RAW conversion with Aperture

Has anyone compared the quality of RAW conversion of Aperture vs. Nikon Capture as well as other converters?
I really like the quality of nikon capture and would not want to purchase aperture unless the conversion was at least equivalent.
Thanks for any input.
mark
G4 17" Laptop   Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

I've compared Aperture's conversion side by side with Adobe Camera Raw's. My method was to do some conversions with Camera Raw and save the result along with the RAW file. Then, in the Apple Store, I performed the conversions using Aperture.
The results from Aperture are not good. They look okay at reduced size, but if you look more closely, the de-mosaicing Aperture performs is quite bad. On some images it is only "somewhat" worse than Camera Raw; on others it is so bad as to be unusable. Shadow detail suffers the most, but highlights are not immune. Some images showed color fringing that was not present in the Camera Raw conversion, even with all chromatic aberration adjustments set to zero in Camera Raw.
I ignored differences in color and tonal rendering because I did not have enough time with Aperture to learn to get the best results out of it in terms of color. It takes a while to figure out how to get good color out of a RAW converter.
In no case was Aperture as good as Adobe Camera Raw in terms of image quality. The difference was immediately obvious at 100% magnification.
I would not use Aperture for RAW conversion.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, in case it matters, my camera is a Nikon D2X.

Similar Messages

  • How can I use EOS 6D RAW files with Aperture 3.2.4?

    The EOS 6D RAW support for Aperture requires Aperture 3.4 or later. I tried to update to Aperture 3.4 but that requires OSX 10.8.3. I am stuck with OSX 10.6.8 for a while because I use Adobe CS5.5 and it is not compatable with newer OSX. So i do not seem to have a path for 6D RAW support. I can use my EOS 20D RAW files just fine. What is it about the 6D RAW file that necessitates OSX 10.6.8 or Aperture 3.4?

    The common way is to try converting to DNG and then use the DNGs with Aperture. The drawback (other than the format conversion) is you lose camera specific optimisations with the DNG (mostly noise reduction tweaks for specific ISO values and colour tweaks).
    In the past it would have been easy to edit a few config files to get Aperture to recognise new cameras with similar sensor tech as existing cameras, but this data is now encoded so can't be changed. It is a bit frustrating when you know there is nothing special about the sensor and Aperture would be able to process the data just fine.
    Andy

  • Panasonic Lumex DMC-LX1 raw conversion for Aperture doesn't work.

    I've seen many people having raw conversion problems. Direct import of Lumex raw files to Aperture does not work.
    Adobe DNG conversion of raw to dng does not work.
    I'm running on Photoshop CS.
    Perhaps my DNG conversion settings aren't right? Tell me what they should be.
    Do I have to go as far as changing the raw.plist or whatever it's called.
    Would CS2 with the Raw conversion Plug-in work instead?
    Remember that..."If all the woman lived across the sea, what a great swimmer Yellowman would be"!
    2.0 Duelly G5 4gigs ram. 23" Flat Cinema   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    Joe,
    good to see that you are reading these posts. I am sure that many users whose cameras' raw files are currently not supported by Aperture would love to help out in any way they can.
    However, as we are living in a converging world, why doesn't Apple talk with Adobe and share some of the information used for RAW conversion? I'm thinking dcraw which (according to a note in its source code*) is using data provided by Adobe... and that same data is also contained in the Raw.plist.
    Thus, if Adobe knows something and shares it with dcraw, and Apple uses some of the dcraw code (at least the m2 matrices found in Raw.plist are equal to the dcraw ones), why can't you guys all share the same information, and thus speed up RAW support for all cameras?
    Just a thought.
    Kindest regards,
    Karl
    * This is the bit:
    Thanks to Adobe for providing these excellent CAM -> XYZ matrices!
    void CLASS adobe_coeff (char *make, char *model)
    powerbook G4 17 1.33 GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

  • Do I need an external raw editor with Aperture?

    Sorry for the simple question - I'm an unsophisticated photographer just dipping toes in RAW stuff
    Does Aperture have the same functionality as the external RAW editors like Sony Image Data Converter and the various Canon tools etc?
    What I am asking is - do I need to install these and use them as external editors or can I achieve mostly the same thing in Aperture on the raw/arw images?
    I don't agonise over the detail but I would like to tinker and experiment, but having an extra tool is a bit annoying.
    Cheers, Z

    Aperture is a generic third party raw converter, like Lightroom, Aftershot, DxO, Capture 1, and several others.
    Canon DPP, Sony IDC, etc are specific converters for their own brand of cameras only. As such they offers features that make use of manufacturer knowledge about the raw, the sensors, the lenses, the camera settings and so forth.
    The third party solutions like Aperture compete pretty well in terms of the basic raw conversion, but only have limited access to some of the camera specifics, so can't fully compete when it comes to some of the cameras advanced processing options (for example diffraction compensation offered in some recent cameras)
    Where third party solutions compete is in their ability to support raw from multiple brands of camera and by providing a much larger set of additional features.
    Aperture provides excellent features to support the entire workflow process from initial capture to final publishing.
    Its raw conversions are generally excellent in terms of the detail/noise balance. Colour and tone is usually a bit neutral or flat and needs adjusting to taste to make them pop, but the use of presets can make this fast and semi-automatic (contrast this with Lightroom which applies a profile that gives a much punchier default conversion). However, specific results will usually vary by camera; Canon, Sony and Olympus and Fuji conversions are usually well regarded, while Nikon users seem to be the most vocal about apertures flat conversions.
    The use of in camera settings (tricks) designed to extend dynamic range can impact the raw processing. Where Aperture can read and understand the settings (like Fuji's DRx00% settings) it does a good job, but I see occasional issues reported from Nikon users about issues when using its ADL feature.
    So whether you will need an additional raw tool will ultimately be down to what cameras and lenses you use and you own impressions of what you think of Apertures conversions for that equipment.
    Unfortunately, there is no longer a demo version for you to try for yourself, although I've seen some comments here about purchasing and then asking for a refund if you are not happy, but I doubt that is official policy but perhaps contact App store support and ask.
    When I bought the wrong Bourne movie in iTunes, at first I thought they'd given me the wrong one and complained. Then I realised it was my mistake so told them to forget the complaint. They emailed back saying they had refunded my purchase as it wasn't what I intended to buy. I've had several other dealings along related lines and I have to say I've never been on the wrong end of one their decisions, they have always played very fair with me.
    Andy

  • Anyone getting acceptable D700 NEF conversions with Aperture?

    I got home from photographing an afternoon wedding today and nearly ****** myself when I pulled up the files in Aperture: most of the pictures taken outside appeared overexposed by a stop or two, looked horribly desaturated, and suffered from serious white balance problems. "Highlight hot zones" lit up half the image in red. I had been keeping my blinkies under control during the shoot, and the images looked fine when I spot checked them during the day, so I suspected that Aperture was doing something wonky. I exported several of the masters and opened them up in Raw Photo Processor, my benchmark raw converter. Sure enough, they looked fine. Aperture is screwing up the raw conversion.
    It was particularly interesting how the embedded JPEG that initially popped up looks fine, and then Aperture's subsequent raw conversion looked terrible.
    I'm running up-to-date everything: 10.5.5, latest camera raw update, etc.
    Is anyone getting acceptable D700 NEF conversions? If so, what are you doing differently?
    Thanks,
    Andreas

    Andreas,
    If Preview is showing the same behaviour, then it's not Aperture itself but rather the Camera Raw 2.2.
    To clarify the "similar output" statement I made with respect to the RAW conversions:
    ViewNX - straight off it looked like what I wanted with minimal tweaking, as it read the NEF file secret sauce instructions such as tweaked saturation. Was not as good at fixing highlights and shadows though in the case of problematic shots but produced excellent detail
    ACR - produced good middle-of-the-road that by comparison to ViewNX was a little under-saturated or lacked "pop" (but I couldn't finger any particular aspect). By cranking up the saturation and laying with white point, black point etc could arrive at a similar appearance outcome to ViewNX.
    Aperture - seemed to produce a shot more like ViewNX and allowed big latitude in adjustments, especially pulling detail out of shadows without blowing out the photo. Auto exposure was surprisingly useful. Level of detail perhaps not quite as good as ViewNX, but had to be looking at 400% blowup onscreen to pick it, and even then the diff could have been put down to the level of default sharpening.
    I hadn't heard of RPP, but will give it a go.
    Meanwhile, you're stuck in no-man's land... Here's hoping Apple fixes the 2.2 bug in 2.3 and you can finally do the RAW processing!
    Regards,
    Calx

  • Integrating Canon Raw Converter with Aperture (for G9)

    This is a follow up question to an email I posted last night on Apertures incompatibility with Canon G9 Raw Format.
    DOes anyone or has anyone tried to integrate the Canon Raw Converter that came with the G9 in with Aperture? I thought of it this morning. My thought is to identify the Canon Raw converter as the external editor. Changes can be made in Canon RAW then saved. There would be the additional picture created in Aperture that I can modify. Granted the saved format would need to be a jpeg or tiff file format.
    Any thoughts? Has anyone tried this?
    Also, what is a high quality format the file can be saved once changes are made in Canon RAW?
    Thanks

    Using 'Open in External Editor' in Aperture tells Aperture to convert the RAW file to either a TIFF or PSD and send that to the external editor, not the RAW file. So if a camera is unsupported by Aperture you can't use the command...
    Ian

  • Leica Raw conversion in Aperture

    Hi all. Is there a plug-in available to view Leica Raw images in Aperture?
    Thanks, David

    I also use a Leica M8. Importing the RAW files into Aperture gave me small thumbnails which are actually 8KB Jpegs. These, I suppose, are files Leica uses for previews. Obviously Aperture does not support and convert DNG files, which are championed as a universal RAW format by Adobe. I think it is narrow minded and short sighted by Apple not to support that format. Consequently I downloaded the latest beta version of Adobe LightRoom and started working with this fierce competitor of Aperture. It works beautifully with my Leica files and a wide variety of other RAW files as well. Of course, Photoshop CS2 and CS3 (Beta) use the same converter. It can't be in Apple's interest to drive professional photographers who use Leicas into the arms of Photoshop Lightroom. It sure worked in my case - I now use Lightroom more and more and I'm charmed by many of its elegant features. Since Adobe has opened DNG to everyone I see no reason why Apple cannot support it. It is high time that the industry adopts a universal RAW standard rather than constantly updating software to a rapidly growing number of proprietary formats.

  • No Nikon D3100 raw support with Aperture 2

    I have Aperture 2, and have recently bought a Nikon D3100. All updates have been made, and I am able to see the raw files with Preview. But they are still not recognized by the Aperture 2 application.
    Is it a bug? What gives?

    With all due respect this has nothing to do with "gaming". LR2 users can't update to ACR6 either, same situation.
    I feel frustrated. Now I'll have to start using other application, since I will not continue to invest on an application that does not update raw support and tries to game me into upgrading.
    So you're willing to buy a whole new application instead of paying for the $99 upgrade? And this application will offer you lifetime support for any new camera bodies, no upgrades required, ever? Hmm...
    It's the reality of software: at some point, you need to upgrade. Like it or not.
    The advantages of AP3 over AP2 for any serious photographer are well worth the minimal upgrade cost. The RAW updates last for the life cycle of the product they're aimed at. When a new version comes out support usually follows. This isn't necessarily fun but pretty standard all around.

  • Aperture 3 bad raw conversion with Canon files

    Hi, Aperture is converting my 6400 iso raws into images I can't work with to my satisfaction. For pleasure I shot a staged disco dance event with some fun colorful lighting. When imported into Aperture via card reader the previews look somewhat similar to the Rebel's LCD jpg rendition.
    One example, the stage light beams which are enhanced by smoke machines have one light with blue and another with magenta. When I click on that preview, the spinning wheel appears as usual saying loading which I believe is applying Aperture's interpretation algorithms. The results are stripping all the magenta and no matter what I do with the controls such as enhancement I can't get back the correct color. Remember the first loaded preview are similar to what I see in camera.
    I rarely shoot this high of iso and I'm finding adjustments with highlights to be extremely sensitive with a much lower threshold of adjustment. On most of the previews I attempted adjustment I preferred the look before Aperture converted them. Clicking "M" for master does not revert back to what I first saw before selecting it. I can't get back to that original first imported look. I can see the differences in the previews side by side, one I click on and a similar shot I didn't.
    I have never had this criticism before with this camera at 100 iso though it is recently acquired by a few months and never had this complaint with any of my NEF Nikon files. At first when beginning import the preview widow scrambled the order of the files where some images sat besides other images taken at an entirely different time. I closed everything and restarted and at first it did it again then corrected the order to which I hit the import button. I kept the images on the card and now will reload them directly onto my HD first. I'm reluctant to load into Aperture directly until I figure out what is going on.
    I did download Canon's DPP processor and it did hold onto the colors that you see with the thumbnails you see to the left of the selected image. Go figure. I have not touched any of the import settings in preferences.
    Your suggestions appreciated.
    John

    So what you're seeing initially at import is the JPEG that the camera generates as a preview for the image. All RAW files have this; the JPEG is what's used by the camera itself to give you the preview on the back of the camera.
    When Aperture imports, it will initially show you the JPEG. Then, once it renders its own version, based on the raw converter built into OS X, it will show you that updated preview (which is also a JPEG). From that point on, that's what you'll see, and you can't get the RAW-embedded JPEG again.
    If you use Canon's DPP, you're going to get a rendering that looks like what you saw on the camera, because they have access to their algorithms that they use for RAW->JPEG conversion. Apple doesn't have access to this; they make their own raw converter.
    It may be possible that there are issues with Apple's raw converter in specific circumstances (i.e. high ISO images on a certain camera with heavy magenta or odd lighting). You don't say what version of Aperture and OS X you're using, but it looks like it is not Aperture 3.6 + Yosemite. It may be worth upgrading to see if  it's something that's improved (an easier way is if you have access to a machine with Yosemite, just open one of the RAW files in Preview, as that uses the same raw converter, to see if it's better).

  • Weird RAW conversion using Aperture

    I'm shooting with an Olympus E-1 and I'm getting some weird patterns in high ISO shots. The pattern is not as noticeable in low ISO shots. Here's a sample.
    http://www.andy-kang.com/misc/pattern.jpg
    Anyone else experiencing this with other camera files?
    Power Mac G5 2GHz DP   Mac OS X (10.4.3)   3.5GB RAM, X800XT

    Ouch Andy - that is so bad it's almost cool.
    The Aperture raw converter is fundamentally broken, but I haven't seen anything quite this bad until your example.

  • 10.4.10 and Canon 1D Mark III RAW Conversion in Aperture

    I'm noticing bright reds are not being converted properly at all. Overall, most images look excellent; however, images with a large amount of red look terrible. I've tried converted the .CR2 files via DNG and then in LightRoom, and the red looks good.
    Has anyone else noticed this? I'll try and get some crops and place on Flickr tonight.
    PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.9)   4 Gigs RAM, CalDigit S2VR Duo 1TB

    I haven't seen those problems. Did you post the samples on Flickr? How can I find them?

  • Bad conversion for RAW file with Maverick

    Hello,
    I own a SONY Alpha A6000 camera. When I shoot my pictures in JPEG, no trouble. When I shoot my pictures in RAW, the pictures are overexposed after conversion in iPhoto.
    In the list of camera supported by iPhoto (and Aperture), the SONY Alpha A6000 is not present.
    Can you tell me when we will have a new update for RAW conversion with Maverick ?
    OS X 10.9.3
    iPhoto 9.5
    Thank you ;-)
    Bruno.

    It looks like we have been speaking/writing at cross purposes
    Your question raised two aspects - the RAW support for your specific camera, and how raw support is working in Aperture and iPhoto generally.
    You are right, the camera is not on the list of supported cameras. Apple is not supporting all cameras, and some will never be supprted. I am waiting since four years for the support of my camera. Since your camera is not supported, you should not be using the raw with Aperture or iPhoto. As I pointed out, it is a bug, that you are able to process the RAW files at all in iPhoto or Aperture. iPhoto is using the RAW conversion for a different camera. Be careful, when Apple corrects this bug, you may no longer be able to open these RAW files in iPhoto.
    But the second problem is the over exposure. It is unlikely, that this is due to using the RAW support designed for a different camera. We are seeing this problem continually in the Aperture forum, when in-camera settings are used. It is due to the fact, how Apple's RAW developement works. It disregards in-camera tags. You will see the same effect, when the proper RAW support for your camera will finally be released.  That is why I pointed you to Keith Barkley's great user tip. It describes the only safe way to work with RAW photos in Aperture and iPhoto:
    (                 The Big Three: Setting your camera for the best Aperture RAW results)
    As long as you are using in-camera settings, you will never see in your camera generated previews, what the RAW files are like, that you are recording.
    And we cannot predict, if and when your camera will be supported.

  • Anyone try Smart Objects with Aperture; is this useful?

    Here’s what I did, wondering if this is helpful. I exported a master (which produces the RAW file) to disk.
    Open the image in Photoshop using the Aperture “Open with External Editor” command. Now use the Place Command and you can create a smart object with the RAW file. It initially opens Adobe Camera RAW so you can adjust as you wish. When done, you can save this SO in the version.
    Go back into that file from Aperture, and if you wish to edit again with Photoshop, you have the option of double clicking on the SO to call up ACR, tweak and save.
    So layers are not supported but Smart Objects are multiple versions of a PSD embedded in the original (if my understanding is correct).
    Am I crazy or does this allow us to do RAW conversions with ACR but use the rest of Aperture?

    That's a neat variation. Here's mine:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1292903
    Summary:
    1) Export original to a hot folder which opens the file in ACR, convert.
    2) Apple-Tab back to Aperture, 'open in external editor'.
    3) Run an action that copies the image from the ACR conversion into the Aperture version and save. Action is included in the linked thread.
    Combining the two approaches could work rather nicely.
    Note - once an image has been opened using 'open in external editor' layers ARE supported. From this point on, 'open in external editor' passes the file directly to PS, without flattening. Just watch out for overwrites.
    Ian

  • A novel idea regarding RAW conversion

    With the much debate about Aperture and ACR and RAW conversion, I had this thought: RAW conversion is really part of the image editing process, not part of cataloguing, selection, organization, or required for producing thumbnails.
    I'm not exactly sure when the RAW conversion takes place, but I'm guessing on import, so that images can be immediately edited. Why can't thumbnails and organization take place in Aperture without converting from RAW? Adobe Bridge seems to manage this just fine. It would seem like the logical place to put RAW conversion is as a precursor to image editing in Aperture. For example, when you click the adjustment button, the conversion takes place. This would seem like a logical way to incorporate a RAW Converter plugin.
    Why does the Aperture RAW conversion have to take place at all (except when a user demands it) ? Seems like this follows workflow more logically...
    Brad

    Interesting. Well this is confusing then -- why in
    the world is Aperture not sending a RAW file to
    Photoshop when you configure Aperture to use
    Photoshop as its external editor?
    It seems from my observations that this was a design choice on the part of Apple. This is going to get a bit technical...
    When you choose to open in an external editor, Aperture automatically converts any 'master' file (tagged as 'isExternallyEditable' = false and 'isOriginalFile' = true in the XML file) to a 16-bit TIFF or PSD file, adds that as a new file stacked with the original RAW and opens the new file in the external editor. That new file is not really a 'version' in terms of it just being an adjustment recipe, but is a whole new file which is linked in the database to the RAW, just like a stack.
    Once that new file is made, it's 'isExternallyEditable' tag changes to true and from then on Aperture passes the file directly to the editor. This state is shown by the target icon. This repeats until you make image adjustments to that image within Aperture, leading to your earlier problems with repeated editing of the same file in PS. If you DO make adjustments to it within Aperture it then becomes a new 'sub'-master with it's own versions.
    Playing devil's advocate, there is actually a valid reason for doing things this way - pass the original RAW file to ACR, and how does PS know where to save the resulting file so that it goes back into Aperture, or which RAW master to associate it with?
    A possible solution with Aperture 1.0?
    The manual workaround at the moment which would give a reasonable amount of play back-and-forth would be to set up two hot folders using folder actions. One automatically opens any files dropped into it in PS. The other automatically imports any files into Aperture.
    So, do all your choice editing until you just have final picks, not bothering with any image adjustments, then:
    1) Go through the final picks, Apple-Shift-S (export master), saving them into the PS hot folder. They automatically open up in ACR, probably one at a time.
    2) Do your RAW conversion with the superior toolset available.
    3) Save into the Aperture hot folder and watch them be automatically imported.
    4) Now the more manual bit - drag that converted file into the stack with it's RAW original.
    You now have the original and it's converted file linked together in Aperture, although keywords etc. will be separate. Once the hot folders are set up it should be relatively straightforward. Not nearly as straightforward as it could be, but hopefully manageable.
    Ian

  • Panasonic LX3 raw conversion problem

    In Snow Leopard I had no problem with raw conversions with my Panasonic LX3 in Aperture, after ugrading to Lion my pictures come out very very dark with a deep green tinge.
    Does any one have any ideas what might be causing it. All the camera setting are normal and Aperture reads Nikon raw files perfectly.
    Mike

    What version of Aperture are you using?
    In MacOS Lion the raw conversion has been moved into the MacOS, but Aperture does not find the raw support for some cameras innitially.
    Two things to try:
    Force the generation of new previews by holding down the option key while selecting "Update Preview"
    If this only happened after you upgraded to 10.7.4 and worked well before, then register your camera with the lauch services database - see this post by Alan Roseman:Aperture 3 preview of raw file greenish, but read the follow up posts first (the lsregister command) as well, on how it is supposed to work and how to correct the typos.
    Added: if that does not help, try to remove the raw presets from ~/Library/Application Support/Aperture/RawDecodePresets.plist, to force a rebuild.
    Regards
    Léonie

Maybe you are looking for