Making White Balance, Sharpen, ect. part of the default HUD

Greetings,
I would like to add the sharpen, white balance, color correction and others set to be a part of the default HUD. I found this post here: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=674833&tstart=0
but it does not seem to work for version 2.1 (the version I have). I say this because I do not have the file AdjustmentsDefaults.plist in my Library/Application Support/Aperture.
I tried to look within my profile and within the main Library.
How can I do this? Thanks.

Hey,
It's much easier in 2.1.
In Aperture open The Adjustments HUD.
Click and Add '+' button and select edge sharpen to add the edge sharpen brick to your HUD (or any other you should choose).
On the edge sharpen brick itself click the action button (the picture of the cog wheel).
Choose 'add to default set'.
You should be sorted.
Hope this helps.
M.

Similar Messages

Howto: Make Edge Sharpen etc. part of the default HUD

Hi all,
To make the new Edge Sharpen control part of the standard HUD:
0) Quit Aperture
1) Go to Library/Application Support/Aperture
2) Copy the file AdjustmentsDefaults.plist to a safe location
3) Open the original AdjustmentsDefaults.plist file by double clicking it. This should launch the Property List Editor with the file loaded
4) Unfold the Properties List nodes
5) Select the last entry in the plist (the one named 5)
6) Click on "New Sibling" in the toolbar
7) Enter RKProSharpenOperation as the value
8) Quit Property List Editor
9) Restart Aperture and enjoy your customized HUD!
Other operations that appear to work are
RKRedEyeOperation (Red Eye)
RKStraightenCropOperation (Straighten)
RKCropOperation (Crop)
RKDustRemovalOperation (Spot and Patch)
RKChannelMixerOperation (Monochrome Mixer)
RKNoiseReductionOperation (Noise Reduction)
RKSharpenOperation (Sharpen)
Sepia and Color Monochrome seem to be handled by parameterized versions of RKImageOperation and I haven't experimented with adding these.
As always; perform experiments like this with care!
Kind regards

that one is already a default ... at least it was for
me after upgrading to 1.5 ...
maybe someone who has the plist in front of them can
give the exact, or else i will when i get home ...
My face is FF0000!! You are right, it is there. I don't believe it was before 1.5 and I missed it.
Thanks!

So randomly my ipod crashed and when i turned the ipod on again it was all white and blurred. Part of the screen is up to speed but the other half is slow. Already tried turning it completely off and restoring it on the computer

So randomly my ipod crashed and when i turned the ipod on again it was all white and blurred. Part of the screen is up to speed but the other half is slow. Already tried turning it completely off and restoring it on the computer

First, try a system reset. It cures many ills and it's quick, easy and harmless...
Hold down the on/off switch and the Home button simultaneously until you see the Apple logo. Ignore the "Slide to power off" text if it appears. You will not lose any apps, data, music, movies, settings, etc.
If the Reset doesn't work, try a Restore. Note that it's nowhere near as quick as a Reset. It could take well over an hour! Connect via cable to the computer that you use for sync. From iTunes, select the iPad/iPod and then select the Summary tab. Follow the on-screen directions for Restore and be sure to say "yes" to the backup. You will be warned that all data (apps, music, movies, etc.) will be erased but, as the Restore finishes, you will be asked if you wish the contents of the backup to be copied to the iPad/iPod. Again, say "yes."
At the end of the basic Restore, you will be asked if you wish to sync the iPad/iPod. As before, say "yes." Note that that sync selection will disappear and the Restore will end if you do not respond within a reasonable time. If that happens, only the apps that are part of the IOS will appear on your device. Corrective action is simple - choose manual "Sync" from the bottom right of iTunes.
If you're unable to do the Restore, go into Recovery Mode per the instructions here. Also, if you have IOS-7, read this.

Making a password show what parts of the document you see

I have a random request from a client that I am not sure is even possible.
They want their document to be used by two people, one of them will only be able to see say 4 pages of it while the other will be able to see it all including what the person before had entered.
I think you can get around the text part quite easily but to have it show different parts of the form via a password is very hard for me to do (even if it is possible at all)
Can anyone lend me a hand in this?
If you need me information feel free to ask.

It sure is possible. I have been doing it for quite some time now and this would be a perfect situation for the Action Builder if coding in FormCalc is not your thing, but I can give you both.. I will use a sample form for the demo so if the lingo doesn't match up to your form, let me know or if you need an example. If anyone has anything simpler or I missed something, let me know. PM me if you want a sample form.
Create a new PDF and add in a second blank page and set that page to hidden in the Object field. Place a text field on page 1. Go to the Action Builder (in Windows go to the toolbar at the top, then "Tools" then select "Action Builder". The Action Builder is a great tool to add some extra functions into your PDFs with the preset actions. From the Action Tool box select the "Add New Item" from the top left of the box, right next to the trash can icon. This will create a new Action. There are 2 things for the Action: a condition and then a result. In the Condition section click the "object" link and then select the text field you put on page 1. Once you select the text field, the Condition box will change to "when text field TextField1...." and there will be 2 drop down boxes. With the condition set as "Is" put your password in the blank field. Then in the Result section select the drop down box and go to "Show/Hide an Object"and then select Page 2. What this will do is when TextField1 is equal to your password, page 2 will be visible. You can do this with not only a page, but specific elements within the PDF. So additional Textfields, pages, static text or other elements. One thing to keep in mind is what I like to call "foward/backwards logic" in that a user can enter the password to show the data, then remove it to hide whatever. Just go back through the Action Builder in reverse order that you did, where when TextField1 IS NOT the password, set the elements to hidden.
If you can do this via Formcalc, the setup would be similar, but instead of using the Action Builder you could do something like, create a numericField that has a number based password. On that field, go to your Script Editor, select "Change: from the show section, change the Language to FormCalc and then enter:
if ($.rawValue==1)then
xfa.resolveNode("Page1).presence = "visible"
else xfa.resolveNode("Page1").presence = "hidden"
endif
The bolded 1 is the password. The second and third lines cover what you want hidden or visible. So change whatever you want the password to, change the hidden and visible sections and then give it a try. You could even set this on a docReady show option as well to check that field when the form is opened if perhaps the first person saved the PDF with the hidden sections open. That way they do not need to enter the password every single time. Of course before they send it they should remove the password. Just be ready that whenever the user opens the form, even if they do not change anything, they will be prompted to save.

Making itunes recognise an extrenal drive as the default location always

Hi
I am really hoping someone can put me out of my itunes misery. I have been running the following set up for a while now but it is driving me crazy and if anyone has a solution, I would really like to give it a try!
I currently have itunes installed on my Macbook Pro, running 10.5.1. I have set the location of the itunes library in preferences to be my portable usb drive which is connected at the back of my time capsule. Every now and again, I remove the USB Drive and attach it directly to my laptop so that time machine will back it up and any changes I have made. I am totally paranoid about losing my Apple Losless files and it has taken me Months to get to this stage. Its still a work in progress and I have many more CDs to import. I love working this way as I can play music wirelessly to my stereo downstairs using airtunes which works great!
My problem is this. Every time my computer is restarted, I use boot camp, I use DVD Player or sometimes randomly it seems, itunes reverts to the default location for itunes, being Macintosh HD/userS/music/itunes. This means I have to go back to preferences and manually re-point the location to my external USB drive. It's not the biggest problem except it then wants to update itself and run through all of the files again every time this happens. As you can imagine, this takes quite some time with a large library and I am continually adding music and watching DVD's every day.
It's becoming a real pain each time I need to restart or perform one of the above tasks as I have to wait for itunes to update itself. Is this normal? Is it just a fact of Apple life that itunes does not work on an external drive? In which case, most people must run out of hard disc space at some point. Surely people must have better solutions in running their itunes libraries...? I am hoping some of you can share these with me.
I have tried googling this and have tried consolidating my library, (which took a week!)etc but nothing seems to solve this. What I am looking for is some advice either on running a better set up (I am sure what I am doing is probably not the best way of running itunes) or some sort of command in which I can make itunes recognise that my external drive is the default location for my library and not in the users library permanently.
Any help gratefully received. Thanks!
Samantha

No problem what so ever. I am not certain you will gain anything by it, though.

Custom white balance and EXIF data

Using 3.1.1 for two weeks or so, all is good for now but I have a question. After shooting the same subject with different white balance (still learning digital photography) with my D7000, a few with auto WB, a few with the camera's incandescent settings and a few with customized K degrees, 4,500K, 5,000K and 6,200K to analyze the differences, on the exif data, Aperture only shows AWB and the "incandescent" setting on the camera whenever used, but it doesn't show me when I set the degrees by numbers on the camera, it shows as "auto white balance", is this part of the white balance glitch? Although I can see the difference between those custom K degrees on preview, how do I find out in Aperture the exact K used on those custom WB other than looking back on the camera?

Thanks for replying.
No, not in Auto mode. I was in Aperature mode.
I have used custom white balance many times before.
I tried the battery removal etc. No luck there.
Removed and reinserted card. No help.
I finally got out of this hangup.
I downloaded all images to PC using the Canon EOS software.
Then I deleted all images from card in camera.
Then when I set up custom white balance again, it worked just as expected.
There was a very brief flash of the "Busy..." message and then into the next step to set .
Have no clue as why this suddenly started.
Maybe struck by stray gamma ray burst
Canon 3Ti, EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS II, EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II, 320EX Speedlite

Can you remove the camera white balance setting in Aperture

I have a Canon 7D and use Aperture for processing and storing my images.
With the Canon I shoot both video and still and frequently adjust the white balance in the camera. I make a frequent mistake in leaving the wrong white balance setting on - eg when taking video indoors in the evening I set the white balance to indoors (the Canon seems poor at white balance decision making on video) and then I forget I'm not using auto white balance and switch to taking a photo with flash. The result is a horrible blue photo - which if I don't spot the problem at the time seems very hard to correct afterwards.
I use the Aperture white balance adjustments frequently but unless there is a patch or white or grey I an use the dropper on, I find this particular situation seems to be right off the scale of what I can fix in Aperture. I end up with sliders at the extremes of the scales and no intuitive sense of what numbers to type in manually to try and get realistic colour - so I often end up discarding these photos even if the shot itself is something I'd like to use.
So my question is given I'm importing RAW, is there a way to show the phoo without the (wrong) white balance setting I applied in the camera, to let me choose white balance from scratch?
Or if not, do you have any advice about how to adjust from this very bluey unrealistic colour of image?

Kirkby - thanks for the quick reply.
Didn't know you could drag inside a value field - that's helpful.
But being able to get different numbers on the slider isn't the root of my problem.
In a specific example I have two photos - one taken with white balance set to flash and the photo was with flash, where after a bit of tweaking to get the colour I want the temp slider is at 5000K (and tint 0). The second photo has my shooting error with interior lighting white balance but taken with flash. The two shots were taken from almost the same point of the same view (but different people in frame). The shot with the white balance error comes off camera horribly blue coloured. I can fiddle with the two sliders - I take temperature to 20000K and tint to 40 to do the best with it I can, and with those settings one of the two faces is approaching flesh colour but the wall behind the subjects (which is a light blue in reality) is now appearing light yellow in places. I just can't get a good looking colour effect no matter ow extreme the slider settings.
I may have phrased my question badly - as I totally agree you can't show a raw without a colour setting - so maybe I'm better asking to be able to use a different colour setting on the raw data rather than having to start with adjustments on top of my white balance mistake.
Given the two shots were in the same place against the same background and the same lighting (both with flash) it seems to me I ought to be able to get a similar colour effect on both and I just can't. To illustrate here are the two photos (the one on the left was shot with flash wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 5000K and 0 tint, the one on the right was shot with indoor wb and in Aperture I'm viewing it with 20000K and 40 tint and it looks terrible!)
https://www.box.com/shared/qle3t6ovyhrd1egez3vc

Aperture incorrectly reading white balance data from RAW file?

I'm having some problems with both Aperture 1.1.2 and 1.5 importing RAW files from a Nikon D70 and a Canon G6. In both cases, Aperture is not reading the "as shot" white balance correctly.
With the G6, Aperture is always setting a fixed color temperature of 6016K, and a fixed tint of -15, regardless of the image in question. If I read the same image using Adobe Camera Raw, or Lightroom, then it I get the white balance value as set in the camera.
With the D70, it's picking up a different white balance value from the one set in the camera, always one far warmer than it should be, and with a green tint. Again, the Adobe tools get the right value out of the RAW file. With both cameras I have experimented with setting the white balance manually on the camera, and also with the "auto white balance" setting, but it makes no difference to Aperture.
Obviously I can change all of the values manually, but it's very time consuming, and in most cases the in-camera value is pretty close to what I need, so I'd much prefer Aperture to use it.
In any case, I'm worried about the discrepancy between Aperture and Camera Raw on something so basic.
Anybody got any ideas? I'm hoping I'm just doing something silly, as I have only been using Aperture for a couple of weeks, and maybe something is mis-configured.
Thanks
HG

In any case, I'm worried about the discrepancy
between Aperture and Camera Raw on something so
basic.
Sorry I can't help you directly with Aperture as I haven't bought it - yet. However, re-the above quote, I'd just mention that the interpretation of colour temperature values is not quite as simple as it might seem. Even more so when you bear in mind that RAW converters from 3rd parties like Adobe or Apple are not based on the RAW conversion engine produced by the camera manufacturer - in effect they have to guess/estimate what the temp/tint values in the RAW file actually mean...
Some time back I made a series of tests using 3 Canon cameras, with ACR, Capture One & the Canon RAW converter. Each produced noticeably different results, and C1 & ACR showed quite different temp/tint values. (The Canon software only showed 'As Shot' - no values). The differences were consistent between shots from each camera (using WB values input or AWB) - but they weren't consistent from one camera to another. Which program produced the best result depended very much on the Camera/Subject/Personal taste...
Hope someone can help with Aperture specific info, I'm sure there must be a way of making camera specific adjustments to the RAW conversions...

Photo Merge using RAW files - does white balance matter?

I'm using a Canon 5dII and create RAW files to be merged - both stitched and for HDR. In other words, if I bracket 3 (0, +2, -2) I'll do the bracket 3 times, once for the left, middle and right parts of the scene and will have 9 RAW images. I'm asking the question because as I pan I may be moving from sun to shade. If I use auto white balance, I'm concerned that the 3 stitched sections may have a different WB set (e.g. sun and shade). If PS5 doesn't use the WB tag, then it is immaterial. If it does use the WB tag would it use the same setting for all 3 parts of the stitched scene. I could of course manually set the WB for each series of 9, but would prefer not to if it is not necessary and continue to use AWB as I now do.
THANKS! I know my question is not specific to Macintosh - If this should be directed to another forum please let me know.

If I am visuallizing what you are asking correctly, yes it does matter. In my
exspirence the way I have had the most success doing what you are doing is
to merge all your image that are -2 stop into a pano. Save
as a high-res TIFF 16-bit or higher. Repeat the process
for the following 2 stop and then merge your TIFFs to
and HDR. Something I always to before
Photomerging is to use Camera Raw get the setting of exposure and what not exactl
y how you what them copy those setting and paste to all the following images that are included in
that photomerge, that helps to take care or variation
s that can happen with exposure doing panos, it more often then not has a
real nice outcome.

Separate luminance and color white balance

I know this is a quite peculiar idea, but i roundtrip to Photoshop a lot just for this..
we all know white balance affects how contrast and luminance of different image areas are interpreted by the software, and at times, especially in low or mixed light, I find that the 'color wise correct' white balance is often different to the 'luminance wise best' one..
i hope this doesn't sound too tortuous, and i really don't know if it would be hard to implement, but it would definitely help a lot with image quality..

ok..
I usually do this for low light portraits or mixed light situation, but it really works for everything, and is quite similar to the "tone" part of topaz detail plugin, for example..
we always choose WB to have a pleasant or correct color rendition, right?
but if we are in black and white, different WB settings affect different areas of the image, lightwise..
and i find out that there is always a sweet spot, depending on the lighting, where noise is better and shadows are better distributed, and and that usually doesn't match to the color WB sweet spot..
this is the original auto wb image
and its bw equivalent
here wb is tweaked to better balance shadows and contrast
but you can see colors are way off..
to give a better idea..
original:
two wbs, obtained with layers color blend mode of original onto bw tweaked
i realize at this size the difference may look small, but it really changes the balance of light, especially with low light or underexposed or mixed light shots..
hope now it's more clear..
cheers
Tommaso

Working Without White Balance

Camera: Nikon D90
Adobe CS5 Design Suite
My goal is to work in Photoshop and Camera Raw without using White Balance.
As I understand, the camera stores within the raw NEF file what was seen by the camera chip without correction. For example, if the camera chip sees say 10,000 red photons, this is stored as say 200. If the camera chip sees 20,000 red photons, this is stored as 400. Hence, it is linear. Of course, the actual storage is as a Bayer array.
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/camera-sensors.htm
In theory, from the raw NEF file, one should be able to reconstruct the image that fell upon the camera chip.
On the camera itself, there are many camera White Balance settings. However, it lacks a "None" i.e. "As Is" setting meaning do not assume anything about the light source and make no correctons. Just record the photon levels and give me back the same image that was focused on the camera chip.
As an experiment, I shot a daylight scene using 2,500K (obviously, an extreme value) for the white balance. When I look at the raw file in Camera Raw, the "As Shot" shows a heavy blue tint. Hence, Camera Raw was using the 2,500K white balance selecting of the Nikon for the "As Shot" setting in Camera Raw. Looking at the Camera Raw basic panel White Balance drop down items, there is no "None". Hence, Camera Raw always assumes there is a White Balance and makes corrections.
Why would I want to do this? For example, I have multiple varied color light sources. I want to see exactly the image my eye sees. I do not want the camera making corrections since there is not a single light source for it to make assumptions about how to correct.
Is there a way in Photoshop or Camera Raw to show me the image without any white balance correction. Thanks in advance.

Petrula wrote:
Camera: Nikon D90
Adobe CS5 Design Suite
My goal is to work in Photoshop and Camera Raw without using White Balance.
As I understand, the camera stores within the raw NEF file what was seen by the camera chip without correction. For example, if the camera chip sees say 10,000 red photons, this is stored as say 200. If the camera chip sees 20,000 red photons, this is stored as 400. Hence, it is linear. Of course, the actual storage is as a Bayer array. In theory, from the raw NEF file, one should be able to reconstruct the image that fell upon the camera chip.
On the camera itself, there are many camera White Balance settings. However, it lacks a "None" i.e. "As Is" setting meaning do not assume anything about the light source and make no correctons. Just record the photon levels and give me back the same image that was focused on the camera chip.
The sensor is linear, but the sensitivities of the red, green and blue channels differ, so one must take these differing sensitivities into account when rendering the image from the raw data. As demonstrated by others, channel multipliers of unity (UniWB) do not yield the intended result. To obtain your intended result, empirically determined multipliers would be necessary. When used for white balance, these multipliers are chosen to that a white target will have equal RGB values in the rendered image. For your purpose, multipliers would need to be chosen so that the white target would assume the color of the incident light. In other words, if the white target were illuminated with reddish light, the image would be reddish and not white.
Why would I want to do this? For example, I have multiple varied color light sources. I want to see exactly the image my eye sees. I do not want the camera making corrections since there is not a single light source for it to make assumptions about how to correct.
Is there a way in Photoshop or Camera Raw to show me the image without any white balance correction. Thanks in advance.
On the camera itself, there are many camera White Balance settings. However, it lacks a "None" i.e. "As Is" setting meaning do not assume anything about the light source and make no correctons. Just record the photon levels and give me back the same image that was focused on the camera chip.
As an experiment, I shot a daylight scene using 2,500K (obviously, an extreme value) for the white balance. When I look at the raw file in Camera Raw, the "As Shot" shows a heavy blue tint. Hence, Camera Raw was using the 2,500K white balance selecting of the Nikon for the "As Shot" setting in Camera Raw. Looking at the Camera Raw basic panel White Balance drop down items, there is no "None". Hence, Camera Raw always assumes there is a White Balance and makes corrections.
Why would I want to do this? For example, I have multiple varied color light sources. I want to see exactly the image my eye sees. I do not want the camera making corrections since there is not a single light source for it to make assumptions about how to correct.
Is there a way in Photoshop or Camera Raw to show me the image without any white balance correction. Thanks in advance.
I infer that you want the captured image to reflect the spectra of the actual scene luminances (or more likely a metameric tristimulus match) rather than how you perceive them. The human visual apparatus exhibits chromatic adaption, whereas the sensor does not. The CIE xyz model assumes complete chromatic adaption and the color models based on CIE models need a white point to operate, so you are attempting to use ACR in a manner other than for which it was intended. There is an interesting exercise on the Stanford web site that shows how one can use a digital camera (the Nikon D70) in conjunction with a spectrophotometer to obtain spectrophotometric data from the camera. To recreate the actual spectra, two additional colored filters are required, but if one merely needs a metameric tristimulus match, perhaps only the three native CFA filters of the camera would be needed.
http://scien.stanford.edu/pages/labsite/2006/psych221/projects/06/clintonk/index.htm
Going back to ACR, experience indicates that if one wants to recreate the appearance of a colorful sunset or a candlelit scene (cases that exceed the limits of chromatic adaption), a daylight color balance works best. It would seem intuitively that an equal energy illuminant (CIE Illuminant E) would be appropriate. This corresponds to a correlated color temperature of approximately 5455K.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_illuminant

White Balance in Color

I have been using Color for my first short film and I wanted to get feedback about my process in balancing the white balance. Color is absent the easy white balance eye-dropper. So this is my process in the Primary In room.
1. Balance the contrast - crushing blacks and boosting the highlights.
2. Balance skin tone using the mid-tones color wheel.
3. "Eye-ball" the white balance by moving the Highlights color wheel until I achieve whites I deem white.
Do the scopes help me balance the white better? Is this a proper process? After I complete these steps I move to saturation and secondary CC.
Thoughts?
cja

If you were airline pilots, I'm not sure I'd want to fly with that carrier. Instruments are there for some reason, I guess, but you don't need 'em on ultralights, but on second thought maybe that's why there are so many stall-spin fatals. Hmmmmm. Well, anyway...
COLOR does have an auto balance, but it needs something in the frame that really wants to be R=G=B, because that is what it does, after sneaking a peak at where the corresponding Y-luminance sits. Sometimes its a reasonable starting point. But if the brightest thing in the picture really is a brilliant blue, then it won't work.
COLOR is concatenated Primary In, Secondary, COLORFX, Primary Out deliberately. The opening premise is to achieve a balanced, non-clipped, non-crushed image to send onwards for qualified-area corrections, look enhancement, and then overall final contrast, overexposure and black crushing at the end in Primary OUT. That was the idea. Its how Silicon Color trained the first round of Final Touch operators. You are free to pursue any avenue that achieves the result you desire.
Use of instruments. It is possible to use the scopes to achieve balance, especially using the vectorscope display. One of the simplest concepts is to learn to "lay the furball over the origin". Eventually you will figure out what part of the furball corresponds to the white point, the black origin, and how to guide the values into a particular area, especially when hue matching scene-to-scene in the still store. One of the egregious drawbacks of the COLOR scopes is the omission in the RGB parade of the Y signal. That would be most helpful (to people who pay attention to that stuff) and its why its the default on most outboard scopes. I'm particularly fond of the Tektronix Double-Diamond gamut display... makes getting a grey scale as simple as "standing up" the two trees.
Strictly speaking you don't really need to know what the exact numbers are, until you try to get a project past a QA somewhere. Those people have no sense of humour.
jPo

Can't get decent white balance

I shot some photos with my Canon EOS outside with the white balance set to 3200. The photos are, of course, blue. In iPhoto, using the slider, I can get almost perfectly corrected white balance with great skin tones. Bringing the photos into Aperture and using the white balance correction slider doesn't get me close to what iPhoto did. What's up with this?
RM

It’s a common problem. Usually because of PC monitors being back lit and often set very bright. So the representation on the PC will be different compared with on photo paper. Nice image by the way.
Most labs use the sRGB color space; so make sure you are saving your print copy with that profile. If you view your image on screen by getting down on your knees, and looking up at your monitor rather than from eye level, you will get an indication of how dark the image really is.
I always make separate copies for print with an overall levels adjustment and with sharpening as the final edit, based on each different print size. I would suggest for this image moving the middle pointer to 1.75 but you may need to experiment with different settings. Make a test batch and compare them when you get them back from Walmart to see which works best and use that in future.

White balance and RAW

I have been importing RAW files from my Canon S70 for a while, and everything has worked very well. Recently, however, imported RAW files are showing up with the incorrect white balance in iPhoto (different from the one they were taken with on the camera). If I open the same RAW file in any other editor the correct white balance is displayed. Does anyone know how I might fix this?
The weird part is that it didn't used to do this--iPhoto used to display all my RAW files w/ the white balance they were taken with. It was nice because I could just export JPGs directly. Now, however, I have to open them up in another editor and export so they have the correct WB.
Any help would be great, thanks.

Heya Black eyes,
I've never heard of this one before except in an instance where the person was using Photoshop CS to edit the files right after importing them into iPhoto (Photoshop was adding its own colorprofile and throwing off poor iphoto).
Consider removing ~/library/caches, and ~/library/preferences/com.apple.iphoto.plist, and ~/pictures/iphotolibrary/albumdata.xml to the trash.
Restart your computer.
Test iPhoto - does the issue persist?
If so then try creating a new iphoto library by launching iphoto with the option key.
Import from your camera to there.
If it works then your original iphoto library needs to be rebuilt following kbase 107947 and using all 4 options.
If not then I would make sure that the color sync profiles on your system as a whole have not been changed.
Hope that helps!
Cheers!

Aperture 3 White Balance range

I recently took a handful of photos under some garishly unbalanced street lights. I took a greycard shot and used custom white balance in my Canon camera, which caused the photos to come out surprisingly well but not perfect.
When I loaded the photos up in Aperture, I thought that two or three pictures could use some additional tweaking. By making any white balance adjustment at all in the application, it reset the white balance to 2000K -- which is actually above the temperature of the lights.
I can't seem to manually set the white balance to any lower value, and the only way I can get rid of a color cast is to disable any White Balance adjustment (thus using the setting from the RAW file).
Is there any way to extend the range of Aperture's white balance adjustments? Is this the sort of thing that ought to work its way into a feature request?
(Just for conversation's sake, the location in question was the Campbell Community Center's parking lot during a San Jose Bike Party. Anyone from the Aperture team is welcome to take some snapshots there if they doubt the necessity of a wider white balance range...)

Have you tried tweaking it with the curves adjustment? Sometimes you correct colour casts a bit more precisely with a simple "auto split" curves adjustment, or by tweaking the curves themselves manually.
Have a look in the manual starting at p536 and also check out p549 specifically.

Making White Balance, Sharpen, ect. part of the default HUD

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for