HDR Images and Aperture Workflow?

Hey folks, I'm starting to get my hands dirty with HDR images, and am having some difficulty with the seemingly high (at least for me) learning curve in getting going.
I'm wondering if anyone here who has experience with HDR can summarize how they use Aperture in their workflow for creating and working with images to get an HDR result.
I shoot a series of a shot -3 to +3 (inclusive) in exposure steps which usually nets me about 7 images. Where I seem to get botched results in prepping my images prior to going to Photomatrix, Photoshop CS3 or the not-so-impressive (for me) Hydra HDR plugin.
Any assistance (or pointers to must-read docs online) are greatly appreciated !

Hey Magnus, I'm actually trying to limit my processing of any sort to inside Aperture as much as possible. Perhaps I'm a bit spoiled with my need to stick to an aperture-like (RAW) process; I find it frustrating to have to generate duplicate versions of images in external editors (photoshop, hydra etc.)
I think the main thing for me is to identify a clear path to follow to start generating HDR content I feel right now like each attempt is a stab in the dark

Similar Messages

Improve HDR images in Aperture

Hi,
I've recently been trying HDR photography, and so far the results have been pretty poor. I'm currently using the Photomatix HDR Tone Mapping plug-in for Aperture 2.0.
Every time I produce an image, they come out very cartoony, and not at all like the beautiful landscaped examples you see on the net. I've also had a bash with Photoshop's HDR tool, with similar unsatisfactory results.
Can anyone give me some thoughts as to where I may be going wrong? Is there a limitation to this particular plug-in? Or is there a problem with my technique. (At present I'm only using 3 exposures. Would going to 7 produce more natural looking final images)?
So far, I've found that shooting raw and adjusting highs and lows carefully is producing better results than HDR for me.
I have a job coming up which is for a bar in a skyscraper and I want to produce some really spectacular shots, with good range in the interior and exterior areas.
Any help or thoughts would be fantastic.
Thank you.
Richard

Most times when HDR images come out cartoonish the fault is in trying to do to much. The results are usually better if the HDR effect is kept to a minimum.
Another thing to keep in mind is that not all scenes lend themselves to an HDR interpertation. And the correct exposure series can have a huge effect on the final result. While the software will make creating an HDR image easy the final result, as you are finding out, is still in the hands of the photographer.
You might also want to chack out NIK Software's HDR plug-in. They have a free trial. They also have a number of free online seminars and instructional videos. See Nik Software

Can I perform masking & layers for HDR image in Aperture 2 _RAW images

Hello
I own Aperture 2.
Can I do post processing such as masking & layers like one do to to create HDR image.
If so...
I generally take in RAW format. In Photoshop or Photomatix the HDR post processing is done in JPG. [I do not own Photoshop or Photomatix]. Do I have to save it as JPG or take my photos in JPG to get the above done in Aperture 2?
Will Aperture 2 handle JPG to create HDR image?
Regards

yo,
i only very recently paid for photomatix (pmx) and started to use it....... i like it
eish, paid $129 from their website.......... see it (essentials?) is 29$ from app store
"real" hdr multiple exposures are possible with pmx as well as single image "tone mapped" files
aperture 2 or 3 do not offer hdr post processing, i think, photoshop *** compared to pmx (more tweaking possible)
if you use pmx one can use raw or jpg files, i do not think it makes a difference to the outcome
i use it as a stand alone app, BUT i think it could be used as a plug in... why bother?
one can save pmx files as tiff or jpg
you decide
let me know
ps- do not destroy the original files!, it's easy enough to re-convert them to hdr/anything again later
pps- you can download pmx as a try out for free, but they post a watermark on the final result, it's worth the experiment, at least you know what you are dealing with.... (available from their website), but it looks like the app store option is cool!... check out both

Lightroom and CS5 and Aperture Workflow?

I am trying to put the finishing touches on a year and a half long port to mac from windows. My expectation is that I will be purchasing CS5 (Illustrator, Photoshop and InDesign) and I was hoping there would be a user or two on the forum that may be able to just advise me as to whether I am moving in the correct direction. Also, I was hoping to get a heads up on how Lightroom might fit into the following proposed workflow. Here is what I am anticipating:
1. Export necessary images from Aperture into folder named "Aperture" with sub-folders by project name.
2. "Photoshop" folder (with project sub-folders) for any edited images, transparency overlays, etc.
3. "Illustrator" folder (with project sub-folders) for any vector editing of images and/or individual vector files
4. "InDesign" folder (with project sub-folders) for ID posterboards, publications etc that reference files in Photoshop and/or Illustrator folders.
5. "Keynote" folder (with project sub-folders) for presentation that reference files in Photoshop and/or Illustrator folders.
6. "Uploads" folder for any images uploaded to ftp that cannot be done from within the Aperture interface.
Does anyone know if this looks about right, how Lightroom might fit into this workflow and/or whether there is a way to streamline this in any way?
In the past I've tended to be very reliant on dragging and dropping and copying images images across my hard drive for access and organization in various projects (web media, proposals, publication, papers, etc, etc) but as I start working in Aperture I can obviously see the benefits of keeping a lot of this data within Aperture. That said, some of this workflow is a bit hard to anticipate and I'd also like to know what I need to buy to get it optimized.
TIA for any suggestions or help.

Lightroom and Aperture serve identical purposes. There is no reason to use both.
Since they serve identical purposes, at least at the macro-planning stages, you can substitute one for the other in any workflow.
There is nothing in your proposed workflow that I would recommend.

Using both iPhoto and Aperture workflow help

I am using both aperture 3 and iPhoto 9 to edit and keep track of images
I imported images to iPhoto the have Aperture import the iPhoto library this way I have i library..I know if something happens to it I am screwed
1) I know that Aperture is non destructive, is iPhoto?
2) will changes ( like GPS location) in aperture be applied to iPhoto images
3) looking to see if I can make changes made in one program appear in the other
4) or it it better to import the images in from my external drive (how they were before iPhoto), and have a separate library for each program

Here's the best advice for using both iPhoto and Aperture:
Pick one horse and ride it. They both do the same job. If you're shooting Raw or high volumes of Jpeg, then definitely go with Aperture. If you're doing family snaps with a point and shoot stick with iPhoto. Using both adds unnecessary complexity to everything, and with complexity comes the risk of error and data loss.
1) I know that Aperture is non destructive, is iPhoto?
Yes. In a wholly different way, mind you, but yes. WHen you edit an image in iPhoto it creates a new file called the Modified Version. You can always revert to the Original photo. If you edit only with iPhoto then you can also avoid generational loss.
2) will changes ( like GPS location) in aperture be applied to iPhoto images
No.
3) looking to see if I can make changes made in one program appear in the other
You can't.
4) or it it better to import the images in from my external drive (how they were before iPhoto), and have a separate library for each program
It makes no sense to use both programs.
Aperture and iPhoto are entirely different applications that work in very different ways.
The only communication between the two is as follows:
Aperture is able to parse the iPhoto Library to allow it to import the contents while stacking the Originals and Modified versions, preserving metadata and so forth.
Aperture can share its Previews with the iLife apps, including iPhoto.
That's it.
So, specifically, what interaction there is between the two is designed to facilitate migration from iPhoto to the more powerful app. After that, iPhoto has exactly the same relationship to the Aperture Library as, say, Pages or iMovie.
iPhoto has no knowledge of, and knows nothing of how the Aperture Library works. It cannot read the Aperture library.
What are you hoping to achieve by running both?
Regards
TD

IPhoto and Aperture workflow

I would like to have all of my everyday pictures jpeg in IPhoto and all my Raw file in Aperture. Since you can only associate one software to automaticly import the pictures,(in my case IPhoto) I have to import all of my pictures in IPhoto, then manually import my Raw file in Aperture from the IPhoto library, then go back to IPhoto to remove my RAW file from IPhoto album.
There must be a better way.

One thing that you can do is to do your import into Aperture first. In Aperture, the window opens with all of your photos that are on that card you are currently importing from. Select your RAW files from the thumbnails (files for the RAW images are labeled differently on my camera), import those images into Aperture. When done importing select "Delete Imported Images and Eject Card". Re-insert card, open iPhoto and import all of the files that are left.
What I tend to do is shoot everything in RAW, then the everyday photos get exported to iPhoto as a jpeg then deleted from Aperture (if necessary). Another benefit of doing it this way is the jpeg that Aperture produces is smaller in size and sharper in detail than the jpeg that is formated in my camera (Cannon Digital Rebel).
Hope that helps

Lx3, RAW images and Aperture 3

I recently purchased the legendary lx3, and though I'm quite pleased with the camera I admit being disappointed in the level of distortion in RAW mode. I've read various threads/articles on how the latest version of A3 (which I have btw) corrected the problem so I have to wonder if I'm missing an import setting or something.
Thanks for your help.
M

yes I think the LX3 must correct for some of that when your shooting Jpeg's. They must factor it in the processing in camera. Obviously when you shoot RAW that isn't applied. I don't think Aperture has a tool to help you with it but there may be a plug in that might be able to?

Even though I can see my HDR image and it is in the Library in collections, when trying to move it I keep getting "offline or missing"

Being a beginner in Lightroom, What do I do about an image I can see and its in collections files in the library and develop but can,t be moved to desk top? I get a posting that "source file are offline or missing.....Thanks

Please read these instructions: Adobe Lightroom - Find moved or missing files and folders

New HDR Image darker than preview

Today I was using Adobe Bridge to combine sets of 3 photos with different exposures to create HDR images and sending them to Photoshop. So far today I made 20+ such images and successfully saved them into PSDs.
I just ran into an odd problem. After clicking 'Merge to HDR' in the Bridge -> Photoshop option, Photoshop did it's thing of merging my 3 images. The preview window came up, it looked perfect, so I clicked 'Ok'. Then it created an Untitled document (as it always does), except that this image is much darker than what was shown in the preview. I tried doing some light adjustments, can't get it to be what I saw in the preview window.
All of my other HDR creations were exactly the same as I saw in the preview window. What's going on?

One important thing to keep in mind is that what you see on screen when working with 32-bit images IS NOT the actual image. There are no monitors at least consumer priced monitors that can show 32-bit's of data. What you are seeing is a faked representation. You will only see the real image when you convert out to 16-bit or 8-bit. Also, many video cards allow you to set 32-bit color in the control panel (Windows, can't speak for the Mac) this is NOT the same thing as a 32-bit HDR image. The 32-bit color is the number of colors NOT the dynamic range from darks to lights it is this dark to light data that can't be seen on monitors. BTW I just recently learned this from a podcast from the digital photography connection. The have Lightroom and Photoshop podcasts and just recently covers HDR for both programs, this was covered as was PhotoMatix. <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected].. > Once you hit okay in the preview window and Photoshop creates the 32-bit > image, you may want to try going to your view menu and adjusting your > 32-bit viewing options. > > [edited by host] > > Hope this helps! > -Kurt

Can't imoprt images into Aperture from CF card

I have just installed Aperture into my Mac Book Pro. I connected my card reader (with compact flash card) to a usb port which opened Aperture. I selected "import images" and Aperture correctly identifies my camera (Canon 5D) and CF reader, but displays "No images to import. Yet I am able to import these same image files (RAW) into iPhoto or Adobe Bridge with no problem. I have deleted & re-installed Aperture with the same results. Help!

This post was a couple weeks ago and the original poster may have found a solution already. But, I'm posting to offer a different explanation for others that may have the same problem.
When I get the "No images to import", it is because Aperture is not done scanning the CF card. Some cards apparently take longer to scan, especially the larger cards. I had never seen this error before I bought larger CF cards. Compact Flash cards that are 2GB-4GB never give me this problem as the cards are scanned quickly.
I usually go do something else and come back. I don't think it has taken more than a couple minutes before the "No images to import" button changes to reflect the number of images on the card and enabled. My largest CF is 16GB. If you have something larger, I would probably give it 5-10 minutes.
Hope this helps someone.

Noob question about HDR images

hi everybody! i am reading this book about photoshop hoping to understand a lot more than i already know about pixels and colors and image dinamics and such..i got to the chapter about HDR images and here's what i dont get. as i understand, given a HDR image it has 32 bit depth meaning its file contains much more information about contrast and brightness than any existing monitor can output, so when u open it in photoshop u will never see its true quality. my question is( and i admit it may seem pointless to some, but i am committed to understand the cause and purpose), when converting it to 8 or 16 bit depth this window pops up asking me to tweak gamma, exposure, shadows and highlights, etc., but why is this linked to the conversion process? why not simply convert it, maintain the same appearance as before and then if needed manually adjust using all the image controls from the photoshop menus? i have CS6, if that matters.

I don't know if this will help, but I've heard about HDR monitors (still very expensive), which supposedly very accurately display the HDR values. If you hang one on the wall in your house, people might think it's a window, since it is literally a source of light, in the same way a window to the outside world is.
Possibly the most surprising use of HDR imagery is in 3D apps where global illumination models are used. HDR imagery literally is the only source of light for these images. There are no lights in the scene, only HDR imagery. This is because of the great dynamic range of HDR.
A more practical (to me) use of HDR is when resurrecting antique images. If you scan multiple exposures from old prints, then create HDR, sculpting values in 16-bit becomes a very powerful tool, only due to the HDR value range.
Photoshop, although it can edit very well in 16-bit, can only show 8-bit representations of HDR imagery, since almost all monitors are 8-bits per channel. Because of the monitors, we can only see a small part of what is actually present in the HDR file.
I've never done it, but I imagine that if we all had HDR monitors, we'd need to wear protective glasses (like you wear driving in your car when the sun is out) most of the time to do our work. :+)

Aperture 3 and Photoshop workflow

I have recently been opening a lot of my RAW files in Photoshop (via external editor). However when I do so Aperture comes becomes quite sluggish when viewing the newly saved 256MB PSD with the context of Aperture.
I am just wondering what people use as a general workflow when combining the two applications...specifically to get around the speed issue.
Flatten the PSD that is linked to Aperture, and save a copy of the layered PSD elsewhere?
Export from Aperture and import into PSD manually?

Ernie: I should have been -- and need to be -- clearer. Thanks for sticking with this.
there is no "send as is" command. No image can be SENT to the external editor except a New Version created as either PSD or TIFF file, which will be flattened.
I realize there is no "send as is" command. The commands in question are (each from the context menu):
. "Edit with +{Name of External Editor}+, and
. "Edit with Plug-in"
The treatment of the image files for each of these commands is, afaict, the same. In an effort to indicate either of the two commands, I confusingly shortened it to "send as is".
I just tested this. I believe that there has been an important change since Ap3.0. The situation is improved, but still murky.
Here is what currently happens:
Adjust an image.
Send it to an external editor (a new Master is created, stacked with your original Master, and sent out)
Edit it
Save it
It comes back as a (sometimes layered) file. So far so good.
If you want to open that file again in the same plug-in, you can, and you can access all your layers.
But if you make adjustments to that file, and then send it using the exact same command as you sent it before, instead of (as before) creating a new Master with your adjustments baked-in, Aperture sends out +the current Master with NONE of your subsequent adjustments+.
You can edit this Master. When you save your changes, the new (now third Master) replaces the second Master, and your adjustments are applied to it.
The first time you use one of the external edit commands on an image, a new Master is created and all your adjustments are saved (by being baked into the image format file created).
The second time you use the +exact same command+, the Master is sent out for editing without your adjustments, and the edited Master ends up replacing the Master you sent out. +_That Master is, afaict, lost -- unrecoverable -- gone forever._+
That the same command does two different things is totally wrong. That it is possible to overwrite one of your Aperture Masters, is also wrong.
In practice, the commands to edit with an external editor, when applied to +an image+ which has already been edited with an external editor, is equal to "Edit Master". This might end up being slick, but currently it is very un-Aperturish.
Or -- and this is not unlikely -- there's something I'm missing.
Two additional anomalies I noticed when testing this today:
. After an image has been edited with an external editor, the Aperture command "New Version from Master" is unavailable for that image. This makes no sense. You can create a new Version from the Master by duplicating the Version and "Reset all Adjustments".
. Aperture makes no distinction which plug-in or external editor has been used. A file edited in PS can be then edited with Nik tools. The Master will the image and file format of whatever was the last external editor used. (IOW, invoking a second plug-in or external editor does not force Aperture to create and stack a new Master. It just creates a new Master and disappears the old one.)
I want to keep this as clear as our terms allow. Your statement:
No image can be SENT to the external editor except a New Version created as either PSD or TIFF file, which will be flattened.
is (sorry) doubly wrong. When you +"do a repeat open in Photoshop"+ you are in fact not creating a new Version. So in that case it CAN be sent NOT as a new Version. And the new file which is created by Aperture when it does create a new file prior to sending it out is not a Version -- It's a Master which is stacked with the original Master. (Versions are text files. Masters are image format files.)

DxO Optics Pro and Apple Aperture workflow?

I'm wondering if anyone here has workflow suggestions for using DxO Optics Pro and Apple Aperture?
I've been using DOP for a couple of years now and love it, of course. I am just starting to use Aperture to catalog, sort and arrange a large collection of images. I would like to be able to import images on my drive into Aperture and keep them in Aperture's library, and get DOP to do its work in small batches when needed (essentially the "Scenario 2" workflow that is suggested in DxO's support section for using Adobe Lightroom.) But is that even possible with Aperture? Needless to say, I don't want to lose (during import into Aperture or export to DOP) the photo file information that DOP uses to do optics corrections.
If the workflow above isn't possible, I'm open to suggestions. If I must process ALL my images with DOP first, before importing them into Aperture, I can live with that, but it would be good to hear from some experienced users before I just assume I have to do that.
Thanks!
(By the way, I did read the other thread on here about DOP & Aperture, and it doesn't really go anywhere toward suggesting workflows. It just ends up discussion DNG files a bit, but that's about it.)

Hello All,
I've been working on getting this one figured out with DxO for the last week or so.
While I can't report that I have figured out the secret of the mysterious DxO OP & Aperture workflow (there doesn't appear to be one), I have figured out some key info that I needed to know to get started with Aperture, and continue using DxO OP.
First, the main thing that I became curious about... What EXIF information is lost when importing into & exporting from Aperture. I especially wanted to know what EXIF information that DxO OP needed to do its processing would be lost. (I know there are EXIF info viewers that I could use to check the info for myself, but I wanted to here conclusions from the source.)
The tests were done with the very helpful tech support folks at DxO. We ran 4 files through their fine tooth combs. Two files were straight from the camera, one file was imported (not referenced) into Aperture then I "dug" for it within Aperture's Library using "Show Package Contents", and the fourth was imported into Aperture's Library then I did a File > Export... > Export Master. (As Hud46/Dave guessed above) All EXIF was identical for all 4 files, so DxO could do its complete processing on any of them.
Many of you may have known this already, but I wanted to be sure.
Now, on the topic of a usable workflow for Aperture & DxO, I'm still working on that on. I'm guessing that I'll be finding out pretty much the same that you guys have mentioned here, that they don't play well (enough) together yet.
Allen, I agree that DxO does need to work on their compatibility with Aperture (as they seem to have done with Lightroom) so any feedback to them about that would be a good thing. Having been in touch with them a fair bit on this topic though, I have found that DxO sees Aperture as something of a "closed" system. I don't know what's up with politics of all this, so I'm just going to keep asking for the compatibility and let them sort it out.
Jack, Thank you very much for your workflow suggestion. I will give it a try and see how it works for me.
For what it's worth, I did just do a shoot for a client and used Aperture & DxO OP together. At first glance it looks something like what you did Jack. What I did, simply, was:
1) Downloaded images from the camera using Image Capture (I had already done this step actually) and put them in a folder.
2) Imported the images into an Aperture Library (for just this project) as Referenced Masters.
3) Sorted & rated them. Selected my Picks.
4) Exported those Picks as Masters.
5) Ran DxO Optics Pro on the Picks & saved the output.
6) Delivered to the client, then archived that Aperture Library, DxO's sidecars & output to Hard Drive & DVD.
7) Deleted all of it from my hard drive. (Why keep toting around, and having Aperture deal with in some way, 6+ GB of originals & thumbnails, etc when I likely won't need them all in that incarnation again? Hard drive may be getting bigger and bigger, but I can easily outshoot them.) Now, of course if I need to work with that shoot's Aperture Library in the future, I can't just work with in on the DVD, but at least I won't have to do my rating all over again.
Just thought I'd share that workflow in case it helps someone out with a similar situation.
Onward with the testing... I still have to figure out which way I should import my own main collection of images.
-Neil

Aperture and ACR workflow

For those who find Aperture's Camera RAW conversion too primitive, the program can be used in a simple workflow that maximizes your productivity while insuring maximum quality conversion.
1- IMPORT your RAW images into Aperture and add keywords and other tags.
Aperture brings in the RAW image UNALTERED.
2- COMPARE AND SORT your images using the EXCELLENT TOOLS in Aperture.
You can also freely experiment with versions to test ideas for everything from exposure to B&W conversions.
3- SELECT YOUR BEST IMAGES inside Aperture.
Most of us working in the professional world are really only interested in using the top 1% or less of a typical shoot. It is only those that need to be converted as output for Giclee printing or as digital masters for retouching and CMYK printing.
4- EXPORT THOSE BEST IMAGES using the export "DIGITAL MASTERS..." command.
Many of us find Aperture's RAW conversion to be excellent but for those who don't, you can choose at this point all your selected images, which by now should be a very short list, and export them as UNALTERED RAW files to a folder outside of Aperture.
5- CONVERT those exported camera RAW images using whatever conversion program you want, for many it will be ACR, and do any extra retouching in Photoshop.
And for those worried about Aperture's filing system, you can store these exported "Best Images" exactly like you used to do, in old fashioned folders on your hard disk, in whatever categories make sense to you.
For those of us producing professional work on always shorter deadlines, Aperture is an outstanding tool that makes our job much easier.
Mac OS X (10.4.3)

Tom, first allow me to congratulate you on starting a practical thread. Now that many of us own Aperture, and I'm not saying the issues threads aren't useful, figuring out where it fits in our workflow is a fine idea.
Here is my (pre-Aperture) workflow, and some ideas for an interim (working with what we have) post-Aperture flow. I'd really appreciate any advice or suggestions.
Pre: Conversion mostly in ACR/Bridge (occasionally in C1Pro-generally fleshtones). Color Space generaly set in camera as Adobe RGB, same for PS. Preliminary sharpening with PhotoKit, noise reduction if necessary with neat image or noise ninja, adjustments, aspect ratio crops, etc. Save as TIFF/16bit layered if necessary/add "Base" to filename when saving. Reopen in PS for output specific sharpening, save flattened copy. Open in ImagePrint-Print. Library has been on external HDs, backed up to duplicate HDs which are taken off premises. Current library size:700Gigs and growing fast.
Post: Import into Aperture from Card, also backup RAWs to DVD. As suggested here, do sorts and picks in Aperture. Maybe do some crude adjusting for low res images for client proofs (web or contact sheets-sorry, haven't tried using Aperture with Epson drivers or tried the web posting). Export RAW picks for conversion and editing elsewhere (I have tested and the camera EXIFs are still there in PS (I'm not sure they will be on re-import?). So, now I've got a RAW with an attached .xmp, one or more Tiffs. I can reimport the TIFFs, but can I re-associate them with the Master? Is there any way that I can import the .xmp and associate it with the master? So, I can pick, web, go to printer and archive (although I'll hit a disk space issue-ideas there?)
I tried to do this without asking for changes in Aperture, but not using Aperture where I felt it was immature. There are already enough discussions about conversion, editing and storage. The interface is promising and I would welcome any shortcuts you can come up with. Meanwhile, I'm going to try with new shoots, and a few existing shoots for experimanetation, but leave my old library intact. Then I'm going to put Aperture's library on an 800Gig external eSATA RAID0 -two disk; and back up to another. Wish me luck.

HDR and Aperture

I am very intrigued with HDR results and plan to download the Photomatix trial. Here is my question. How do the two programs work together? Do I download my raw files from my CF card into Photomatix and then to Aperture - or to Aperture first? If Aperture first, how do I get the various-exposed files into Photomatix? BTW, I am shooting a Nikon D700 and am therefore converting files to DNG before importing into Aperture. Any advice on workflow suggestions is appreciated.

Into Aperture first then open Photometrix under "Edit with". I tried the Hydra plug in and was not very satisfied. Bracketeer, a stand alone program, worked much better. Give us a report.
Mark

HDR Images and Aperture Workflow?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for