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!

Similar Messages

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.

Is there a Forum for japanese users ?

Hello.
I use solaris10 (10/08) right now.
I have several questions.
Is there a Forum for japanese users ?

John:
Try starting up in Safe Mode, then login, empty Trash and restart normally.
If that does not help you can try re-installing Stickies. Use Pacifist to open the .pkg and extract Stickies from your computer, then install it from you install disk. If the problem is with the application, that should take care of it. If it is systemic we'll have to try find the source.
Good luck.
cornelius

I would like to suggest a Verizon-specific forum for Mac-users

Verizon is the largest provider of wireless and other related solutions. When I have problems with my Mac or supporting services I am consistently able to find solutions on either the Mac or Verizon forums. However, this takes quite a bit of effort to locate the right answer for my problem. And, this takes a lot of time.
I would like to harness solutions for Mac-users who are Verizon customers all in one place. This could make it easier for Mac-users to get quick answers. This could also be a great referral point for Verizon as it sorts out answers/solutions for Mac users.
Currently, Verizon hears from less than .05% of its customers that there are any issues of compatibility, less access to great services, needs for solutions for Mac. However Mac users represent at least 20% of computer users around the US. On the one hand you can infer that there are issues with less than .05% of the Mac universe or, on the other hand, you can infer that many just don't go to Verizon for the solutions.
I am not sure which is right. I just know that having solutions in one place, my Mac home, would be useful. I hope you will consider the idea.
I do realize no forums are dedicated to any one provider. However, Verizon, again, is the biggest provider. Maybe this is worthy of a forum.

Hi,
I this case I don't see the need to duplicate services that are independent and already out there
http://www.dslreports.com/forums/all for North America as a whole
This British one has ISP related forums as well as OS specific issue ones
http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/
If I had Internet Connection problems and my ISP seemed unable to help me then I would look to those.
I am sure there are many that are also Language based all over the world or at least country based where a language is spoken in more than one part of the world.
It is about the level of question involved and some may already get answered in the "Getting On Line" and similar forums already here.
8:36 PM Tuesday; August 24, 2010
Please, if posting Logs, do not post any Log info after the line "Binary Images for iChat"

For Aperture Users

I have been a long time Aperture User. I also own my own copy (glad I did) of Photoshop CS6.
Aperture will function for a good long while, love the program, but don't mind switching now that the writing is on the wall.
I wasn't aware of all the "cloud" changes/focus of Adobe. This is new to me. I took the plunge two days ago with the $9.95 option. Wasn't happy with $120/year to borrow a program, but figured there must be some reason this works.
Now that I've used LR for a day, played with it, I better understand it. I've watched it from a distance grow over the years. Attended photoshop conferences and heard about it, figured I might buy it some day.
That day has come.
I've already got my refund coming. Here's why Adobe.
#1 - as an Aperture User, I don't understand your terminology. When I read what would happen if I decided to quit paying you money, I had no point of reference to understand exactly what that meant. Figured it didn't matter.
#2 - loaded up the program, imported pics, started learning. Started having fun. Suddenly it hit me: I lose the key functionality I need if I quit paying Adobe money. I realized what that word "develop" meant.
#3 - once I realized that I would basically have a program that doesn't do much of anything, correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't figure out what it would do other than slideshow, share with Facebook, etc (other programs do that much for free)...what would Lightroom do if I quit paying Adobe money?
#4 - Now that I realize what is happening, I can't keep going forward, it would be irrational. Unless I'm misunderstanding something. Clarify please. I'm willing to pay for software, always have. My wallet hurt buying the full version of CS6.
#5 - Here's the crux of what I don't think Adobe is taking into consideration with the pay forever or lose functionality model:
        - I was diagnosed with cancer in 2008. Beat it.
        - I was diagnosed with cancer again a few months ago, stem cell transplant, chemo, going to beat it.
        - LIFE PRESENTS CHANGES AND PROBLEMS. I realize you guys are rich and expect us all to just pay forever, but there are twists and turns that come in life. I am scaling down to save money while temporarily on disability. Lets say I have to stay on disability (which I won't, I work and will work unless I die) and am presented with a difficult life circumstance, I've paid $120 or more for a program I can't do anything with.
Does this sound even logical? Why not offer to those who desire, the ability to purchase Lightroom upright. Just buy it. I'm willing to pay. I suddenly see this pay forever or else model as a rip off. If life takes a cruel turn, and trust me as a 49 year old hard working man who has paid his dues, life can get unfair at times. What are you going to do for a loyal customer Adobe? Just disable my program and not care?
Think about it. Just think about it. Maybe after a person pays a normal fair price, they could fully own the right to normal functionality, no more updates, and not be penalized for not paying forever. I don't need all the syncing and other nice features. Those are great and progressive, but what about just a photo management program that allows for RAW processing/editing?
I don't understand the advantage of a pay forever model, with the exception to how it pads Adobe's wallet. Otherwise, as an end user, I'm screwed by another large corporation. At least Apple let me have my program and said they will keep it running for a while.

First of all, you're not talking to Adobe here, most of us are not Adobe employees and the few that are can't change the marketing policies.
Secondly, as David__B has explained, you can still buy Lightroom, own it forever, no monthly fees.
Thirdly, if your only view of Lightroom is an editor, then yes, if you stop paying the subscription, you can no longer edit your photos (but you do not lose the edits you made to photos before you stopped paying). If you think of Lightroom as a digital asset management program, you can still use it as that (even if you stop paying the subscription); you can also export your photos or distribute them via Print, Web, Slideshow or Publish methods, so the work you have done in the past is not lost in any way.
Does this sound even logical?
No, your facts are wrong.

Exporting From LR For Aperture User

I second shoot weddings frequently for an Apple/Aperture user friend of mine...I'm PC and LR all the way (using LR5).
I typically just dump my RAW files on a DVD or flash drive and let him edit mine in his workflow. I'd like to provide him with edited files though to save him a little time on his end.
Is it feasible to export my DNG files out of LR w/ my edits intact, in a format comptible with Aperture? If all else fails, I can just give him the DNGs with a separetd folder of edited JPEGs...But wanted to check first to see if anyone has had success with this export/import process in the past.

I can probably answer myself.... I overlooked the new "complete toning in Camera Raw" button!!!!!

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.

Need Windows forum for Mac users

I am a Mac user. I like Macintosh better than Windows. I am far more familiar with Macintosh than Windows. However, I have to use Windows in addition to Macintosh. I need help in using Windows XP. However, Mac users and Windows users have different vocabularies and different cultures. It is difficult for me to communicate with Windows users.
I understand that this discussion site at Apple is not appropriate to post questions about Windows XP.
Are there any non-Apple forums or public newsgroups where one can ask Windows-related questions to Windows gurus who are also very familiar with Macintosh, who understand Mac vocabulary, and who perhaps like Macintosh better than Windows?

Thank you, Felix and mecklists. I will post a question about Windows XP in a new thread in this forum first. Let's see whether the question will be deleted by the moderator.
Also, let's see whether this forum is attended by "Windows gurus who are also very familiar with Macintosh, who understand Mac vocabulary, and who perhaps like Macintosh better than Windows"

Time Machine warning for Aperture users

I guess some people here will be using Aperture and Leopard.
See this:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1017&message=25380995
Hard to believe really.
AC

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1197983&start=15&tstart=0
does this affect iphoto users as well? i don't think so.
thanks.

Flash Player works for one user only

Running IE7 under Vista. Have one other user on laptop with Vista. I am the Administrator.Since downloading latest version of Flash Player it will work on my log in but not when the other user is logs in.
No error message. Simply all Active X items appear as box with a red X. Have checked the Security settings for both users on IE appear the same.
Tried Adobe Support chat service but all they could do was direct me to a Forum.
Any help will be appreciated.

This has come up multiple times over the last few months. There has been a solution posted somewhere in this forum, but I don't remember what it was.
Try searching the forum for "limited user" or such; hopefully you will find it.

Icc profiles for aperture book printing...

Do the Aperture Book Printing folks provide icc profiles so I can soft-proof the images beforehand?

Please note that monitors provide fairly accurate color when the images are saved in an sRGB color space, however, presses are not as reliable...
Well, Mike, thanks for sharing the info here.
At one point, in Mark's email to you, as mentioned above in his email from Apple, I have to say I am a little surprised about his statement re: monitors provide fairly accurate... when the images saved in an sRGB colour space...
It is very tricky statement where it depends on how we define the term "fairly accurate" in monitors. What we don't know if Mark meant by when monitor has been "properly" set up as profiled and calibrated with high-grade calibration hardware. Unless IF the monitor has been proper profiled and calibrated, then his statement would be correct. But IF not profiled or calibrated at all, I am afraid that his statement is incorrect.
Now these days with newer monitors and newer Apple laptops with better monitor technology, it is still need to be properly profiled and calibrated. It just depends on individual's preference, desire and the purpose of such project whatever someone is working on. While majority of Aperture users' are probably mostly professional photographers or those who are into photography savvy, then colour-managed workflow is a norm. For me, it IS absolute A MUST colour-managed workflow.
Although, I do a heavy post-production workflow on MacPro where I always have my monitors calibrated. I don't typically calibrate my laptop, though. Because sometimes I forgot to turn off the automatic ambient light in System Preference in Display section. It is a little inconvenience in that case. Unless if I am being away on photographic trips far from Canada abroad, then it is a different story. But not always bring my calibration device with me. Too inconvenience to haul it around at the airports etc. So colour-managed workflow is a must with MacPro in my studio.
However, other individuals have their own preference, comfort zone and the purpose of such project. Perhaps their workflow set up differently than yours or mine, that is ok.
But in that email you received from someone at Apple didn't make it clear about that statement about 'fairly accuracy'.
Then something else is something else actually--when Apple guy said presses are not always.... Again, that is why it is important that you get monitor properly profiled and calibrated. Once it is done properly, then it is all good. But remember, you need to re-calibrate monitor once a week or every two weeks or once month. In order to get pretty close to printed output, always a good idea to soft proof. If needed to make slightly conservative adjustments to your satisfaction or level of expectation, the output would be fairly close to what it is appeared in monitor. When I mean "fairly close" in comparing the output to what you are seeing in monitor with these post-production images used in that output, in fairness, I would estimate fairly close in terms of anywhere in range between 92 to 95 percent - that is very fair conservative perspective on how close in the output vs monitor. It is truly, really, truly rare to get the output 100% as obvious and precise as you are seeing in monitor. If that is the case, and if that is true FOR that person achieved this, this probably means takes that person many years to perfect his/her colour-managed workflow for that matter. Never has been that pretty close, but I'd be shocked if I see mine aced right on spot. I'd be lying to you if I get all output perfect as appeared in my monitors. If I did, that would be incorrect statement.
It seems a lot of factors and things to do and things need to require in a thoroughly colour-managed workflow production, it is how it is done. But this can also means save money, effort and time if done properly right from the beginning.
In fairness, I would really wish that guy from Apple should have said a little more obvious and precise with his definition of fairly accuracy with monitors. It doesn't says what kind of monitors he refers to. Low quality, cheap monitors deliver good results? Lot of factors need to be looked at for consideration for yourself.
Of course, as you can tell that colour management topic is pretty heavy, highly technical and everything in deep thinking with world of colours. It takes years for an individual (both pros and non-pro individuals) finally understand what it is all about. Again, technologies evolve rapid for the better in many cases for new monitors, commercial print equips, advanced ink technology, advanced paper production technology... That goes on effortless endless, actually.
Hope some of thoughtfu perspective and experience be of some interest, and it is obvious that this discussion probably will attract some more excitement discussion, the more the better. So that every other Aperture users who have the similar issues, they'll definitely want to come to here... And learn and share.
I also use Blurb too. They are getting better than it was once a couple years ago when Blurb first started. As they add more variety of book sizes, types of paper stock and things like that. This also give someone some flexibility in choosing workflow production using Blurb software or online bookmaking or using PDF to Book service for those who are advanced users that use InDesign layout design app. In that case of PDF to Book, the advanced users would need to download Blurb's preset plug-in to put in InDesign in order to export the PDF output to meet and integrate into Blurb's Preflight Checklist at the time of upload. I use PDF to Book service with InDesign, etc. It is fairly self explanatory and easy to follow steps. Also slightly off topic, but when making Blurb book, to get most out of their product and service with Blurb, in that case, they came up with brilliant resource called Colour Resource Centre designed for making more beautiful books. In that resource centre, it is easy to read and follow.
I would think this probably shed some insights and understanding the basics of colour management, the whole thing all about this, that and the other all together.
I would also want other high-powered hard-core Aperture users share their experience with Aperture Book printing service. I'd be happy to share my experience about making Aperture Book vs. Blurb Book through PDF to Book service. However, I would think the export to PDF from Aperture probably has it's own different setting or slightly different configuration inside the PDF engine on Mac for Blurb book. There has been some discussion about wanting a Aperture Plug In for Blurb Book. blurb has been quiet on it, I take that they probably will not develop a special plug-in for Aperture Users. Sorry if it is a little off topic. But somehow someone in the discussion mention Blurb. so...
Anyhow, hope that helps.

Forum for discussions around "My Oracle Support"

Since there isn't a forum specifically for "My Oracle Support" what do people think about having one created.
There are forums both here and in the MOS communities for just about every other product that Oracle has what about one for MOS on http://forums.oracle.com?
Any value in it?

Pointless wrote:
Hans Forbrich wrote:
user10158586 wrote:
If having it out in the open didn't get complaints noticed, why would they care?I don't think anyone (except possibly Oracle's support group) is arguing against getting this stuff into the open.
The question (at least in my little mind) is "Why do people think that Oracle should provide the forum to air Oracle's laundry?"Possibly because it would encourage them to provide a better service to paying support customers and listen to what they need and that that would ultimately be beneficial to Oracle?
When Oracle do not provide a public forum for Oracle users to discuss their experiences and lock threads when people do discuss their experiences tends to suggest that, yes they notice the discussions on this site and that they do not want those experiences to become public, because in general they are not positive experiences.What makes you think Oracle Support will listen here? They feel they have an appropriate forum.
>
I think in the long run Oracle's stance on the support upgrade and their efforts to keep it quiet will only hurt Oracle.I agree.
But then again, perhaps they believe they provided us with appropriate opportunity to provide feedback.
Indeed, they have held several public forums asking for feedback (in particular for input on how to design the new Certify system), some of which I advertised for them, AND NO ONE CAME. There were dozens of excuses provided when I contacted individuals to encourage participation.
If they provide facilities and resources and we ignore them, why should they (MOS) make any effort to come to a location that they have told us they do not officially monitor.
Indeed, we have been told several times that MOS/MOS-C and Forums are separate. And the moderator here is trying very hard to keep them separate as well.
>
What is worrying is we have seen a similar attitude during the various forums upgrades where useful features are continually removed and features no one wants are added and scalability goes down. It begins to look like an institutionalized attitude of not listening.Bi-directional. There is truly a mutual attitude of not listening.
For example - you claim 'no one wants those features'. Yet, those features were, and are, wanted by some - specifically by the Applications community that is not at all well represented in OTN Forums.
(How they are implemented, and whether Flash is a usable technology for this ... is another discussion entirely. Let's just say I am on record as an early advocate of http://supporthtml.oracle.com)

27" iMac upgrade priorities for Aperture use?

I am about to pull the trigger on a new iMac 27". Current Aperture librabry is about 700GB and this is my primary computer use. Libraries currently live on a 1T Rugged drive and are shared between an 2009 21 iMac and 2010 13MBP. Things are just too slow and I want more screen space. Trying to sort out best use of funds...so, base config looks like this so far:
3.2GHz Quad-core Intel Core i5
16GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM
1TB Fusion Drive
GTX 675MX 1GB GDDR5
In terms of more bang for the buck, does it make sense to upgrade to:
3.4 i7 ($200)
3T Fusion ($150)
680MX 2G ($150)
I currently have a 2T USB 3 external and a 3T Firewire external (Time Machine BU). I am thinking, given I need a mobile solution for traveling and working out of home, keeping the libraries on an external would negate the need to upgrade to a 3T fusion. My understadning of Thunderbolt and USB3 is I would not notice the difference working externally or on an internal Fusion-is this more or less correct? Better to spend the money on an external Thunderbolt when they come down a little more?
680MX is considered a fast gaming card...but might it also "future-proof" (if you can even do that these days!) the mac for graphics requirements to come? Or is it overkill for Aperture and PS? Again-better to spend the money elsewhere?
I am leaning towards the faster processor. Although I hear mixed things, the tests I have seen do say this will give an overall boost.
I would welcome any insights from others who walked this path...
many thanks
NJ

I might be missing something*, but if this is correct:
My understadning of Thunderbolt and USB3 is I would not notice the difference working externally or on an internal Fusion-is this more or less correct?
_and_ you need to access your Library from multiple machines in multiple locations, why not just stick with the base iMac configuration you posted and put your Library on your 2 TB USB-3 drive? As long as you are not putting the Library on the internal drive, I think your thinking here is correct:
I am thinking, given I need a mobile solution for traveling and working out of home, keeping the libraries on an external would negate the need to upgrade to a 3T fusion.
I run very large Libraries off external USB-3 drives (mounted to an rMBP w. 16 GB RAM and a 500 GB SSD) and find the performance is no different than when using a large Library that is stored on the SSD. (I have seen no reason to expect external Thunderbolt drives to be noticeably faster than USB-3.) I think the 3 TB Fusion makes sense in a laptop; for your stated needs, I wouldn't upgrade (you may have additional storage needs you didn't mention, though).
I agree with William about the faster GPU -- but just on a hunch. I think Apple's programmers have gotten expert at getting performance where they can, and one place they seem to look is the GPU. For Aperture users, I would say about the GPU the same thing one has always said about RAM: when you buy a new machine, put in as much as (or the fastest) you can afford. Once you have 16 GB of RAM I would spend some money on a GPU upgrade.
*and if I did miss something, apologies in advance .

Is there a hyperlinked index for Aperture 3 user Guide?

The hyperlinked User Guide for Aperture 2 was so easy. How do you find information quickly without an index in the Aperture 3 guide?

I read the PDF document with Preview. Searching is easy, and the contents and cross-references are linked. But it's true that there is no index of terms. Kinda moot with a search feature available, no?

Fix for Aperture 3 printing issue for Non-US users - "Value too large"

Hi,
I just found a fix to an annoying bug when Non-US customers want to print in Aperture 3.0 and 3.0.1 on their printers:
If you set the Image Size to "Custom image size" Aperture 3 will complain that:
"The value xx is too large" !!!, even if the margins are set to a minimum!
Here's the solution and it's definitely a bug:
Set your Measurement Units to "US" instead of "Metric" in:
System Preferences > Language & Text > Formats > Measurement Units: US
Since I had my Measurement Units in "Metric" instead of "US", Aperture thinks that you enter your values in "Inch".
So when a Non-US User enters 25cm, Aperture interprets it as 25" inch for a 8"x10" paper size, that's why then it complains that value is too large.
Yep a bug!! Waiting for Aperture 3.0.2
Hope this helps

Some problem here... Have you guys already filed a bug report? If not, please do so, so Apple nows there is this problem. You can file a report from the Aperture >Provide Aperture Feedback menu item.

Forums for Aperture Users?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for