Aperture to LR4

Hello All,
Amature/hobbyiest here who shoots with a Cannon 60D mostly in RAW. I have been an Aperture user for about two years, and I have had quite a bit of success with it. But one thing that I feel limitied by is the inability to create layers, edit individual layers, combine those layers into one photo (I believe this is called "flattening"), and create HDR phots. I know that this is not what Aperture is designed to do, so I'm looking to make the switch to one of the Adobe products. I have been told by the Adobe rep on line that both layers and HDR is contained within LR4, but then I have read elsewhere that neither of these features are in LR4. So here I am posing the question. I know that this isn't the specific forum for this second question but considering I'm looking for the flexibilty of layers and HDR, would I be better suited to explore Elements 11? CS6 is going to be out of my budget, so it's between these two products.
Thanks, in advance, for your responses.
Marc

I have been told by the Adobe rep on line that both layers and HDR is contained within LR4
Neither is true.
Lightroom does not do layers.
Lightroom can indeed work with HDR 32 bit images, but it cannot create such images; you need other software to create an HDR image.
If you want both in one program, you should probably look at Photoshop CS6. I believe the most recent version of Elements has layers (but with fewer features than Photoshop), but it doesn't create HDR photos.

Similar Messages

  • I'm using a Mac.  I "upgraded" to LR5 from LR4.  I do not want to be a member of the "Creative Cloud".  I just want to use the software I purchased, specifically to upload to my SmugMug account.  Is there a way to use an add-on to do this?  Aperture and L

    I'm using a Mac.  I "upgraded" to LR5 from LR4.  I do not want to be a member of the "Creative Cloud".  I just want to use the software I purchased, specifically to upload to my SmugMug account.  Is there a way to use an add-on to do this?  Aperture and LR4 were easy but I'm finding it impossible without subscribing to CC.

    Sorry, maybe I don't understand, but why do you feel compelled to subscribe to CC if you already have a permanent Lightroom 5 licence?
    For the SmugMug plugin, a simple Google search ("smugmug lightroom plugin") gives this link to download the plugin:  http://help.smugmug.com/customer/portal/articles/121321
    Another way is to click the button "Find more services online..." in the the Publish Service section of Lightroom, and to search for SmugMug in the Adobe Add-ons portal; you will find a link to the latest plugin: https://creative.adobe.com/addons/products/1755

  • When will Aperture have support for RAF files from the new Fuji XPro-1?

    How long does it normally take to get the RAW file format updated? Fuji say they sent the file details to Apple many weeks ago. This is a camera being given fantastic reviews in all professional magazines worldwide - but I'm stuck with an Aperture folder full of "unsupported image format" files.
    Really annoying as I use the full suite of Nik plug-ins so I can't do anything with these files until Aperture is updated.

    Per an interview with a spokeswoman from Fuji, they have indeed provided Apple (and Adobe as well) all the needed technical information in order to support the RAW files (i.e. algorithmic information created by Fuji for the non-standar filter array, etc etc). Please don't spread any more misinformation about it, it's already been flamed to death on all the online camera forums. You can still choose to 'blame' whomever you wish about why it's still not supported by Apple, but you can no longer reasonably assert that Fuji hasn't done their part by providing them what they need. Nondisclosure agreements were signed as well.
    Having said that, I find it ridiculous at this point that it's not supported, for several reasons, some being the seemingly similar Fuji users who also use Aperture as well as the opportunity here for Apple to take some market from Adobe (who as of yet are not producing very great output files for Fuji X-trans). Apple was/has been at a disadvantage to Adobe for a long while now, and being an outsider, I presumed Apple would want to take advantage of this (and any similar) opportunity to grab some share from Adobe. I was well wrong, and it seems that other lesser-known-used companies are now doing just that.
    Well good on them. I for one will be looking at any/all (new)comers and will certainly be going with the best of those. Sorry Apple, you lost another one. There was a real competition, for me, btwn Aperture and LR4 up till this point. You'd have to pull a rabbit out of your hat to keep my Aperture biz.

  • Problem on Lightroom4, Aperture but not on iPhoto or preview.app

    Hello,
    I've got a strange problem and can't find any answer when searching on Google.
    I moved my photos (JPEG) from iphoto to LR4 and aperture.
    The exported file from iphoto looks the same in mac preview.app than in iphoto. However, once imported in LR4 or aperture the quality is awful (lot of noise).
    Strange points include:
    - If I export back the image from LR4 and aperture, it looks once again just ok with the preview.app; so it's not some compression happening when I import the photos in the new tools.
    - If I take a screenshot of the photo looking awful in aperture or LR4, the screenshot looks ok on preview.app...
    - Same problem for photos in sRGB or Adobe RGB.
    Can someone give me an hand on this?
    Many thanks,
    Florian

    With or without mountain - Lion MacOS 10.7.4 Beta is also pre-release and subject to the non-disclosure agreement
    Please also note that I realize that when using a second screen, I don't have the same issue.
    How is your double-screen setup? What goes on which display? And have you tried to switch the two displays?

  • Pictures folder does not have all events in it.

    I import my photos using iPhoto 11 as I use Aperture 3 and/or LR4 to edit events and/or photos. However I am unable to import newer events from the Pictures folder option that Aperture and LR4 gives one to import as all my newer events of the past 12 months do not show up in the Pictures folder. Could anyone please help me as I have been trying and reading in the forums for ways to achieve this and am unable to find a solution. I am totally frustrated!!!
    Thanks for any advice.

    Could you please explain your workflow in more detail? I am not sure I understand your problem yet.
    I import my photos using iPhoto 11 as I use Aperture 3 and/or LR4 to edit events and/or photos.
    Into which of these applications do you import your photos? Do you import into iPhoto and then edit in Aperture or Lightroom, or do you import into all of them?
    However I am unable to import newer events from the Pictures folder option that Aperture and LR4 gives one to import as all my newer events of the past 12 months do not show up in the Pictures folder.
    Are you expecting, that the images that you imported into iPhoto will be stored in the "Pictures" folder, and you want to import them into Aperture as well, or do you want to edit the images that you now have in iPhoto with Aperture?
    I think, you may have a misunderstanding how iPhoto and Aperture work. Both are database programs that manage the image files you import. You should not try to access the managed images using the Finder and the folders with the pictures - that is risky, because iPhoto or Aperture may lose track of the image files. If you want to use an external editor to edit the imported images, use iPhoto's or Aperture's interface to external editors.
    To switch between Aperture and iPhoto is very easy. Both programs can open each other's photo libraries. To edit the events that you imported into iPhoto with Aperture, simply open the iPhoto library with Aperture.
    In iPhoto use the command "File > Open Library in Aperture"; to switch back to iPhoto use Aperture's command "File > Open Library in iPhoto".
    Some things to consider, when switching between Aperture and iPhoto:
    Aperture 3.3: Using a unified photo library with iPhoto and Aperture
    Regards
    Léonie

  • Support of RAF-files - Fujifilm FinePic S5000 camera

    Hello
    I had got some images from one that have a Fujifilm FinePic S5000 camera. If I imports the RAF-files (Fujifilm RAW-format) into Capture but it seems that Capture doesn't support RAF-files. Will Capture support RAF-files in the future?
    I have tried to convert the RAF-files to DNG-fles by using Adobe DNG converter but the result is the same. I believed that Adobe DNG converter could convert all known RAW-format to DNG also RAF-files from a Fujifilm FinePic S5000 camera.

    Per an interview with a spokeswoman from Fuji, they have indeed provided Apple (and Adobe as well) all the needed technical information in order to support the RAW files (i.e. algorithmic information created by Fuji for the non-standar filter array, etc etc). Please don't spread any more misinformation about it, it's already been flamed to death on all the online camera forums. You can still choose to 'blame' whomever you wish about why it's still not supported by Apple, but you can no longer reasonably assert that Fuji hasn't done their part by providing them what they need. Nondisclosure agreements were signed as well.
    Having said that, I find it ridiculous at this point that it's not supported, for several reasons, some being the seemingly similar Fuji users who also use Aperture as well as the opportunity here for Apple to take some market from Adobe (who as of yet are not producing very great output files for Fuji X-trans). Apple was/has been at a disadvantage to Adobe for a long while now, and being an outsider, I presumed Apple would want to take advantage of this (and any similar) opportunity to grab some share from Adobe. I was well wrong, and it seems that other lesser-known-used companies are now doing just that.
    Well good on them. I for one will be looking at any/all (new)comers and will certainly be going with the best of those. Sorry Apple, you lost another one. There was a real competition, for me, btwn Aperture and LR4 up till this point. You'd have to pull a rabbit out of your hat to keep my Aperture biz.

  • Why do I get Colored bands on some images in LR4 and LR5, but not in Aperture?

    On some images -- both RAW and JPG -- when opened in LR4 or LR5, there will be one or two "curved" color abberation lines across the entire image. This doesn't occur when I open the images in Aperture. Any idea why? Thanks

    >Is it possible that Aperture is showing you the camera-embedded JPG by default?  What happens if you actually produce a JPG from the raw file in Aperture?
    Aperture works the same way as Lightroom in this respect. It will first show you the embedded jpeg and will render a new conversion from the raw data as soon as it can. So it is possible the OP saw the embedded jpeg, but that should not last long and certainly by now should have been replaced with a newly rendered preview. Either Aperture is more forgiving of a small defect in the raw file or Lightroom import is somehow getting corrupt files of the sd card and Aperture not (would be weird). Another option is that the camera raw cache is corrupt. This can be checked by emptying the cache (Preferences->File Handling->Purge Cache). Lastly, this might be a corrupt preview in Lightroom. Check this by zooming 1:1 on an offending area in the Develop module and seeing if it goes away.
    >I suspect that the curvature is in fact due to lens corrections, and that these lens corrections are always on
    I believe you are right. I remember vaguely that there is some default lens correction with some cameras like this that is independent of the lens correction module. No clue whether the LX7 is one.

  • Why is the Raw processing so noisy and lousy in Aperture 3.3 vs LR4

    I have been using LR4  to process my photos due to its image quality and its functions .
    However I have always liked aperture for its file managmenet. when the 3.3 is out I thought
    this could be me the game changer, ( I am shooting with 5D3)
    However over the weekend I have found out that doing a side by side comparision the Aperture's Raw (CR2) processing
    is simply not acceptable. it is lack of sharpenss and high noise is nothing but a joke if you compare to the LR4.
    I hope it is some setting that I am doing wrong so I went to the apple store, and ther" Creative" guys was not able to solve
    the issues as well, so now I am back to square one. I have to use LR4 to process my photos and APERTURE to store them...
    Any one has better ideas?
    The difference was to me day & night, it is not subtle ,,,
    I hope someone can help me with my aperture issue so I can go back to using just one system.

    What ISO are you shooting with?
    Lightroom's noise reduction is better than Aperture's on noisy images right now.  Lightroom's controls can easily knock down luminance and chroma noise, while Aperture's tools are fairly limited.  You can use 3rd party plugins (Nik Dfine, Noise Ninja, etc.) that will do a good job but that renders a TIFF file which I'm not overly fond of for just this purpose.
    But, still, the 5D Mark III has awfully good noise performance.  Are you shooting at ISO 12800 or higher all the time?  Is the noise frequently visible in all of your shots when you're not pixel peeping?
    I ask because, while Lightroom is certainly better w.r.t. noise reduction than Aperture at the moment, I don't have all that many of my shots that really, really need noise reduction.

  • LR4 Video = Aperture Knockoff - Great --- But knock it off RIGHT !

    Hi.....
    I dont particularly like Aperture. But I have been using it for a while now to organize my video-rushes.
    Particularly trimming the H264 prior to transcode is amazing.
    So I saw that LR4 had gotten video capabilities and downloaded the beta.
    Great work Adobe. Must say. Really like to be able to WB my clips in Lightroom prior to transcoding. Super.
    However, what use is Lightroom really If I cant:
    1) Export to a Real-World codec. (You offer H.264 or DPX - Latter is GREAT but a little overkill for an H264 source that doesn't need to go commercial)
    2) Import the trimmed clip (with the trims) directly into Premiere Pro or other apps. (I can drag the clip from LR4 directly into PPRO but PPRO will NOT adapt the in and outpoints which is totally stupid ;-)))
    The way LR4 implements Video capabilities is an exact knock-off of Aperture 3.
    What I ask is that if you have the audacity to so clearly copy Apples features why dont you copy them 100%....
    Aperture has the following feature " Export Version " This feature will save the trimmed version of the Movie WITHOUT re-compresing(Re-Encoding). It will save the trimmed version to WHATEVER codec the original file is.
    So one can cut off start and ending and SAVE the H264 as an independent movie WITH NO RE-ENCODING. I have Tripple checked it.. Re-saved that timmed file 10 times (Meaning 10 Generations of re-saving).
    Putting all 10 inside AE and comparing with difference Mattes yields a black background which means, if you composition background is black, that there is NO differences. IF Aperture would indeed re-encode the 10th generation
    re-save of the H264 would look horrible, NOT SO.
    Adobe, your Premiere Crew holds the opinioin that ABOVE (Saving an H264 without Re-Compressing) cannot be done without quality loss.) That is why the "Save Trimmed Version" in Premiere Pro does NOT save H264-Trimmed versions but the whole file.
    They claim that the movie would loose quality as PPRO would to re-encode. That IS NOT SO. Aperture and Apple have been doing it for a while now.
    I know that this is ADVANCED technology and it is difficult to figure out. But perhaps if your engineers cannot figure this one out, you could at least give LR4 Video Users the ability to export the trimmed movie to ProRes or other useful codecs.
    Thanx for reading

    99jon wrote:
    Why not stick to Premiere Pro and set your in and out points there?
    Using Lightroom simply adds to the workflow, with another stage of rendering.
    I will always transcode.... Working with H264 is NOT an option for professional editing, Speedwise, it is TOOOOOO slow...
    I need ProRes. If Lightroom could export to ProRes I could transcode ONLY the core´part of the clip and not the whole clip with extraneous beginnings and endings.
    As of now, I'll just transcode everything coming off the FlashCard to prores. Then view it in the Finder. I would LOVE to copy the Flash card to the hard drive (Or import directly) then use LR4 as my Librarian GREAT FOR META DATA. Then transcode ONLY the part I need to ProRes...
    Been doing this in Aperture, since V3 came out. And this is a VERY effiecient workflow. Premiere Pro iS NOT A LIBRARIAN where Lightroom is.
    TO bad, adobes departments arent really communicatiung with each other. If LR4 developers would just have ONE meeting with the Premiere Pro department, adobe would gain ALL Premiere Pro users for Lightroom in the blink of an eye....
    I could just export to DPX(LR4 does that) which I do every now and then, but ProRes is just as good and takes up 10x less HD space... So LR4 def. would benefit GREATLY from being able to export to ProRes.
    Besides, LR4 USES Adobe Media Encoder and its presets to convert to DPX and etc... So WHY ON EARTH would adobe limit to DPX and H264... Lazyness ????

  • Switch From LR4.4 to Aperture 3.4 Issues

    Even before recently reading about Adobe's announced plan to only rent out its major photography software, I had been considering adding Aperture to my current compilation of iPhoto, LR 4.4 & Photosshop CS5.  My reasoning then was wanting to maximize my utilities relative to my Mac-only computer environment (iMac, MacBook Pro, iPad & iPhone), but still strugging after what seems like about a hundred years of frustrating effort to both comprehend & manage the features of Photoshop that I want or need to use.  Adding LR to the mix when I got my Fuji X100 a couple years ago was a help but with a new Fuji X100S & wanting to start doing more RAW work, I began considering Aperture for its RAW conversion capabilities, which are highly regarded on the Fuji forums. 
    But now I really also don't want to buy in (literally) to Adobe's new business model, which may even include only LR rental down the road, so I am seriously considering Aperture as a primary tool, but with older, existing versions of PS & LR as backups or available if there is something I need but cant do in Aperture.  Without being able to trial it anymore, I am still a bit hesitant even though I believe from what I have read that Aperture will give me better photo management capability with maybe not quite the same range of editing features, albeit in a more Mac-like environment. 
    My threshold issue though would be transfering all of my image files (which are all in JPEG format) from their LR4.4 catalogues to Aperture project files - for example will edits made to those images be retained as part of the JPEG file?  Will the metadata info be transferred as well?  Are there any other transfer problems to be concerned about?  Any other suggestions or thoughts will be greatly appreciated.  Thanks,  Jed

    Sue - my photos are in a separate Lightroom folder that I store on a separate hard drive & then access them directly with LR4.  And I did check to determine that in Finder if I click on any photo & then Get Info about that file, all of the metadata, exif data & file naming info is shown for it.  So hopefully after updating & re-saving the photos in LR4, they will import into Aperture with this data intact.  I also want to check out the video tutorials on the Apple support page for Aperture to see how the program deals with importing from another DAM program like LR4.  But many thanks for your helpful advice.
    My initial consideration for making the switch was the somewhat surprising result that the Aperture RAW converter for the new Fuji X-Trans sensor-created files works better than Lightroom or Capture One conversions.  But then the recent changes being made by Adobe to get more $$ out of the hobbyists is now the catalyst for actually doing it sooner than later.  I also would like to be able to view some images with my Apple TV 2 & have better compatability with my iPad & iPhone.  And I've set up some Cloud storage, but like you, none yet for photos.  Cheers,
    Jed

  • Macbook Air 11" (2012) 8GB Ram, 128 GB SSD: i5 vs. i7 as travel companion for a little LR4/Aperture 3

    Hello everyone,
    I am about to buy a MBA 11" for my early 2013 four week trip to Asia. I travel about 2 1/2 months a year and was wondering if the 180€ upgrade to i7 was really worth it?
    Besides the obvious movies and web browsing I plan to be taking around 50 pictures a day with my Canon S100 and do some Lightroom 4 or Aperture 3 retouching on a dozen or so of them.
    Any suggestions?
    Best Regards,
    Vincent

    Vincent,
    I've been using Lightroom & Aperture on and off as a "casual enthusiast" for the past 4 years across multiple different machines (i3s with 2GBs of RAM, i5s with 4/8GB, i7s with 16GB) and I've come to the conclusion that it boils down to this -
    1.) You can never have enough available resources/processing power. Whether it's RAM or CPU, you won't find yourself ever saying: "Man this computer is too fast for my needs." When you tell your computer to do something, you'll always be waiting for it to then perform that action. It might 1 milisecond or 10 minutes but you're still waiting even if it's so fast that it gives the appearance of an instant response.
    2.) "Maxing out" a unit is an excellent strategy when purchasing a computer. Especially on computers, like the MacBook Air where upgrading them at a future point in time to keep it current is impossible. The CPU you buy today will be the CPU you'll have until you part with the computer. So bumping things up to the maximum like RAM and CPU capabilities would be considered as smart by people who like to "future proof." That being said, if you're the type of person (like myself) who upgrades their portabilities every 8-14 months this maxing out strategy may not be most beneficial. Especially considering, in my case, I sell my existing unit in preparation for the newer models and in order to reduce my out of pocket find that the base models resell much faster and with the best ROP (Return on Purchase, I don't consider a computer an investment).
    3.) If you are the type of purchase, like my girlfriend, who buys a computer and will use it until the end of days (5 years typically) then maxing out every available slider, option or upgrade is almost a no brainer. Because in 5 years when the computer's hardware is barely relevant that extra oomph she purchased initially allows her to get a much better DOP (Duration of purchase) versus someone who didn't spend the extra money for the extra performance.
    So personally, if you can afford the CPU upgrade, you intend to hold onto the machine for several years and you value your time as money then every bit helps. I'd say... Go For It!
    However if the finances are tight, if you don't intend to make this 11" MBA your bread & butter, go to, workhorse then hold off and put that $$ to use on something like AppleCare, peripherals or accessories.
    Yes, the i7 is faster. But at the end of the day it's still a dual core low voltage CPU and the differences between both CPUs in practical usage is not going to be so extreme that time will stop.

  • Dual Monitors and Lr4

    I am looking at switching from using Aperture and Photoshop, to Lightroom and Photoshop for my photography workflow. However during my free Lightroom trial, I have ran into a deal breaker with dual monitor support.
    I use a Macbook pro w/ an external monitor for editing. In Photoshop and A3, I keep all my pallets, sliders, and thumbnails on the laptop screen, and display the full size image on the external display. I would like to do the same in Lightroom 4, however, there is one small problem.
    When trying to achieve the same set up in Lightroom, I can view the image nicely on the external monitor, but I can't actually work on the external monitor. Example: If I decide a blemish needs touched up I can't use the spot removal tool on the large external display, but instead have to use it on the small laptop screen image. The same is true of the crop overlay and adjustment brushes. Also the fantastic option commands for mask overlay and sharpening, are not visible on the external display.
    Please tell me there is someway to change this?
    I strongly prefer LR4's sharpening and noise reduction, and feel I could reduce my reliance on CS6 for many images.
    Thanks in advance,
    Troy

    My first encounter with Lightroom was similar to yours: Why the heck can't I move the panels where I want them? This is ridiculous...but after a while it grew on me.
    There's no reason you can't have the main action on the large external monitor (as ssprengel says). But you have to get used to the idea right away that Lightroom is a single-screen application, and the second screen is just an extension used for an alternative view (grid/loupe/1:1). Don't fight it, it's just how it is.
    Troy_Fagan wrote:
    feel I could reduce my reliance on CS6 for many images.
    That's absolutely right, that's what happened to me.

  • Chromatic Aberration Removal in LR4 is terrible

    I used a manual fixed focal length penatx lens on my Canon 40D and it shows chromatic aerration in the raw file. In LR4 all you can do is check the option to remove chromatic aberration. LR4 did an awful job making it even worse. See before and after image below. The chromatic aberration should have manual controls to adjust it to one's liking. Red/Cyan and Blue/Yellow sliders should be complemented by a Green/Magenta slider in the manual section. Now that would be an improvement on LR3. I loathe chromatic aberration which is unavoidable in many cases. More control over it's removal is a definite must. LR4 has gone backwards. I don't want to have to fiddle with profiles etc to fix this. Just put the controls that were in LR 3 back and add a green/magenta slider please.

    I'll try the moire brush as suggested.
    I am trying to emphasise the point that the software should be moving forward. That means new tools or upgrades should avoid adding artifacts as much as possible and certainly upgrades to existing tools should not perform worse than the original tool. I have found an example here where it does with chromatic aberration removal where an artifact is formed.
    It's interesting that some of the commentary above almost suggests that chromatic aberration removal should be an adjustment brush. The user could then isolate the edges that he/she wants to remove the coloured fringes from. Then there should be the ability to choose which colour shifts are required red/cyan, blue/yellow, or green/magenta.
    It looks like the current tool may improve some edges while making others worse. If checking the choice of automatic aberration correction doesn't work - then one has to go to another external editor to fix the problem - not the most satisfactory result of an upgrade. I like the suggestion in another thread of having both the option of auto and manual control options - much like exposure control. Photographers like manual control of image enhancements.
    I have chosen to take pictures that have extreme aberrations to test the robustness of the tool. I have shot pictures with high contrast lighting, with older cheaper glass, and with the aperture wide open. I'll try to get some pictures to Eric as mentioned above.

  • Raw file rendering problems with Canon EOS 5D in Aperture 3

    Since upgrading to Aperture 3, I have had serious problems with the rendering of Canon EOS 5D (not Mark II/III) RAW files. With Aperture 2, both the preview and full-sized images looked basically the same as the original images as displayed on the camera's display, without any adjustments.
    With Aperture 3, each preview images initially look fine after import, but when Aperture re-renders it from the RAW file (e.g. when displaying the full-size image), the colors are drastically intensified, and the hue is shifted generally towards green/blue. I've checked the RAW Fine Tuning, and it is set to the defaults. If I turn the default RAW Fine Tuning settings all the way down, the image is still not at all like the preview from the camera - it becomes much darker and stays too blue/green, with washed-out colors.
    A friend with a Canon EOS 5D MkII also recently upgraded her Mac from Aperture 2 to 3, and hasn't experienced any problems. We've tried importing RAW files from my (non-MkII) camera to her Mac (with the default RAW Fine Tuning settings), and get the same results as with my own Mac (i.e. strange colors), so the problem seems to be related to the camera model.
    I've also noticed that scanned greyscale tiff images (including images that were originally imported under Aperture 2) are changed when first displayed by Aperture 3 - they become darker and more contrasty, with lots of information lost in the shadow areas.
    I've also tried removing Aperture preferences, Aperture itself, and re-installing from download, with no change in the problem. (Aperture is the current latest version, 3.3.2.)
    Has anyone experienced similar problems?

    I'm having the same problem.
    iMac running Mac OS X Lion 10.7.4 and Aperture 3.3.2.  Workflow is importing through Canon's DPP and then using referenced images in Aperture.  The images look great in LR4, or Canon's DPP but are flat and dingy in Aperture.
    There's a free preset that goes part way to fixing it at http://theapertureblog.com/2011/02/10/my-aperture-workflow-for-working-with-cano n-5d-mark-ii-files/
    but as good as this fix is, it doesn't quite do the trick. [not being a hater, and not saying I can do better]
    I just got back from shoooting 1,500 images with a 5DMii and a T2i using Canon 24-105L IS, 70-200 2.8L, 50 1.8 and a Sigma 120-400 and the T2i images are not just better, they're in a different league.
    I've tried shooting in Faithful, Neutral and also toggling these presets in different ways and still can't get Aperture to match what I see on the camera's screen or in other Apps.  I love the interface and DB of Aperture, but what's the point of using it if it doesn't produce and awesome image in the end?

  • Kelby's wish list for LR4 ...

    Scott Kelby posted his wish list for LRv4 on his blog today pointing out features, adjustments and tweaks he would like to see in the next iteration of Lightroom ....
    http://www.scottkelby.com/blog/2010/archives/11824
    Is he on target? Are his suggestions worthy, important and doable?
    I must say I wouldn't be disappointed with his vision of what LR4 would be capable of ....

    Personally, I'm on a pretty different page.
    I could care less about Lightroom's slideshow capability - because I don't use it (I use 3rd party presentation tools after exporting from Lr).
    I could care less about Lightroom's photobooks - because if I did use photobooks, I could do it in Aperture or some other 3rd party software.
    I could care less about soft-proofing because I don't use it, and if I did, I could always pull the photos into another app that does support soft-proofing.
    ... I could go on, but my point is that anything that can easily be done at the endpoints of the workflow with another tool is less of a concern to me than the things I do day in and day out, which is Library + Develop, especially Develop.
    And Adobe still has some serious image quality matters to address, e.g. Highlight recovery.
    I would agree with Scott on these points:
    - Networked catalog support (although I don't have need, I understand other peoples need for this).
    - Soft-proofing: this is not a contradiction - I acknowlege other peoples strong desire/need for this.
    Other stuff I don't use but would imagine becoming big:
    - GPS/Location support.
    My wishlist:
    - Finish what they started being #1 image-quality-wise
        - especially highlight recovery
        - and other hue shift anomalies.
    - Finish what they started being #1 performance-wise (read: get the bugs out so the performance for "all" of us matches the performance for the lucky ones).
    - Add better color handling and/or adjustment capability.
    - Better auto-tone and Active-D-Lighting-like support (fill-light + clarity goes pretty far now, and jjust fixing highlight recovery would be a huge step in the right direction here).
        - Fix 'Clarity' so that one can down-throttle its affect on "already high-contrast" edges.
    - targeted adjustments (based on luminance, color, ..., e.g. U-points only better)
        - includes making the auto-mask work better.
    - all adjustments available locally.
    - Separate channel levels and curves.
    - distraction removal brush (e.g. content-aware fill).
    - Support for image enhancement via plugin. - once pixel manipulation is integrated with parametric editing (see my #1 wish below) - this will be a fallout - I don't care too much whether image manipulation tools plug into photoshop or lightroom, as long as they are readily accessible in Lightroom without forking a separate photo.
    - Full-screen editing with develop panels + library panels simultaneously open on secondary monitor.
    - Full access to Lightroom UI via SDK (plugin) - including event notification and having things in the panels.
    AND MY #1 WISH FOR LIGHTROOM 4:
    - 100% integration with Photoshop and/or other 3rd party pixel editors and plugins - this would include the ability to have multiple shots be considered sub-shots of an HDR image. - If this were done, it would lessen many of the needs for natively supporting things like separate channel levels and curves and all adjustments local. To reiterate: the main goal is to be able to do things presently relegated to pixel editors without forking a new photo, even if internally its handled as a fork - I don't want to have to manage an additional independent photo entity just to remove a twig.
    I'm sure there's more, but I gotta go dance...
    Rob

Maybe you are looking for

  • Multiple devices trouble sharing & syncing apps with iCloud

    We have 2 iPods, 1 iPhone, a PC laptop and a PC all on the same iCloud Apple ID.  The iPhone and the two iPods each have their own Apple ID for making purchases.  The iPhone and one of the iPods are able to share apps purchased separately after the d

  • How to apply album cover picture to all songs on cd not just one at a time?

    i found agreat website with free cd covers for my songs that will show up in the corner of my ipod. but i can figure out how to apply the picture to all the songs in an alubm an dnot just one, i can only drag the picture into the box in itunes one by

  • Printing a pdf from a marked-up pdf.

    Acrobat Pro 9 no longer lets me print a pdf from a marked-up pdf.  Any suggestions?

  • Another one with the "did not respond" error

    Hi all, We've been successfully video chatting with my parents using iChat AV for years on our old machine - an 800 MHz G4 iMac. We just upgraded to a new iMac with the Intel Core Duo processor, and now are getting the "did not respond" error that ot

  • Automated Export to CSV Possible?

    HELP My users want to have an Export of all Siebel data to CSV file done EVERYDAY.. Is there a way to automate it?? Instead of me having to request it everyday?