Question about Aperture Presets

I've been using Aperture 3 for a few years now and have collected a number of adjustment presets. I was wondering if there is a way of finding out by looking at a any particular version which preset might have been used on that image? It's easy to tell if adjustments have been made to any image, but not if the adjustments made were part of a preset or not. I know I can lift and stamp any adjustments, but sometimes I'd like to know what preset was used to make a particular version. As an example, I've recently been using VSCO Film presets with some pretty good results, and often times I'll go back to a particular image and I can't tell if the adjustments I made were part of a VSCO Film preset and which particular preset was used. Is there a simple way of finding this out? Does anyone else think this would be a good thing to be able to find out?
Thanks.

I use Keywords for external editors (PTLens, PS, Hugin, various Nik tools, etc.), but I would advise you to think hard on whether you want to use them for Adjustment Presets. As Frank pointed out, the Preset is in no way absolute: it's simply a collection of Adjustments, any one of which can be disabled, changed, or deleted. It's simply a way to batch-apply Adjustments.
All the information you need to know about what you've done to create a Version from a Master is directly in front of you: the Bricks and their settings as shown in the Adjustments tab of the Inspector. You can likely tell at a glance if you started with your VSCO Preset.
You might get part-way to your goal by creating Smart Folders that filter for Images that have all of the Adjustments used in your Preset. Of course the grouping "these Adjustments are included in Preset X" is not likely to be unique.

Similar Messages

Question about Aperture slide shows

Question about Aperture slide shows. How can I eliminate banding in a blue sky when photos are displayed in Aperture Slide shows?

What kind of banding? Do you have a screenshot?
It could be jpg compression related, I think the previews are all jpgs.

Several Questions about Aperture Problems

Having used Aperture for some time, and being a Mac user since 1985, I have a list of questions about Aperture that I need help with.
1. Periodically operating the sliders will make an image turn black. Sometimes this is early in a session, sometimes late. Various workarounds will bring the image back, but once this starts, quitting seems the only option. Can anyone help me with why this happens and how to stop it?
2. About 20% of the RAW files from my supported camera display the Unsupported Image Format error screen. These files operate perfectly in the manufacturers software and in other image management software that does not use the OS RAW libraries. Can someone help me with the cause of this and the solution (not a "workaround" but a way to make it stop happening).
3. ALL of my RAW files from my supported camera, when I try to lift metadata, return the error message that there is no metadata to lift. But in fact, the metadata inspector displays metadata. How can I stop this from happening and experience normal metadata lifting?
4. When I use the DNG format from my supported camera, a great many EXIF fields do not display, such as lens data. Can someone help me with DNG files, since these never generate the UIF error screen (cf. #2 above) as the manufacturer's RAW files do. I'm forced to use DNGs to have all my shots, but the EXIF data is not fully displayed.
5. Today I opened Aperture and no previews would display. Aperture froze while updating thumbnails. I'd not done any non-routine edits or imported any unusual files or formats. Aperture then would not quit. Is it safe to attempt to restart Aperture?
6. At times Aperture slows to the point of not working at all. Long pauses simply in trying to enlarge the selection circles for redeye removal, for example. What would cause Aperture to slow down without warning at any point in the workflow? How can I experience a more consistent operating speed from Aperture.
7. How do other image management programs like Lightroom compare on these points? Is Aperture typical or should I seek a change in my workflow, improvement in my hardware, or some adjustment in my installation?
Info: MacBook Pro, 4 GB RAM (apple), 320 GB drive, 45 GB free on drive; library of 3800 images. Fewer than 12 projects.
Thanks for your assistance.

n #3. It looks like you're absolutely right on this. I went back and checked on photos I'd edited and there was the altered metadata. +Many thanks for dispelling that concern!+ I love being a happy camper. Check that one off the list!
On 1, I've followed the black-screen issues and pretty much all we know is that a workaround exists--usually selecting the crop box restores the picture, but a lot of times it blacks out again. Having used Apple products over 25 years, all of which was in my adult professional life, I haven't seen Apple willing to just let users tolerate an irritating "workaround." I think this is something that needs fixing.
On 6--I don't understand how the rotational speed would produce erratic performance issues. I can go a month of reasonable performance, and then suddenly things bog down. Also, if that is the reason, this really ought to be part of the System Requirements, or at least, a recommendation. Maybe it is already--I should check to be sure. I confess this is one aspect I had not thought about.
Thanks so much for thinking about these. I love my Apple products and have owned almost every generation of Mac since the "Fat Mac" (512K RAM! 800Kb Floppies!) and hate to stare at the screen and think I've been given a truly poor product--not in my DNA--but these things break my heart.
Message was edited by: LawsonStone
Message was edited by: LawsonStone

Actually this is a question about Aperture

I know this post is in the wrong place, but I though someone discussing iPhoto might have some info on Aperture....
I am VERY excited about the new product I see APPLE are advertising called Aperture. This is just what I need. I am not a professional photographer. But I am a surgeon who uses photographs extensively - both in treatment planning and in professional presentations. The extensive archive functions are excatly what I and other colleagues have been looking for for quite some time now.
BUT ---- Does anyone know what will be the compatibility of these RAW files with Powerpoint and with the Adobe CS programs that I use in making presentations and in creating figures for publication??????
This is a key issue that I want understand before I drop $500.00 on this program

Dr. Rontal
I share your enthusiasm for Aperture (see my post in this forum on Aperture and RAW files). I would have to think, from what I've picked up off Apple's Aperture website, that if you saved your finished files in JPEG format they will work fine in Powerpoint. JPEG files are pretty universal. I noticed in that site that Aperture is advertised as working with Photoshop 7 (and I think CS), so you shouldn't have any problems there, either.

Question about Aperture and NEF...NEF conversion to match embedded jpeg

I just bought a D3 and will be getting Aperture soon. I understand that Aperture will not utilize the in camera settings in a NEF file (white balance, vivid and saturation, etc), and that the Nikon software will utilize the camera settings in the NEF file during the conversion process. I also understand that the NEF file has an embedded JPEG for thumbnail and preview, and this embedded JPEG is processed in the camera using the in camera settings. So, if Aperture was able to automatically compare the embedded JPEG to the raw NEF image, it could then create, or reverse engineer the conversion settings to match all of the in camera settings. Maybe this has been talked about before, I don't know. Does anyone else have and idea about this? Thanks
-Eric

Oh..OK I'm glad there's been talk about this. Maybe this would be a cool feature for Apple to put into future Aperture technology.
-e

Question about Aperture library size

I am storing my photos on a secondary drive. However, my Aperture library is just as large as the original source folder even though I am not copying the images into the library.
Shouldn't the library be smaller since it only references the images from another location?

If you changed the size and quality of your preview settings, it's not enough to just "Update Previews". You will have to DELETE the old previews and generate new ones.
(That's what my findings where)
To my understanding, previews are used
- if you use the Aperture "Quick Previews" functionality
- for synching with your e.g. iPhone
- in the Media browser dialog of e.g. iWork applications
(am I correct and complete?)
In my first days of Aperture 2 I increased the size to unlimited and the quality to 12, since "of course" I wanted to see the best possible quality of my pictures.
Now I learned that previews are not used in normal Aperture workflows, so I reduced the size to the lowest possible value of 1280 and the quality to 12.
This way I reduced the size of my library (30k JPEG photos, all referenced) from 108 GB to 33 GB.

Question about Aperture behavior on cropped photos

Hello everyone,
If I crop a photo in Aperture 3, and then click on the "Auto level" button, will the "auto level" stuff be applied relatively to the whole photo or only to the cropped photo (just like in Photoshop) ?...

That's not really how I'd want it to work. If you had some portion of a picture you were cropping out precisely because it was, say, so bright white and washed out, and then wanted the rest of the picture to be auto-balanced based on the more appropriate range of shades and colors, you'd want it to be ignoring the part you cropped away. I haven't had a chance to play with that exact scenario though, but if what you say is true, what is the solution to a scenario like that? Round-trip it to PS to really crop away the unwanted part?
Duncan

Printing question about aperture

When you make adjustments to an image in aperture and then print it, which picture prints, the original or the adjusted image?

Thanks for the info. I have a poor quality color printer and the image did not look all that different from the original. I thought I would ask before I upload my images to a good lab and spend some serious money only to be disapointed. Now I don't have to worry.

A question about brush presets.

can you set personal brush presets for individual brushes? for example can i set one brush with shape dynamics, texture, smoothing, and have a different brush with different settings. it seems that whenever i try to create a custom brush and alter these settings it does so to all my brushes. i'm kinda new to brush creation, i rarely try to alter the settings or try to reate a brush.

I suspect you may not fully appreciate the matter yet.
Assuming you work with CS5 it sounds like you set your Dynamics etc. and then change the Brush Tip instead of saving that Preset and, if you want to do so, switch to another Preset in the Brush Presets Panel.

HT201670 Question about cropping in negative space on Aperture

I have a question about cropping on aperture. I would like to print a photo that is 6 x 10 inches. No photo company prints this size, so I was going to print 8 x 10 and physical cut out the extra space. Unfortunately my photo is already zoomed in and i can't figure out a way to crop and include negative space. Is there a way to do it on aperture. Should I use a different software program. And when i print to Wallgreens or shutterfly, they just strech or crop the image even further. Sould I be using a better printing company?
Thanks!

You can add blank areas to your image by printing the image to a new image:
Select the image in Aperture and use "File > Print".
Then set up a 10x8 paper size and disable the "Crop to fill" option.
Set the margins to zero inches.
Select to print to PDF.
In the "Print" dialog select to save the PDF as an image file (jpeg, tiff)
Or use an external editor to add borders to your image.

A Question about RAW and Previews

I have just recently starting shooting in RAW (mostly for the post production editing abilities - I am an avid amateur photographer bent on learning as much as I can). I set my camera to capture in RAW + L. I don't know why I feel like I want it to capture both the RAW and JPEG file, and thus leads me to my first question: Is it necessary to have the camera capture both the RAW and Large JPEG? I am assuming the answer to be no, as I am sure if after importing the RAW file into Aperture, you could always export a JPEG if you wanted one? So no need to fill up your internal memory (if using managed masters) with the extra JPEG? Is this thinking correct?
Next, if you do import RAW-only files and then want to export certain images, do you have a choice to export the original RAW image? It seems that it only allows you to export a JPEG Original Size. To answer my own question, perhaps you have to export the Master in order to export the full RAW file when exporting? If you want to export a JPEG, you have to export not the Master, but a version of the Master? Is this correct?
Lastly, I wanted to ask a question about Previews. I have my preferences set so that previews have the highest quality with no limits to size. What is the significance of setting it this way? I just assumed that if I wanted to share an image at the highest quality without exporting it, this was the way to go. Is there any validity to this? The reason I ask is that I don't want to have all of these high quality previews taking up internal disk space if I really don't need to. Is there a way to change the preview size once previews are created? Meaning, if you have it set to generate low quality previews, can you change it dynamically to high and vice versa?
I know this is a lot in one post. Thanks for tackling it.
Mac

You can change the quality of the Previews in the Preferences -> Previews tab.
You can regenerate Previews with the Delete and Update Previews under the Images menu.
Regards
TD

Question about size of ints in Xcode

Hello. I have a a few quick questions about declaring and defining variables and about their size and so forth. The book I'm reading at the moment, "Learn C on the Mac", says the following in reference to the difference between declaring and defining a variable:
A variable declaration is any statement that specifies a variables name and type. The line *int myInt;* certainly does that. A variable definition is a declaration that causes memory to be allocated for the variable. Since the previous statement does cause memory to be allocated for myInt, it does qualify as a definition.
I always thought a definition of a variable was a statement that assigned a value to a variable. If a basic declaration like "int myInt;" does allocate memory for the variable and therefore is a definition, can anyone give me an example of a declaration that does not allocate memory for the variable and therefore is not a definition?
The book goes on, a page or so late, to say this:
Since myInt was declared to be of type int, and since Xcode is currently set to use 4-byte ints, 4 bytes of memory were reserved for myInt. Since we haven't placed a value in those 4 bytes yet, they could contain any value at all. Some compilers place a value of 0 in a newly allocated variable, but others do not. The key is not to depend on a variable being preset to some specific value. If you want a variable to contain a specific value, assign the value to the variable yourself.
First, I know that an int can be different sizes (either 4 bytes or 8 bytes, I think), but what does this depend on? I thought it depended on the compiler, but the above quote makes it sound like it depends on the IDE, Xcode. Which is it?
Second, it said that Xcode is currently set to use 4-byte ints. Does this mean that there is a setting that the user can change to make ints a different size (like 8 bytes), or does it mean that the creators of Xcode currently have it set to use 4-byte ints?
Third, for the part about some compilers giving a newly allocated variable a value of 0, does this apply to Xcode or any of its compilers? I assume not, but I wanted to check.
Thanks for all the help, and have a great weekend!

Tron55555 wrote:
I always thought a definition of a variable was a statement that assigned a value to a variable. If a basic declaration like "int myInt;" does allocate memory for the variable and therefore is a definition, can anyone give me an example of a declaration that does not allocate memory for the variable and therefore is not a definition?
I always like to think of a "declaration" to be something that makes no changes to the actual code, but just provides visibility so that compilation and/or linking will succeed. The "definition" allocates space.
You can declare a function to establish it in the namespace for the compiler to find but the linker needs an actual definition somewhere to link against. With a variable, you could also declare a variable as "extern int myvar;". The actual definition "int myvar;" would be somewhere else.
According to that book, both "extern int myvar;" and "int myvar;" are declarations, but only the latter is a definition. That is a valid way to look at it. Both statements 'delcare' something to the compiler, but on the second one 'define's some actual data.
First, I know that an int can be different sizes (either 4 bytes or 8 bytes, I think), but what does this depend on? I thought it depended on the compiler, but the above quote makes it sound like it depends on the IDE, Xcode. Which is it?
An "int" is supposed to be a processor's "native" size and the most efficient data type to use. A compiler may or may not be able to change that, depending on the target and the compiler. If a compiler supports that option and Xcode supports that compiler and that option, then Xcode can control it, via the compiler.
Second, it said that Xcode is currently set to use 4-byte ints. Does this mean that there is a setting that the user can change to make ints a different size (like 8 bytes), or does it mean that the creators of Xcode currently have it set to use 4-byte ints?
I think that "setting" is just not specifying any option to explicitly set the size. You can use "-m32" or "-m64" to control this, but I wouldn't recommend it. Let Xcode handle those low-level details.
Third, for the part about some compilers giving a newly allocated variable a value of 0, does this apply to Xcode or any of its compilers? I assume not, but I wanted to check.
I don't know for sure. Why would you ask? Are you thinking of including 45 lines of macro declarations 3 levels deep to initialize values based on whether or not a particular compiler/target supports automatic initialization? Xcode current supports GCC 3.3, GCC 4.0, GCC 4.2, LLVM GCC, CLang, and Intel's compiler for building PPC, i386, and x86_64 code in both debug and release, with a large number of optimization options. It doesn't matter what compiler you use or what it's behavior is - initialize your variables in C.

Concerned about Aperture backups vs. iPhoto backups

Hi All,
I've just installed Aperture 2.0 and after reading a lot of the posts here regarding the superior way that Aperture handles files compared to iPhoto, I wanted to start using Aperture for everything regarding organizing my photos.
I have a couple of concerns/questions though...
1) After importing my iPhoto library into the Aperture library as managed masters, I see that I can't actually access the originals/masters inside the Aperture library via Finder. When I right-click on the Aperture Library and choose Show Package Contents in Finder, I see the albums and events, but I do not see any of the actual photos.
This concerns me regarding backups... even if I use the Vault feature in Aperture, I wouldn't have access to the actual masters outside of Aperture. If I want to migrate to a different photo cataloging/editing app later, can this be done?
With iPhoto, I can access the originals when I need to AND they get backed up with Time Capsule or any other system backup.
2) I've read a lot about Aperture's non-destructive editing being a strength... Isn't this the case with iPhoto as well? In Finder, the iPhoto library contains a folder called "Originals" and one called "Modified"... the Original folder contains the masters and the Modified folder contains copies of the masters to which I've applied edits. Wouldn't this be considered non-destructive as well?
3) Given these two above points, I'm considering starting over and importing my iPhoto library in Aperture as referenced files. My two concerns here are this:
a) What are the draw backs, if any, of doing this? Won't I get the same benefits using Aperture with referenced files?
b) If I add new photos to iPhoto after I've imported the library into Aperture as referenced files, I'm assuming they won't show up in Aperture, right? I guess the alternative is to just open up the iPhoto library in Aperture and not import anything... anything I'd be missing here with regards to Aperture's superiority over iPhoto?
Thanks so much for any answers and advice. I appreciate it.
Rick
Message was edited by: rickdeet
Message was edited by: rickdeet

rickdeet
Welcome to the Apple Discussions.
1) After importing my iPhoto library into the Aperture library as managed masters, I see that I can't actually access the originals/masters inside the Aperture library via Finder. When I right-click on the Aperture Library and choose Show Package Contents in Finder, I see the albums and events, but I do not see any of the actual photos.
a: The Library structure of Aperture is quite different. Yes the files are there, but they are inside further packages. Each approject is in itself a further package file, and it contains - among other things - the actual files.
Now this opens several lines of possibilities. 1: I post a lot on the iPhoto forum and I always advise users to use a Managed Library. iPhoto’s abilities with Referenced Libraries are poor. This is not the case with Aperture. It has very strong abilities with Referenced Libraries, so much so that many folks recommend them as default.
That said, if you prefer the managed library, then backing up the Library Package does exactly that. Just like iPhoto, you get everything.
If you want to migrate to a different application, well, frankly the right way to do that is to export the images - same as iPhoto. But that said, if you get inside the Library and then the projects, there are your Original files. Just a single extra layer away.
2) I've read a lot about Aperture's non-destructive editing being a strength... Isn't this the case with iPhoto as well? In Finder, the iPhoto library contains a folder called "Originals" and one called "Modified"... the Original folder contains the masters and the Modified folder contains copies of the masters to which I've applied edits. Wouldn't this be considered non-destructive as well?
Yes and no... Aperture works very differently from iPhoto. As you point out, in iPhoto edits are carried out on a copy of the Original and saved as the Modified version. However, this modified version is a generation down - and therefore more compressed - than the Original. That said, with the Non Destructive feature of iPhoto 08 and later, you’re never more than one generation away from the Original +if you edit in iPhoto only.
Aperture works very differently. There is no Modified Version. When you edit an Original in Aperture your decisions are recorded in the Database and applied to the pic live as you view it. The only time a new file is produced is when you go to use it - email it, print it, whatever...
Given these two above points, I'm considering starting over and importing my iPhoto library in Aperture as referenced files. My two concerns here are this:
a) What are the draw backs, if any, of doing this? Won't I get the same benefits using Aperture with referenced files?
Do you mean “Won’t I get the same benefits using iPhoto with Referenced Files? IF so, the answer is no. And if you ever have to re-attach the masters to a iPhoto Library, then you can set aside the weekend to do a lot of clicking.
There are no drawbacks with using a Referenced Library in Aperture. If the numbers of photos you process are very large there are distinct advantages to doing so - masters stored on multiple disks for instance.
b) If I add new photos to iPhoto after I've imported the library into Aperture as referenced files, I'm assuming they won't show up in Aperture, right? I guess the alternative is to just open up the iPhoto library in Aperture and not import anything... anything I'd be missing here with regards to Aperture's superiority over iPhoto?
Why would you import to iPhoto is you’re using Aperture? A much better workflow would be to import to Aperture and then share the Aperture Previews with iPhoto. But no, the relationship between Aperture and iPhoto is not dynamic. They don’t read each other’s Libraries as they change.
Aperture’s superiority over iPhoto is down to much better file management controls, much better processing tools with more more fine control over them, much better everything to do with processing photos.
iPhoto has better slideshows and it has Calendars.
Regards
TD

Question about battery maintenance and longevity

I have a question about the efficacy of the built-in battery maintenance of the Lenovo Power Manager utility; specifically how it pertains to my W520, if that makes any difference.
With my previous laptop (an HP), any time I knew it would be parked on my desk for a week or longer, I would manually discharge the battery to about 40% and remove it to run the machine on AC power only. This proved to be an excellent practice that enabled the battery to work like new for three solid years. As soon as I stopped bothering with that, the battery life started dropping like a stone.
Lenovo's power manager offers the option to maintain the battery automatically or manually override it to maintain a charge within specific range. But I am wondering: how well this will work in the long run as compared to handling it manually? And how do the two options (automatic and manual range) compare with eachother in terms of maintaining long term?
I currently use the manual setting and keep it between 40% and 45%.

I would put into manual, you have more control. Automatic follows a preset rule, which may not apply in every case or battery model.
Regards,
Jin Li
May this year, be the year of 'DO'!
I am a volunteer, and not a paid staff of Lenovo or Microsoft

Questions about Photo Files

I am new to Mac and have a couple of questions about storing photo files just so I'm clear on everything I'm doing (or should be doing).
I have copied my files over from an external hard drive to the Pictures folder on the Mac which seems pretty much how they were stored in Windows. I have always used Photoshop to edit my photos and will be doing the same on the Mac plus I am going to start using Aperture.
I thought I would check out iPhoto today and if I understand correctly it imported (copied) all the photos in my files over to it so now there are two copies of all my photos and double the space taken up on the hard drive. Can someone confirm this is true and if probably not the best way to store my photos since I will be using Photoshop?
My second question, is there a way to have thumbnails of the photos in folders with out opening the folders?
Any and all advice on photo files, storage, ect. is welcome!
Thanks in advance

Hi
That's correct - when iPhoto imports your images, it stores them in its library (Pictures/iPhoto/iPhoto Library, which appears to the Finder as a single file, but which is actually a package containing files and folders). It doesn't delete the original version.
Both Aperture and Adobe Bridge (which is bundled with Photoshop) will themselves have the ability to manage your images, so you'll probably want to decide which application you prefer for image organisation and stick with one or the other. Aperture and iPhoto will also work together, so you can actually choose to store your masters in iPhoto if you prefer its image management.
Both Aperture and Bridge have "thumbnail view" of an image library, or you can do a quick and dirty preview by opening the image folder in the Finder and switching to icon view (and using the View Options menu - cmd-J - to increase the icon size if necessary).
Matt

Question about Aperture Presets

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for