Aperture Photobooks - RAw or Jpegs?

I am new to Aperture and starting to make a photobook. I have jpeg and RAW pairs of the images I am using. I can't seem to figure out which one Aperture is using when I am compiling the book. Does it matter which file the view is set to? Any insight would be great.

Does it matter which file the view is set to? Any insight would be great.
Aperture will use either the raw or the jpeg when rendering the the images in your book, depending on what you have set as the original for the pair.  You can change the original to be used for a raw+jpeg pair in the Photos menu:
Photos > Use jpeg as original   or  Photos > Use raw as original
I tested this by using raw+jpeg pairs, where the raw is of an unsupported format or differs considerably from the jpeg, so it was obvious, which original files has been used to render the images in the book.
Regards
Léonie

Similar Messages

  • Aperture Marks RAW as JPEG

    I finally have some time on my hands to go through and clean up some old projects in Aperture.  I started digging into a project from 2008 and noticed that the RAWs and JPEGs had seperated from each other for about half of the images (they all came from the same memory card and were imported at the same time).  From what I have read, recombining them is a real pain and probably not worth it.  But the issue that does bother me, for a lot of the seperated RAWs and JPEGs, Aperture has labeled them both as JPEG in the top of the "Info" pane when one of the images clearly has a ".nef" in the file name.  I am at a total loss about how to rectify this issue.  Any ideas would be amazing!
    Thanks!

    Try and export as original on one of them which is marked wrong and see what it exports as. You can try exporting them all as Originals and re-import them as pairs as long as they are the same name...different extensions of course.

  • I cannot download photos in raw and jpeg into aperture from canon 5d mark111

    I cannot load photos from canon5d mark3 into aperture in raw and jpeg, any ideas?

    Don't believe the RAW's from that camera are supported yet. See OS X Lion: Supported digital camera RAW formats

  • Does Aperture work on my RAW or JPEG files?

    When using Aperture only one image appears, although both RAW and JPEG are stored originally.  What am I actually editing, RAW or JPEG?  How can I tell what is happening?
    Thanks

    Hello, that depends on how you imported your RAW-jpeg pairs.
    With the above setting the RAW will be used, with "jpeg as master" the jpeg.
    To change your setting after import, see this post:
    Re: How do I work on my raw files and not the jpeg files that currently dis
    May 8, 2010 5:48 PM
    Regards
    Léonie

  • RAW to JPEG export in Aperture 3

    I've imported RAW + JPEG image pairs from my camera, and selected the RAW image as the master. I understand that Aperture uses the JPEG for display purposes. My question is this: when I export (it would be the version rather than the master), as, for example, when I want to send the file to a photo lab for print processing, is Aperture working from the JPEG file it imported, or from the master (RAW)? I've made some adjustments to the white balance and lighting. I noticed that when I export the image after the adjustment, that the JPEG file is the same size as the original JPEG file that was imported as part of the pair (in this case, about 2.5 mb). I bumped up the image quality for the export, which results in a larger JPEG file that is exported (9.3 mb). What I really want to know is, is Aperture just expanding my 2.5 mb JPEG (making a larger file, but still from a lossy format), or is it creating a new JPEG file of larger size from the RAW master (and therefore, less loss)? I hope my question makes sense. I can't find any information on this in the program documentation.

    Richard GORRE wrote:
    Meaning I dont know the utility to import 2 files at the begining, except using more space.
    If somebody can explain the advantage, it will be nice BR Richard
    The main advantage to shoot and import RAW + JPEG is for the processed JPEG from your camera.
    If your camera has the ability to capture say Black & White and you grab some images that look good in camera, then when you import both into Aperture, you will have that B & W JPEG as well as the full color information RAW. If you like the JPEG enough, then the work is done. If not, you can use the full color data in the RAW and create your own B & W image using Aperture's tools.
    The same applies if you like the camera's processing for color, filters, etc. It is a matter of convenience really, not born of necessity.
    Hope that helps.

  • RAW adjustments in Aperture vs adjusting a JPEG

    In Aperture their is a pull down menue for "RAW fine tuning". Other than those 4 or 5 adjustments am I correct that their is no difference in terms of adjusting a RAW or JPEG file in terms of exposure, contrast, levels, shadows and highlights, etc..? I understand that a RAW file is non-destructive but have not actually ever been able to see the advantage of adjusting RAW images over JPEG images. What am I missing?
    Thanks.

    I understand that a RAW file is non-destructive but have not actually ever been able to see the advantage of adjusting RAW images over JPEG images. What am I missing?
    In analog colour correction, the original is a viewable graphic which is preprocessed in the sense that the make and model of film introduces a look. The original is colour managed through capturing an IT8 target for the look of the make and model of film.
    In digital colour correction, the original is not a viewable graphic. Instead of applying preprocessing in the film medium, it is applied in the camera which incorporates a kind of colour preprocessing which is dependent on the camera manufacturer.
    There is no one RAW preprocessing any more than there is one film preprocessing, e.g. see Wikipedia. Image data and the colour preprocessing is coupled in the RAW file format, so to speak replacing the analog original as it is before exposure correction / colour correction.
    RAW can be considered the equivalent of the high bit image data captured in a drum scanner before exposure correction in the scanner software, application of the corrections to the capture, saving of corrected and downsampled to 8-bit to disk.
    There were intermediary implementations of non-destructive colour correction, the best known of which was Live Picture for which Apple's former John Sculley was in turn CEO. Live Picture started with 8-bit scans and converted into a tiered image data format.
    Layers and edits were stored in a resolution independent format that was independent of the image data format. One could manipulate 1Gb image data on a Quadra with a NuBus card, beating Photoshop by many miles.
    When one was done with editing, the resolution independent edit file was applied to the resolution dependent image data file in a high-bit calculation using Apple ColorSync 2 as calculation and conversion engine and ICC profiles as device characterisations.
    Essentially, Aperture is an implementation of this idea to digital cameras.
    With regard to JPEG, then JPEG is a final export format and NOT an editing format. It is not simply a change in the bit, but a change in the colourant data. Internally, the channels are rotated to a CIE-like model and the chroma channels are crushed. Saving to JPEG once for output is workable, saving to JPEG twice in the course of colour correction should always be avoided.
    /hh

  • How do i convert raw to jpeg in aperture

    How do I convert raw to jpeg in Aperture 3 ?

    I find all this rather strange! I often convert RAW to Jpeg if I want to keep an image for reference but it doesn't merit or require the 8 to 10MB of the RAW file (on my computer, my external drive, or anywhere else). For example, I take photos of artefacts in museums, and I also photograph the labels/legends beside them, for reference. I can keep those solely as quite small Jpegs since I'm never going to want to print them.
    (No, I don't want to switch settings on the camera while I do this - I'll only forget to switch back, and then have loads of low-res Jpegs that were meant to be glorious RAW).
    In other software I've used, there's a batch convert that makes this very simple. Seems that in Aperture I'm obliged to export and then re-import. Not a big deal, but a slight pain in the arse all the same, and a little odd.
    Anyway, thanks to the above posts, I now know how to do the export-import malarkey. I couldn't find it in the manual.
    cheers,
    Helen

  • Aperture 3 RAW update for sony rx100 m3 RAW and JPEG

    Sony RAW and JPEG files unsupported by Aperture 3....help please Sony rx100 m3

    Are you trying to import RAW&JPEG pairs?  Try to set the Import settings in the Import panel to import with the JPEG selected as the original file.
    If that does not work, try to import JPEG files only.
    Are you still getting the error message?

  • The raw portion of a referenced master got separated from its jpeg pair when I was relocating originals.  Can I recombine the raw and jpeg pair?

    Hi, I'm a fairly new Aperture user and have just started storing my photos on an external hard drive. An error message appeared when I was relocating originals of a project. It stopped relocating at one image, saying that the jpeg file did not exist. I found the raw file name under the new project folder that I was relocating it to, but it's jpeg pair did not move. The file names look identical except one ends in .JPG and the other as .NEF. I tried to combine originals, but I got the same error message and when I looked at the files the raw now had (1) attached to it, whereas the jped didn't. The Aperture window started to close unexpectedly many times. I tried Repair Permissions and Repair Database and that seemed to stop Aperture from closing unexpectedly, but the raw and jpeg  pair are still in separate folders. How can I get them paired up again or does it matter? I'm using Mac OS X and Aperture version 3.4.5.
    Thanks,
    sophie

    If you don't take care when choosing the location for referenced images, you can create some problems for yourself.
    From an operational perspective 'Managed' images means Aperture will take care of the image file storage for you, 'Referenced' means you will take care of it yourself.
    There are a number of things that may have happened but this is what I think is most likely:
    If you shoot a lot of photos with the same brand of camera, eventually you'll end up with duplicate file names, for example two different files called DSC_1234.NEF. If you attempt to store these in the same folder yourself, worse case scenario is you may inadvertently overwite one of the files. If you use Aperture to relocate, you'll get one of the files with a new name of DSC_1234 (1).NEF.
    So your first step is to figure out what these files really are. Are they duplicates, or are they different files with the same name, and do they each have a matching .JPG
    Aperture has the tools to fix up the problem, but you need to confirm what the problem is first.
    If you don't have many of the (1) files, it may be worth continuing your 'relocate' to subfolders - making sure your subfolder hierarchy doesn't cause duplicate names to be stored together. Then when everything else is stored correctly, address the problem images by moving them to where they should be, with the right name and the JPG/NEF pairs together.
    You can then search for missing files in Aperture and use the 'Locate Referenced Images' to reconnect them with Aperture.
    Andy

  • Best practice for photo format: RAW+PSD+JPEG?

    What is the best practice in maintaining format of files while editing?
    I shoot in RAW and import into PS CS5. After editing, it allows me to save as various formats, including PSD and JPEG. PS says that if you want to re-edit the file, you should save as PSD as all the layers are maintained as-is. Hence I'd prefer to save as .PSD. However, in most cases, the end objective is to share the image with others and JPEG is the most suitable format. Does this mean, that for each image, its important to save it in 3 formats viz RAW, PSD and JPEG? Wont this increase the total space occupied tremendously? Is this how most professionals do it? Pls advice.

    Thanks everyone for this continued discussion in my absence over two weeks. Going through it i realize its helpful stuff. During this period, i downloaded Aperture trial and have learnt it (there's actually not much learning, its so incredibly intuitive and simple, but incredibly powerful. Since I used iphoto in the past, it just makes it easier.
    I have also started editing my pics to put them up on my photo site. And over past 10 days, here is the workflow I have developed.
    -Download RAW files onto my laptop using Canon s/w into a folder where i categorize and maintain all my images
    -Import them into Aperture, but letting the photos reside in the folder structure i defined (rather than have Aperture use its own structure)
    -Complete editing of all required images in Aperture (and this takes care of 80-90% of my pics)
         -From within Aperture open in PS CS5 those images that require editing that cannot be done in Aperture
         -Edit in CS5 and do 'Save', this brings them back to Aperture
         -Now I have two versions of these images in Aperture - the original RAW and the new .PSD
    -Select the images that I need to put up on my site and export them to a new folder from where i upload them
    I would be keen to know if someone else follows a more efficient or robust workflow than this, would be happy to incorporate it.
    There are still a couple questions I have:
    1 - Related to PS CS5: Why do files opened in CS5 jump up in terms of their file size. Any RAW  or JPEG file originally btn 2-10 MB shows up as minimum 27 MB in CS. The moment you do some edits and/or add layers, it reaches 50-150MB. This is ridiculous. I am sure I am doing something wrong.  Or is this how CS5 works with everyone.
    2 - After editing a file in CS by launching it from Aperture, I now end up with two versions in Aperture, the original file and the new .PSD file (which is usually 100MB+). I tried exporting the .PSD file to a folder to upload it on my site, and wasnt sure what format and size it would end up with. I got it as a JPEG file within reasonable filesize limits. Is this how Aperture works? Does Aperture allow you options of which format you want to save the file in?

  • Does Aperture support RAW 3F (*.fff) file format?

    I am scanning all of my film with a Hasselblad FlexTight F1 scanner. I saved the files in their RAW format called 3F (*.fff). I am completely schocked that Aperture doesn't recognize the file format. After all, isn't Apple selling Aperture as "Professional Applications"? Hmm, what is more professional than scanning film with a $15,000 FlextTight scanner?
    What are they thinking, or what am I missing? I just don't get it.

    Well, if you look closely at the technical specifications (http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/raw.html), you'll see that Aperture is meant for digital images taken with a digital camera and not for scans, sorry.
    Wide Support for RAW Formats from Leading Cameras
    Aperture 3 supports the RAW formats from more than 150 digital cameras and camera backs. Aperture also lets you work with most DNG files.1 Shoot JPEG? Using Aperture, you can import JPEG images from virtually all digital cameras.
    As a work-around, try another lossless format for your scans. Are your scans very large? Then you may possibly run into another problem because of the file size. I am having frequently problems with Aperture being unresponsive, if the image file size of my scans is close to 1 GB.

  • Difficulty navigating to and identifying my RAW and JPEG Images

    Hi,
    I have several related issues that I would appreciate help with.
    I am finding difficulty navigating to and identifying my RAW and JPEG images in Aperture. I do actually principally work with JPEG and only use RAW when I perceive there to be a benefit by improving a poorly captured image.
    To give you some background.  I am using an iMac OSX 10.8.3 and Aperture 3.4.3 Camera Raw 4.04. When I Import images I import both RAW and JPEG using RAW as the original.
    At the Import stage both RAW and JPEG thumbnails are displayed. However once imported only one thumbnail is displayed in the Library on some occasions this will be the JPEG and on other occasions the RAW (as identified from the Info tab. How can I select which version to work with?
    I would appreciate assistance with this.
    Regards,
    John

    It is possible to see the Raw master along side the Jpg master if you wish.
    When a version is created (make new version from original) it is created off the original that is currently selected. So if the jpg image is the current original all versions created will be made off the jpg image. Likewise if the raw is the current original all versions created will be made off the raw image.
    Also keep in mind that a version that has no adjustments applied to it is identical to the original it was made from.
    So to get both along side each other do:
    Set raw as original, create new version from original. Label this version Raw original version. Now switch to jpg as original. Make a version from this and label it Jpg original version.
    Just ensure you never apply adjustments to these two images and you will always have both the jpg and raw images available to compare.
    In addition if say the jpg is the original and you want to make a version from the raw, instead of switching the jpg and raw you can just go to the Raw original version and duplicate it.

  • Import RAW and jpeg

    If I try to import both RAW and JPEG from the same folder or from the same card LR only imports the RAW files. I usually shoot RAW and JPEG simutaneously so they both have the same filename but different file types. Photshop handles this OK so whats going on?

    It would probably have been better to start a new thread, rather than attaching your new question on the end of a 3 year-old thread, but anyway, by JEP do you mean JPG?  Where are you seeing JEP/JPG?  The RAW files from your camera won't say .RAW as the extension, but .CRW or .CR2 if Canon RAW and .NEF if Nikon RAW, and perhaps some other extension for a different manufacturer.
    As far as shot-specific information: shutter-speed, aperture, ISO and focal-length are shown several different places such as under the histogram, in the metadata panel in Library mode, and in the Info Overlay in Loupe view in Library and Develop modes.  You can define what specific things you want to display in the limited area using View / View Options.  You can use the I key to cycle between nothing, Loupe Info 1 and Loupe Info 2.
    For learning photography, shutter, aperture, ISO and focal-length are mostly what you'd need, along with white-balance color-temperature which is visible in Develop mode.  Some camera-manufacturer-specific programs can also show things like which focus-points were enabled, but Lightroom works with many, many cameras from various manufacturers and things like focus-points are recorded differently from each manufacturer so LR doesn't attempt to decode and show such less-standardized information.
    If you really want to see ALL the information encoded in an image--the EXIF data, then download EXIFtool and drag-and-drop an image to the EXE that has (-k) in the name and you'll see a very long list of information, most of it irrelevant to general photography and, again, different for different cameras, where LR is trying to show things that are common to all cameras.
    EXIFtool is available from:  http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/

  • RAW or JPEG  What id best for creating an iBook?

    I have photos in both RAW and JPEG format.  I know that when a RAW file is edited it is saved as a JPEG.  I noticed that the size of the edited RAW file is often smaller than the same JPEG photo. (Sometimes it's up to 2MB or more difference.)  Believing that a larger size photo has more detail do you recommend using one file format over the other (edited RAW v. JPEG) to create an iBook?

    I'm sorry ... I may have mislead you by using the term "iBook" was inccorrect.  I want to create a photobook.  iPhoto does processes RAW images.  From iPhoto: "... iPhoto imports RAW-format photos in the same way it imports any other photos, organizes them next to your other shots, and lets you edit them using advanced editing tools designed for RAW photos.  When you edit a RAW-format photo, iPhoto saves the edited photo as a JPEG file (by default) or a TIFF file (if you select that option in Advanced preferences); the original RAW file remains unchanged."
    When I edit RAW, the edited file, a JPEG, is smaller than the original JPEG.  (I shot photos in dual format; both RAW and JPEG.  I did this only one time; the first time I used RAW.)  Thinking that a larger size photo is "better" i was wondering what one would recommend using. 
    Thanks 

  • Format - RAW vs JPEG vs TIFF?

    I am new to Aperture and I received a Nikon D3000 for Christmas. I am NOT a professional photographer. I just take pictures of my family and places we go. I would appreciate suggestions as to what format might be best for me. Thanks.

    JPEG is the simplest, smallest, probably offers best quality for someone who doesn't want to post-process the image themselves, but offers the least amount of control. When shooting in JPEG format, you can think of the computer inside the camera as being your own little photo-processing department. The camera will not only "capture" the image, it'll post process it by adjusting light levels, white balance, noise levels, sharpening, etc. It's all fully automatic.
    HOWEVER... it will ALSO compress the image substantially so that it doesn't take much space. When it does this, it'll decide to reduce the quality of the image in areas where the human eye probably wont notice. This is lost data that you can never really recover. The "problem" here is that if something is over-saturated, too bright, or too dark, etc. a JPEG will just "compress" all the pixels that seem to be "alike" by making them effectively identical. When you later try to adjust the image by editing saturation, highlights, or shadows, you'll discover that the JPEG has clipped off all the detail and the area of the image is flat. This would not happen if you had shot in RAW.
    RAW offers you the most control over your image. A RAW image is sort of like the "negative" in a film camera before it's been printed by the photo lab. The camera retains the original data as seen by the sensor at the time the image was captured and does not 2nd guess what the image was supposed to look like. It will make some adjustments, but it will not make any adjustments that are considered "destructive" to the original data. The files will not be compressed -- so the storage of each image will consume much more space on your memory card. Areas of an image that are too bright, too dark, saturated, or blown out and "appear" to be flat, may not actually be flat. You may actually be able to recover data by adjusting the photo -- this is because if too two pixels on the sensor appear to be nearly identical but are not actually identical, RAW will not compress them to be the same color (as JPEG would). It'll store the difference no matter how subtle. When you adjust the image, you may see the detail return.
    HOWEVER... some things you may take for granted with a point-and-shoot will NOT be performed on a RAW image. For example, the camera will not attempt to de-noise the image. If you shoot in both RAW and JPEG then compare the results (without doing anything to either image) you should notice that the JPEG actually looks better. But that's because the JPEG was already processed and the RAW was not. After processing the RAW image, you may find that the RAW looks better. RAW is particularly better when you know you'll need to adjusting the images.
    TIFF is non-lossy (like RAW) but unlike RAW, TIFF is a fixed standard. E.g. if you need to give someone a non-compressed non-lossy file so they can do more processing with it then you send them TIFF. If you send them RAW you're taking a chance that they wont have any software that can open the file. The "problem" with RAW is that it's more of a concept than a standard. Every model camera seems to have it's own variation on 'RAW' and that's why there's a delay in support from Apple & Adobe to add 'RAW' support for any new model that comes out.

Maybe you are looking for