Noise Reduction Programs as External Editor

Can anyone tell me if I can set up a noise reduction program (Noiseware, Noise Ninja, Neat Image, etc) as an external editor to LR and use the "round trip" feature used with PS/PSE? I don't currently have either PS or PSE, since LR has been able to handle my editing needs with the exception of noise reduction. Hence my research into free-standing programs.
Thanks in advance.
Adam

From the Noise Ninja web site:
http://www.picturecode.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
"It is usually best to apply noise reduction as early as is practical in the workflow. Post-processing adjustments like sharpening, contrast stretching, and color balancing can alter pixel values and noise levels in unpredictable ways. Depending on the amount of adjustment, this can make it more difficult for Noise Ninja to estimate noise levels. Sharpening, for instance, is a nonlinear operation that can significantly distort the distribution of noise values.
If your workflow requires that you use Noise Ninja after some other operations, then try to create noise profiles using calibration images that have been put through the same operations.
Running Noise Ninja early in the workflow is a good rule of thumb, but Noise Ninja can be applied at any time. Sometimes it may not be possible or practical to run Noise Ninja at an earlier point in the workflow. For example, most users are not using a RAW processor with plug-in that allows Noise Ninja to be run before other adjustments in the RAW processor."

Similar Messages

Any high definition video noise reduction programs/plugins out there?

i have a Sony HDR HC1, and im just using iMovie to import the HD video then send it to FCE3.5.....and i dont plan to buy a new camera until i make my second low-budget feature (editing my first right now).....and i have some low-light shots that shows bluish-colored noise (the camera has a CMOS chip) and i need to know how to get rid of the noise (and for a less noisy picture overall, even though very little in normal light conditions).

Er, 'Cineframe' (pseudo 24p) and 'CineGamma' (film-like brightness range) are available on the bigger FX1 and Z1, but not on the smaller HC1, sorry. But the HC1 has a similar (or maybe identical) 'Cinema Effect', which does simulate 24fps film.
However, you can't choose this (under 'D. EFFECT' in the 'PICT. APPLI.' menu) if you've already chosen a film-like manual shutter speed ..e.g; 1/25.
You can't keep the 'film-like' manual 25 shutter speed, either, if you choose, in the 'PROGRAM AE' menu, 'PORTRAIT' (..which generally tries to give the widest available aperture, to give shallow depth-of-field like a 35mm film camera lens).
So for a "film-like" appearance with the HC1 I'd choose:
Manual shutter speed - 25
Sharpness - up a bit from normal
Steadyshot - ON
Manual exposure - ON (..that's the little round button next to the 'Exposure/Vol' switch on the left-hand side, below the Backlight button..)
This HD Sony camcorder is probably way beyond the price range you're interested in, but the V1U does offer most of what you want..!
The Panasonic HVX200 is extremely versatile ..but the cost of memory cards is probably prohibitive ..unless you shoot only 8 minutes at a time!
(..Here's a useful comparison between the earlier Sonys, JVC and the Panasonic, but it doesn't mention the new V1U..)
(..The Canon XL2 offers 24p and interchangeable lenses, but no HDV..)
Essentially, the JVC HD100/110 shoots only HDV (or DV) 720p (24, 25, 30fps), Progressive (full frame) format, and doesn't shoot "video-like" 1080i (interlaced) at all. So it's specifically intended for tape-to-film transfer, which may be what you want.
Here's a .pdf of the instruction book.
Notice that the JVC is a manual focus camera ..there is no autofocus at all. It comes with a 16x zoom, but no figures given for its low-light limit, such as 4 lux or 6 lux.
The original HDV 1-chip JVC GR-HD1 is to be avoided, as its low-light performance - and performance overall - is pretty poor.
The new Sony V1, having a fixed, built-in, non-interchangeable lens does have autofocus - though that can be switched off. It shoots HDV 24p and 30p, but also 'normal' non-progressive video. Here's Adam Wilt's assessment of it. It has a 20x zoom, and shoots down to about 4 lux.
Sony's earlier - and cheaper - Z1 has a 12x (autofocus) zoom, 60i and 50i video shooting, and 'synthesized' 30p, 25p and 24p modes, which Sony calls 30F, 25F and 24F ..as these are progressive frames constructed from various interleaved fields and frames. So 24F isn't exactly the same as 24p. Minimum light: 3 lux.
[..The 'super-HAD' CCDs in the FX1/Z1 don't appear to give any vertical smear of bright highlights ..though that's often quoted as a particular selling point of CMOS chips, compared with CCDs..]
I use the UK-only 50i version (the FX1) of the Z1, and can say that it's excellent in incredibly low light. These HDV Sonys (..except the 7 lux HC1..) all feature optional "CineGamma", which alters the recorded brightness range to look more like film than video, and "CineFrame" which is this artificial progressive mode - called 'Cinema Effect' on the HC1.
Here's some more info about Sony's 'CineFrame' pseudo 24p.
In summary:
The JVC is the nearest HDV you'll get to true 24p, but it's less easy to handle (no autofocus, 16x zoom) than a Sony, and doesn't offer interlaced video recording like a normal camcorder ..so it'd probably be inappropriate for shooting for TV.
The V1 is a multi-talented video/24p camera, with a big 20x zoom, low-light, but doesn't take interchangeable lenses.
The Panasonic HVX200 seems to offer the best of many worlds, but has only a 13x built-in zoom, and although it shoots extremely hi-quality material onto memory cards, they're expensive and have only a small capacity.
Yer pays yer money and yer takes yer choice..

Using external editor by wine

I'd like to use my PictureWindowPro® as external editor in Aperture but it only runs by wine.
PWP® is windows only software with some unique and powerful tolls.
Does anybody know how to link a wine program as external editor?

Workflow-
iPhoto 9.5.1 open in desktop 1
PSE 12 open in desktop 2
In iPhoto I select 4 photos, rt click on one of the photos, select edit external editor
Most of the time the photos open in desktop 2, but 10-20% of the time they will open in desktop 1. I then show all the desktops (F3) and drag the photos to desktop 2.
I can see there is going to be a lot of finger pointing (iPhoto vs OSX vs PSE) as to which piece of the operation is dropping the ball. iPhoto finds the 4 photos, opens them in PSE, but someone lost the desktop information. With that said, I think the iPhoto programers need to talk to the OSX programers to determine if the desktop information is being correctly passed. (I would guess that PSE assumes all PSE windows will be on the same desktop)
As an aside, I can perform most of my PSE operations in desktop 1 using keyboard shortcuts.
-alan

When attempting to use Lightroom external editor program to edit a photo in Photoshop Elements 10, the photo does not open / appear on photoshop elements screen. I don't have any problem with this when using Photoshop Elements 6 or Photoshop CS. I'm usi

When attempting to use Lightroom external editor program to edit a photo in Photoshop Elements 10, the photo does not open / appear on photoshop elements screen. I don't have any problem with this when using Photoshop Elements 6 or Photoshop CS. I'm using a Mac with Mountain Lion OS. Any solutions?

Adobe now hides the editor - what looks like it is not - you want the editor hidden in the support folder - see http://forums.adobe.com/message/3955558#3955558 for details
LN

Why is my noise reduction lost in photoshop elements editor?

I took some star shots recently in RAW format. When I open them in elements, I first get a window that lets me make changes to the RAW file, including exposure, clarity, sharpness, noise reduction... etc. I adjust the noise reduction with the luminosity sliders and get a good looking picture (a lot of noise removed). However, when I click "Open Image" to get it into the editor, it loads the image into the work space with all of the RAW edits I just made, except the noise reduction (it reverts back to the original amount of noise). Why is this and how can I stop it from happening?

The top larger image is the "after" I save (.png form), the screenshot within photoshop is the "before"...
I've also tried to the merge layers beforehand as well, but it actually just displays the image as if it were the saved version, with the noise coming through extremely hard. I just didn't save it yet.
I appreciate the suggestion!

Using Adobe Bridge as Aperture 3 External Editor

I have a problem that I can't seem to solve and I'm hopeful that a post here can get me closer to some resolution. I recently started using Bridge for noise reduction and PS for high pass sharpening. The downside is my work flow is now shot full of holes! I have Bridge as my external editor; I make the edits in Bridge then do a high pass sharpen as well as any other edits I might choose to make in PS. If I need to, I flatten the image if I have layers. It is here that my problem begins.
Aperture creates the new tiff version within it's program as soon as I choose to edit in Bridge, but I don't know the exact process to save that image while in Bridge or Photoshop to reflect the changes in Aperture. Another question I have is which version of the image in Bridge I should be editing the jpeg or tiff? any help here would be greatly appreciated!

I use Bridge as editor because once there, I go into "camera raw" to process images.
So now you're bringing a third app into the equation. Bridge, ACR and Photoshop are all individual applications. If you're not using an app like Aperture then Bridge might be the front end for the other two, but in the case you describe it has no role.
Another thing to think about: ACR ("camera Raw") is for processing Raws - which job you are currently doing with Aperture. You're not sending Raws to Bridge/ACR... You're sending tiffs.
I think you need to rethink your workflow somewhat. I'm not sure you've grasped what the various tools actually do.
Regards
TD

External Editor only TIFF and PSD

I want to edit my photos in Photoshop but in the Preferences there are only the TIFF's and PSD formats supported - since my original files come as JPEG's it would be sufficient to safe the files as high quality JPEG's. Is there a possibility to edit a PLIST file in Aperture, that this option gets visible in the Preferences?

my qustion is would not this be the perfect job for a
DNG file in
a future V. of apeture ?
I can state this would not be a good way at all to handle this situation. The problem is this - you have been working on color and other adjustments based on the Aperture RAW conversion (which itself you have probably carefully tweaked as to sharpness and noise reduction).
Using DNG and going to some other program to edit, you are relying now on the ability of that other program to do exactly the same RAW conversion and also do all of the adjustments Aperture did in exactly the same way. As you might imagine, no other program has a hope of doing the conversion and adjustments exactly as Aperture does them, for they are not Aperture. Thus when you did sharpening or some other adjustment in that other program it would be based on a different RAW conversion that may well not have the exact same combination of RAW adjustments applied.
That is why when moving to other programs to continue editing a rendered format (such as TIFF) is the way to go, because it exactly preserves all of the editing you have done to that point.
As to the posters original question it would not actually be that great an idea to send a JPG over to the external editor because it would have to be a brand new JPG with your adjustments applied, and then when you saved it from the external editor you'd have a 3rd generation JPG file and every time you edited it after you'd have yet another generation of JPG loss.
What you can do to conserve some space is to select PSD for external editing, and then in Photoshop (or whatever you open the file in) convert to 8-bit mode (by default it's 16).
Just think of ti this way - that JPG is no longer a JPG, it's your new master! Preserve quality at all costs (well at least space costs).
Messing with the plist file may give you an 8-bit PSD file directly, I have not messed with those settings after 1.1.1 came out.

Feature request: local noise reduction...

I love the local corrections in LR2, and I'm using especially the local sharpening feature a lot. But I'm really missing a local noise correction feature (at least for luminance noise). It's such a shame to be able to do about any correction that I need inside Lightroom, but still having to make a round trip to an external noise editor to remove local noise. Especially since doing noise reduction as the last step doesn't seem to be very efficient at all.
Local noise reduction would make this already great program so much better (at least, to me).
Richard

>My understanding is that sharpening does not add noise, but emphasizes the noise that's already there, making it appear from being insignificant to noticeable.
We're being overly semantic here of course, but it just depends on how you define it. If you define noise as for example the root-mean square deviation from the "real" image (a very common definition but it ignores the noise's spectral distribution), than absolutely sharpening a noisy image adds more noise. Sharpening operates as a high frequency amplifier, amplifying edges that are just noise instead of real edges, so it basically amplifies the noise that is there, leading to an increase in apparent noisiness. The same is true for clarity. Clarity is basically a sharpening operation at a very high radius. If your source image is noisy (especially if it has a lot of low-frequency noise - i.e. "grain"), it will also amplify it. Conversely, negative sharpening results in reducing high frequency noise. as it is just a small radius blur effectively.
>Moreover, sharpening in LR develop is considered capture sharpening, where the small loss in sharpness form the RAW format is regained.
The sharpening brush is different as it is meant to be a creative sharpener. It definitely amplifies noise if you push it. And even so, using Develop's capture sharpening, it is indeed possible to amplify (=add) the noise using the capture sharpening if you use the controls wrong. The capture sharpening has the superb mask generator that can be used to protect areas that are not edges, limiting its tendency to amplify noisiness. However, it will amplify noise near edges, sometimes making them appear as if you have a waterpainting. This is also an example of amplifying noise. Remember, even if these tools are meant to do a certain thing, it doesn't mean they cannot be made to do something else.
>To just regain lost RAW sharpness at the expense of noise would seem almost like defeating its own purpose.
Sharpness and noise go hand in hand. There are smarter and less smart algorithms but fundamentally, sharpening always amplifies noise, and noise reduction always reduces sharpness. As I said some algorithms are better and limit the effect, but the bottom line is that there really is no way around this.
>Or, is it more correct to say that applying -ve clarity/sharpening will make the noise "Appear" less obvious, but not actually get rid of it.
Appear less obvious is exactly the same as reducing it. Your eye is very good in judging noisyness as it is very good at recognizing patterns and so you can easily see what is noise and what isn't. If an image appears less noisy, it is less noisy. Computers are not that smart yet and if you call a tool clarity, it does not magically know how to not amplify noise or how to not reduce noise when using it negative. Same with sharpening.
Conclusion: negative sharpness & negative clarity == noise reduction. They are just not as good as some dedicated noise reduction algorithms as they are not primarily coded to do noise reduction. They do have that effect however.

LR4 Feature request: Add local noise reduction

Hello,
I wish to apply noise reduction localy. On the backgroud apply a lot of and in forgroud (where the object/personn ist) a little.
See this example.
The current local noise reduction ist NOT the same as the one in the detail panel. It is a lof f less efficient.
Thanks

martin-s wrote:
...I had no idea there was a cut-off point...
The only people who know about it are the one's who hang out on this forum .
martin-s wrote:
I use negative sharpness combined with negative clarity and/or contrast for blur effects. It's not unusual that I stack multiple brushes when -100 isn't enough
Thanks for the tip. My problem with blurring in Lr is that the blurred region ends up "too clean" (the rest of the photo has at least a bit of noise in it). I have dealt with it in the past by applying grain to the blurred region using an external editor - but that takes a lot of the fun out of doing the blur in Lightroom.
Rob

"noise reduction" not applied to exported photos

I've always used iPhoto to slightly modify my photos, before exporting and sharing or uploading to Flickr.
But, since yesterday, the exported photos do not include my "Reduce Noise" modifications. When I export them, they include the color, retouch and so on, but they look as they were BEFORE I applied the "Reduce Noise" filter.
When I look at them in the browser, they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
When I press space to see them zoomed, they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
When I double-clic to switch to edit mode, they appear WITH noise reduction.
And when I export them (either by dragging and dropping to the desktop or an application, using the export function or opening in an external editor), they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
I have tried to delete the preferences of iPhoto, but the behaviour of iPhoto remains the same.
This applies to all the photos I've tried it onto. And this never happened before yesterday.
I didn't install anything new, I have no plug-ins or things like that. I've repaired the permissions, even restarted and zapped the PRAM. The only thing I've done recently is install Aperture with the 30 days trial offer. Could this be the origin of the problem?
iPhoto is an important tool for me and has always worked perfectly. I hope someone will help me solve what is a big problem for me.

I sent to the trash the iPhoto preferences I could find and launched it again
This time, I got the same behaviour, but also got console messages, as follows:
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BilateralFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS /BilateralFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01 and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05.
*18/05/08 00:51:18 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05 and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/RemoveBlemishFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/RemoveBlemishFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/RemoveBlemishFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/RemoveBlemishFilter.

Suggested Workflow when correcting Perspective in external Editor

I am using PTLens as an external editor to correct perspective distortion on wide angle shots. I'm writing a TIFF for PTLens and stacking it with the original RAW upon return to LR.
What would the recommended workflow be for doing that?
Do basic development first on RAW, then edit in PTLens, then crop?
Do edit in PTLens first, then go on with basic development on the TIFF?
I see the following issues:
After "burning" the TIFF for PTLens, I lose the ability to alter the corrections made on the RAW (e.g. local adjustments)
I need to do at least a crop in LR after correcting perspective in PTLens
Thanks for any suggestions.
Beat Gossweiler
Switzerland

Beat,
It is frustrating to have multiple version of the same images due to having to go to outside programs to perform certain functions. Ultimately, I believe LR will accommodate our needs in lens distortion as well as noise removal (and a few other key areas) in the RAW pipeline either through improved LR features or through the allowing of plug-ins directly into the pipeline. In the meantime, I use the following workflow (only for images that I take outside of LR, either PS or other programs, which is a few as possible):
1.     develop in LR using my camera specific default settings
2.     fix white balance as it seems to work best with the RAW file before conversion to TIFF (definately before conversion to JPEG)
3.     export to TIFF into outside program
4.     perform outside program modifications
5.     import the modified TIFF (hopefully automatically) back into LR
6.     stack the TIFF with the RAW and make the TIFF the top image (automatically if possible)
7.     make all other adjustments (cropping, exposure, adj brusth, etc.) to the TIFF, treating it as the negative
It seems to keep me from getting confused about which image to work on when in LR.
Everybody of course has their own strategy. Hopefully you will come up with one that works for you. Good luck.
Jeff

Feature Request: Option to Load Master in External Editor

Right now, if I want to edit a file in an external editor, Aperture makes a version first. While I understand the design reasoning, I need to override this behavior in two specific cases:
First, sometimes I want to use Adobe Camera Raw to process a RAW file. Aperture should allow me to do this directly from the application without exporting the master and loading it from the Finder.
Second, and this is more important for me, I'd like Aperture to send original layered PSD files as imported back to Photoshop for editing. Aperture will import my layered PSD files without difficulty. If I export the master, I get the original file. But if I try to open it in an external editor (Photoshop) from Aperture, Aperture makes a flattened intermediate version. That's not what I want - and it destroys my non-destructive workflow by flattening all my layers in Photoshop. What I'd like is an option to have Aperture send the master layered PSD file to Photoshop, allow me to edit it, and perhaps save the changes back in Aperture as modifications to the original layered PSD file.
There's an interesting semantic issue. "Non-destructive" is more than just not touching the original files. It's allowing for a workflow which can be rolled back to previous states. My work in Photoshop uses layers, masks, adjustments, and channels to achieve this. I need Aperture to allow me to keep using Photoshop in a non-destructive way, while enabling me to edit my RAWs and other flattened files in the powerful ways that Aperture offers.

Managing layered PSD files in Aperture
For those who absolutely must manage layered PSD files in Aperture, here is the way to do it...
1- In your original PSD file, HIDE ALL LAYERS above the background layer
2- IMPORT this PSD file into Aperture
3- CREATE A VERSION in Aperture by choosing to edit externally in Photoshop.
4- Back in Photoshop OPEN THE ORIGINAL PSD file along with the new version
5- LINK all the LAYERS in the original PSD file and DRAG them TO the new VERSION (holding the shift key down so they pin register)
6- SAVE the new version in Photoshop
7- Back in Aperture your version is now an exact layered copy of your original which will not flatten when reopened from Aperture into Photoshop.
Obviously this process will be rather tedious if you need to deal with hundreds of layered PSD files, but if you are in that situation that implies you already have a workflow and a storage strategy that works well for you. So why change, especially to Aperture?
Adobe Bridge or Media Pro or Portfolio are the obvious programs for you !
Dual 2ghz G5 Mac OS X (10.4.3)

How do I get imovie to use Photoshop Elements 12 as external editor?

How do I get imovie to use Photoshop Elements 12 as external editor? I am making a movie slide show with music from my Caribbean vacation photos and adding text captions to photos in PS Elements 12. I can also add some effects to photos like edge blur although I like iphotos effects better but iphoto doesn't seem to do text. The finished PS Elements photo doesn't seem to want to be shared by iphoto which is what imovie uses...
I am still learning to use PS Elements 12 for Mac (had PSE 7 for WinVista but wasn't proficient) and Mac and it's programs are new to me. I switch between my old Dell which is still amped for graphics and the new Mac mini. I started to use Movie Maker to do my vacation project but read that imovie was better but so far it doesn't seem to have as broad of file useage when it comes to imovie and photo files.
Hmmmmm??? What to do?

You simply need to create your stills with Photoshop Elements, save them in a suitable format (.jpg, .png, .tiff are all acceptable) then drag and drop them into your iMovie timeline. You don't have to use iPhoto.
Geoff.

External editors and read-only folders

I'm trying to use LR4 to work on NEF images I'd imported from a read-only directory. While regular LR4 editing works, using an external editor doesn't because LR4 insists on trying to write a file into that read-only directory. Is there a way to persuade LR4 to put the files it uses to communicate with external editors somewhere else? I intentionally want to keep my NEF directories read-only because they're synced with other programs (which would get upset by LR4 sneaking extra files in there) and because I don't want to accidentally alter anything there.

Not for secondary editors.
Only the primary Photoshop CSx can open a file wihtout creating it first. Then tiy ba use Save As from Photoshop to choose another location.

Aperture 1.5: External editor not bringing image back into Aperture?

Hi,
I am running Aperture 1.5 and have Noise Ninja installed as my external editor. I can successfully send an image from my Aperture library to NN and edit it there, but when I save the image, it is not brought back into Aperture. Further, if I try to send another image from Aperture to NN while NN is open, a new TIFF version is created in Aperture, but nothing opens up in NN.
I've been using Aperture and NN for about a year, and it has always acted like this, so I've basically given up on trying to use the External Editing feature in Aperture, but after some research it seemed like this shouldn't be as difficult as it has been for me.
Has anyone else had a problem like this and been able to resolve it? And does it matter that my files are referenced, and not stored in the Aperture library?
Thanks all
Burt

Burt,
Did you ever find a solution? I'm having the same problem with Photoshop files not saving back into Aperture. I haven't been able to figure it out.

Noise Reduction Programs as External Editor

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for