Aperture & photoshop

i have aperture 3 and have just got photoshop elements 10 when i send to external editor it sens ok but after making adjustments saving and returning to aperture no adjustments are there

That is a known problem; see this support article for a work-around:
Aperture 3.2.3: Viewer does not update after editing an image in external editor http://support.apple.com/kb/TS4237
Resolution
This is a known issue in Aperture 3.2.3. To work around the issue, resize the viewer window slightly which causes the image to update. Applying any adjustment to the image will also cause the viewer to update.
Regards
Léonie

Similar Messages

Please help me Automate an Aperture/Photoshop workflow

I'm trying to streamline the process of exporting a RAW file from Aperture to Photoshop for editing and then re-importing it into Aperture. I have zero experience with Automator, but someone else on the Discussions site was kind enough to share hte Automator process he uses for this.
Problem is, I can't get mine to work (or I don't know how to make it work).
I created a folder called "Photoshop-IN" where I would export the RAW files from Aperture that need editing. Then I created a folder called "Aperture-IN" where the completed Photoshop files would be exported for re-import into Aperture. Then I created this workflow:
http://homepage.mac.com/chriskresser/PhotoAlbum16.html
I think the workflows are correct, but I don't know what to do at this point. The original poster said something about making them "watched folders", but I have no idea what that means or how to do that.
To test the workflows, I tried exporting a RAW photo from Aperture to a "Photoshop-IN" folder. Then I opened Automator and clicked the play button for the designated workflow. It tells me it executed properly, but nothing happens. The CR2 file wasn't opened in Photoshop, is still in the folder, and didn't get moved to the trash.
I also tested the other workflow (getting PSD file back into Aperture), and that doesn't seem to be working either. With this workflow, I get the following message. "Aperture got an error. Some parameter wasn't understood. (-1715)".
What am I doing wrong? I realize that this might be pretty far off topic, as it is more a question of how to use Automator and possibly AppleScript. But any help would be appreciated, including direction to some resources where I could learn more about Automator (the help section is woefully inadequate!)
Thanks again,
Chris
G5 2.0 dual-core Mac OS X (10.4.3) 17" Apple LCD, iSight, Bluetooth Keyboard & Logitech Cordless Laser Mouse

Your PS-in workflow is too complex, all it needs is a Finder action to open in PS:
http://www.azurevision.co.uk/aperture/open-in-ps-action.jpg
Then File>Save as Plug-in..., choose 'Folder Actions' and then where it asks what folder to attach it to, navigate to your folder. Now, every file that is copied, moved or saved into that folder will be opened in PS.
The import into Aperture workflow is mostly OK, but you are passing a folder from the first action, not files. Try adding a 'Get Folder Contents' action just after the first action. With a bit of jiggling around and using the two actions of that workflow you should be able to save it as a folder action.
A couple more threads using a slightly different approach:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1292903
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1372571
Basically these export a RAW file out to a watched folder (as you are trying to do), but instead of saving it out and re-importing into Aperture, a duplicate file is made in Aperture by using 'Open in external editor' and saving the converted file into that.
Ian

Aperture/Photoshop plug in and image size

I'm having a problem I don't really understand. I have Aperture 3 and I have CS5 that I'm trying to use as a plug-in for Aperture. This is half an Aperture question and half a Photoshop one so I hope someone can answer it for me.
In Photoshop I made an "action" that is a sort of raised beveled watermark for my photos.
I open one of my images in Aperture and "fix" it - soften the skin, blur the background (whatever...) then I go to the top menu item "Photos" and go down and pick "edit with Adobe CS5." And my image opens in Photoshop. I go to the menu and pick the watermark action but when it works my watermark can't really be "read" because it's not fitting on the photo, it's too big and falls off the edges. The photo is 1241x1280 px.
But here is the odd thing. If I take that same photo, the very same size 1241x1280 and open it directly in photoshop, completely bypass Aperture, and run the watermark action, it's actually a bit small (but usable) it fits fine in the very same photo! When I check the image size in Photoshop it is the same size (regardless of if I open in photoshop directly or go there from Aperture).
So this problem only seems to happen when I edit the photo from Aperture. I'm new to both Aperture and Photoshop (crazy to try and learn 2 programs at once) and I don't know if I can make just the watermark layer in photoshop smaller. But again it fits fine if I apply it directly from Photoshop bypassing Aperture.
Does anyone know why this happens and how I can make the watermark work? Or can I make a watermark in Aperture?
Thanks for any help,
Susan

susan-kelly wrote:
Like I said when I rescale it they way you said to do in photoshop it changes the size and distorts it a bit.
If you hold down the 'Shift + Option' keys while scaling, the text, shape or raster object will not distort and will resize from the center (AKA - maintain aspect ratio).
I run the full version of PS, so am not sure if the commands are exactly the same if you are running PS Elements, but there is a command at 'Layer menu > Layer Style > Scale Effects..' which can be used for scaling the bevel settings to match the scaling of the watermark item.
One exact way to do this in PS full version is to choose the Edit > Transform > Scale command and then use the option bar fields under the main menu bar to change the 'H' (Height) and 'W' (Width) percentages equally (to say 70% in each) and then use the aforementioned 'Layer........Scale Effects' command and enter 70% in that dialog. This should reduce the watermark and effects appropriately without distortion.
Note - indeed both programs are very deep (especially PS), but that just gives you more fun to learn as you go. Don't worry about mastering either, just work within a structured workflow so you can take the steps at your own pace.
Again, I am not sure what version of PS you are running, but the one book I suggest looking into more than any other is at the link below. It is somewhat dated, but the information is completely relevant and covers the general usage of Photoshop to make anyone comfortable with the tool set.
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Photoshop-Unmasked-Science-Selections/dp/0321441206/ ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1307824869&sr=8-1
The companion website is still up and you can download all the images used in the book if you want to practice on the same images he outlines. Well worth a look if you want to learn Photoshop.

Creating pdf contact sheets at screen resolution using aperture/photoshop

Can anyone advise me on how to create a pdf document of contact sheets- low resolution [72 screen res]that is less time consuming than the present work flow described below?
At present I export jpegs 450pxl 72dpi from aperture. create contact sheets in photoshop and then
create a pdf in photoshop. Average number of images per client is approx 800-1000,
The pdf I have created with aperture has a resolutuin of 300dpi- which is a large file to email etc. I have tried reimporting the 450pxl jpegs but aperture still creates the document at 300dpi.
Is it possible ...
1/. to solely use aperture to create low res pdf's
2/. If not is it possible to create an action in photoshop [or use automator] to speed up the process described above?
I do have a little experience using actions in photoshop but am by no means an experienced user.

Awesome! I didnt even know aperture could do that
Now another quick question on this topic, if im using RAW files, does aperture need to convert the file to jpeg or tiff (like it does if you export version as jpeg)?
If it does, that may be a problem as it takes forever for aperture on my macbook to convert raws and save as jpegs, like a good minute or two per photo, and if i have 200odd photos....not good, people will crack it waiting and leave.
Or does it print as raw? Cause im pretty sure my printer (or any printer) can not print raw files. Will try it tonight on my printer but a heads up will be useful.
I could just shoot in hi-res jpeg, but id rather shoot raw incase they want a large poster size print etc.
Thanks.

Aperture, Photoshop, and Apple's possible direction for Image Editing

All,
After using Aperture now for several days, and reading many different forum topics, in particular this one which speaks of desired enhancements to Aperture:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=253594&tstart=0
there is one thing that really sticks out on my mind. While all of us photographers have slightly different specifics to our workflow, in general they are very similar. And with respect to Aperture, there is one huge area where most of us seem to be hitting the brick wall: image adjustments, and by extension, image file management. Let me explain what I mean.
I think it is a fair generalization to say that the vast majority of serious digital photographers are using Photoshop (or some other image editing app, but I'm just going to refer to Photoshop for convenience) for post-processing of some kind. In using Aperture, and figuring out how to fit it into workflow, we've got this situation of how to move from organization and image library management to the full gamut of image adjusting functionality (photoshop) and back again to library management. The need to use photoshop then exposes the issue of how files are stored on the filesystem, etc. Stay with me here...
I have found myself thinking, and it is pretty clearly demonstrated in the forum topic mentioned above where folks are making suggestions for improvements to Aperture, that there's this barrel people are over in knowing whether Photoshop and Aperture should live in the workflow together, or whether Aperture should (or is intended to) replace Photoshop in the workflow. This got me to thinking about the fundamental question -- what is the intent, i.e. the vision for Aperture? Is it meant to replace Photoshop, or restated, is Aperture meant to be the app in which all image adjustments are to be made, OR is Aperture meant to just ease workflow, and is it intended not to be the primary app for image adjustments, but rather integrate with the primary image adjustment app?
The reason I bring this up is that the answer to this question makes all the difference in what enhancement requests and what people should expect from Aperture now, and in future versions. If Aperture is the primary place for image adjustment, then its obvious that there are some very significant additions that need to take place to Aperture, and likewise, the issue of putting images on the filesystem becomes much less important. However, if Aperture is a workflow-easer, then such image adjustment improvements are minimally important if at all, and filesystem / Photoshop / PSD file integration becomes paramount.
I know what Aperture does, what features it provides, etc. But I can't help but realize that its not really that clear (or I just don't understand yet) what the full scope of Aperture now and in the future is intended to be, and the forum topics are pretty decent documentation of the fact that the user base at this point is fairly cloudy on that too.
I can't help thinking that in the midst of the Apple pro line of tools, where we have tools that edit: video, audio, DVD creation, text effects, and now digital photography workflow, that there's one glaring hole: static image editing, i.e. a direct Photoshop competitor. I went through the Aperture video demos before Aperture shipped, and watched these photo pros talk incessantly about how "now there's an app that addresses how I work -- Aperture". That's great, but Apple has to know the role that Photoshop plays in present photography workflow -- for those pros too. So I'm sitting here thinking to myself, why would Apple roll out such a product with some clear workflow hurdles to common Photoshop usage.
Ok, here's the punchline: does anyone else here have a sneaking suspicion that Apple is not to far off from releasing their own image editing application that's a direct Photoshop competitor? I mean come on, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Sountrack, and by extension of the CEO to Pixar, Renderman. How can you not have a static image adjustment application entering the scene at some point?
I'm curious what others think. I'm just trying to make sense of how to fit the neat stuff I see in Aperture into a workflow that doesn't play very nicely with Aperture at some points (because I'm using Photoshop).
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

So Apple adds curves adjustments,
we'll need noise reduction, greater sharpening
capability, etc., etc., and then when we have all
those features, surely we'll need masking and select
capability to perform those adjustments selectively,
etc. Where does it end?
Actually that could be a good cut-off point - add a few more/better 'global' adjustments but leave all mask, selection and layer based tasks to external editors. Personally, I used to swear by curves, but haven't really touched them in PS for a year since shooting more RAW and learning how to use the shadow/highlight adjustment properly. Sometimes for overall colour for JPEGs, but that bit can be done just as well in levels.
My workflow isn't particularly typical, but here goes.
Type of photography - stitched panoramas as a professional, plus general snapshots/nature/landscape as hobby. Single user with no network storage.
Currently I use a very organised folder structure in the Finder, along with aliases in DragThing docks for easy access to final stitched files, all with their own unique ID. RAW conversions are done in ACR/PSCS2, or Bibble if I'm in a hurry on the laptop. About 40% of the panos are shot in RAW, 40% are bracketed JPEG and the remaining 20% are 'single' JPEG. The panoramas go through quite a lot of post-processing in PS using a whole series of actions and AppleScripts.
I'm expecting my workflow to look something like this:
1) Download directly into Aperture, possibly with added help from Automator/Applescript when it comes to proper date-based names.
2) Divide download into a new album for each panorama.
2a) If it is a people pano there will be quite a lot of duplicate shots for each panohead position - make a stack for each position and choose picks - this bit will speed things up enormously by itself. Reorder stacks to fit correct order of images going around the scene.
3) Export to TIFF (sometimes JPEG) and stitch using PTMac (sometimes Realviz Stitcher). Oh, and any people who think Aperture is limited, buggy and bad value should go and look at Stitcher - it costs the same, has a far more limited feature set, is on version 5 and by comparison makes Aperture look bug-free.
4) Bring stitched panorama into Photoshop to adjust seams through layers if needed, flatten, final tone adjustments (usually using shadow/highlight), possibly some colour tweaks, sharpen. For bracketed shots I will blend together the three exposures at this point using a custom action - this kind of thing is unlikely ever to make it to Aperture.
5) Bring final print-ready file into Aperture for cataloguing/backup.
5a) If file is too big for Aperture, make a smaller version for cataloguing and store original file in Finder. This gives me a good file for 90% of purposes, with the huge file available with a bit more work.
Too big? I've found that Aperture gets sluggish with files over 18-20,000 pixels wide, and chokes totally somewhere between 25,000 and 32,000 pixels wide - 'image format unsupported'.
To summarise - organise and convert in Aperture, stitch in specialist software, do PS-specific stuff then bring final image back in to join the source images.
Ian

Airplay Aperture/Photoshop to Apple TV?

Is there a way with Lion to Airplay programs like Aperture or Photoshop to Apple TV/Bigscreen?
I know this can be done by connecting with an HDMI cable. I am hoping there is a way to Airplay this (If not, please Apple add this!)

Hi Photon
As Vaz said you can share any photos from your Mac through iTunes to your Apple TV
thus to big screen TV:
Advanced- choose photos to share.
You can then select Iphoto-Aperture or any pther folder
with media in it.
Direct from PS-Dont know.
Cheers Tomi
Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.7), 8 core 8Gb Ram, Macbook Pro 2009 6G

Aperture, photoshop layers and Alpha channels - notes

In examining Aperture 2.0 to see if I could use it instead of Adobe bridge in my workflow (which makes intense use of Photoshop) I found that Aperture (and, apparently, OS X) cannot properly display a preview for a .psd file with either layers or an alpha channel. In some cases, the preview image is simply an error message, in others the alpha channel is displayed as black. These problems make Aperture a non-starter for me.
Searching this forum for information, solutions, and/or workarounds, I found some references, but nothing of high value. (Sorry, posters.) Started my own investigation, and discovered some things that might lead to a reasonable workaround. My notes are here:
http://homepage.mac.com/bbarlow641/webinfonotebook/
too long, I think, to put into a forum post. Sorry to link out to somewhere else, but if you're interested, it's worth a click. (Or the linked page may not have "high value" either. But it helped me to think through the problem.)
Ben

bbarlow641 wrote:
Saving the file as a layered TIFF file would preserve the layers - that might be a good idea since Aperture doesn't recognize psb files. But any "saving as" step - as a psb or as a TIFF - creates a second (large) file, so I don't think it's an ideal solution.
I don't know if that helps in your workflow, but the way I handle this is:
• import the raw file into Aperture
• open in external editor (i.e. PhotoShop; external editor format: tiff)
• edit in PhotoShop
• when saving I am asked if I want to save it as layered tiff (provided the preferences are set accordingly: File Handling / Ask before saving layered tiff files);
• here two things are to be considered:
_ the file extension used by PS is "tif", so it has to be changed to "tiff"
_ on my MacBook Pro the Save As-dialog opens showing the correct file location (i.e., the correct subfolder inside the Aperture library), on my Mac Pro the initial location is somewhere else (remembered from the last saving procedure); I have to work around this by first command-clicking in the image window's title bar to open the edited file's location in the Finder, so that I can then drag it onto the Save As-dialog. This is actually slightly annoying, but I did not find out the reason so far.
• Aperture automatically refreshes the saved file.
This way I end up with just this one extra file. The whole procedure would be a bit simpler using referenced files instead of storing them in the library.
My settings in PS do have the "Maximize Compatibility" option set (in the notebooked example, it's set to "ask", normally it's set to "always"). I'm using CS2. Maybe this setting works in CS3 to create the composite? I've heard several people here say that same thing, but it definitely doesn't do it for me...
For me this works, and as far as I remember also worked in CS2; do you see a difference in file size between files saved both ways? How does Preview.app display the file saved with "Maximize Compatibility"?
Since my first post, I've been trying to figure out how to add a PS action that would run an Applescript to tell GraphicConverter to open and close a file, creating a preview. But it seems that while an Applescript can trigger a Postscript action, the reverse (having a Postscript action trigger an Applescript) is not possible.
Might something like a hot folder with an automator scripts attached to it be a possible workaround?
Message was edited by: Bernhard Barkow

Which current Mac Pro for Aperture/Photoshop

After much research and what seems to be chasing my tail, I though I'd ask the forum for some advice on which machine will best suit my needs. I am currently running Aperture and Photoshop CS3 and looking for a fast machine for the job. I sort through around 2500-3000 raw files per week and hope the new Intel Xeons will speed up my workflow. It's the question of "How many cores are better?" that's confusing me as I am unclear on how many Aperture and Photoshop can actually make use of.
I'm looking to upgrade from my 3.06 iMac to a Mac Pro but having trouble choosing between a new 2.66 quad or a refurbished 2.26 8-core. I understand the drop in processor speed might be noticeable in some instances but the from what I have gathered an upgrade to the ATI HD 4870 is a must as is 6GB ram on the 2.66 and 8GB ram on the 2.26. It's not so much the price difference of the two machines (£2200 for the upgraded 2.66 and roughly £2700 for a refurbished 2.26 plus upgrades) it's will my workflow see any great benefits from the 8-core over the quad. The program I use most is Aperture, followed by Photoshop then FotoMagico, iDVD and Toast Titanium. Does Snow Leopard affect the use of cores in these programs?
Any feedback is much appreciated or pointing in the direction of some real world tests as all the bench tests of the 8-core are so impressive but I'll not be using it for 3D/Video at all.
Thanks in advance for your help.

According to the Adobe blog the delay in offering a 64-bit suite for Mac is because the entire suite has to be rewritten in Cocoa (both previous and current offerings are written in Carbon) CS5 will be written in Cocoa and will utilise the full functionality of the Snow Leopard OS (OpenGL, GCD etc) so memory addressing will be a huge step forward on Photoshop (which I use).
I used Photoshop CS4 on a 2008 Mac Pro 2 x 2.8GHz 8 core (dual Xeon 5400 series Quad core CPUs) and just recently switched to a 2009 Mac Pro 2 x 2.26GHz 8 core (Xeon 5500 series Quad core CPUs). I used CS3 on the original Mac Pro 2 x 2.66Ghz (Dual Xeon Dual Core CPUs = 4 cores total). It's not a fair reflection as CS3 ran under Rosetta on the original Mac Pro and CS4 has better integration on the Intel based Macs, but in general, I noticed a much better rate of workflow on the 8 core machines over the 4 core machine.
More importantly, I would point out that running batch process of RAW files in CaptureOne Pro was significantly performing the batch process on the 8 core machines than on the 4 core machine. (250 RAW files {with no corrections] from a Canon EOS 1D MKII into 16-bitt TIFF files). I can't remember the exact figures but the 8 core machines were @ 23 - 25 minutes quicker than the 4 core machine.
I know it's not scientific and software versions were different which could add to the different results in part, but the 8 core machines both out performed the 4 core machine substantially.
However, the 2009 Mac Pro Quad Core is capable of running 2 threads per core (in effect a virtual 8 core machine and as many reviewers have pointed out, perform faster than the 8 core Mac Pro in certain applications (which have not been written to utilise the full multi-CPU-multi-core environment.
The Memory limitation on the Quad Core is 16GB RAM (Apple state 8GB but reviewers have installed 4 x 4GB DIMMs into the Quad Core without issue). Unless you are doing 3D or HD rendering etc you probably won't really need over 16GBs of RAM, however the cost of 4GB memory sticks is expensive. Crucial only offer a 12GB kit for the Quad Core Mac Pro 2009 to make full use of the triple channel memory speeds (DDR3 best performance in multiples of 3) and 12GBs from Crucial is @£771.00 (prices correct at time of writing this. This equates to @ £257 per 4GB.
Total for Quad Mac Pro with 12GB (3 x 4GB RAM) = £2670
Total for Octo Core Mac Pro with 12GB (6 x 2GB RAM) =£2731 (New price not refurb)
Graphics card upgrade etc will be the same on both machines. Memory based on Crucial Memory prices.
So, for a 2009 Mac Pro with 12GB RAM, it is £61 dearer for an 8 core (virtual 16 cores) machine over the Quad Core Mac Pro. The 8 core system will give you further memory expansion once prices of the 4GB memory sticks come down significantly. The Quad Core will only be able to be upgraded with 8GB RAM sticks over the 4GB sticks available now and will cost a huge amount at time of launch.
Buying a refurbishment 2.26 GHz with similar memory upgrade would in my opinion be the way to go. I know the CPU clock speed is lower, but in real time non memory intensive applications the difference will be hardly noticeable.
I went through the same dilemma as you. I opted for the 8 core system with 12GB RAM and the ATI HD4870 graphics (bought as an upgrade kit so was dearer than the build to order option). I am very happy with my purchase.
The other option is to check out eBay there may be a very well spec'd 2008 Mac Pro for sale with warranty, 16GB RAM and the 8800GT graphics card for less than either of the new systems.
Over the long term, the 8 core offers more affordable customisation options over the Quad Core, but it depends on how long you plan to use the machine

Strange Aperture, Photoshop, D300 image problem

Hi all,
I posted this the other day, but had no responses so I’ll try again.
I am having a strange problem with a D300 .nef image opened from Aperture into Photoshop. Though the image looks fine, something is amiss. Most notably when I try to use the shadow/highlight command in Photoshop, the image actually darkens (highlights are set to zero amount). If I export the image as a jpeg and open it in Photoshop, the s/h command works as expected. If I export it as a .psd (or .tif) file to my desktop and open it, the s/h command again darkens the image. Interestingly, the .psd file thumbnail on the desktop shows really orange with red streaks through it, but opens as it should in Photoshop, except for the s/h problem as described above.
Since the original post, I’ve noted similar problems with other images taken around the same time. Interestingly, others seem to work fine. As a test, I exported the original .nef file to the desktop and opened it in Camera Raw/Photoshop and it works fine.
Could it be corruption/bug in Aperture’s .psd conversion? Or, probably more likely, am I missing something. . . .
Any thoughts or suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Steve

Now I'm really confused.
I experimented with an old D100 .nef image, and the same thing happened in Photoshop.
I found however, that if I turn the black and white clips (originally set at 0.01%), the shadow/highlight command works as expected. I don't know why this would make a difference in the Aperture .psd file, but it does. When I open the same .nef image in Camera Raw/Photoshop directly, the black/white clip setting (at .01%) is negligible on the image.
As per my prior post, I'm not sure how to link to these files, but I gladly will if I can figure it out.
As always, thanks for the help.
Steve

Aperture Photoshop CC file compatibility

I changed the outside editor for Aperture 3 to PsCC. Now there is an error message stating PsCC can't read my raw files. Why?

I was having this same issue and I fixed it but I'm not exactly sure what did it... I'm using Snow Leopard on a Mac and I have cs5, cs6 and CC installed. Initally after installing CC, I was able to associate files using the normal "open with" and "change all" dialog. However, after installing a Mac security update today, the "open with" reverted to CS6 and when trying to change all to open with Photoshop CC, it would just revert to CS6. Here's what I did today before I was able to change them all back to CC.
1. Installed Photohop CC Update
2. Restarted Computer
3. Changed *one* file to open with CC and closed the dialog
4. Installed PHotoshop CS6 Update
5. Opened that "one file" (which still had open with Photoshop CC selected) and hit "change all"
Magic. Not sure what did it... but maybe if you repeat that process, it will work for you.

Making an HDR document Aperture-Photoshop workflow experiment, any takers?

Howdy, Fellow Photographers
I tried this recently but failed and I'm trying to figure it out.
So, is anyone interested in a 32-bit HDR test using Aperture and Photoshop CS2? I think this feature is revolutionary in Photoshop CS2 and hope Aperture will have something like it in a future update/upgrade.
The takers will have to have Aperture (duh) and Photoshop CS2 (duh).
1. Take an image in Aperture.
2. Make about 8 versions of the image.
3. Make 4 that are incrementally over-exposed,
4. Now make 4 that are incrementally under-exposed.
To achieve this:
Make 8 identical Versions.
Select each image (version) and open the Adjustments Inspector , select Exposure and click up into the + range and then select the next image and do the same but up a notch to a higher over-exposed level, continue this until each image is slightly over-exposed from the previous image.
Now select the next 4 and under-expose them into the - range using the same methodology as described above.
At the end you'll have 8 images (versions) that have a wide exposure value. Utilizing the same Master image with different versions having individually different exposure values. Some very dark to some very light.
Export each version as a "PSD - Original Size (16-bit)" file and "Include Metadata" checked into a folder on your Desktop or other hard drive.
(According to this Apple document
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302943
the only way to export and maintain the EXIF metadata the version has to be PSD and not a TIFF.)
In order for this to work Photoshop has to see and recognize the EXIF data. Open Photoshop CS2 and make a new HDR document, browse Photoshop to the folder with the images from Aperture. Make the new 32-bit HDR document.
Did Photoshop make a new 32 bit HDR document?
Let me know if this worked for you.
Many thanks
love & peace,
victor

Good Morning,
Thank you, joshua, Denny, jrg_uk and Ian
Yes, me too, I was getting the same error message about not having enough dynamic range or as you say joshua it sees the same EXIF settings for all of the shots.
Nevertheless, what I want to do is bracket the exposure levels (f-stop/aperture) and leave the shutter speed alone the way it is done with a camera and tripod but instead do the bracketing within Aperture (the application) and then send the photos (Versions) to the HDR feature in Photoshop CS2.
Thank you for your help!
Back to the drawing board...
love & peace,
victor

Setting up color space between Aperture, Photoshop and my Epson 3880

Hi. I use Aperture to do quick fixes and Photoshop for more complex edits and printing. I have setup my export preference in Aperture to the external editor as 8 bit ProPhoto RGB and in Photoshop my color space as Prophoto RGB. I use mainly Nikon RAW files. (Epson suggests using ProPhoto RGB to get the most out of the ink). Does all this make sense? As a sort of related question I don't suppose there is a way to export RAW directly from Aperture to Photoshop using the mouse right click and edit with Photoshop option..

Yes, your setup makes sense, but the fact you're asking implies that you don't know much about colormanagement. Thus although this part of your workflow makes sense, it might well be that you're making error in the printing process for example. Get yourself a copy of the 'Real world colormanagement' by Bruce Fraser, to teach yourself all about it. Furthermore, when working in ProPhoto RGB, I'd suggest working in 16-bit instead of 8-bit, to reduce possible banding in color gradients.
By export RAW directly to Photoshop, I believe that you mean opening the RAW-file in Camera RAW? No, there is no way of doing that directly, though Aperture does have an export master option, allowing you to place a copy of the original RAW-file anywhere on your hard drive.

IPhoto Aperture Photoshop

From your practical experience, what are the main advantages of Aperture as a product placed between iPhoto and Photoshop?

Hi
I use Aperture3 and CS4, I frequently move between the two,always round tripping from within Aperture.... but honestly since Ap3 I have barely used CS4. Not that I wont use it again, but at the moment I am finding Ap3 so good for purpose... I shoot mainly Wildlife and Landscape.
I honestly have not used iphoto for a couple of years now... Nothing against it, its a great app but Aperture meets all my editing/ photo management needs.
Personally, I wouldn't say that Ap3 is more complex than CS4, I find it more simple, I know what you mean about the low frequency of use of CS4 tools, balanced against the cost of CS4. But I still like having the ability to use layers,when needed, they're not that complex really.....Here is a good tutorial, there is some more useful photoshop techniques here as well.......... http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/articles/layersand_layermask.htm
I agree with the the other replies here, try it, you cant tell how it tastes until you taste it... give it a go and see.... dont be deterred by all the issues you read here, there have been some, but personally speaking, all is running fine here......
Hope this is of some help to you..
Regards
Gerry......

Aperture/Photoshop Color Control Issues

I am photographer that has been doing the unthinkable for the past four years – I use the Finder to scroll through pictures I’ve taken and load them one-by-one into Photoshop CS4 for editing. I know this is dumb, and I really want to change my workflow. I’ve really like Aperture, but it has one fatal flaw (and one minor flaw) that is preventing me from using it. I desperately need help, as I estimate I need to review and edit 50,000+ images this year!
I’ll give you as best of a description of each problem and everything I can remember that I’ve tried. Note, that these issues replicate on three different Mac (all also clean installs), Mac OS 10.5 and 10.6, a PC, and the issue is the same with Lightroom 2 and 3 Beta, as well as Aperture 2 and 3. I must be doing something really dumb!
The Major Problem:
So I start off with a picture like this in Aperture (it may be useful to open images in multiple tabs):
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/5585/28037816.png
So, I go to work making my adjustments to the RAW file (a NEF, since I shoot Nikon) and end up with something like this:
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3703/43700549.png
Now I right click on the picture and go to edit it in Photoshop CS4. I have my format set to work in 8-bit PSD files at 300 dpi(Aperture>Preferences>Export), and am using the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 color profile embedded in the picture. My proofing profile in Aperture is also set to this same profile (View>Proofing Profile), as well as the working profile in Photoshop CS4 (Edit>Color Settings). And this is what I get:
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/9311/35278285.png
Note that I haven’t made a single adjustment in Photoshop! It just opens that way!
Let’s say I go a step further and try to recover my desaturated image. I’ll apply a series of filters here that I normally wouldn’t for this image, but will do here to further illustrate my point. Here’s what I produce:
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/6954/97748984.png
And now for the fun part. I save (File>Save) the image in Photoshop making sure to Maximize compatibility (since Aperture can’t seem to read it if I don’t select this) and Aperture faithfully works to update the preview of the image. Unfortanately, the image now looks like this:
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9811/77252849.png
So basically, I have no color management occurring from program to program. I know photographers use both of these programs successfully, but I just can’t make them preserve color faithfully! It happens with TIFF files, it occurs no matter if I use a PC, or either version of Aperture or Lightroom! I’ve tried multiple Macs and multiple OS versions, and am clearly missing something.
Help me!
(The minor issue I described above may be corrected if we can get this fixed, so I’ll follow-up if needed.)

Lets see if we can figure this out.
I personally use a calibrated Apple Cinema Display to start with so maybe that makes a difference.
So, in Aperture do this
1) edit the image of choice
2) if you like go ahead and set the onscreen proofing profile -let's use sRGB 2.1 in this example
— View>Proofing Profile then select sRGB on the top
3) Then select the "Onscreen Proofing" so it is checked also under the View menu
4) Go to your Aperture Export presets
— Aperture>Presets>Image Export
5) The very top preset usually is "JPEG - Original Size"
— make sure the color profile is "sRGB IEC61966-2.1"
— make sure "Black Point Compensation" is NOT checked
Now, the image you just edited go ahead and "export Version" and save it to the desktop
When done open it in Photoshop.
Make sure that your color settings in Photoshop is set to sRGB
HOWEVER, if it isn't, you may get a message that the "embedded profile does not match your working space in photoshop"
NOTE: if Photoshop is set to Adobe RGB , that too is ok and that's when you will get the "mismatch profile message"
So, IF you DO get that message, the rule is ALWAYS Honor the embedded profile of the image/photo
If your Photoshop is set to sRGB too, then you won't need to worry about this.
If your image still looks washed out at this point let us know.
In my case what I export from Aperture 3 looks the same in Photoshop CS4
Message was edited by: Falcon01

Aperture/Photoshop...file open from

Hallo!
I have a Problem, I manage all my photos with Aperture, and would like open directly from Aperture a file in Photoshop...how must i dow?
thx
Yoghi

hoi joghi
alles fein i de schwiiz? damit alli chönt mitläse schriib ich jetzt aber besser in änglisch wiiter...
there are 2 ways to open your files in photoshop:
1. you open the image "in external editor" (apple-shift-O - check your aperture preferences to set photoshop to be your external editor). this will create a new version in aperture. once you made your changes, hit "save" in ps (not "save as") and aperture will reflect the changes in its new version.
2. to avoid the version (or to process a raw file in photoshop), you can open a file in photoshop through an "automated export". create an os x folder and attach an automator function that opens every new file in photoshop. then in aperture simply "export version" (or original) to this folder and it will automatically be opened in photoshop as well.
na dänn, hoffe das hätt g'holfe und ich wünsch no en schöne tag!
cheers from australia.

Aperture & photoshop

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for