Compatable GPS units with Aperture 3

In the user manual for Aperture 3, there is a link for a list of compatable devices; http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs
There is no list at this link. Does anyone know where I can get this info? I'm looking to use a GPS for upcoming shoots and would like to know what is compatible with Aperture 3. Any help appreciated

Another AMOD user here - I posted a few times about this last week, but I'll borrow from that thread to talk about my experiences with the AMOD and Places.
Had a 3 week shoot in Argentina and decided to try out Aperture 3's new GPS location tagging. So I bought an AMOD 3080 logger and faithfully used it the entire trip. Here's my story, plus a few issues with Places.
First some notes on using the AMOD 3080 - at times it was hard to get to get it logging in Buenos Aires, I assume due to the building density blocking the satellite receptio. Sometimes took 20 minutes to start "flashing", meaning it had acquired the GPS signal and was logging, though it was much speedier out in rural areas.
Charging the three NiMH batteries every night was a bit of a hassle for my charger, which recharges by pairs (I logged about 12 hours a day, so the batteries were usually out of juice by the end of the day). I had a second set of extra batteries, so I would recharge 2 batteries one night and 4 the next. A couple of times I misplaced which of the three was the uncharged battery from the night before, so that was another stupid thing to have to worry about. But be sure to factor in another $30 for a NiMH charger into your total price for the AMOD (plus the weight of the chargers on the road). It might mean a more expensive unit, with a lighter and integrated built-in charger, could suddenly look better. FYI, after returning I found the following unit that charges each AAA battery independently, which would be a better way to go.
http://www.amazon.com/Crosse-Technology-BC-700-Battery-Charger/dp/B000RSOV50/ref =wlit_dpo?ie=UTF8&coliid=I38WY26GTFAAB0&colid=1JZG5Z0U956FB
But other than remembering to switch it on and off, I'd just throw the AMOD in my camera bag throughout the day. One nice thing is no fussy settings beyond on or off - it just pulls time (UTC) and location from the GPS ttransmissions - only option is to choose a 1 second or 5 second log interval.
I ended up with about 30 log tracks from the trip (everytime you switch on the unit, it adds a new track). This was more data than the 128 MB capacity, but I also was able to back up the AMOD to my NEXTODi Extreme 2700 units - I back up my images onto two different Extreme units every night before wiping my CF cards. Near the end I did a "move" onto the NEXTODi which copied the data over and then erased the AMOD.
Regarding the import of the GPS logs into Aperture, the import for the AMOD files is fast and painless. I did sych the cameras to UTC before I left (within half a second), as I thought there would be some sort of auto import. But after the logs are inside Aperture (you select/load them on a map), you have to choose the images you want to place on that particular log, then drop them onto the track at the corresponding time for the main image you have chosen. Even though I set my camera to Argentina time, when I imported my images into Aperture 3 they defaulted to US PST, my home time zone. So i had to readjust all photos to -5 hours, Argentina time, to match the GPS data. So to implement the correct placement, in this case I had to drag the selected photos around the GPS track on the map until it showed 5 hours 0 minutes time difference, then drop the photos onto the map.
Understanding this now, I suspect the Aperture team did it this way (all photos will be offset by the same time difference show when dropping) in case the camera is not set to the exact time used by satellites (UTC). But it still is a bit frustrating that I can only get a minute synch. Further, if you are in pone place for an extended time, you get a tangle of lines on your GPS track - finding the correct one wold be murder. Combined with the problem getting a signal in BsAs, I had to fuss with placing the images much more than I thought I would have to. I solved this by starting a group selection from an image that had a "cleaner" time to find onthe HPS path. Again, not a deal-breaker but a bit more hassle than i expected. All in all, I'd say I spent 5 or 6 hours getting the 7000 images on the correct tracks, at the correct times. Ths included some time for manually placing images that fell outside of the logs.

Similar Messages

Is the Nikon GP-1 gps compatible with Aperture 3?

Is the Nikon GP-1 GPS compatible with Aperture 3?

"A standard GPS cannot do this, and so in many cases will take 1-2 minutes to get a precise location."
No, that's completely incorrect. Most modern GPS chipsets will lock onto 3-4 GPS signals within seconds unless you've taken it somewhere far from the last time it was powered up and it has to search from scratch because it has to build a new almanac and ephemeris.
You're also confused about which technology you're talking about. aGPS or Assisted GPS has nothing to do with triangulation. It can only help improve time-to-fix if the phone has an active data connection so that it can download data that will help the GPS get a fix faster. No internet, no faster TTF.
Cell tower triangulation is so inaccurate that lawyers know that if presented as evidence it can easily be challenged and thrown out in court cases.
<Edited By Host>

Using TomTom GPS unit with Leopard - connectivity issue

I am using a TomTom One 3rd Edition (the newest) and all the documentation from Tomtom indicates that it should be fully compatible with my Mac, but on connecting the GPS with the USB, I invariably get a spinning ball of death, which then requires a forced quit of the Tomtom HOME software.
I can't find any information about this issue on these boards, or on the wider internet. The GPS works fine, but without being able to hook it into my Mac, I can't d/l any map updates, which will definitely be a problem...

I assume TomTom Home is a program that is to run on the Mac? If so, is there an update?
You might want to sign up at TomTom for support. Their TomTom on palm support was superb, but I can't say much about the support for their own models. But it might be the best way to solve this.
Sorry I can't help more.
Jim

8703e Comaptibility with Bluetooth GPS unit

Will Delorme's Earthmate BT-20 GPS unit connect to the Mini-B USB port of my Blackberry 8703e and allow me to run Nav4All?
If not, can you recommend a good GPS unit that will?

Bleutooth (BT) is like low power wifi. To use a BT receiver with the iPod y will have to find a app that is compatible with the iPod and the receiver. I do not know if there is one. Users have reported problems with using receivers with iOS 6. See:
after updating to iOS 6 gps signals are...: Apple Support Communities
TS1702 magellan External gps not...: Apple Support Communities

Car GPS Units and their Software

Hello,
I am in the market for an entry level car GPS system and I am shopping aroound at everything from Garmin to TomTom to the more unknown companies like Mio and Navigon. One of the critical elements of the GPS that I cannot really find any information online for any of the devices is the software that you have to load up onto your computer for updates.
Does anyone in the community have experience they could share in using GPS software that comes with your GPS? What works, what doesn't? I see online that Garmin and TomTom have Mac support. How is that support really though?
Does anyone have aany experience with any off beat brands? Mio for instance seems to be a fairly popular off brand of GPS devices, however I cannot find anywhere whether or not their installation software can run on a Mac or not. Any feedback would be great.

Many GPS units require an old style serial RS-232 connector which is pretty antiquated. A few probably have been updated to USB. Keyspan offers RS-232 compatibility with Mac OS X and its adapter to USB. These companies make Mac OS X compatible GPS software and hardware:
RoadNav, RouteBuddy, GPS Connect, GPS NavX, MacGPS Pro, GPSY, Hiketech, Route 66 (mapping software that ties into GPS units).
And there is the
Macmap usergroup on Yahoo (no affiliation with Macmaps*, and was discovered long after I created the Macmaps domain)
- * Macmaps is my own personal website which I may get compensation from.
Message was edited by: a brody
Message was edited by: a brody

How can I use EOS 6D RAW files with Aperture 3.2.4?

The EOS 6D RAW support for Aperture requires Aperture 3.4 or later. I tried to update to Aperture 3.4 but that requires OSX 10.8.3. I am stuck with OSX 10.6.8 for a while because I use Adobe CS5.5 and it is not compatable with newer OSX. So i do not seem to have a path for 6D RAW support. I can use my EOS 20D RAW files just fine. What is it about the 6D RAW file that necessitates OSX 10.6.8 or Aperture 3.4?

The common way is to try converting to DNG and then use the DNGs with Aperture. The drawback (other than the format conversion) is you lose camera specific optimisations with the DNG (mostly noise reduction tweaks for specific ISO values and colour tweaks).
In the past it would have been easy to edit a few config files to get Aperture to recognise new cameras with similar sensor tech as existing cameras, but this data is now encoded so can't be changed. It is a bit frustrating when you know there is nothing special about the sensor and Aperture would be able to process the data just fine.
Andy

Using Places in iPhoto with aperture photos

If we have a picture in aperture with the City and Country Name attribute filleds, this picture in iphoto will not have the info. So, iPhoto no uses the EXIF City and Country Name fields.
are there any solution to use the exif info filled in apeture with Places in iPhoto?
Thanks.

I am not familiar with Aperture so I don't know what it can do or if any helper programs/plug ins will do with Aperture.
However there are other Geotagging programs out there. One that is very easy to use in conjunction with Google Earth is Graphics Connverter. With GC, you can open Google Earth, find the location of you want to tag your photo with, then switch over to GC and use the menu item to geotag the selected photos (you can do many photos at once) with the currently displayed Google Earth location. In addition there is a menu command to simply type in coordinates if you do not want to use Google Earth. GC can also tag using GPS data logger files.
GC will write the coordinates to the EXIF data and I have done it myself on both normal JPGs as well as Olympus RAW format. I know when I geotag with GC and then add the photos to iPhoto, iPhoto sees the tags just fine and show their locations. I assume Aperture would do the same.
iPhoto can tag photos as well, but it only writes the data to the database and doesn't actually add the info to the EXIF of the photos themselves until you export the photos out of iPhoto. Do to do it with iPhoto is a multi step process that would require adding them to iPhoto, tagging them, then exporting them back out of iPhoto. I think CG would be an easier solution.
Patrick

GPS data in Aperture not saved to files

Hi there
I have been using Aperture for a while and love it! Recently I purchased a DSLR and upon importing into Aperture, I manually added the locations to the files. Whenever I view the places feature for my library, I can see pins on the map so I know its been saved correctly.
When I imported the files, I ensured the import was "file system" and so hopefully Aperture doesnt save it into it's own library.
Unfortuantely, when I try and view the EVIF GPS data in Photoshop for these files, the GPS value is empty. If I manually export the file, the data is there, but somehow the files are smaller in file size (even though I chose JPEG Original Size).
Is there a way for me to make GPS changes in Aperture and for it to be automatically saved to the actual file instead of me going through the process of exporting it?
Thanks!

Aperture does write the GPS data only to the versions, when you are assigning a place, not to the EXIF tags of the original files.
So you will need to export the edited version to write the GPS to an image file.
If I manually export the file, the data is there, but somehow the files are smaller in file size (even though I chose JPEG Original Size).
"JPEG Original Size" refers to the pixel size, not the file size. You could try to increase the image quality settings in the "JPEG Original Size" export preset. Select this preset in the export panel and then switch to "Edit". This will allow you to increase the "image Quality" by adjusting the slider. Or select a "Tiff" preset, to export losslessly.
Another work-around would be to use exiftool to set the GPS tags on your originals, if you are experienced with the Terminal (see: Modifying EXIF tags of Originals Using exiftool: camera, lens, gps)
I usually do the geocoding before importing the image files to Aperture with Jetphoto Studio, but that is not a free application.
Regards
Léonie

Do I still need GPS when A-GPS comes with Phone?

Could somebody explain me whether I still need an external GPS module when using Nokia E71? E71 comes with A-GPS, which stands for assisted. What the heck it means. To me it sounds like "the GPS is not good, so it will need assitance from your provider".
Nokia is still offering the Nokia Bluetooth GPS Module LD-4W as an accessory for E71. So this prompts me to ask whether I still need it. The LD-4W is not listed as Asssisted GPS. Does it mean it's better?
I am confused with all that GPS.
Thank you.
- Polo -
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Great, thanks guys for explanation. Yes, I looked up, E71 has GPS with A-GPS. So it means it drains less battery and is faster to find location because the phone doesn't rely solely on the satellites but it gets information from towers faster.
Does it mean, if I don't have data plan OR if there are no towers, the GPS still should be capable to do the job?
Anyway, seems like a good idea to get LD-4W to save battery on the phone. The LD-4W can operate 11 hours on GPS only, no A-GPS. Can E71 come close in number of hours for GPS use? Anybody tried?
An interesting thing would be whether E71 A-GPS can match the 11 hours of the LD-4W GPS unit. In the city the results would be different than on the countryside, I guess. Going on travel might make sense to get LD-4W. If staying only in city, it might make less value then? Hmm.
I will give it a try and see how it works.
- polo -
Message Edited by polocanada on 12-Aug-2008 01:29 AM

Add or edit geotag (GPS) data with Photos App

Geotag is an EXIF metadata associated with a single photo that give the geographical location of where the photo has been taken. At this time, the geotag EXIF is fully supported by Photos (we see the location on a map) and we have the option to strip the information when we share the photo. To work with Photos, the EXIF geotagging info must be embedded with the photo when it is transferred from the camera to the Photos App.
However, many cameras don't have a GPS that sets the photo location. The geotag must be added later manually. Some photo editing software strip EXIF data (or just Geotag data) and sometimes these photo editor apps set geotag of their own (the location where the picture is edited, not the original location where the picture comes from).
It would be nice to add a geotag addition/edition feature to Photos.app.

Now that iCloud drive keeps the photo library synced between all devices it would be nice if there was a way to edit tags, geotags, descriptions, etc. on iCloud.com as well as IOS.
I tested to add GPS using AppleScript, but most of the EXIF field are readonly and we cannot change the GPS tags with Apple Script in iPhoto. It was possible to do that in Aperture, but does not work in Photos.
Right now, it is best to add GPS before importing to Photos.

IPhoto 09, Nikon D90 Camera and GP1 GPS unit

I own a Nikon D90 camera, and have just ordered a Nikon GP 1 GPS unit to use with it. I was wondering if there was anybody in the forum with this setup already, and what experience they are having using it with iPhoto 09. I have written Nikon, and am going to write Apple, with this question, but was hoping there might be somebody that already had the answer and experience in the forum. Any help would be appreciated, thank you, Jim C.
Dual 1 Gig G4, 2 X500 Gig HD, 1.5 Gig Memory Mac OS X (10.5.6)

I am using Jobo photoGPS ( alias Geotate Kato) together with Canon EOS450D with to my great satisfaction.
It works with any camera having a flash-shoe; very small unut, excellent battery life.
Raw GPS data is recorded; you need a PC(now on the mac too) to match photos and GPS-data which is then written into EXIF. Diffferent from other units, the clock on this one does not need to be exactly synchronised with the camera.
Importing these photos into iPhoto'09 works without any problems: they are automatically placed in the correct location.
On the other hand, I have enormous problems with loading the maps; they're loade only partly, extremely slowly or not at all. The longer I work in iPhoto, the worse it gets up to complete blocking.
Looks to me very much like a memory-leak. I already contacted Apple: no response.
Restating the Mac temporarily solves/betters the problem.
Any clues?

Too late to start up with Aperture?

I'm aware of both Aperture and iPhoto being trashed by Apple in the near future. I have been using iPhoto on my MacBook Pro since it was introduced and usually do some additional editing as required using Adobe Photoshop Elements. But now I'm starting to shoot in RAW, and iPhoto won't even take RAW files into it's library without converting them to Jpegs. I think the best bet for me would be to upgrade to Aerture but I also know it's no longer going to be supported. In fact, I've read that Apple is no longer interested in the entire advanced enthusiast and pro photography spaces. Thoughts and advice for me? I have been spoiled by the wonderful Apple apps that work so nicely. By the way, I haven't upgraded to Yosemite, nor do I intend to. I think in my case it will take me in the wrong direction.

Reasons for migrating to Aperture of course depend upon your intended use. As pointed out here, development for Aperture has ceased. Apple has decided to migrate to another application, using cloud based back end for image storage. There has been more than one or two posts of disappointment on this course of action. In the end it's Apples decision however right or wrong the users believe that decision to be. Your best bet is to look at the features, determine if those are of use to you, scan the threads here for comments, then determine if the cost is worth it.
As opined Aperture probably has about a year of life left. After that you may be able to use it so long as you do not upgrade your operating system. But make no mistake - there will not be an Aperture 4.x. Nor, in my opinion will there be any significant (or heroic) efforts to fix what are now significant issues with Aperture.
The trade off, in my opinion is not worth it. Especially when you can get Lightroom now for a modest price. That is if you don't mind paying a monthly usage fee and really don't need facial recognition. The former being the pricing plan Adobe is moving to and the latter being completely absent from Lightroom. I don't know of any other viable professional package on the market right now. On the upside, Adobe products do support IPTC extended metadata which Apple never adopted. Understandable, it was an Adobe push - but the data stored is pretty nice. Mostly dealing with model and release information (and others, read the IPTC specs if you are interested) - if you deal with that kind of thing.
As for my experiences - Aperture use to be an incredible product. Especially with the introduction of Facial Recognition - which is now horribly broke. Here are some of my experiences.
FACES:
- Aperture now scans my entire photo library for new faces in every image every time the application fires up. This isn't a problem if you have a few hundred images. Once you start hitting about ten thousand (10,000) it becomes a nuisance. It takes about 45 seconds. Multiply that time out based on your library size.
- Aperture now rescans every identified face for a match, every time you identify a new face. Ok, I get this process. You have marked this guy as John Smith, now we are going to look for possible matches for John Smith. The only problem is that it appears to being in every face which it cannot justify as someone else.
- Aperture often double tags a face. To explain this you have to understand what the software is (probably) doing and how it records facial locations. First it applies some order of facial recognition. It looks for things which appear to be faces. Eyes, nose, mouth. It then draws a box around that area. You have the option to select that boxed area and in the upper left hand corner click on the "x" to close the box. Except when two boxes are exactly on top of each other. It's maddening. You cannot get rid of either box. Nor, can you identify the name of the person in both iterations of the box. If you understand all the places where you can name people (every software package has multiple places to do the same task) then you can select one of the boxes and tell Aperture that this area "is not a face". But since you are now telling the AI that the information contained within the defined area is not a face (when in fact it is) you are setting yourself up for a real HAL9000 moment. And if you don't get that reference, you are simply confusing the system. Especially when you leave box 2 in place and give that person a name. So is it a face or isn't it? Aperture appears to be using both decisions (is and isn't a face) in future iterations of facial identification (finding faces in an image) and facial recognition (is this face Johnny Smith or Jane Smith).
PLACES:
- A number of folks have reported problems with the geolocation of images. With the upgrade to the latest OS I have also begun to experience this problem. Images which I shot in my home studio were correctly mapped within a few feet of my home. With Aperture 3.6 many of them are not even on the same block. I actually have photographs which were previously (properly) mapped in central Maryland, that with the 3.6 upgrade are now tagged in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Yes you can manually move them to their correct location - but again, thats great with a few hundred images. Thousands becomes a real nightmare.
This same geomapping problem has reared its head in faces as well with some users reporting the placement of the facial identification box in the wrong location on the image. Far be it from me to disparage software developers but it's almost as if the crew forgot that the image coordinates (whether for dropping a box on a photo or a pin on a map) start at 0,0 being the upper left corner of the display. /snark
STORAGE:
- A couple "upgrades" back Aperture migrated a reasonable and easily understandable storage methodology in which photos were filed (on your hard disk) in a directory architecture based on the date/time of image. So, if something horrible happened a savvy user could open the Aperture package, navigate through the directory and recover lost or damaged data. Not anymore. I defy anyone to explain the system now. It appears to have something to do with the ingest date, solar or lunar cycle and a hashed algorithm of some programmers mothers birthdate which is then translated into an XML filename. All that to say - good luck finding your photo IF you need to AND you are storing images internal to the Aperture database. But lets get serious about filing images under a directory system based on import date/time. This is great - if you import your photos on the date of the shoot. But, if you go on a two week trip of Europe and ingest all your photos the day you get home, well that's not too bad. A year later when you have to recover all your photos from a significant system failure and end up ingesting 10,000 photos on 15 May 2014 that is another story entirely. Now, good luck finding your photos on the hard disk (if you need to that is).
SECURITY:
- Apple applied the "sandbox" theory to image security. Basically in a nutshell all your photos are locked from editing by only approved applications. So don't even think you are going to download some awesome script to do some wonderful task and have it work. Sorry. It took me months of phone calls with apple support before one of those on the line even thought to walk me through my editing process and determined the script/app I was using was not apple approved and this was causing my problem. I get it, new risks in computer data and all. But there comes a point when you have taken security so far as to lock the user out of the loop.
CRASHES:
- We all have them, and they all happen at the worst possible moments. In the past 2 days I have been working in Aperture with my data and experience Aperture crashes about every 45 minutes or so. Yes, I have repaired my permissions, yes I have repaired the database and Yes I have rebuilt the database. It just appears to be another nuisance of Aperture that wasn't there a couple years ago. I have even gone so far as to completely uninstall Aperture, reload it from scratch and re-ingest all my images (that is how I discovered the whole ingest date/time versus shoot date/time storage della described above). My entire library now (in the Aperture Package) falls under a single year (2014) when previously it was spread across 40 years (from the 70's to current date). Yes, I have images from the 70's in aperture. I scanned a lot of film over the years. Regardless, I could never track down exactly why the crashes were happening. Some feedback from Apple would be nice - I have after all must have sent them a few hundred crash reports by now. My RAM is good (yup, I have tested it), drive space is fine and I have plenty of it so ..... Im left scratching my head.
Aside from all of that - I loved Aperture, while it lasted. I will be saddened by it's loss and to date I haven't heard anything yet which gives me hope about Photos. As someone who is occasionally paid, and who occasionally pays to shoot (read into that what you will) I refuse to store my image library on anyone else cloud. I have my own storage architecture which has worked fine for me. I haven't lost an image now in the many many years I have been using it. If you shoot a lot I recommend you look into Drobo. I was an early adopter and have never looked back. I have two 16TB units on my desk - one for live data, one for TimeMachine.
Cloud storage is simply too risky.
1. You are reliant on too many factors which are (a) out of your control and (b) are run by people who really don't care about your data or your business. Not to mention the constant finger pointing. If a switch goes out somewhere in Nebraska I hope you had a local copy of your data because now you can't work. But then again, that defeats the whole purpose of cloud storage doesn't it? How many Apple users signed up and put up web pages in what is now the cloud? You remember those days? You data is your data and will always be there? Until we change our ToS and now longer support personal websites.
2. Pricing. Seriously look at the pricing. The cloud tops out at 1TB for $20/month. Not bad. What do I do with the other 15TB of data I have? Oh, and after 3 months I could have purchased a Western Digital portable USB 1TB. If Moore was right (and so far he has been pretty close) that 1TB next year will only cost me $30 at the local Best Buy. If you can find it. You know 6TB drives come out this fall? Only a couple hundred dollars each. About 1 years payments on the cloud. Now I realize I might get slammed there - not everyone has $60 extra dollars for a portable 1TB drive. But I am assuming you do since you are tinkling about spending $70 for an app which is only viable for another year.
3. Cloud storage really? I don't know about you but the last time I ran an all day shoot I used up about 128GB of card space which took me a couple hours of transfer time (card to local disk). Now, how long would it take me to run that up to the cloud before I can use it. And that was on an older camera which was half the megapixels of what I am shooting now. So, 1/4 of my storage maximum being transferred up to the cloud after only one shoot. Awesome. Ill get a coffee, take a road trip, and in a couple days my images will be ready for first draft editing. Meanwhile my client will be ..... strumming his fingers? Don't worry though sir - a couple more days and your proofs will be available online. For everyone with any mad skillz to hack into. The only secure computer is one not online.
So, there are the down sides from my perspective. Yup, it's one sided. If you want to know the good stuff (and there is a lot of good stuff) just read the sales brochures. It's fine product - so long as you understand the limitations. And overall I am happy with it. And I will, again, be saddened when it leaves the market.
Aperture's days are numbered. I am past denial and isolation. I guess this places me in the anger stage. There is no use in bargaining. It is Apples decision and they have made it. Depression is next. I doubt I will make it to acceptance - unless there are some significant changes to Photos and I don't see that in the works. Apple appears to be dropping their professional line of products and pushing to the general market.

Is Viveza compatible with Aperture 3?

I have recently moved my digital world to a slightly bigger and faster iMac and have been experiencing some problems with Viveza. I had previously been using Viveza (v2.0.0.4), with Leopard OSX 10.5.8 and Aperture 2.1.4 with some good results. However, since upgrading to Aperture 3.1.3 and Snow Leopard OSX 10.6.8 I have been having problems. Has any body else found this? Mine seem to be, that after placing say six or so control points, the program just freezes and becomes totally unresponsive and the only way out is to force quit. I'm trying to nail this one, not sure if it is an Aperture problem, an OSX compatibility thing with Viveza?

Tim Campbell1 wrote:
Any Wacom tablet will work.
The Intuos line tablets have a few unique feature advantages over the Bamboo line, but Aperture doesn't take advantage of any of those features.
Aperture WILL take advantage of the fact that tablets are "pressure sensitive" -- so if you're applying a brushed on adjustment. Say you're using the "burn" brush to darken an area -- a very light touch will apply a slight amount of "burn" but heavy pressure will apply a much stronger amount of "burn."
If you're buying a tablet *just* for Aperture, then save yourself a few bucks and buy a tablet in the Bamboo line. If you also need support for drawing & painting apps, then spring for the more expensive Intuous line.
(Emphasis added.)
This is mildly misleading. Aperture takes full advantage of all but two of the Intuos4's additional functions.
As I point out below, for these reasons I don't agree with Tim's recommendation.
The Intuos4 is, compared to the Bamboo Pen & Touch (all based on specs at Wacom's site):
2x more accurate
0.5x more responsive
2x more sensitive to pressure, and
2x higher in resolution
All of those are taken advantage of by Aperture. Additionally, the Intuos4 comes with the TouchRing and six ExpressKeys, all of which can be easily programmed to execute Aperture commands. (The Bamboo has 4 ExpressKeys and no TouchRing.) Also, the Intuos4 includes the fully programmable Radial Menu, which can be a workflow accelerator for Aperture. (This may be available on the Bamboo -- I just don't know.)
My recommendation is that, if your are regularly going to use a tablet for making Adjustments and using Aperture, get the Intuos4 Medium. It that is outside your budget, get the Intuos4 Small. If you are only going to occasionally use the tablet with Aperture (or only occasionally use Aperture), the Bamboo Pen & Touch may suffice.
Note, as well, that Wacom's software bundles often completely change the value of some of their products.

Lightroom 5 GPS issue with Nikon D3

I can not see the GPS coordinates in Lightroom 5. I am using a Nikon D3 with the GP-1 GPS unit.

Thanks, this solved my issue! Don't know why, it was the printer color profile who had been selected on my monitor profile!!!

Nvidia 7300/7600gt desktop users with Aperture graphic corruption read:

Not promising anything, but consider installing the January 19, 2010 "Graphics Firmware Update 1.0 (iMac and Mac Pro) compatibility with Windows 7" then perform a restart as per the installer. Then restart while resetting PRAM (I have done this numerous times before this update, so don't even think of suggesting this was the fix) and then shut down for good measure and reboot again....what the ****....
EXPLANATION:
I have a new HD, new RAM, new clean Aperture and OS install. I have been trying to determine the source of my woes for months. I also performed a complete check of the innards of my machine (checking voltages, yanking mother boards and GPU board for visual inspections, capacitor failures, connections, traces, etc......all to prove everything looked great with little dust) But I still had issues.
For kicks, even though I am not running WIndows 7 or BootCamp (I use VMWare for XP Pro) I updated the graphics firmware in my computer. It says: "Download and install the Graphics Firmware Update 1.0 IF YOU RUN WINDOWS 7 using Boot Camp on your iMac (with NVIDIA GeForce 7300 or 7600 GT) or Mac Pro (with NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT or Quadro FX 4500) computer." (Capital emphasis mine) Furthermore, some descriptions I have seen for this refer to "early 2008" models...clearly not mine...though Apple, to my knowledge, never made iMacs in 2008 with a 7300/7600 GT card. They were produced in 2006 and early 07.
I originally assumed this update was not required or recommended for those of us NOT using WIndows 7 (and perhaps this assumption is correct, technically). Well, I did the update, and since performing this update...I am nervous to even suggest this....I see the graphic corruption has not occurred while making adjustments. I have even used screen sharing with Aperture in full screen mode with success....crazy, I know.
This is...so far...a miracle. It also proves in my twisted dementia and euphoria, that it was NOT (here comes the jinx) hardware failure related, but rather a driver or firmware issue. (of course you will see a follow up about how this was an awful idea plagued with problems and no fix for Aperture....but be patient, all good drama needs time)
Let me be clear, the update never popped up via software update and the update itself says it is for windows 7 boot camp users of which I am NOT...
The ROM Revision # has changed in "About This Mac" TO 3467 FROM 3021. I cannot necessarily suggest this was a fix (I have done nothing else, however, to my computer since), but it seems to have worked so far. I have no idea how to roll back this firmware if you should try this, not succeed and suffer problems. But for the risk-takers (not sure how risky this is for the described users) it's worth a shot. Post your experience via this thread, just to confirm if I am imagining this....
Message was edited by: lovinmymac

Clem wrote:
Does it still crash if you change your directory that you are exporting to, but leave it in icon mode?
Yes. I just checked, and the 2nd try it crashed when in icon mode to another than the usual directory. Usually I export to the Desktop, now I exported to the home-dir.
Are there other images or pdfs of interesting items in the directory?
My Desktop is usually empty. I tried again exporting random images one by one removing each exported image in between, and after around six times it crashed. So I would say: No.
Do the icon size or text settings have an effect on if you crash or not?
I have tried with 2 sizes 64x64 and 128x128 with the same result: Crash. So I would say No, but I haven't tried all icon sizes.

Compatable GPS units with Aperture 3

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for