Export 300dpi - open in Photoshop 72dpi

Question

Hello everybody,
After the update from Aperture to version 2.1 something strange happened. In the settings from Aperture i choose the setting 300dpi and jpeg original size.
When i open the image in photoshop after it's exported from Aperture is shows me that de image is 72dpi ???? How come???

Answer 1

The thing is that this issue isn't one with an easy work around. It is literally the lesser of two evils:
Follow this:
Export a RAW file as a jepg at 300dpi including meta/exif data = Jepg file at 72dpi including meta/exif data; full sized file at 2906 x 4372 (40.4" x 60.7") 3.25MB.
Export a RAW file as jepg at 300dpi NOT including meta/exif data = Jepg file at 300dpi NOT including meta/exif data; full sized file at 2906 x 4372 (9.7" x14.6") 3.25MB.
While many think this is a viable work around by simply adding the meta data post export in Bridge, it isn't really. It isn't because the vital exif data is forever gone and can't be added in post export. Everyone may remember the exif data is the camera info that states the exposure settings as well as lens, camera body, etc.
And, going one step further, if there are people out there that think a viable work around is exporting meta/exif embedded files via tiff/psd format and to then convert to jepgs - that is nutty. Honestly, done this way, it would be faster to use the competition (LR) and save a BUNCH of steps.
Hey there Apple - this Pro Application is in need of some help. This is a real deal killer for so many of my colleagues despite the new features like dodge & burn / plug-ins viability. I can't begin to describe the level of embarrassment I felt when presenting at a state photography workshop where I had to literally ditch using Aperture and resort to using Bridge to finish up the files for the examples and lessons I was explaining. Had people coming up to me at the break asking me what "program" I was using earlier so they could "not get that one".
My deepest hope and my greatest concern is that Aperture does not lead a long and slow death, dragging its many supporters along the way. I remember a conversation with the great Jim DiVitale last year where he and I were talking about Aperture and LR. While he said he really liked Aperture, a lot, his feelings were that Aperture would lead the same demise that Beta did between the VHS vs Beta format. He shared that Beta was in actuality was a better format with better features, VHS one out because of a number of trivial reasons. Jim went further to say that while Aperture could actually be a better piece of software, he felt that LR would win out because similar trivial reasons.
My hope is that this doesn't become the case and that issues like this current software bug, as well as a few other large ones, don't become part and parcel to advocate against Aperture and eventually present to Aperture, its death.
My fingers are crossed!
CD