Images display better in iphoto than Aperture2

Has anybody an explanation why photos in iphoto and Quick Time look sharper than in Aperture2 ?
Somebody asked this question in 2008 but no solution.
Here the link:
file://localhost/Users/wolfzum/Desktop/Images%20display%20better%20in%20iPhoto%2 0than...:%20Apple%20Support%20Communities.webarchive
Thanks Wolf

One logical reason would be because iPhoto shows JPEGs that have been modified by in-camera adjustments like sharpening whereas Aperture normally shows unadjusted images from RAW which by definition does not include in-camera adjustments.

Similar Messages

Colours look better in iphoto than on desktop

Hello all,
I am new to Mac. I'll try to be short.
I used a photo as my desktop background on my macbookpro. However, when I opened the same photo in iphoto, it looks much sharper and the colors are much more vivid than on my desktop background.
I noticed the same thing with all other photos. They look better in iphoto than in Preview for example.
Could someone explain why this is so?
thanks a lot,
JM

JM:
Go to the Monitor section of the System Preferences and see what the color profile the monitor is set to. You can change it to whatever you find via Terence's post and see if it renders more accurately. You can change it to one of several to get what looks best to you.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Why are images displayed in Photoshop different than the same images displayed in Indesign?

My images imported to Indesign do NOT display as the images in Photoshop.
They seem to display under different color profiles.
The images in Indesign are more desaturated than the images in Photoshop.
This is a problem because now I don't know which image appearance to trust!
How can you get the Indesign images to look like the images in Photoshop?
I use Photoshop CS4 and Indesign CS3.
I import the images from Photoshop to Indesign for exporting to a PDF as the base for Blurb printing (www.blurb.com).
I use the CMYK profile Blurb_ICC_profile.icc:
The images in PS4 are converted to Blurb_ICC_Profile (CMYK).
Both in PS4 and ID3 the color settings are
                           Working spaces:
                              CMYK: Blurb_ICC_profile
                           Color management Policies:
                               CMYK: Preserve Embedded Profiles.
The images are imported into Indesign by drag and drop from Bridge CS4. In Bridge it says that the images have color profile CMYK, Blurb_ICC_profile.
I also do get "Unsynchronized: Your Creative Suite Applications are not synchronized for consistent color." And I don't seem to be able synchronize between CS3 and CS4, or whatever. I do NOT depend on any synchronization.
The settings above should be enough to show the images consistently in Photoshop and Indesign.
SO WHY DOES IT NOT?
Should not Adobes own applications be able to keep color consistency?

Hi WA Veghe,
>First: DO synchronize, makes sure you have the same profile settings and color mange settings.
I don't seem to be able to synchronize between CS4 (Photoshop) and CS3 (Indesign).
It seems I have to do without synchronizing..
>I do not seem to find HOW you are diplaying images on you screen: with Soft proofing?
What happens if you soft proof in Photoshop and InDesign on screen: View > Proof colors. Do you proof with the same profiles, both simulate paper and black on?
I can simulate Proof Colors (working CMYK), but not simulate Paper, both in Indesign and Photoshop.
Problem is: SAME settings in Photoshop and Indesign BUT the image displayed in Photoshop is brighter and more saturated.
So which image should I correct after?
thanks for all help
/L

Image layouts display differently in Safari than in Explorer

I have noticed that web page images display differently in Safari than in Explorer on a PC. On a PC, the web page may display three images side by side. In Safari, I might get two images side by side and the theid image below. Is there any correction for this? Thanks.
Norb

#sidebar_1 a:vistied {
color:#000;
is stating that all visited links in the #sidebar_1 div to be black. Are you saying that all visited links are black, outside the sidebar_1 div?
Jim

Vertical images are fine in iPhoto, but don't display properly in aperture.

Hello everyone, i have an old project around 1000 pictures and all the images show properly in iPhoto. I have a shared library with aperture and when i open that project in aperture , all the vertical images seems to be destroyed as soon as i double click on them. It looks like an half downloaded jpg. None of the Previsualisation or the full screen display are correct. What's wrong ?

I had already tried it and it doesn't work "the selected element has been modified in iphoto and cannot be updated" (L’élément sélectionné a été modifié en externe dans iPhoto et ne peut être mis à jour.)
here are screencaps to show you what it looks like.
So everything is normal in iphoto, then I double click on an image in aperture and this happens, then the thumbnails are destroyed, and then in iphoto it is also destroyed.

Why is elements better at photomerge than CC- CC does not appear to automatically fill image based on content but elements does when merging a panorama. Also the stitching is visable in CC but almost perfect in elements- why?

I took 6 panorama shots of a scene and used CC to Photomerge them as one. Couldn't see where to automatic blend the edges and there was 'stitch' lines when the images were merged. So i did the same in Elements 11 and it was perfect. Am i doing something wrong in CC or perhaps not doing something at all?
Any help, please?
Dave

Hi - Thanks for taking the time to reply and i appreciate the remarks- if a little harsh- we all have to start somewhere and i am fully aware of the limitations of Elements which is why i decided to add CC to my software. I can only say that if an inferior quality software from Adobe does the job well then CC must also be suited to doing the same which is why i can only think, from your comments, that i have not done something simple- however- following tutorials to get to the end result should have sufficed- it didn't so perhaps i will consider posting the difference between the two applications- and, perhaps suffer a few more 'harsh' comments. The learning curve is quite steep and i am a visual learner, but i'm also not totally incompetent:)
Kind Regards
Dave Munn
Original message----
From : [email protected]
Date : 02/02/2015 - 06:45 (GMTST)
To : [email protected]
Subject : why is elements better at photomerge than CC- CC does not appear to automatically fill image based on content but elements does when merging a panorama. Also the stitching is visable in CC but almost perfect in elements- why?
why is elements better at photomerge than CC- CC does not appear to automatically fill image based on content but elements does when merging a panorama. Also the stitching is visable in CC but almost perfect in elements- why?
created by station_two in Photoshop General Discussion - View the full discussion
First a clarification: you are not addressing Adobe here in these user forums. You are requesting help from volunteers users just like you who give their time free of charge. No one has any obligation to answer your questions.
I'll give it my best shot anyway.
Few folks in this forum are really familiar with Elements, for which there's a dedicated, totally separate forum.
Different engineering teams, also.
From this perspective, it will be difficult to give you a direct answer to your "why?" question.
Personally, I blend very large panorama shots in Photoshop proper since I can't even remember when without any issues whatsoever, up to and including in Photoshop CS6 13.0.6.
Without being at your computer and without looking at your images, I couldn't even begin to speculate what you are doing wrong in Photoshop, which I suspect you are. The least you could show is post examples from your panoramas that have gone wrong.
I can tell you that panorama stitching requires significant overlap between the individual shots, besides common-sdense techniques like a very solid tripod and precision heads.
The only version of Elements I have ever used for any significant time was Elements 6 for Windows, which I bought in 2008 to use on a PC (I've been an avid Mac user for 30 years). I found Elements so limited and so bad that I successfully demanded a refund from Adobe. IU mention this only to emphasize that I can truly only address your question from a Photoshop (proper) and Mac user point of view. I couldn't care less about Elements, but if you have comparison examples of panoramas processed in both applications, by all means post those two.
Generally speaking Photoshop is a professional level application that makes no apologies for its very long and steep learning curve, while Photoshop has many hand-holding features for amateurs and beginners.
Perhaps the bottom line is that you should stick with Elements if you personally manage to get better results there.
If the reply above answers your question, please take a moment to mark this answer as correct by visiting: https://forums.adobe.com/message/7152397#7152397 and clicking ‘Correct’ below the answer
Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page:
Please note that the Adobe Forums do not accept email attachments. If you want to embed an image in your message please visit the thread in the forum and click the camera icon: https://forums.adobe.com/message/7152397#7152397
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at , click "Following" at the top right, & "Stop Following"
Start a new discussion in Photoshop General Discussion by email or at Adobe Community
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1516624.

How To Display Image Dimension in Pixels Rather Than Inches

I am using Photoshop CS3, which I'm still learning to use. I want to see an open image's dimension (W X H) in pixels in the image's window/workspace.
Right now, when I open a file it displays the file's Document Sizes in the lower part of the workspace (sorry, don't know the proper terminology). Selecting the arrow next to this currently displayed information, I can then select Show>Document Dimensions. However, it always gives the image's width and height dimensions in inches. But, I want is to see these dimensions in pixels.
How do I get the document's dimensions to be displayed in pixels rather than inches? Thanks in advance.

Oops! Sorry about putting this in the wrong forum. I'm using PS to edit images that I'm using within DW. Hence, my (temporary) confusion.
Anyway, yes, that solved my problem. I appreciate the quick response. Thanks!

How to store images as disk files rather than in iphoto db

Is there a way to make iPhoto maintain the images as disk files, rather than import them into iphotos massive database file. I would prefer to use iphoto to just store a link to the photo, rather than the photo itself. That way I can work with the image in photoshop or whatnot without having to jerk around with the iPhoto database/

Welcome to the Apple Discussions. No need to find a workaround. You can use Photoshop from inside iPhoto.
Using Photoshop (or Photoshop Elements) as Your Editor of Choice in iPhoto.
1 - select Photoshop as your editor of choice in iPhoto's General Preference Section's under the "Edit photo:" menu.
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
NOTE: With Photoshop Elements 6 the Saving File preferences should be configured: "On First Save: Save Over Current File". Also I suggest the Maximize PSD File Compatabilty be set to Always.
If you want to use both iPhoto's editing mode and PS without having to go back and forth to the Preference pane, once you've selected PS as your editor of choice, reset the Preferences back to "Open in main window". That will let you either edit in iPhoto (double click on the thumbnail) or in PS (Control-click on the thumbnail and seledt "Edit in external editor" in the Contextual menu). This way you get the best of both worlds
2 - double click on the thumbnail in iPhoto to open it in Photoshop. When you're finished editing click on the Save button. If you immediately get the JPEG Options window make your selection (Baseline standard seems to be the most compatible jpeg format) and click on the OK button. Your done.
3 - however, if you get the navigation window that indicates that PS wants to save it as a PS formatted file. You'll need to either select JPEG from the menu and save (top image) or click on the desktop in the Navigation window (bottom image) and save it to the desktop for importing as a new photo.
This method will let iPhoto know that the photo has been editied and will update the thumbnail file to reflect the edit..
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.≤br>
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

Tips for a better Looping image display?

I have a rather simple and large (file size) image display
here for a website in sacramento:
www.norcaldesigns.com/cLandscapes
the image loop is just one image that moves on the timeline
and returns to frame one at the end. I would love some advice or
links to examples of better ideas for looping image display.
Thanks!
-Jesse

Assuming that this is a valid concept (sorry, as a user I
find it quite annoying and dizzying after awhile), one of the
approaches to speed it up in the beginning - split the image into
several ones and load them one by one or in groups so that first
few to show load, naturally, first. Then you will need to append
them to the strip.
It would be much more scalable to keep the reference to the
images in an XML so that should you remove or add images -
everything is done in the XML and you don't have to recompile every
time.
Also, I would set a higher frame rate (around 30fps) -
animation looks a bit jerky.
If the presentation of many images is important - perhaps
another type of transition should be considered (not scrolling but,
say, blending via alphas or something). In addition to the movement
being dizzying, there is very little time to appreciate the
images.

Poor quality images displaying in Screensaver after iLife 08 - suggestions?

After installing iLife 08 on my iBook and iMac, I have noticed that the quality of the images displayed on the screensaver from My Pictures folder is very poor. It looks as if it is using an upscaled thumbnail and not the full image. You can no longer select the iPhoto library as the folder to use as it now seems to be a single file rather than a folder. You cannot peek inside this file using finder. Is this an insoluble problem? I liked being able to use finder within the iPhoto library. Any suggestions would be welcomed.
Wilson

Problem is now solved. I cleared the application, system and kernel caches with OnyX, which I have on all 4 of our Macs. That was about the only bit of maintenance I had not done - typical and it was the one that worked. ScreenSaver now displays the Pictures images at the correct resolution.
Wilson

Fixed: TIFF image display / import problems

Hello All,
I posted this in the discussion threads where I had previously discussed it with other members. But, felt that it would be good to share with everyone who is importing their photo's into the new iPhoto 6.
I, like many others, have been having a terrible time getting my iPhoto collection imported into the new iPhoto 6 program.
I have tried both the upgrade method (on a backup copy of my original library), and a fresh import of all my files.
Without fail, all of my TIFF images gave me trouble. Some looked like squiggly lines. Some looked like a diagonally distorted image (like you see on old Televisions trying to tune in difficult stations). And, some just plain refused to work.
All of my problem images look fine in the thumbnail (the library view). But, you quickly discover the problem when viewing the full-size image in the "edit" mode.
Some of my TIFF images are 30 megabytes in size, and many of them are smaller files of a more typical size. I found that the smaller files were just as unlikely to work as the larger ones.
And, while converting to JPEG may be an option, I didn't want to lose the depth and detail that TIFF offers (especially on pictures of documents / writing). The original TIFF images will offer greater detail when blown-up than compressed JPG files.
All of these images worked fine in iPhoto 5, and display perfectly fine in every other program. But, iPhoto 6 just refused to display them properly.
Well, I think I found the fix.
Today I downloaded the new iPhoto 6.01 update. But, that didn't fix the problem either. So much for Apple fixing it.
Anyway, I have been experimenting, and finally found a difference between images that worked and those that didn't.
The images that worked, have an ICC profile embedded in them from the device that created the image (in my case my scanner).
So, I set out to find out if simply removing the ICC profile would fix the problem.
And, through my experimenting, I found that if I opened the image in another program, and then exported it as either a TIFF (the same format) or a JPEG that the resulting image would open in iPhoto 6 just fine.
Further examination demonstrated that the ICC information was removed from the exported file.
As I understand it, ICC is basically an image color correction / calibration tag. It enables different devices to properly display and print the image with the proper colors.
Basically, each device has a color profile (scanner, monitor, printer, camera, etc.). This is to make sure that when you see something on the screen that it looks the same as when you print it out. Likewise, you want the image on the screen to match what the scanner and digital camera saw.
So, these are essentially conversion tables to make sure that each device properly displays or prints the image as the original source "saw" it.
Anyway, not wanting to manually strip this information from each file, I looked on the Internet for an automated solution. And, fortunately I found one.
http://www.colormanagement.com/technicalresources/files_targets_and_utilities/mac_os_xscripts/
The file you are looking for is "Mac Os X ColorSync Toolbar Script: Remove ICC profile". Click on the title just mentioned to download the script.
It is a Macintosh Script that you simply download to your desktop (or anywhere else you would prefer). It is in a Stuffit Archive, so you'll need Stuffit Expander to decompress it (basically the Mac equivalent of a ZIP file).
Once decompressed, you should see a "script" icon that is labeled "Remove Profile".
Simply "drag" your original files and drop them onto this icon / script. The script will then remove the embedded ICC information from the image file.
Once you have removed the ICC information from your image's file, try importing it into iPhoto 6 again. Then, see if it works
It is important that you perform this on a backup / duplicate copy of your original files. You don't want to damage your only copy if something goes wrong.
Now, one further note: If you do this, you may see the image looks different. In my case, the image is truer to the way it really looked when I scanned it in. The paper texture looks right now.
If you want to do this while keeping the image's appearance the same as it looks now, then here's another way:
Open the file in Apple's "Preview" program. This is usually the default image view.
Then, do a "Save As" or "Export" to create a new copy of the image. If you perform an Export, be sure to set the image quality high or you may inadvertently reduce your pictures detail (especially if you export to JPEG).
This essentially does the same thing. But, it will take more work if you have multiple images.
Using the previously mentioned script, you should be able to drag and drop multiple files in a group.
Anyway, I hope this helps the rest of you out.
Let me know if it fixes the problem for you as well.

Hello All,
I have an update:
It is definitely not a user account issue. I just completed a fresh install of OS 10.3.9 on my Mac Mini.
I performed a fresh install (on a freshly formatted hard drive partition), and made the installation as bare as could be for the sake of preventing potential problems.
I installed OS 10.3.9, and all the standard items in the usual OS 10.3.9 installation. I specifically left-out all the foreign language stuff, all the online programs (for other ISP providers), and misc. garbage.
I also left off all the iLife programs (every iLife program) that came with the restore disks. I even left-off the original QuickTime installation. My thought here was that I wanted to make sure that there were no problems introduced by upgrading the original iLife Applications to iLife '06.
So, this way, all the iLife '06 programs are installed fresh with no upgrading being performed.
So, I installed this bare OS 10.3.9 installation. Then, installed all the updates that were available. I repaired permissions before and after each update. And, installed all the updates from downloads from Apple's website (Not using Software Update).
After verifying that Software Update could not find any additional updates available, I then installed iLife '06.
This required first installing Quicktime 7.0.4 from the iLife '06 DVD.
After installing QuickTime, I then proceeded to install the iLife '06 package (remember that this is a completely new iLife install - not an upgrade install since I avoided installing the older versions).
Once iLife '06 was installed, I then installed the recent 6.0.1 updates for all the iLife Apps.
Then, I launched the iPhoto program for the first time to see if it would properly import my TIFF images.
Unfortunately, it still displays them as if they are scrambled (like a blocked television / cable channel).
So, with that done, I can confirm that it is not a corrupt file or another program on my system causing the problem. It is definitely a problem with iPhoto 6 / 6.0.1 and OS 10.3.9.
Just thought I would post the update here for others to add to their knowledge-base. Maybe if we rule out potential problems we'll be able to find the actual solution.
Again, this same set of images imports just fine into iPhoto 5 on OS 10.3.9 and 10.4.4. And, it also imports just fine into iPhoto 6.0.1 in OS 10.4.5. So, it is a problem apparently specific to OS versions 10.4.4 and older using iPhoto 6 or 6.0.1.
As mentioned previously, these TIFF images can be made to import fine if I remove the ICC information from the image. So, that may provide some clue as to where the flaw is in the iPhoto 6 / 6.0.1 program.

PS CS5 Image Display Differs From Used ICC Profile In Win 7

Hi,
on my Windows 7 Ultimate x64 machine, I just calibrated my Dell SP2309W monitor using an i1DisplayPro and basICColor 5, creating a ICC v2 profile (I am aware of the problems under Windows with ICC v4 profiles).
It created the ICC profile and applied it to be used by Windows. I double checked under COLOR MANAGEMENT that the new ICC profile is being used. Although I can see that the new ICC is being used (desktop appearance changes), there are a few issues I am experiencing:
(1.) Windows Photo Viewer
The thumbnails in Windpows Explorer look fine (they DO use the new ICC profile), when I double click a jpeg and open the image it DOES NOT use the new ICC profile. When I click the PLAY SLIDESHOW button (starting the slideshow) in the opened image in Windows Photo Viewer, the images DO use the new ICC profile.
(2.) Internet Browsers
All current internet browser (Firefox, IE, Safari and Chrome) DO use the new ICC profile and display the image correctly.
(3.) Photoshop CS 5
When I open the same image - that Windows Photo Viewer does not correctly displays (according to the new ICC profile) - in Photoshop CS5, I get the same image display that Windows Photo Viewer gives me (when not thumbnail or not in slideshow mode) - it appears to be the sRGB display.
My color settings in PS CS5 are: North America General Purpose 2 > sRGB IEC 61966-2.1.
When I go to View > Proof Setup > Monitor RGB I get the image display using the new ICC profile.
Why does the image look different in PS than my calibrated monitor should output ?
I was under the impression (please correct me if I am wrong), that the sole purpose for calibrating my monitor was to get a uniform display across (ICC aware) applications. Even when one applies different color spaces to a document in PS, I thought the output on my calibrated screen done by the graphic card should always be according to my calibration and the settings in the ICC profile being used.
What Am I doing wrong or what am I misunderstanding ?
Any help or input is appreciated !
Thanks.
- M

Hello,
A note on monitor calibration: calibrating your monitor will not guarentee that every application will display color correctly, it's more of a step along the pipeline, and for the preview part of a color workflow it's the last step. Here's how color translation follows for an ICC workflow when previewing to a monitor:
Image Color Numbers > Document Tag or Workspace Profile > Monitor Profile
For non-color managed applications, if the original document is or isn't tagged with a color profile it will be translated directly to the monitor profile anyway. This is the equivalent in Photoshop of selecting "Monitor" in soft proofing. Selecting monitor in softproofing will bypass the tagged or workspace profile to translate colors directly through the monitor profile.
For most automatic color managed applications (like Firefox), the image will be translated through the tagged profile and then sent through the monitor profile. If the image is untagged or the profile is unrecognized, the colors get sent directly to the monitor profile.
For Photoshop, a tagged document will have its profile respected and then sent to the monitor. An untagged document will be assigned the workspace profile, which acts like a temporary document profile, and then gets sent to the monitor. This is often why users will notice Photoshop behaves differently from other applications. It's usually a case of the workspace coming into play. By default the workspace profile is set to sRGB. You can change this in Edit > Color Settings.
The purpose of the workspace is originally for printing workflows, as a way of keeping consistant color translations when dealing with both tagged and untagged documents. For web output workflows it can be useful for viewing everything through sRGB, which is typical of the average monitor output (not so with newer wide-gamut monitors, another source of confusion...) combined with the fact that originally most web browsers were not color managed. Hence viewing everything through sRGB is pretty close to what most monitors see and what untagged/unmanaged docs will look like.
Monitor calibration is useful only because it brings your monitor output to a "known state". In traditional workflows the monitor was always a middle-man, a preview device which was useful for getting an idea of what the printed output would look like before you print it. Since print colorspaces are often smaller than display spaces, it's feasible and useful to narrow down the monitor/display space and calibrate it to a known state, so that even if it doesn't totally match the print, you'll get used to its differences/limitations and they'll be consistent so long as the calibration is maintained.
For web output, your final output is often another user's computer monitor, which can have any form of behavior (most standard monitors are pretty close to sRGB, or use sRGB as an operating system workspace (default monitor profile). Wide gamuts behave differently, but I'm not sure if there's a particular ICC space that they closely match, or if different wide-gamuts are even that close to each other in their display color spaces.
Hope this helps!

Why does moving the mouse over an IMAQ image display slow the GUI down so much?

I have a large application with several vi's running simultaneously under labview 8.6.1. When I mouse over an image display control in one of the vi's, everything slows down a shocking amount in all the other vi's. The windows task manager does not show a large increase in CPU use. My pc is has a quad cpu with 4GB of RAM, and the CPU and memory loads do not appear to be terribly taxing to the system. However, many of my vi's apparently come almost to a standstill if I just move the mouse in a circle around my image control.
This looks like it is largely a GUI display issue. If I make a new vi and put a while loop in it that only displays the iteration loop number to an indicator, I can see the iterating occurring, then stopping totally when I mouse inside the image display control. When I stop moving the mouse inside the control, or when I move it outside the control, the interation loop number jumps up, as if it had been incrementing behind the scenes the whole time. So only display of the interating was halted.
This problem occurs even if the vi with the image control is not executing. If the vi with the image control is open but not running, and I mouse over the image on it, the other guis all come to a screeching halt.
Does mousing in the image display control really utterly crush all other guis in all other labview windows? Is this an issue inherent to the image display control? If so, is there anything I can do about this?
Also, this issue is not entirely limited to display. I started looking at it in greater detail because this issue also exposed what I think is a race condition in my code. I have a vi that acquires an image from a ccd and puts it into an IMAQ image.ctl. This image then gets passed up to a vi up the call chain, and is put on a queue and sent over to be de-queued by a vi that has the image display control. Here's the kicker: when I mouse over the image display control, the image successfully gets acquired inside the subvi, and if I probe the wire leading to the output IMAQ image display.ctl, I see the image. If I simultaneously probe the wire coming out of the subvi one level up the call chain, the image gets lost about half the time. This only happens if I am mousing in the image display control IN A TOTALLY DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE VI. If I bump up the priority of the ccd image acquisition vi to 'highest priority', the problem only happens about 1% of the time, and I really have to mouse around to make it happen. Still, it's disturbing that mousing in the GUI in one window results in a failure of a separate subvi to simply pass an image up the call chain. I understand that IMAQ images are referenced rather than passed by value, but I don't see why there should be a failure to pass the image up the call chain. I've looked for a race condition, but can't find one.
Eric

I have finally been able to replicate the behavior that you are seeing on another computer once the image was large enough. Here are a few notes about this behavior:
First. The UI only slows down when the images are large, 16 bit images. The reason why this is unique to 16 bit images is that they can only be displayed on the front panel as 8 bit images. The workaround that Weiyuan suggested to change the 16 bit display mapping hints towards the root of the problem...that any time a mouse runs over the indicator, Windows asks the entire image to re-draw (having a separate indicator overlapping the image will create the same behavior). With a 16 bit image, not only does the image have to re-draw on the screen but the 16 bit pixels need to be mapped to 8 bits. When setting the 16 bit display mapping to Full Dynamic, this requires mor computation/pixel than 90% dynamic or one of the other mapping schemes.
This is expected behavior if your program is running and you're trying to display a large 16 bit image. To fix this behavior there are a couple options:
Change the 16 bit display mapping to something other than full dynamic. You can choose which 8 bits to display or if you want to map the bits.
Resize the image just for viewing purposes on your front panel (since you aren't going to view every single pixel of you image on the screen). You can use the IMAQ Resample.vi to do this. This will allow you to take your 1500x1500 pixel image and only display a 500x500 pixel version.
If you are interested in viewing small details of the large image, consider just displaying a smaller region of interest at a time.
Let me know if any of these solutions work for you. Good luck on your application.
Zach C.
Field Engineer
Greater Los Angeles

Is there a way of aligning the images in iweb photoalbums other than have them be a square?I have them at same height and resolution but htere is a default that shrinks them and aligns them at the bottom.Thanks.

Is there a way of aligning the images in iweb photoalbums other than have them be a square?I have them at same height and resolution but htere is a default that shrinks them and aligns them at the bottom.Thanks.

So how did you do it?
by understand what iweb widgets do, in this case setting gridEntry widget's scalMode preference from fill to fit.
then reset the displayed image, so it fits in the display area even if it's portrait aspect.
however, i found some glitches in gridEntry widget that's quite strange... but all fix-able.
perhaps, iweb experts (whose had poked at my example) here can chime in.

Saved image displays differently outside Photoshop

When I save an image I've been working on in Photoshop, then open the saved file outside Photoshop, the image looks quite different than it does inside Photoshop, much drabber and less saturated. I have both Photoshop and the display program set to sRGB. I figure that I should have consistency within the monitor, whether it's calibrated or not. I'm sure I'm missing something basic here. I'd appreciate any help here, because my prints wind up drab, too. Many thanks!

LBJack wrote:
I overlooked one switch in the Save dialog. Now the images display correctly.
Can you be more specific, please?
Were you saving images without a color profile before, and some application(s) in your system were displaying them improperly?
Problem is, in that case one wouldn't really expect to see the kind of difference you describe unless your document profile really wasn't sRGB IEC61966-2.1.
Is it possible you're editing your images in the Adobe RGB 1998 color space? That could happen if you're opening images through Camera Raw, as the color space it's set to deliver is configured separately (via the link at the bottom-center of the Camera Raw dialog) from the Photoshop defaults.
By the way, if you don't already know, you can easily set the status block in the lower-left of the Photoshop window to show you the color space of your current document:
-Noel

Images display better in iphoto than Aperture2

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for