the 3 exports.

I see the same behavior exporting D50 NEFs as JPEG with quality at 11 vs 12, and I have never seen a good explanation for this.
I find that high quality conversions from Nikon's own software give me a file size in between Aperture's Q=11 and Q=12 export results, which I find to be ideal. For many of my exports I feel that the Q=12 result is too large, and the Q=11 result too small, i.e. I fear that too much information has been lost due to compression if I were to want to make a large high quality good print.
Honestly, though, I can hardly tell any difference in the image between Q=11 and Q=12, even pixel peeping at full size.
I would love to see a export quality setting that produced a result in between what we currently get with Q=11 and Q=12. It does seems to be a large gap.
Message was edited by: ramblinwreck001

Similar Messages

  • Aperture JPEG export behavior: How does it handle non-versioned JPEGs?

    I routinely export Aperture images as 98% JPEG. I understand what this does for my RAW images and I think I know what Aperture does for JPEG originals that I've edited.
    I wonder, however, what it does for my JPEG originals that I've not edited. I want it to simply export the original, but Aperture might instead decompress the original and recompress at 98% JPEG. This will usually increase the file size and reduce the image quality, it's clearly not a good strategy.
    If I were working in iPhoto it would, in this case, follow the better strategy of exporting the original, untouched.
    So what does Aperture do?

    "Export as 98% JPEG except when there's no version and the original is JPEG. In that case, use the original JPEG".
    Except that it's "when there's been no adjustments at all to the image, no keywords or other metadata changes, no time zone changes, the original JPEG is already in the correct colour space and has the pixel dimensions that I want."
    There's no easy way of making an AppleScript that can find out all that information, particularly whether any image adjustments have been made, or if you have added metadata which isn't in the original file.
    Ian
    P.S. From your talk of 'versioned images' I'm assuming you've got the preferences set to make a new Version if you make any image adjustments? That might make an AppleScript possible, depending on whether you do anything with metadata, and how often you use Stacks.

  • Aperture to export photos either TIFF or JPEG files, highlight and shadow transition has obvious faults, this problem solved!?

    Aperture to export photos either TIFF or JPEG files, highlight and shadow transition has obvious faults, this problem solved!?

    What problem?
    You will have to be _a lot_ more specific if you'd like responsible feedback.
    I export thousands of TIFF and JPG files a week with no obvious faults.
    (Sent from my magic glass.) 

  • Aperture vs Adobe Lightroom (Beta 3) JPEG exports

    I've been beta-testing the Adobe Lightroom product and comparing it to Aperture. I'm using Aperture 1.1.1 on a MacBook Pro.
    Lightroom has some intriguing features, but I've noticed a wildly different color when exporting the same image to JPEG format from Lightroom and Aperture.
    I took the same RAW image from a shot I took with my Nikon D70 and exported a JPEG from Aperture using default settings with no color adjustment. In Lightroom I exported the same image to Photoshop, and then exported a JPEG with default settings and no color adjustment.
    Look at the difference:
    https://www.carsonmedia.com/projects/softballphotos/phototests/photocomparison.h tml
    Can anyone explain the difference? Aperture seems to export a JPEG that resembles the original.
    I'm perplexed at the difference.
    --Brandon
    15" MBP 2GB RAM OSX/XP   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    Yeah, looks like a colorspace issue -- I'm guessing Pro Photo, but it might not be LR's fault. Last I checked, LR actually exports PSDs, not JPEGs, in Pro Photo space to PS. So 2 possibilities:
    1. LR incorrectly tagged the PSD output, so PS doesn't realize it's Pro Photo.
    2. You didn't do a colorspace coversion in PS before saving the JPEG. Try using 'save to web' in PS -- it usually takes care of the sRGB conversion for you. Does it look correct in PS before the JPEG export?

  • Yosemite/Aperture 3.6 jpeg export issue

    I have recently updated to Yosemite and Aperture 3.6.  Now I cannot upload the exported jpegs to my photo site (shootproof.com).  If I pull the jpeg into iPhoto and re-export, then I can upload that file.  I don't have time to double my work flow.  What can I do to fix this issue.
    Regards,
    rharbour

    I can export the photos to jpeg without any errors.  I have tried a couple of the default jpeg settings, but still no luck uploading.  I typically export at the Aperture default full size jpeg setting, quality at 10, dpi at 72.  When exported, I can view the photos fine, and can send them to other computers/ipad/iphone and view them just fine.  I just cannot upload them to shootproof.com without an error.  Worked fine before upgrade to 3.6.
    I can open the Aperture library in iPhoto and export from there and those upload without any problems.  The difference is that in iPhoto, if I export at max the file size is 24 mb but one step down is 1-2 mb.  In Aperture, it exports full size at 7-12 mb which works for me.  I have even had shootproof.com look on their end and they said it was a Aperture issue because they couldn't upload a photo that I emailed to them for testing purposes.
    I will try the fixes that you recommended, but it will be late tonight because I have a shoot this afternoon.
    Thanks and I'll let you know how/if it worked.

  • JPEG Export Problem

    A few days ago, someone was commenting on funny square boxes in JPEG exports that occurred at places with spot touch up was performed. I have now experienced the same problem with a single touch up.
    D70 RAW file-->single spot touch up-->export to a hi-resolution (best possible) JPEG--> ugly spot at site of touch up.
    image available at www.printroom.com/pro/e2photo in gallery "aperture"
    The previous thread was locked, but I never saw an answer to the problem
    G5 iMac OS 10.4.3
    any help would be greatly appreciated
    steven

    hi. apologies for delay in responding - have been trying to find some time to do some testing
    i removed and re-installed the mogrify plugin and this seemed to do the trick. i couldn't replicate with the standard export, so i assume it was just a mogrify issue

  • JPEG Export fails in some way

    Hello guys,
    we have developed a JPEG Export Plugin for InDesign server that worked fine for several years now, never having any problems. Now a strange issue occur and I need some help. When exporting an preview image of one page (containing textframes with text and tables) the preview image is correct if the dpi is smaller than 72 dpi (100% in our application). But when the dpi is equal or greater than 72 the text appears correctly on the image but the tables are missing. This problem occurs on CS4 but not on CS5 server, but there is no difference between the plugin implementation (beside the changes that were obligatory for porting the plugin to CS5). Maybe this is a known issue or someone has solution for it?
    Here is the difference between the exported images (smaller than 72 dpi and greater or equal 72 dpi):

    I do move some photos to OnOne or PS (for editing), then back to Aperture. In Aperture I would select-all (click) the photos I wanted to send to Sam's for printing then drag the selected items (all at the same time) onto the Sam's web site for processing/priniting. Another thought - on occassion I would have to switch-out flash-cards during shooting.
    Ah there you go both pieces of the puzzle solved.
    You're getting the Tiff files in Aperture from the use of the external editor. In the Aperture->Preferences->Export window is the settings for what file type to use with an external editor I'm sure your setting is Tiff.
    And then by dragging the file out of Aperture rather then exporting it you are getting the Tiff.
    IMPORTANT Point:
    By dragging the files out of Aperture you are not really exporting them you are getting the Aperture generated preview (or in the case of the Tiff files the original). The settings in the  Export window have NO effect on the image when you drag it out. In all likelihood you are not getting the size and/or resolution you think you are.
    You should be exporting the versions by using the Export Versions button in the Export window. Once the versions are exported to a folder on your disk you can then drag those to the print web site. This will ensure you are getting the image size and resolution you want.
    regards

  • Jpeg export-  why do some become tiff-Mb files

    Took 10 pictures in RAW. Minor editing in Aperture 3. Uploaded to Sam's Photo for 4x6 prints. 8 went as jpeg (small file), but 2 went a tiff (25mg). These 2 took a long time to upload. What did I do wrong and how can I prevent this tiff (large files) in the future?

    I do move some photos to OnOne or PS (for editing), then back to Aperture. In Aperture I would select-all (click) the photos I wanted to send to Sam's for printing then drag the selected items (all at the same time) onto the Sam's web site for processing/priniting. Another thought - on occassion I would have to switch-out flash-cards during shooting.
    Ah there you go both pieces of the puzzle solved.
    You're getting the Tiff files in Aperture from the use of the external editor. In the Aperture->Preferences->Export window is the settings for what file type to use with an external editor I'm sure your setting is Tiff.
    And then by dragging the file out of Aperture rather then exporting it you are getting the Tiff.
    IMPORTANT Point:
    By dragging the files out of Aperture you are not really exporting them you are getting the Aperture generated preview (or in the case of the Tiff files the original). The settings in the  Export window have NO effect on the image when you drag it out. In all likelihood you are not getting the size and/or resolution you think you are.
    You should be exporting the versions by using the Export Versions button in the Export window. Once the versions are exported to a folder on your disk you can then drag those to the print web site. This will ensure you are getting the image size and resolution you want.
    regards

  • Jpeg export size and quality issues

    aloha,
    I use a lot of photos in articles on the web and size them to about 250 x 166 pixels. I just tested Aperture, Photoshop CS2, Fireworks 8, and Graphic Converter at levels of low, med, high or 30, 60, 80 or 4, 6, 9.
    The best quality in terms of sharpness, clarity and color was PS CS2, with Aperture second. But Photoshop's files were 12, 24 and 36 k respectively, where the Aperture files were 72, 74 and 88k. In fact even at quality 0, the Aperture-generated jpeg was 64k. Fireworks were 4, 8 and 16k but surprisingly poor quality. Graphic converter was 116, 120, and 124k, with decent quality.
    It appears that Adobe's engine is more adept at re-sizing and compressing (not entirely surprising). It leaves me with a bit of a workflow issue, since opening the files from Aperture into CS2 leaves me with a gigantic .tiff in Aperture I don't need.
    Full size jpegs could be exported from Aperture to a folder, then opened in Photoshop, resized, and saved for the web. I can automate the Photoshop part of it, but would need some help automating the whole process.
    Any information and suggestions folks have would be appreciated! I am curious as to why there is a floor on the Aperture jpeg sizes. Maybe I need to turn some option off? I'd love to keep my workflow within a single program.....
    mahalo,
    paul

    What we need are the clip properties & sequence settings in Final Cut Express.  Your screenshot is from a Finder window.
    It would appear you have a clip with nonstandard frame size (1366x768) in an H.264 file.  FCE cannot edit this material.  FCE is limited to specific codecs and frame sizes.  You need to convert your clip to QuickTime/Apple Intermediate Codec. If it's highdef widescreen then convert it to QT/AIC 1920x1080i.  Try using MPEG Streamclip to convert the source clip.
    You also need to be using a matching Easy Setup in Final Cut Express.  If your source media file is QT/AIC 1920x1080i then you should select the AVCHD Apple Intermediate Codec 1920x1080i60 Easy Setup in FCE -AND- then create a new sequence before importing your clip into FCE and placing it in your sequence (timeline)

  • Lightroom JPEG export VS Photoshop Image Processor

    Hey guys:
    Long time photoshop and lightroom user (long time user of all things Adobe). First post here in the forums. I did a search for my question but I think it was too specific, so it returned zero results.
    My question is about Lightroom's JPEG export vs Photoshops Image Processor. When I export a RAW file to JPEG from Lightroom, the file size is freaking huge. The JPEG is as big as my original RAW file (~25mb). Settings are set to default - 100 quality. Everything else remains untouched.
    However, when I use Photoshop's image processor (I launch it through Bridge, easier that way for me) and process the RAW images that way, my JPEGs are roughly 5-10mb in size. Settings in Image Processor are quality 10 and thats it. No actions being run or anything.
    Can anyone shed some light as to why Lightroom exports JPEGs that are roughly 2-4 times the size of Photoshop's JPEGs? My initial thoughts are that the 100 quality setting in Lightroom is more like Photoshop's quality 12 (that always makes me think of Spinal Tap - "Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?" "These go to eleven.") Ideally, exporting out of Lightroom would be much easier for my workflow.
    Thanks in advance.
    -The Doctor

    DrMilesBennell wrote:
    Can anyone shed some light as to why Lightroom exports JPEGs that are roughly 2-4 times the size of Photoshop's JPEGs? My initial thoughts are that the 100 quality setting in Lightroom is more like Photoshop's quality 12 (that always makes me think of Spinal Tap - "Why don't you just make ten louder and make ten be the top number and make that a little louder?" "These go to eleven.") Ideally, exporting out of Lightroom would be much easier for my workflow.
    You are correct: LR Quality 100 = PS Quality 12
    Despite LR having 101 Quality settings (0 to 100) it actually only has 12 Quality settings the same as PS 'Baseline Standard':
    JPEG Quality Setting Comparison
    PS
    LR
    LR Range
    Typical Reduction
    0
    0
    0-7%
    11%
    1
    10
    8-15%
    23%
    2
    20
    16-23%
    14%
    3
    30
    24-30%
    14%
    4
    35
    31-38%
    16%
    5
    40
    39-46%
    24%
    6
    50
    47-53%
    4%
    7
    55
    54-61%
    27%
    8
    65
    62-69%
    25%
    9
    70
    70-76%
    31%
    10
    80
    77-84%
    35%
    11
    90
    85-92%
    41%
    12
    100
    93-100%
    I keep a small copy of the above table taped to my monitor. I chose the numbers under the 'LR' column for the 12 steps (not AA's) to make it easier to remember. In actuality ANY number in the LR Range column will produce the same results for each step.
    Under the 'Typical Reduction' column notice the small amount of reduction for PS 6 (LR 47-53%) Quality setting. If interested why AND why you probably shouldn't use PS 7 (LR 54-61%) Quality setting see this post:
    http://forums.adobe.com/message/5641903#5641903

  • JPEG Export Looks Saturated in Internet Explorer

    I see this question in many forums and online but without a solution.
    JPEG exports (sRBG) look overly saturated when viewed in Internet Explorer browser, including when uploading/viewing in Facebook, etc, etc.  In other words, the colors looks different between Lightroom and Internet Explorer.  (Colors looks the same between Lightroom and Photoshop though.)
    As point of reference, when you download a sample JPEG image from Canon EOS's website (used to show sample images from their cameras) you see that those images also use sRGB profile.  They also look exactly the same no matter how you view them (Lightroom, Photoshop, Internet Explorer, Safari, etc.).
    What is Lightroom doing to photos upon export to JPEG and you need Lightroom or Photoshop to see the same colors?
    I saw some talk about it had to do with Lightroom presets and that you had to zero those out?  Any ideas from Windows users?

    Have you got Firefox or Safari on your machine?  In which case, how do the images look in either of those browsers?  Or, if you're using Windows 7, how do the images look in Windows photo viewer?
    Also, can you say what monitor you are using please?
    I think it might be a colour management issue.  Internet Explorer is not colour managed (not even IE9), Lightroom and Photoshop are colour managed, so is Windows 7 photo viewer (but not the XP equivalent), so are Firefox and Safari (but not Chrome).  When there's a difference between how something looks in an non-colour-managed program and colour-manged programs then it's worth checking for colour management issues. 
    If your monitor has a wider gamut than sRGB, then you would expect IE9 and other non-managed programs to look over-saturated. 

  • Lightroom vs jpeg export

    Hi,
    My images do not look the same as the way they appear in lightroom. Seems like they are loosing contrast/shadows.

    Yes I am using sRGB color profile when exporting.
    This is my screenshot of the image in Lightroom vs Jpeg Export on the right.

  • JPEG exports - "optimize to file size"

    just saw this tucked away in somebody's lengthy post, but i think it merits its own thread.
    it would be very useful, and isnt very difficult, to implement a jpeg export option for auto-setting the quality slider based on "desired file size".
    for instance, my web products need jpegs w/ a max of 800k. in PS, i have to dork around w/ the preview sliders to get this. in LR, there isnt a way. preferred for both would be UI for inputting the desired size and let the cpu do its job.
    this would rock.
    thanks
    matt

    Yes. Generally speaking, would be nice to know the exported file size in terms of MB / KB, in addition to pixel dimensions which are already there.
    Gilles.

  • Adding crop marks in jpeg export

    Hi All,
    Is is possible to add crop marks in jpeg export similar to what we have in pdf export.
    I see SnapshotUtils class but could not see any method to set crop marks.
    What I need to do to set crop marks?
    Regards,
    Alam

    Well, since there is no Crop Marks option when doing a JPEG Export (Snapshot) by hand, I would be very surprised if there were a plug-in API for it.
    So I think you'll have to add your own Crop Marks before you do the JPEG Export. It isn't really that hard ... just a little tedious. You can get the general idea from the CropMarks.jsx script that comes with InDesign.

  • Aperture is exporting large file size e.g. original image is 18.2MB and the exported version (TFF 16 Bit) is 47.9MB, any ideas please

    Aperture is exporting large file size e.g. original image is 18.2MB and the exported version (TFF 16 Bit) is 47.9MB, any ideas please

    Raws, even if not compressed, Sould be smaller than a 24-bit Tiff, since they have only one bitplane. My T3i shoots 14 bit 18MP raws and has a raw file size of 24.5 MB*. An uncompressed Tiff should have a size of 18 MP x 3 bytes per pixel or 54 MB.
    *There must be some lossless compression going on since 18 MP times 1.75 bytes per pixel is 31.5MB for uncompressed raw.

Maybe you are looking for