Photoshop workflow question

I read somewhere that using <ALT> + Click you can use to load alpha channels could someone verify what is the correct method ? And clipping only applies to the background layer when you apply a change to the canvas I was told but I'm unclear about this.

You mean to use guides? that's probably just to get reproduceable
effects so instead of dragging around until it "looks good", you drag
out a guide and then modify until your object hits that guide or
something like that. You'll probably see this in tutorials which want
to make sure that you're on the same page as them.
I'm probably going to have to go back and find that section of the tutorial regarding guides and the warp tool
The thing with Illustrator isn't that you need to save out .PDF files,
it's that when you save your .AI files you have to select the Create
PDF Compatible File checkbox otherwise you won't be able to open them
in Photoshop, Smart Objects or no. Just try to open such a file in
Photoshop, see what it tells you
I will do that, I'm just brushing up on some things with photoshop.  Many have photoshop but many cannot call themselves advanced users

Similar Messages

  • Lightroom/photoshop workflow question

    I have a scenario that I can't seem to get working the way I want.
    Scenario: I edit a file in photoshop with multiple layers (.tiff or .psd). I then add that file to my lightroom catalog and would like to have it automatically updated in lightroom when making changes in photoshop. I know this is possible when using the "Edit in Photoshop" option but I can't seem to get it working when I had the file in photoshop first.
    If I import the file into lightroom and then make changes in photoshop the changes are not applied in lightroom. If, in lightroom, I choose "edit in photoshop" then I get a flat image generated from the lightroom file that does not have all my previously created photoshop layers.

    If you have an image imported into LR then any changes to that image in, for example, PS will automatically be reflected in LR. Aside from being able to see previews in Library, all your Develop adjustments will still apply to the updated image too.
    There are two concepts that need to be understood here. Firstly, LR does not support editing in layers, it was never designed to do this, but neither does it destroy them if they exist. It simply processes whatever Develop adjustments you have to the whole image as if it were flat. Secondly, it is a non-destructive editing platform, which means that all adjustments made in LR stay in LR unless you export the image. Then the adjustments are used to create a new file and, bringing in concept one, this file would not have layers.
    So if you Edit In > Photoshop > Edit a copy with Lightroom Adjustments, then you’ll end up losing your layers.
    If you can put up with not having your Lightroom adjustments when you need to make pixel-level edits, then simply Edit In > Photoshop > Edit Original. Once you have finished your editing, save and overwrite the file and when you go back to LR, you will automatically have your new pixel-level edits + all your existing LR develop adjustments all in a file that retains its layers
    What’s more, there’s no reason why you can’t edit the file outside of LR. Because it’s already linked in the LR catalog, when you next open LR it will recognise that the image has changed and update the preview automatically. Using this method invariably means that some metadata changes. LR does not update externally modified metadata automatically but instead prompts you with an arrow in the top right of the grid and filmstrip previews. Clicking on this give you options on how to manage the metadata conflict.

  • Sharpening export workflow question

    I have a sharpening workflow question. Say I have pictures from a portrait session I just finished. I have to send 10 pictures the client ordered to a print lab and I also will make some small facebook sized pictures and upload them to my business facebook page. The level of sharpening needed for large prints (I upload to print lab as RGB JPEGS) and sharpening needed for the very small sRGB facebook-sized pictures is different. In Lightroom I have the option to set the sharpening on export and have a bunch of presets that alter the export size, color space, sharpening, etc(WHCC print lab, facebook, Client CD, etc). I don't see how to do that in Aperture. I see they have the option if you have a printer, but not on normal export.
    For those of you that have to export batches of pictures in multiple different sizes (with different levels of sharpening), what is your workflow? I could use some photoshop droplets/actions after Aperture export but I was hoping there was a way to avoid the extra step. Am I overlooking an export feature? The BorderFX plug-in looks like the only other option.
    Thank you in advance for time and help!
    Scott

    Frank Scallo Jr wrote:
    The thing is guys - Once a file is sized down it WILL lose sharpening - what we are doing is sharpening the full size RAW file or rather what the full size output would be like. Once we export a version sized down it will lose some of the 'bite'. LR has sharpening options on 'output' which is not only smart but a necessity. Adobe realizes that output for screen needs another sharpen. Apple either doesn't know or didn't bother. It makes ANY output for screen less than best.
    Bear in mind that there seem to be two separate issues going on here - sharpening adjustments not being applied on export, and resizing.
    As far as resizing is concerned, Aperture appears to use something roughly equivalent to Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper setting. Because of this I've never had much problem with Aperture's exports when used for the web, but obviously everyone's taste for sharpening differs which is why an option for output sharpening would be good.
    Sharpening adjustments not being applied on export is a separate issue and should be reported via the feedback form ASAP by everyone who is experiencing the bug.
    Now printing is another animal - I wouldn't print directly from RAW in aperture either if I'm printing small. Again, LR beats Aperture here as well since they include output sharpening for print.
    Aperture has had output sharpening for printing since 2.0 came out (unless it in was 1.5). In A3 you need to turn on 'More Options' and scroll down, I can't remember where it is in A2. I don't know how effective it is as I print via a lab, but it's there and it's been there for a long time...
    Ian

  • RED Workflow questions with Mac Pro (including third party plugins)

    Hello all,
    I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
    Here is what I’m working with:
    2014 Mac Pro
    -2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
    -64GB Ram
    -Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
    -1TB Flash Storage
    Editing all footage off 96TB Raid 6 mini-sas server (getting about 1100mbs read/write rate according to AJA system test) which is faster than any Thunderbolt/TB2 drive array I have.
    Media I work with is footage from the RED Epic (normally 5K) as well as DSLR footage from the 5d.
    Software:
    -PrPro CC 2014 (8.1)
    -Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
    My question(s) pertains to RED post-pro workflow in combination with third party plug-ins and the different approaches to make it more efficient.
    Right now, majority of the clients need a 1080p HD master, and they are generally anywhere from 2-8 minutes (usually). So my sequence settings are as follows:
    Video:
    Editing Mode: RED Cinema
    Size: 1920 x 1080
    Audio: 48Hz
    Video Previews
    Preview File Format: I-Frame Only MPEG
    Codec: MPEG I-Frame
    1920x1080
    Maximum Bit Depth unchecked
    Maximum Render Quality unchecked
    Composite in Linear Color checked
    Export Settings
    H.264
    1920x1080
    VBR 1 pass
    Target Bitrate 12mbs
    Max bitrate 12mbs
    Maximum render quality/depth/previews unchecked
    Issues I have:
    -Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
    -Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
    So my questions are:
    Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
    Would using offline editing help at all?
    Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
    Is there anyway to improve export settings when using an array of filters?
    Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
    Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
    Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?

    Hi This Is Ironclad,
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Hello all,
    I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
    The biggest issue is that most people have is that updating OS X causes certain folders to be set to Read Only. See this blog post: Premiere Pro CC, CC 2014, or 2014.1 freezing on startup or crashing while working (Mac OS X 10.9, and later).
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Hello all,
    I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
    Here is what I’m working with:
    2014 Mac Pro
    -2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
    -64GB Ram
    -Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
    -1TB Flash Storage
    It's a nice base system. How about an additional speedy disk for media cache files. You also did not mention which version of OS X you are running.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Software:
    -Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
    The Red Giant website does not indicate that this software is yet updated to work with Premiere Pro CC 2014.1 (8.1). Proceed with caution here.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Issues I have:
    -Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
    I would not use this plug-in until you get the OK from the manufacturer.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    -Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
    Again, I suspect your plug-in.
    Keep in mind that exports are largely CPU based but you can make sure that GPU acceleration is enabled for AME at the bottom of the Queue panel.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    So my questions are:
    Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
    It's OK.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Would using offline editing help at all?
    No need when you should be able to edit natively. Relinking might also be an issue.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
    That's one way you can do it with the benefit of being more organized.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
    I do. Of course, that's a preference.
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
    Try the following:
    Sign out from Creative Cloud, restart Premiere Pro, then sign in
    Update any GPU drivers
    Trash preferences
    Ensure Adobe preference files are set to read/write(Hopefully you checked this out already)
    Delete media cache
    Remove plug-ins
    If you have AMD GPUs, make sure CUDA is not installed
    Repair permissions
    Disconnect any third party hardware
    If you have a CUDA GPU, ensure that the Mercury Playback Engine is set to CUDA, not OpenCLYou have AMD GPUs.
    Disable App Nap
    Reboot
    thisisironclad wrote:
    Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?
    I really shouldn't answer that question.
    Hope this helps.
    Thanks,
    Kevin

  • Yet Another Workflow Question

    Ok I too, like many others here, am new to the Mac (thanks to Apple's I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ads that my wife couldn't get enough of). I have done some searching around and I see that there are quite a few iMovie workflow questions out there. I have not quite found what I am looking for however, so I thought I would make my first post tonight. So here it goes...
    I have 3 different ways I capture video:
    1. Canon Vixia HF10 (HD)
    2. Canon Powershot (SD)
    3. Blackberry Storm (SD...I know it isn't a good phone)
    I record everything to SD cards. I am wanting to know the best way to store my raw video for editing at any time. Do I copy the AVCHD file structure (for the Vixia) and .avi files (for the other non HD) to my hdd, or do I just import into iMovie '09 and let it reside there, or both? I noticed that iMovie had an archival option (which appears to just copy the AVCHD structure to my hdd), which is why I ask. I want to always keep my raw video in case I decide to go back later and create a new video.
    After I have the raw video archived, I would like to know the best way to use iMovie. Depending on where I end up storing the raw video, should I keep the imported video in iMovie once I am finished with a project, and then reimport it at a later date if need be? Or, do I leave it in iMovie as events? I guess this all rely depends on the first question...where do I store the raw video for archival purposes...
    Finally, when exporting my iMovie project, should I store that in more of a, pardon the Windows reference, "My Videos" folder with a original size, web optimized size, and ipod optimized size? Thus, keeping the actual exported version of the project separate from the raw video?
    I hope I have asked the right questions here. I appreciate any and all help I can get!
    Ron

    Welcome Ron to the  iMovie boards..
    very interesting : 'switchers' care sooo much for 'storage strategies' ..
    the by Apple intended workflow/concept for iApps is:
    any 'photocam' related material (still or movin') comes-in via iPhoto, and is stored in an iP Library (=you can tell iP to create 2/many Libs, if you prefer to organize manually....)
    any 'camcorder' related material HAS to be imported by iM - why? because, iM has some internal routines to make such material editable (codecs, thumnails, stuff....). the same material as 'file by Finder' does not import.. in most cases!
    storage..
    iP stores in its Library (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
    iM stores in Events (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
    to make Projects/Albums accessible to any iApp, you should keep your fingers off that structure.
    Erasing Events 'kills' projects.
    allthough, once 'shared to media browser' there's a 'copy' of your project WITHIN the project file. (= the socalled Media Browser is no single Folder somewhere hidden in the system)
    there's this Spacesaver feature to erase any Event content which is not in use in any project to keep Events lean.
    use the Archive feature from within iM to keep things easy and convenient.. if you miss a single file of the SDcard file-structure, the whole card's content is kaputt ..
    summary:
    • use iApps as intended.
    • use iP for cameras, it stores 'raws' (the avi too)
    • use iM for camcorders, use Archive to store raws..
    • purchase a dozend of HDDs to store your material..

  • Lightroom to Photoshop CC noise/sharpening workflow question

    Most of my images I process 100% in Lightroom.  HOWEVER, I do at times need to send and image from Lightroom over to Photoshop CC to finish.  Then when finished in CC the image goes back to Lightroom 5 as a TIFF.   My question is should I apply sharpening and noise reduction in LR5 prior to sending the image to CC?  Or should I apply sharpening and noise reduction after the end of the round trip to CC and back when the image arrives back in LR5 as a TIFF.  And yes I have tried a number of different ways.  I have tried sending the same image from LR5 with sharpening and NR applied as I would if I were finished. I have sent the same image over to CC with just the default sharpen and noise settings AND I have zeroed out the settings.  I sent all images to CC as 16bit TIFF.   I tried those various ways and have gotten mixed results.  So I was looking for someone with expertise as to what the best procedure is to take when using this workflow. 

    Getting mixed results is normal as it depends on the initial image and what happens in PS.  If you’re changing the overall toning or local contrast in PS then the noise will be different and probably needs more tweaking afterwards.
    I would generally go part way toward my final Detail settings in LR, then do what I have to do in PS, then do more in either PS or LR as appropriate.
    What I usually do in PS is use Smart Sharpen after I’ve resized down to whatever my final size is—usually my screen size for desktop wallpaper, because I like how PS SS works, an in that case I’ve probably done all my Detail work in LR and only do the resize and SS in PS.

  • Adobe dng and Photoshop Elements Workflow Question

    My camera isn't supported by the Camera Raw  for the PSE version that I have so I must convert the original raws into dngs using the DNG Converter. 
    Since the converterr doesn't operate on a file but only on a folder basis, I find that a workflow involves converting all the raws in a folder first and that nearly doubles the storage required.  But in any one folder I might have only a few raws that I am actually interested in.  But I don't see that there is any way to be working in PSE come across a file (using the jpeg image) that I want to work with and then convert just that image.  This would be a better workflow and save a lot of space.
    The alternative seems to involve running though all the folders, noting the image numbers and then moving all those raws to a new folder and convert it before I can sit down to serious work. 
    Any suggestions on how to have a smoother process?
    Thanks.

    You're making it much more complicated than it has to be. If you make a shortcut for  the DNG converter on your windows desktop or for a mac, a desktop alias or put the converter in the Dock, you can just drop a single file on it. The converter will open and you can ignore the stuff in the window except for the destination for the converted file, and click Convert.

  • Please help me Automate an Aperture/Photoshop workflow

    I'm trying to streamline the process of exporting a RAW file from Aperture to Photoshop for editing and then re-importing it into Aperture. I have zero experience with Automator, but someone else on the Discussions site was kind enough to share hte Automator process he uses for this.
    Problem is, I can't get mine to work (or I don't know how to make it work).
    I created a folder called "Photoshop-IN" where I would export the RAW files from Aperture that need editing. Then I created a folder called "Aperture-IN" where the completed Photoshop files would be exported for re-import into Aperture. Then I created this workflow:
    http://homepage.mac.com/chriskresser/PhotoAlbum16.html
    I think the workflows are correct, but I don't know what to do at this point. The original poster said something about making them "watched folders", but I have no idea what that means or how to do that.
    To test the workflows, I tried exporting a RAW photo from Aperture to a "Photoshop-IN" folder. Then I opened Automator and clicked the play button for the designated workflow. It tells me it executed properly, but nothing happens. The CR2 file wasn't opened in Photoshop, is still in the folder, and didn't get moved to the trash.
    I also tested the other workflow (getting PSD file back into Aperture), and that doesn't seem to be working either. With this workflow, I get the following message. "Aperture got an error. Some parameter wasn't understood. (-1715)".
    What am I doing wrong? I realize that this might be pretty far off topic, as it is more a question of how to use Automator and possibly AppleScript. But any help would be appreciated, including direction to some resources where I could learn more about Automator (the help section is woefully inadequate!)
    Thanks again,
    Chris
    G5 2.0 dual-core   Mac OS X (10.4.3)   17" Apple LCD, iSight, Bluetooth Keyboard & Logitech Cordless Laser Mouse

    Your PS-in workflow is too complex, all it needs is a Finder action to open in PS:
    http://www.azurevision.co.uk/aperture/open-in-ps-action.jpg
    Then File>Save as Plug-in..., choose 'Folder Actions' and then where it asks what folder to attach it to, navigate to your folder. Now, every file that is copied, moved or saved into that folder will be opened in PS.
    The import into Aperture workflow is mostly OK, but you are passing a folder from the first action, not files. Try adding a 'Get Folder Contents' action just after the first action. With a bit of jiggling around and using the two actions of that workflow you should be able to save it as a folder action.
    A couple more threads using a slightly different approach:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1292903
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1372571
    Basically these export a RAW file out to a watched folder (as you are trying to do), but instead of saving it out and re-importing into Aperture, a duplicate file is made in Aperture by using 'Open in external editor' and saving the converted file into that.
    Ian

  • How do I integrate SpeedGrade into my Photoshop workflow?

    This will likely sound insane, since SpeedGrade is obviously geared toward video projects, and Photoshop toward processing of still photos, but please hear me out.
    I love Photosop CS6, and my absolute favorite new feature is the Color Lookup adjustment layer. So far, I've been extremely happy with the effects I've been able to pull off by combining that with other adjustment layers, channel work, etc.
    However, I've gotten to the point where I realize that my next step -- much like a user who graduates up from using actions he/she downloads off of DeviantArt -- is to make my own color lookup tables. The only tool at my disposal for this is SpeedGrade. (I have a CS6 cloud membership -- off topic, but way to go, Adobe, that made it feasible for me to "graduate" from only having Photoshop CS5.1 to having the full suite at a very reasonable price!)
    I've used SpeedGrade on video clips I've shot with my Canon 5D MkII to great effect. Nothing I'd post publicly yet (I'm still learning how to shoot motion), but I considered the results to be very positive. I've managed to save several test .look files, as well, both on video footage and still images (JPGs, to be specific).
    I always shoot RAW, and my usual workflow is to start in Aperture (I'm a Mac user), do some basic RAW adjustments, then export a 16-bit PSD and get down to the real work in Photoshop. SpeedGrade doesn't yet seem to support PSDs natively, so in order to create a .look which is appropriate for my image, it currently looks like I need to export a JPG (down to 8-bit sRGB, ugh) from Photoshop, then open THAT in SpeedGrade, do my work, save my .look, go BACK into Photoshop, and use the .look file there.
    I could live with that if -- IF -- the .look file actually gave me my expected results. However, the only time the .look behaves exactly the same in Photoshop as it does in SpeedGrade seems to be if I open the image as a JPG -- thus losing all my layers, adjustments, smart objects, etc. When I apply any of my .look files to a PSD, they come entirely too dark, every time. Many of them have simply turned an image into a large 22 megapixel black rectangle.
    So my question is this: How do I make a SpeedGrade .look file behave predictably in Photoshop, in a 16-bit-per-channel PSD file? I'm OK with changing the color space if I have to (even if it's to sRGB, the bane of my existence) -- but I need to see the same thing in SG that I do in PS. Is this possible today, or am I waiting on the next SG release? Or, and I assume this to be the case -- as I'm a software engineer by trade, and know that this is almost always the case! -- is this a case of user error? And if so, what can I do to correct my user error?
    Or, sacriligious as it may seem since I have all of Adobe's tools, are there other Mac-based products I can use to create color lookup files compatible with Photoshop?
    In case it matters, here's my platform:
    Canon 5D MkII, latest firmware, always shoot RAW
    Apple Aperture 3.2.3 (sorry, Adobe, but ... y'know.)
    Mac OS 10.7 (late 2011 MacBook Pro 17", 16 GB RAM)
    Adobe Creative Suite 6 Cloud Subscription (photo, illustration, video tools installed; no Flash nor web tools)

    Speedgrade does some funny things converting the image encoding with video, jpegs, exr files, etc.
    Unfortunately, I never found documentation of exact what they do with each input format.
    Sometimes they seem to convert the image data to linear (gamma 1.0) before processing, and sometimes they leave it alone.
    So, it is possible, if you can figure out the rules that SpeedGrade is using, and if you can figure out all the controls in SpeedGrade.
    As you may have noticed, that is not an application for a casual user :-)
    Also, Photoshop only uses the color part of the .look - not the blurring or vignetting stuff that SpeedGrade can also do.
    Now, I'd keep at it -- it took me about a week to learn the basics of SpeedGrade (even if I didn't figure it all out).
    But in the end, I wrote my own tools to create most of the color lookup presets that ship with Photoshop CS6 (because it was easier in some cases, and because no tool existed to do what I wanted in a few cases).
    Yes, before you ask, I'm trying to figure out ways to make my tools more user friendly so we could include them in Photoshop.

  • Workflow Question - Recently moved from PC to Mac

    So, let me say that I'm a die hard Windows user -- in fact, in my "day job" I own a software development company and we're a "Microsoft shop". But, my side business is Photography and I'm making the switch to the Mac & Aperture. So, what I'm hoping to get from this post is a "yes, you can do that" or a "no, you can't do that" with Aperture. I'm happy to figure out how -- I just need someone to tell me if it's possible.
    Here's my current workflow (coming from the PC - which required several applications to accomplish these steps):
    1) Import images and rename "IMG_1234.CR2" to "1234.CR2" -- essentially dropping the "IMG_" from the name. Is this possible w/ Aperture?
    2) Do all of the processing on the images (No questions here yet -- got that pretty well figured out in Aperture).
    3) Create a black & white version of each image. Currently doing this by making a duplicate version in Aperture. But, I would like it to be named "1234-BW.CR2" rather than just have "version 2" tacked on the end. Is this possible in Aperture?
    4) "Develop" the pics into jpg's. Again, the final image names should be "1234.jpg" and "1234-BW.jpg" respectively. Again, the question has to do with renaming the original & duplicate version of the image.
    5) Choose all of the color versions of the photos and then selectively pick some of the b/w versions and export them to a "Web" size along w/ Thumbnail versions that will be posted on my web site. (Again, this should be easy if I can name things like I want them to be named in question 3 & 4.)
    So, right now I'm the biggest thing that I'm having a problem with in naming the images -- how flexible is Aperture with this? I've tried to customize the naming but can't see to figure out how to simply remove the "IMG_" when importing and then how to tack on "-BW" when creating a duplicate version.
    So far I really like Aperture -- it will ultimately save me from having to use 5 different applications on the PC and thus greatly improve the efficiency of my workflow. There are some things I've noticed that would be nice -- for example, on the PC I used a program called Bibble Pro to "develop" my Canon RAW files. Bibble is a little smoother (read faster) when making some adjustments. For example, when I'm in full screen mode and adjust the exposure, contrast or sharpening Aperture is not as smooth and "real-time" as Bibble. (And, the Mac I have is the top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I would assume that processor speed is not an issue.)
    Anyway, if you have any insight into this post please let me know. Thanks in advance for any help you can provide... If you want to see my web site to understand what I'm doing the URL is http://www.level3photography.com/proofs.aspx
    Thanks again!
    TK Herman
    [email protected]
    iMac   Mac OS X (10.4.8)  

    ...the Mac I have is the
    top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I
    would assume that processor speed is not an issue...
    Many folks from other disciplines think that applications should, well, just run on any computer. Not so with graphics apps. Photoshop, for instance, slows if not provided a second physical hard drive for scratch disk; Aperture craves GPU hardware; both gobble RAM; etc. Existing PSCS2 Photoshop performance improves up to 8 GB RAM, and we have not yet empirically determined the max amount of RAM Aperture will benefit from but it certainly is more than 2 GB.
    iMacs are consumer machines, not pro graphics boxes, even though many folks successfully use them as such. And, "top of the line iMac made today" would include not the 7300 GT graphics but the 7600 GT graphics card and 3 GB of RAM rather than 2 GB.
    All that said, your iMac should run Aperture well if you keep the box well maintained. Just don't be surprised if you do see some hardware imposed limitations.
    -Allen Wicks

  • Aperture 3 and Photoshop workflow

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

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

  • RAW workflow question

    I have begun using the RAW format on my Canon dRebel and I am having some difficulties in figuring out what my workflow should be. I found the post below in this discussion group, but I am not sure I completely understand the process around converting RAW files in an external program.
    This is what I have tried to do:
    1. in Photoshop Elements 3 I click Open and navigate to the folder containing the RAW files (if I control-click the RAW file in iPhoto and select Edit in External Editor it opens a JPG version of the file in PSE3 bypassing the Camera RAW application)
    2. I make the necessary adjustments and convert the file to JPG at which point I "replace" the JPG in the iPhoto Library
    This does not seem to be working as I am either unable to read the file after or iPhoto will not reflect the new version.
    Any help would be appreciated.
    Michel
    PS: Bonus question: I copied all my old jpg files to the picture directory before launching iPhoto for the first time and importing them into the library. Do I now have duplicates of all files that were on the harddrive before doing the import? Can I delete these to free up space?
    Jan,
    I should have been more clear. Importing from the camera or a reader is the same. If the camera is not supported, it won't work from either as its the RAW file format that determines compatibility. If the RAW files imported into iPhoto the format is supported and you will now have an iPhoto generated JPEG for each RAW file imported.
    If you double click on a thumbnail, it will open in edit mode (or an external editor if configured to do so) in its JPEG form.
    To edit the RAW file you need to drag the thumbnail into your favorite RAW editor and save that converted file in your choice of format outside of the iPhoto library.
    If you double click an image and then want your RAW file back to drop into a RAW editor, you need to select the thumbnail, right/control click, and select "Revert to Original".
    Also, I believe the E1's RAW format is supported since the 10.4.3 update.
    Hope this helped!
    Sam

    Hi Michel,
    I don't do RAW but I can point you to an Apple article. Is RAW supported for your camera? Meaning does iPhoto import the RAW files and put them in an Originals folder in the iPhoto Library folder in the Finder?
    Supported RAW cameras
    iPhoto 5 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): Working with RAW images
    Working with RAW in iPhoto 5
    For the bonus question. You can delete the jpg files you have in the Pictures folder as they were copied into iPhoto's database (the iPhoto Library folder in the Finder) when they were imported into iPhoto.
    Lori

  • Photoshop CS4 question   (Tiles)

    Sirs,
    I have tried asking the Photoshop CS4 technical support a question which they are so far unable to answer - perhaps this forum can provide an answer.
    The question: Located within Photoshop CS4 there is the option to install "Bigger Tiles". Several technical websites have stated that in is important to install the bigger tiles to improve the performance of CS4 and not installing causes Cs4 to run slower and less efficiently. So what is Adobe's opinion on installing the bigger tiles?  To be clear - the option to install is included within Cs4 and the tiles are not an external 3rd party application - I say this to be clear since your technical support on the phone (4 times) had never heard of  Bigger Tiles.
    Ron Wilson Imaging
    Ron Wilson

    What follows refers specifically to CS4, but it's not from Adobe at all.  Just passing this on, for whatever it may be worth:
    Be clear on this: Adobe’s advice as of January 2009 is stale. Plugins  that Adobe either doesn’t enable or even include by default are critical  to performance!
    Use the Bigger Tiles plugin in conjunction with DisableScratchCompress plugin.  Failure to use these plugins results in a penalty of up to 50% on Mac OS X in any “decent” configuration (over  100% for Photoshop CS3). It’s bizarre that Adobe calls these  “legacy” plugins, because they have a massive performance impact. Download the Plugins
    Bigger Tiles is critical
    The Bigger Tiles plugin in  particular is absolutely critical to performance in most cases,  especially with large files. Using Photoshop CS4 11.0.1, I measured  these bizarre results with and without Bigger Tiles on both a 2.8GHz 2008 Mac Pro and a 2.93GHz 2009 Mac Pro  Nehalem. I confirmed with Rob-Art at barefeats.com that same behavior; the culprit seems  to be the Smart Sharpen function, which  runs far more slowly without Bigger Tiles.
    Even if the scratch disk is not being used (no disk  writes are observed),  using the Bigger Tiles plugin is essential.
    Possible exception: if you use files with numerous (50  or more) layers, Bigger Tiles might or might not help, or could be  slower. Test your own particular workflow.
    From:
    http://macperformanceguide.com/OptimizingPhotoshop-Configuration.html
    Wo Tai Lao Le
    我太老了

  • Colour Space / Workflow question.

    Hi,
    I have been seconded to take photos at an up and coming family wedding.
    I will be using a Canon 300D Digital SLR, shooting in RAW, and performing post processing on a Mac using Aperture (yet to be purchased).
    I have established that my print lab works in the Adobe 1998 colour space. So, please let me know if I have the this right:
    As long as my screen is calibrated, and I work in and save my images as Adobe 1998, my prints should accurately resemble what was present on my screen?
    Is there a preference for which format (jpg, tiff, etc.) the images should be saved in for ensuring accurate print output from a pro lab ? They charge per print for RAW conversion, so I'm looking at saving finals as TIFF as the logical alternative.
    Also - can someone tell me if I should necessarily set the camera parameters to any particular colour space ? On the Canon, I have the option to set Adobe RGB, or a number of Canon pre-sets, or in fact set my own pre-sets for tone, colour saturation etc. Does this even matter if I'm shooting in RAW ?
    Any other advice on how I can ensure consistency in this workflow for this and future projects ?
    Sorry for all the questions, but many thanks,
    Paul
    MacBook Pro   Mac OS X (10.4.7)   23" Cinema Display

    I took your advice and sought more info from my lab.
    They have provided me with a calibration image on CD
    as well as a print of the same to do some side by
    side comarison with my monitor. They also provided a
    colour settings file for Photoshop. Armed with all of
    this I seem to be getting closer to understanding the
    necessary adjustments (although I temporarily
    confused things by introducing my home printer into
    the equation, until I realised that this thing also
    has it's own colour settings).
    To me, it sounds like the color settings file for Photoshop is most likely the color profile data I was talking about - does it end in .icc? What are the instructions for installation?
    After you install it you can check the "Proofing Profile" dropdown in Aperture to see if you see anything like it - you'll need to restart Aperture after you install the icc profile (I think).
    You can import the image from teh CD into Aperture and try using the proofing with the color profile sent to see how close it looks.
    Basically the idea of the proofing and the profile is that by turning on on-screen proofng, you are taking the colors you have and seeing how the smaller range of color availaible in the printer will reflect what you have.. this gives you the ability to alter tones until the image you have better fits into the range of colors the printer can produce.
    I haven't purchased Aperture yet, but I presume there
    will be a way to invoke settings similar to the
    colour settings in Photoshop so that what I'm seeing
    in Aperture will be consistent ?
    Yes, sorry for the above then which will be of little use until you get Aperture - basically there is a "Proofing Profile" dropdown and a command to enable or disable "Onscreen Proofing" (which is just like CS2's "Proof Colors").
    Aperture makes use of any color profile defined in the system, so hopefully the installation instructions are for general OS X color profile installation. If it's an icc file you can install it for use with all of OS X.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what you're saying
    it actually makes no difference what parameters I
    specify in my camera if I'm shooting in RAW ? This is
    good to know, as the Adobe RGB setting in the Canon
    is actually quite 'washed out' - and I'd prefer to
    keep it in one of the sRGB settings for my 'snaphot /
    home printing' needs wheh shooting jpegs. So,
    provided I export in Aperture to Adobe RGB (my lab's
    preference) and work with a calibrated screen I
    should be okay ?
    Yes, all true. I just want to make sure to note that the choice of color profile does make a difference shooting JPG as it will affect the colors that are defined in the file (and the viewing of them in a browser), but from your comment above it seems you understood that aspect.
    I calibrated my current monitor (using software only
    at this stage). Does it particulary matter which
    colour space I choose to start from, if I'm modifying
    brightness, gamma, temperature etc. to save as a
    custom profile ?
    I'm not sure here what you mean by "color space you choose to start from".
    Also for profiling even a cheap device like the Huey would probably be a lot better than the software profiling - I went that route at first as well but the hardware stuff is worth it.
    One last, slightly dumb, question. Are "Adobe RGB
    1998" and "Adobe RGB" the same thing ?
    Yep, pretty much the same thing by slightly different names.

  • TIP:  Photoshop Workflow that WORKS (for me)

    Been thinking about this for a while and have figured out a workflow that integrates photoshop(PS) editing quite well with Lightroom (LR).
    My goals.
    *Export to PS in TIF PSD or jpg.
    *Autoimport back to library for stacking with original once edited
    *Avoid excessive browsing while exporting and importing.
    Solution involves use of Autoimport to a 'SORT' folder.
    It is mainly for use with single images that I want to pay extra attention to.
    Here are the steps.
    1. Create 2 new empty folders somewhere accessible. This can be done with the '+' key in the Folders panel. I have mine in my root photo directory. Call them Develops and 1ASORTBOX (the 1A means your sortbox will be at the top of your folder list in LR).
    D:\Develops
    D:\1A SORTBOX
    2. File>Auto Import>Auto Import Settings...
    - Set Watched folder to D:\Develops
    - Set Destination to D:\1A SORTBOX
    - Set Subfolder to Misc
    - File naming :filename
    3. Find a RAW file that needs photoshopping. Develop.
    4. Export to destination D:\Develops
    - choose format etc. FILENAME can remain the same!
    - EXPORT
    You will now see your file appear in the 1A sortbox/misc foler at the top of the list. Develops folder stays empty.
    I created the Misc subfolder so that I can specify subfolders in the future if I want. In the meantime, they all go to misc, but I view them by selecting the top level 1Asortbox folder (all subfolder items remain visible) and sort from there.
    5. select the image in the sortbox - then ctrl-E to edit in PS.
    you can also automatically open the file in PS by selecting that option during export - but you end up with 2 files when you save - this works because PS tries to save the file in the develops folder which is then autoimported)
    - edit the original.
    - Edit in PS and save.
    6. Drag the edited file to the same directory as it's parent RAW and stack it there. (I keep my edited one on the top of the stack becuase that is the one that will be exported when I do a batch export) It can be the same filename as the original. (I wish we could stack across subfolders)
    This method speeds things up a bit for me.
    I avoid having to select an output directory every time I want to export a PSD for editing. The export directory is always set on D:\Develops. It is so handy to have the file autoimported with all metadata intact (including heirarchical keywords). Much easier to drag the images from the sortbox folder destingation folder than to find and reimport single images manually.
    I then use the Ctrl-E edit in PS function if I want to edit these files further. Choose edit original - save will overwrite your PS edits. If you want to keep the original edit, then edit as a copy or create a virtual copy first.
    Hope this helps those struggling with the whole PS integration thing. Sorry its so long - it find it hard to explain these things.
    Any suggestions to improve this would be fantastic.
    Cheers
    KEv
    PS still trying to get my serial email. Grrr.

    I have used this workflow for developing a few shoots and it has been working a treat. Makes lightroom a pleasure to use for me now.
    The automation results in a RAW and jpg in the same folder with same name. Good for stacking and keeping a clean reference system.
    I discovered a bug that occurs with the samename RAW/jpg in the same folder. Posted a thread here:
    http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc3493d
    Basically if you rename the jpg, the RAW gets renamed too. And you can move the jpg around in grid mode properly. If you don't need to rename or move the jpgs around then the workflow is fine.
    So I've made a slight adjustment to the workflow which auto renames the developed jpg.
    The steps are now:
    1. Export from LR to watched folder d:\develops
    - in the export dialog, make sure you select 'open in photoshop' in the dropdown menu.
    After this step you get a jpg (or whatever format you choose) in the sortbox with same name as the RAW, and the file open in PS.
    2. Edit and ctrl-S in Photoshop
    - photoshop will save the edited image to the develops folder (because this is where it opened the image from). LR then auto imports to the SORTBOX folder. Because there is already a jpg with the same name in the sortbox, LR will automantically rename the jpg with filename_2.
    3. Delete the original export jpg from the sortbox and move the edited filename_2.jpg to the destination RAW folder for stacking.
    The filename will be different and not be affected by the bug described. Still very quick and easy, possibly better if you don't mind the changed filename.
    Kev

Maybe you are looking for

  • How to set up multiple streams on one PC

    Hi there, can anyone guide me in setting up multiple streams using the FLME and different sources? thanks,

  • Ipod not recognised in ITunes. My solution (try this - worked for me!)

    Hello. i had IPOD 30GB vid for Xmas and have spent 3 days surfing through info trying to find out why itunes did not recognise it! I could see it in my computer but not itunes. I tried everything - and I mean EVERYTHING. I reinstalled, rebooted, rest

  • WebDAV Navigation and Japanese

    Hi All, I have an English Windows XP with the following settings within Control Panel -> Regional and Language Options: 1. Regional Options tab's Standards and Formats is set to Japanese. 2. Languages tab has had "Install files for East Asian languag

  • System migration / Cloning - Copying to temp HDD then copy back to new Mac

    Well, what I need... An instruction how and using what to copy/clone my system firstly to external USB drive then to other (same) Macbook. Precisely, I have MacBook black one, 80Gb, external HDD is 120Gb... used space on OS X (10.4.8) partition is 34

  • Quicktime Video hangs while audio plays fine

    I have tried everthing to configure Quicktime to play videos with looking like a set of flashcards. I have upgraded to all the latest versions. I unchecked the "Enable direct3d video acceleration" in the Control Paned Quicktime Preferences and have s