Forum for Aperture??

Will Apple be providing a forum here for Aperture any time soon? I'd like to:
a) recommend they support Pentax *ist DS raw files
b) find out if Aperture will recognize/use Adobe XMP files (or do I have to re-specify my raw settings for thousands of photos all over again?) ?

The way I understood it, the full maximum compatibility and capability of the Nikon sensor is not exploited when you use their black box SDK. That's definitely Nikon PR talk. As far as I know you cannot do anything with an SDK except use the specific commands the vendor allows you to use. Other raw formats are more accessible allowing more control. The advantage of the Nikon SDK is that if you want the Nikon look, you get it better with their SDK than with anything else. Want something outside of that, not so good.
DNG is meant to be vendor-independent. Sure, Adobe wrote it, but somebody had to, and better them than just anybody. They have offered it up to a standards body to make it non-proprietary. They are really trying to solve this problem. DNG is also not frozen. It can grow to adapt to developments.
The problem with vendor SDKs is that everyone has to keep up with the increasing list of them for all the makes and models. How many SDKs will there be in 10 years? How many 10-year-old "obsolete" models will have their support dropped so that you can't interpret the files in your archive anymore because its vendor chose not to updated its SDK for Windows 2015 or Mac OS XVI? With DNG, there is only one moving target.

Similar Messages

  • Forums for Aperture Users?

    While this discussion is good for bugs, issues and the technical side of things, there's very little in the way of tips and tricks, photos, settings, presets, etc. That is, the actual results of working in Aperture and the best ways to achieve them. Where do Aperture users congregate apart from here? Thanks!

    The only one I know of is the Aperture Users group on Flickr. I wish there was more though!

  • 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

  • A Good Reference for Aperture, Versions, File Names, Changing & Moving

    I was wondering if there is a consensus on a good reference for understanding how Aperture handles files?
    Versions and file names.
    How do you change them in Aperture?
    What happens if you change them in Finder?
    Do I need versions? (can't I just us file names?)
    What about moving the masters, or changing where there are located at in Finder?
    Can I do that in Aperture?
    Can I only do that in Finder?
    Should I never do that in Finder?
    The reason I'm looking for a good reference is because I haven't found one. The user guide (or manual) that comes with Aperture doesn't help with these issues. Search file name and nothing comes back.
    I did get a copy Apple Pro Training Series book for Aperture 3. But I don't think it does a good job explaining how Aperture's file system works, especially in relation to Finder.
    Rather than fill this forum with endless questions (which could be answered by reading the manual and using it the software) I'd like to get a better understanding, from a good source.
    I've only used iPhoto for Mobile Publishing, ATV and now Photo Stream. I don't use it to organize my decades of photos. I don't like having all my photos inside a managed database, which I don't have to do with Aperture. I never understood why you'd want to change the name of a photo in iPhoto, when it never changes the file name. If you send it to someone, after you changed it's name, the other person gets the photo with the original (still in Finder) file name.
    Thanks.

    I never understood why you'd want to change the name of a photo in iPhoto, when it never changes the file name.
    This may help or not but here goes.
    There's a distinction to be made between files and the data they contain. The example I use is as follows: In my iTunes Library I have a file called 'Let_it_Be_The_Beatles.mp3'. So what is that, exactly? It's not the song. The Beatles never wrote an mp3. They wrote a tune, some lyrics, recorded it and a copy of that recording is stored in the mp3 file. The file is just a container for the recording. That container is designed in a specific way attuned to the characteristics and requirements of the data. Hence, mp3.
    Similarly that Jpeg / tiff/ raw/ whatever is not your photo, it's a container designed to hold that kind of data. And along with that data comes opportunities: Metadata, for a start. Exif and IPTC contain vast amounts of information - some it very basic, like the date and time the shot was taken - some of it quite complex, like a lot of details of the settings used in the camera.
    Aperture, iPhoto et al are all about the data and not the file. Import the file and forget about it. Process the image - crop it, fix red eye, run it through the whole gamut of tools in the App and the file never changes at all. Create multiple versions of the image. But there's still only one file. Name it. You name the photo - and that is an entry in the Exif or IPTC. The name of the photo has nothing to do with the name of the file. Because the file is just the tin for the beans.
    Even when you export, unless you specifically choose to export the Master, you are exporting the processed Photo into a different container - that's why you can export Raw as Jpeg, or Jpeg as Tiff. Because the process of export just puts the image into a new container.
    Basically, if you want to manage files you need to use a File Manager. But you're using a Photo manager and expecting it to behave like a file manager.
    And, of course, apps like Aperture and iPhoto have the option to use the Title of the photo as filename on export to the new file.
    Does that muddy the waters?

  • Non-video tutorial for Aperture?

    I need a non-video tutorial for Aperture, is there such a thing available? A book, a page or WRITTEN instructions? The videos are useless, can't search for what I need to know - ie how do I actually edit a photo and get it to stick (crop, manipulate?) I'm so frustrated I'm editing my photos on my PC and sending them to the mac - thanks!

    The Help file is, imho, well-structructured, thorough enough, and serves beginners well. It is (of course) searchable. It comes with the program, and is also available on-line at http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual
    The Peachpit Aperture 3 book is used by Apple personnel for training. It doubles as a guide for Aperture 3 certification. It is set up as a series of lessons.
    http://www.peachpit.com/store/product.aspx?isbn=0321647440
    Aperture is a complex program with a long steady learning curve. The view from the slopes is good! Take a break from your frustration. Learn the names of things, the layout of the interface (covered in the first pages of the two things referenced above), and ask +specific, answerable+ questions ("When I do Y I expect X but I get Z. Why do I get Z? How can I get X"). There are many here who are happy to share what they have learned.
    Welcome to the forum!

  • Help - just got message "The installed graphics card does not meet the minimum requirements for Aperture"

    Help - just got message "The installed graphics card does not meet the minimum requirements for Aperture"

    Please click Profile Update and follow the directions for updating your profile. Your computer may be too old to support Aperture however without knowing anything about your iMac it's impossible to say. Also there is an Aperture forum to use and you can look at Aperture's System Requirements below to see if you have the minimum.
    System Requirements
    Minimum
    One of the following Intel-based Mac computers:
    Mac Pro
    MacBook Pro
    MacBook
    MacBook Air
    iMac
    Mac mini
    Operating system:
    Mac OS X v10.5.8 or v10.6.2 or later
    Memory:
    1GB of RAM
    2GB of RAM required for Mac Pro
    Other requirements:
    DVD drive for installation
    1GB of disk space for application and documentation
    7GB of disk space for Sample Library

  • Pixelpost export plugin for Aperture

    I found an export plugin for Aperture to send photos to Pixelpost blogs. I'm posting this here in case someone searches the discussion forums looking for one. The link is:
    http://www.pixelpost.org/extend/addons/aperture-pixelpost-plugin/
    or from the developer's site:
    http://www.macroni.be/index.php?x=plugin
    His comments:
    "APP (Aperture Pixelpost Plugin) uploads the selected picture from your Aperture library to you pixelpost blog without having to export the picture first, and then uploading it manually."
    I've tested it with APP v 1.3, Aperture v 2.1.4, OS X 10.6.1, Pixelpost v 1.7.3. The plugin does work, but when you export more than one photo, they all have identical metadata information. You'll have to rename and retag in the Pixelpost control panel. The plugin also does not remember your Pixelpost login information between sessions. In spite of these problems, it is a useful plugin for us Pixelpost users.

    Hey - I downloaded it and sent $ the day he put up the note EXCELLENT implementation, flawless installation and FAST uploading. Do yourself a favor if you're a Smugger. As said above, a marriage of two great products!!
    david
    MP, PB12   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

  • Nvidia 8800 GT not the best for Aperture use?

    I've been reading from barefeats ( http://barefeats.com/harper10.html ) that the 8800 GT is not the best graphics card for Aperture. Actually I don't think they actually tested Aperture, but Motion 3. The Nvidia is a more expensive option than the ATIs, yet it would be worse for Aperture? Has someone specifically benchmarked Aperture 2 (not another pro app, and no synthetic tests of core image) with the 8800 GT against the other cards? Would Apple update Aperture to make it take better advantage of the 8800 GT's strengths (when available in a system)? I hope so. I already got the Nvidia, and am waiting to get a Mac Pro in the summer.

    Here's my prelim findings (as posted in another thread). Will come back with more detailed comments after I have a chance to test some more:
    Re: nvidia 8800GT in 1st generation MacPro
    Posted: 25-Apr-2008 13:08 in response to: Dale Strumpell
    Reply Email
    I've just put one in my first gen mac pro, too. I can confirm a great deal of improvement over the stock 7300 gt. My prob was when an image had been straightened, cropped etc if I then attempted edge sharpening it was just awful - beachballs in abundance, crappy panning, slower than Capture NX. Now, though, it is fast and pleasant to use. That's the good news. The bad news is either:
    1. Apple put such a puny graphics card in a Mac Pro (sic) in the first place (although it copes with everything except its own Pro photo software)
    2. Apple wrote such idiosyncratic software (leaning on the on-graphics card memory so much) that meant Mac Pro (sic) machines hardly more than a year old couldn't cope without a new graphics card when running Apple's own pro photo software. That and the 7300 is still on the "recommended" list of cards for running Aperture 2.
    Ho and, indeed, hum.
    Cheers
    D

  • Did up date for 10.7.4 to 10.7.5 and update for Aperture and now  Aperture doesn't open.  How do I fix?

    Did up date for 10.7.4 to 10.7.5 and update for Aperture and now  Aperture doesn't open.  How do I fix?

    I heard dump the app and reinstall?  How do I go about that?

  • HT4007 How to I find my serial number for Aperture 3. Just moved it to a new imac.

    I purchased Aperture 3 from the Apple App Store in 2010 and downloaded it.  I received an activation key but no serial number.
    Now I have transferred Aperture 3 to a new imac but it asked for a serial number.  I put the activation number in but is says it is invalid.
    I have tried to find my answer via Apple Support but can't find personal support for aperture.
    Can anyone here help me?

    And how did you transfer? What installer did you use? Not a download from the App Store?
    Reinstall using the Trial version installer, if your activation key comes with the Trial version.
    Download here the Aperture 3.1 Trial.

  • A workaround for Aperture users to use .Mac Web Gallery

    As a user who recently switched to Aperture - I was hugely disappointed seeing some amazing new photo-related features in iLife '08 not available for Aperture users. Let alone the cash for purchasing software suites, I can't convince myself switching back to iPhoto for a single feature. So I googled and searched around...
    Some pre-requisite for the workaround: You must have iLife '08, Aperture and .Mac installed.
    _*Solution 1*_
    Create an album in Aperture that contains the images you want to upload to your .Mac Web Gallery. In iPhoto '08, create an empty library, then File > Show Aperture Library, choose the album and import images from there.
    The downside of this is the images are your Versions in preview quality.
    _*Solution 2*_
    Export Versions from Aperture and import the images to iPhoto and perform the upload.
    _*Solution 3*_
    For users building websites in iWeb, I have seen threads that one could use the media browser in iLife suite to perform similar result but it also limits to the preview quality of Aperture.
    I would have to say even the workaround is hugely disappointed but I can't see any other solutions at the moment. I couldn't recall my last ocassion on having such disappointment for Apple's software development.

    Apple really needs to rev. Aperture so it sends photos directly to the new .Mac Web Galleries.
    Everyone needs to go here:
    http://www.apple.com/feedback/aperture.html
    And voice there opinion there to get this added to Aperture.
    Thanks, Scott K.

  • PSE 10 as external editor for Aperture 3 - 8-bit TIFF and what color space?

    Hi all,
    I'm taking the plunge and trying PSE 10 as my external editor for Aperture 3.  I understand that I need to export as 8-bit TIFF files (not 16) because PSE can't do certain things with 16-bit files.  Is that right?  Should I specify a color space in Aperture or leave it as "no profile selected"?  (I don't know much about color spaces; I'm not a pro.)  I print on an Epson RX580 Stylus Photo printer, if that matters.
    I'll be grateful for any help and advice.  Thanks.

    Can I suggest you buy Philip Andrews book, Advanced Photoshop Elements 10.  he explains colour spaces and much much more very clearly and exactly what can be done with 16 bit files and what you then have to change to 8 bit to accomplish.  He's written basic and advanced guides for Elements since day one.  Usually available from Amazon for under £20.

  • Will the new 3GHz iMac (24") with GeForce 8800 be good for Aperture v2?

    hi all.
    I've just seen the specs on the new iMac and I'm interested. I was resigned to buying a Mac Pro but found it difficult to justify the cost because I'm not a professional photographer. the new iMac might be good enough at a much more justifiable cost.
    I wonder if anyone has information or opinions regarding the following.
    Will the glossy screen be a nuisance? There is stray light in our living room where I use my computer although we do have venetian blinds on both windows. (don't bother suggesting using the computer in another room. this is Hong Kong where space is scarce and expensive.)
    Will 3GHz/4GB be significantly faster than my 2GHz/2GB iMac for Aperture operations? (Aperture was not included in Apple's test comparisons)
    Will the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS card be beneficial to Aperture use?
    Will the FireWire 800 be significantly faster than the FireWire 400? on my iMac, transfers to/from my external SATA disks run at only a dismal 13MB/s rather than the ideal 40MB/s. is it my iMac's limited processor power, or a limiting factor with having only 2GB of RAM and a scad of applications open, or a problem (concerning caching) with Leopard's copying routines?
    for future reference, would the Aperture library saved on the internal SATA drive be faster than if it was saved on the external SATA drive connected via FireWire 800?
    your input and information would be appreciated (and it's probably going to be a common question).
    sincerely,
    Gregory

    Gregory Rivers wrote:
    Will the glossy screen be a nuisance?
    My expectation (every workspace is different as are individual perceptions) is that the reflective issues of the iMac's glossy screen would be very tolerable. What many (not all) graphics pros including me find intolerable is the fact that glossy displays add contrast and saturation to images. However many, perhaps most, non-graphics-pros prefer the added contrast and saturation, which is why Apple uses those displays. Each individual must do his/her own side-by-side comparisons and determine personal preference.
    Will 3GHz/4GB be significantly faster than my 2GHz/2GB iMac for Aperture operations?
    Yes.
    Will the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS card be beneficial to Aperture use?
    I believe yes, but that is just a guess since I do not know the card well. Certainly picking an iMac for Aperture usage I would choose the top 24" with the 8800 GS card
    Will the FireWire 800 be significantly faster than the FireWire 400?
    Yes.
    ...for future reference, would the Aperture library saved on the internal SATA drive be faster than if it was saved on the external SATA drive connected via FireWire 800?
    Yes. Best IMO will be to have the AP Library on the internal drive but with Referenced Masters on external FW800 drives. The top iMac allows up to 1 TB internal drive size. Since drives slow as they fill, order a large drive and keep it less than half full to optimize operation.
    ...is it my iMac's limited processor power, or a limiting factor with having only 2GB of RAM and a scad of applications open, or a problem (concerning caching) with Leopard's copying routines?
    Pretty much everything impacts AP performance, so the more things you optimize the better. The maximum 4 GB RAM of iMacs, although quite workable, will always be limiting. Good policy is to restart or at least close as many irrelevant applications as necessary prior to an extended Aperture work session.
    Steve Weller, builder of the excellent <http://www.bagelturf.com/index.html> Aperture website, discusses speed improvements here:
    <http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1273934&tstart=75>
    If you ever do run into performance issues, work to dial in on each of the performance tweaks he discusses.
    As an aside, I too like the MBP (ideally 17" matte screen) as preferable to the iMac because of the portability. Unfortunately cost may make that an unacceptable choice, but I cannot overstate the huge benefits of portability.
    Good luck!
    -Allen Wicks

  • HT1338 I'm running MacOS 10.7.5 with all updates and did an update last night for aperture and now aperture doesn't open.  What's Zup?

    I'm running MacOS 10.7.5 with all updates and did an update last night for aperture and now aperture doesn't open.  What's Zup?  Help!

    Also when I do the system update it's not giving me an update for the latest Snow Leopard. I never knew that was available until I started looking around this site and it seems that since I have the internal dual core I should be able to update to mountian lion...is this correct? Will someone please help me and walk me through this. I love my mac I want to have it running like it should be.

  • Any "print" plug-in's under development for Aperture ??

    Does anyone know of anyone actively developing a "print" tool plug-in for Aperture?
    As I've posted on several related threads, I'm very disappointed with the severe lack of options within Aperture for printing. With the release of the Aperture SDK for 3rd party developers, I'm hoping that someone is developing a plug-in that will:
    - allow ability to select exact photo size per image
    - allow multiple images at the selected size, per page
    - allow different images, at different sizes each, per page
    - provide options to "crop to fit" or "maintain ratio" per picture
    I understand that there's always the option to export photos to CS2 to do this, or use other tools to print. But, the bottom line is that if Aperture wants to be considered a professional tool, it needs to provide this capability from within the tool itself.
    Let's hope this work is underway....
    Regards,
    Tom
    Powermac Quad   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

    tom:
    just FYI, the Aperture SDK is for image export only, not printing.
    as for printing multiple, exact sized images per page, you could use this custom book design:
    http://macmethod.com/ApertureBooks/Site/Package%20Deal.html
    it allows you to create layouts in popular sizes (4x6, 5x7, 8x10, etc) and has lots of combinations of those sizes to help maximize paper usage. the picture drop-ins don't have a maintain ratio option, but will crop-to-fit.
    but i agree, a true multi-print-per-page solution should be integral to the application.
    scott
    PowerMac G5 2.5GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   MacBook Pro 2.0GHz

Maybe you are looking for