RAW panorama workflow

Been inclined recently to try a few panoramas using a 5D3 and tilt shift lenses, shooting in RAW.
I get the impression there is a workflow that can go from Lightroom 4 / Bridge, then Photoshop CS6 and back into Lightroom that can stitch 3 images together and keep them in .dng.
So far I've stitched them together in Photoshop - and I'm dead impressed with what it can do - but I'm having real trouble getting the images back into Lightroom in anything other than PSD or Tiffs. Is it always going to be one of those file options?
I'm keen to try to keep a RAW workflow throughout. Anyone done anything like this? The web is full of solutions as long as you go Jpeg.
Cheers
Richard

Here's an example panorana created using five images with LR4.3 'Merge to Panorama in PS CS6' and Hugin 2012.0.0. I used the best rectilinear correction mode, which is 'Perspective' in Photomerge and 'Rectilinear' in Hugin. Both have no manual adjustments applied other than crop. Both are equally sharp at 1:1 view. The horizontal angle of view is 132°.
I'm not sure why Photomerge created an image with vertical convergence because all five of the original images have perfectly parallel verticals. In addition there are no controls or settings in Photomerge I can find to correct this during stitching. The stitched image requires Vertical convergence correction and rectilinear distortion correction. This takes additional time and will reduce the image sharpness and the constrain to crop area.
Double-Click to see full-size
Using the cylindrical projection mode both the Photomerge and Hugin stitched images look near identical. What's interesting as that Photmerge kept the verticals parallel with using the cylindrical projection setting. As Jao vdL said, It is very inflexible and often moves the perspective around in undesireable ways. The intelligence is simply not very intelligent."

Similar Messages

Looking for some RAW + JPEG Workflow suggestions

I'm looking for some suggestions on how best to organize my workflow now that I've started shooting with RAW +JPEG. I previously shot only in RAW, but the time spent in post-production was killing me. I've realized that for 95% of my shots that already have the correct exposure, white balance, etc, a JPEG photo is really all I need and saves me a ton of time. I've become convinced that editing every single photo from a shoot in RAW is overkill. I want to have the RAW versions, however, to rescue that occasional great shot where I unfortunately miffed the settings.
Through reading other posts here and experimenting, I've found that Aperture basically defulats to showing me only the imported RAW photos and that I need to click "New Version from Master JPEG" to see the JPEG version. This seems counterintuitive to the workflow I'd like to establish though. (i.e. I'm thinking it would be nice to see only the JPEG versions, and then only bring up the RAW version when the photo needs some serious correction).
I suppose I could highlight the entire batch of imported photos and select "New Version from Master JPEG" and then sort through each RAW/JPEG stack, but I'm still hoping there's a less cumbersome way. Anyone out there have any good workflow suggestions for this issue? I'm curious how other people out there deal with this issue in their workflow.
Thanks in advance!
Message was edited by: Nate Cannon

Try this - I do this as a matter of course:
-select all of the photos after importing them into a project
-create a new album from selection/call it JPG
-with all of the images still selected create new version from master JPEG. all of these should now be the album pick
-close all stacks, the JPEG will be the one showing up on top for that album.
RB
More here: [Aperture RAW+JPG|http://photo.rwboyer.com/2009/01/14/aperture-2-quick-tip-shooting-rawjp g>

RAW editing workflow with Photoshop Elements 6

I have been using the following workflow with RAW images in iPhoto and editing them in Photoshop Elements 6. It seems to be working fine. Does anyone see a problem with my workflow???
I choose to edit in external editor (Elements 6), and the image opens in Camera Raw. I make my edits here because I really like the editing power of Camera Raw. After I am finished, I chose Save As and choose jpeg. The save dialog tries to save back to the Originals folder in the iPhoto Library that the RAW file came from, so I simply choose the appropriate event in the Modified folder and save it there. It replaces the jpeg that iPhoto had created when the original RAW file was imported. When I go back to iPhoto the changes are applied.
Now I realize that I can't reopen the original RAW file again in Elements without reverting to original, but that is usually not an issue. I also realize that messing with the iPhoto Library outside of iPhoto can be dangerous. Another drawback is that I haven't been able to open multiple RAW photos from iPhoto into Camera Raw so I can apply changes all at once.
But I can't see anything wrong with the workflow. Am I on the right track, or am I missing something?

No, I don't believe you can do that with RAW editing. By manually replacing the first modified version with your RAW edited version iPhoto will not update the thumbnail. You will be able to see the edited version if you go to the edit mode or full screen mode. But the thumbnail will not be identical. If that's OK with you then you should be able to go with that workflow.
If the edits are significant enough you might want to save the new file to the desktop and import as a new file.
You can try this on a copy of the iPhoto Library. Open the library package and move the contents of the Data folder to the trash along with the Thumb32Segment.data, Thumb642Segment.data and ThumbJPGSegment.data files. Then launch iPhoto with the Command+Option keys depressed and follow the instructions to rebuild the library. Select the first three options. This will rebuild the thumbnail files and my reflect your edited versions. Again, make a backup copy of the library before trying this.
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.≤br>
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

RAW PHOTO WORKFLOW AND BACKUP?

i have a canon 20D which is set to shoot both jpegs and raw photos. when i plug my card reader into my mac, it automatically opens IPHOTO5 and then i download the images. i get two thumbnails, one says it is a raw, the other a jpeg. but:
1) i have no idea how to backup the raw images to a dvd or to my external hard drive. and (see below for related problem)
2) i don't know how to work with the raws. i do own photo shop, but tried dragging the thumbnail into photoshop, and it tells me it could not complete the task because it is the wrong kind of document. i had the same problem when just trying to drag those raws onto my desktop. is this because i am just dragging thumbnails, and if that's the case, where do my raws reside in IPHOTO?
3) and, even if i can figure out how to get the raws into photoshop, when i go to save them, how and where should i save them and if i want to use the corrected raw to send for printing, do i need to change to a different format? and should i save the new file in iphoto?
4) last, i get the feeling that maybe the raw photos i have imported from my cards into iphoto (then deleted the originals) now no longer exist as raws anywhere. does iphoto not actually import the raw, but just a raw thumbnail?
sorry for all the questions that might seem elementary, but i have never had a digital SLR and i really need to establish a proper workflow and make sure to backup my most important photos.
many thanks for all suggestions!

1. Click on the Finder icon on the Dock to open the Finder, open the Pictures folder, and you will see several dated folders (folders named as such: 2005-11-20, 2005-01-07, 2006-01-07, etc.). Each folder contains pictures you downloaded form your camera on those dates, but only photos you have not deleted.
2. Down the bottom somewhere (in the Pictures folder) you will see iPhoto Library. Open this folder and you will see more folders, but dated as follows: 2004, 2005, 2006, etc. Open one of these folders, and you will see other folders, but numbered as follows: 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 11, 10, etc.
Not every one of these numbered folder will have an "Originals" folder, but some will.
Whatever you do, don't change the folder's names, or structure of anything in the iPhoto's Library. I have no idea if you should drag the original photos out of the Originals folder, but I would think that you can duplicate the photos, and drag only the copies into another folder on the desktop.
Keep in mind that you can set the iPhoto Preferences so that PhotoShop Elements is set as the photo editing application. If you set iPhoto to do that for you, when you double-click on any of the photos on the iPhoto window or display, Elements will automatically launch and open the photo for you. If the photo is a RAW or JPEG, Elements will show it as such at the left bottom corner. If you want to leave the RAW photo intact, just rename the copy you are working with- before you save it (don't save any photo with it's original name to avoid changing the original). However, you can save an original that has been changed in a format such as TIFF, and in another folder, CD, another hard drive, etc. TIFF files are not compressed and take lots of space on the hard drive, but the photos does not degrade. Every time you work with a JPEG image it degrades.
Again, wait for others to respond to your post. They may have better ideas than mine.

DNG/raw+XMP workflow comparison

[ Note: this discussion has been branched from an existing one (link on top ^) and deals about DNG-raw+XMP -PECourtejoie ]
Omke Oudeman wrote:
What Disk based XMP data file you are referring to and you think Camera Raw get's involved in this while writing metadata? Could you specify your thoughts about that, I thought it only reads the new thumbnail after saving metadata to the newly saved filed after a keyword has been added.
And an other thought, you have to set the Camera Raw general section to save image settings to either side car XMP files or Camera Raw Database. Might this be of importance to set to either of the two for testing. That said, default is sidecar files and I don't see any benefit with saving in a central data base instead of having the settings traveling in (DNG) or beside (XMP sidecar)
I deal primarily with image files, specifically NEF, PSD, and JPG. All Camera Raw 'edits' are stored to the XMP sidecar files (in the case of NEF files), or as embedded metadata (in the case of the other formats). Of course, they aren't really edits, and are more like conversion instructions for Camera Raw.
Whenever I keyword raw files, their XMP sidecars are modified to include the keywords. If you inspect one of these XMP sidecars, you will see that they contain Camera Raw settings, keywords, and camera EXIF data--anything you might need to know about the image, stored externally to the image file. I don't know for sure, but I guess that some or all of this information is also stored in the Bridge database. I would never dream of trusting XMP data to a single database, as it constitutes many hundreds/thousands of hours' work. As it stands, I like that I can keep the XMP with my raw files, where I can see them!
It's important not to get confused between the Bridge database and the Bridge cache, and the equivalent database/cache belonging to Camera Raw. I haven't found much information on the Bridge database--I guess it's central to the operation of Bridge and the way it handles files and its cache. The Bridge cache appears quite straightforward, being a hierarchy of jpegs designed to allow Bridge to display images quickly.
Bridge uses Camera Raw in order to generate 'High Quality' thumbnails and previews of supported image types, based on XMP data, optionally including TIFF and JPEG. Camera Raw has its own mysterious database and cache, but this internal working is irrelevant to this subject (AFAIK) as Bridge only uses Camera Raw as an API for generating previews for the cache, and keeps an eye on any file updates made externally in order to keep its own records up-to-date. This is presumably why Bridge is always reading the disk.

I deal primarily with image files, specifically NEF, PSD, and JPG. All Camera Raw 'edits' are stored to the XMP sidecar files (in the case of NEF files), or as embedded metadata (in the case of the other formats). Of course, they aren't really edits, and are more like conversion instructions for Camera Raw.
Same here although my NEF's are CR2 form Canon and always converted to DNG, so no worry about sidecar files that can be lost
Whenever I keyword raw files, their XMP sidecars are modified to include the keywords. If you inspect one of these XMP sidecars, you will see that they contain Camera Raw settings, keywords, and camera EXIF data--anything you might need to know about the image, stored externally to the image file. I don't know for sure, but I guess that some or all of this information is also stored in the Bridge database. I would never dream of trusting XMP data to a single database, as it constitutes many hundreds/thousands of hours' work. As it stands, I like that I can keep the XMP with my raw files, where I can see them!
Here is where I got a little lost, as earlier stated I was not aware of keywords, labels and rating stored in sidecar XMP, I always thought those files only contained the ACR settings. Using DNG one of the many pro's (sorry Mike, don't want to start again ) is that all info is stored in the file itself and no sidecar files.
And to be honest, I won't have many problems with lost ACR settings, they can be easily recreated for my workflow and in the analog days you were also not able to recreate a negative in the same way after a few days or more due to different chemicals/temperature, enlarger light source strength, other box of paper and not to forget your own moods....
But losing other IPTC settings like copyright and keywords is a problem. When having converted ('developed') the raw files there is no problem for this info, it is stored in the file info and according to IPTC standards visible by most applications.
I have decided to not provide vital info on raw files (CR2 or DNG) other then rating/labeling and changing the filename to yyyymmdd and sequence number. My keywords and description etc are only added to the keepers. They are renamed too but with the same yyyymmdd and a more relevant name and sequence number. I also include the original filename option while batch renaming. The DNG files are just stored on a HD with a proper year and date folder structure, there are also far to much raw files to put all those effort for keywording in.
The keepers are going in my central archive and I use Canto Cumulus single user as DAM. When needed I can find the originals very easy, even don't use Bridge to look for the right one, just glance at the original filename, use the Finder (windows explorer?) to find the files on the external HD and copy the wanted file with some others from same series and these are cached in Bridge to look at and work on. I do so because Bridge takes to long to cache (even with only thumbs) from external sources and the above mentioned method is much faster
It's important not to get confused between the Bridge database and the Bridge cache, and the equivalent database/cache belonging to Camera Raw. I haven't found much information on the Bridge database--I guess it's central to the operation of Bridge and the way it handles files and its cache. The Bridge cache appears quite straightforward, being a hierarchy of jpegs designed to allow Bridge to display images quickly.
For me there is no confusion between Bridge cache and ACR cache, they are both easy to find and I regularly dump the whole Cache file for Bridge after it has grown over 30 GB in size. I can't rely on Bridge for use of DAM and it gives a fresh start and the cache rebuilding is not that time consuming when it can do its work and you don't need the computer yourself. I also don't worry about the ACR cache, it does not grow above 1GB and replaces the oldest with the newest so don't have to clean it myself.
just wondering where to find the Bridge Database, can't find it and according to the activity it should have huge sizes??
It is still a mystery to me.

RAW Processing Workflow

Just attended a LR seminar where I realized that LR is a "gotta have it."
But there is one aspect that confuses me. I shoot RAW & Jpg on a 30D. I am not sure how to process the Raw files.
I know I have to get them into LR, so I download from Card reader into LR - or do I? It seems that both the RAW & jpg's will not be downloaded. So not sure what to do here.
But more important, I open a pic in LR, apply WB, other manipulations to the RAW file. Then I want to edit in PS CS2. so when I Open, will I go directly into PS or will I go into ACR? Once in ACR (or PS), will the pics look different than what I am seeing in LR after making cahnges in LR? Do I again apply things like WB, Exposure in ACR & then click yet again to open in PS?
So it seems that I am adding an extra step by using LR with RAW files, is that right? Then after I edit in PS, I suppose I save as a Tiff or Psd & then open yet again in LR for Printing?
So I guess in addition to not being clear about the way LR, ACR & PS interact, I am not clear if there is even a need to shoot RAW, or to shoot RAW & JPG?
Can someone help clear up my confusion?
Thanks

Not quite right. If you open a raw file in PS CS2 or CS3 from LR, ACR is always involved. Ensure that you use ACR3.6 or newer if you have CS2.
ACR will understand all adjustments you made within LR. The result is then stored is whatever format you choose.
If you use CS3 you can also set the preferences in CS3 to use ACR for the jpg files. This comes in handy if you have photos which are solely in jpg format and you are forced to use the jpg file as your master photo. Then also the LR adjustments will be seen in CS3.
Allow me a comment to your workflow. After working with LR for a while you may consider to skip creating jpg and raw in the camera. In my experience it is more convenient to just create raw files and import them to LR. The jpg for different purposes will be created with the LR export function and (in my case) stored in folders which are not managed by LR
I have to add that 99% of my photos will only need adjustments within LR and no further postprocessing within Photoshop.
regards
Chris

RAW+JPEG Workflow issues

When shooting RAW+JPEG Im having trouble finding a good workflow (Canon 5D Mark II, LR 2.2, Windows), whether or not I import with LR treating the RAW and JPEG files as separate photos. (Im drawn to shooting RAW+JPEG as the Mark IIs JPEGs are often very good.)
One major problem with importing RAW and associated JPEG as one unit (i.e., not as separate photos) is what I consider to be a bug: when I export metadata and ratings, they are applied only to the RAW file and not to the JPEG. Is there a setting I havent noticed or an easy workaround?
Also, after importing as one unit, it would be very convenient to be able to separate the RAW+JPEG into separate photos (e.g., for editing and export). Why does the combined vs. separate approach have to be decided on at import time without being able to change it later?
In trying to work around the above problems, I import as separate photos and try to treat each RAW+JPEG pair as a unit. As some have suggested, perhaps the best approach is to create a stack for each RAW+JPEG pair (easy with auto-stack). But this approach is very limited because you cant really treat a stack as a unit, i.e.:
- quickly apply metadata and ratings to a stack
- delete all photos in a stack
- move a stack for sorting and into collections
You can work around these limitations by unstacking each pair and selecting both, but thats a bit clumsy.
Any advice or info would be appreciated.
js

I think I already commented on that in an earlier post.
ACR until quite recently had a very bad habit of bad colors by default... why would I want to create a .jpg from that ugly RAW using LR when they whole purpose of having the .jpg was to have some reference of 'reasonably close to what I'm after.' Or perhaps you needed some quick prints, and don't feel like messing with tweaking colors in RAW at the moment... and camera generated .jpg is 'good enough' with just some simple minor adjustments.
The new profiles are a huge improvement, but at times I still shoot both... just to check up that its still doing what I expect of it. And most of all, I want to use LR to manage ALL my images. Stacks are a handy way to hide the clutter if that's what you want to call it... their functionality just isn't what you'd expect to be there.
Others may have their own reason for wanting to use both. But again... I'm not arrogant enough to presume that everyone should be doing things just as I do, that's the beauty of options - it makes the program more powerful for a wider userbase. If options like this are more difficult to implement than the GND or adjustment brushes... then perhaps some poor initial decisions were made in how they based LR in the first place.
Besides... it wouldn't be as much of a 'hassle' if the proper tools were in LR in the first place. ;)
Plus, aren't there ways to filter so you only see RAW if that's what you are after? I honestly don't know, because I personally don't see the 'duplicate' files as a hassle - though their management could be eased... which I think was the intent of all the suggestions.

RAW+JPEG workflow solution needed

Question to any pro's out there-nitpicky. Aperture 3. I have imported 1000's of files via seperate RAW and JPEG import option into projects, then created a RAW album and a JPG album within each project via a file type filter. I have done this because I want to have the ability to choose to save space by deleting some unwanted RAW files that I know I will never edit, but keep some of those JPEGs. For some I might want to keep RAW and not have the JPEGs. Sounds funny, but the space adds up when shooting 7fps, thousands of 6 MB JPG add up. Here is my question. I have been rating a bunch of the RAW in my RAW album within a project. I have lots of files that I have rejected. Is there a way to automatically match the associated JPEGs of these already rated rejected files that I don't want either RAW or JPEG without doing so manually in the project "parent" folder. HELP! I didn't see this hiccup and I have manually seperated all my projects this way. Is there a better way to do this workflow in the future once I have found a way to straighten this mess out?

Sorry - how thoughtless - here are the steps (pretty much off the top of my head)
-Autostack the RAW JPEG pairs
-Make album of RAWs and album of JPEGS with corresponding file types as album picks
-Go through RAW album w/ stacks closed and label all RAWs to be rejected.
-Go to JPEG album and open all stacks filter by label to pick up the image stacks with JPEGs to keep select all and create new album called KEEP JPEG
-Go to JPEG album filter by label select everything, get rid of filter, invert selection
-Create new album called KEEP RAW
-Go to KEEP RAW album open all stacks filter by file type JPEG, select all, delete images
-Go to KEEP JPEG album open all stacks filter by file type RAW, select all, delete images
I just did that off the top of my head without being in front of Aperture so it might a little wrong but you get the idea. With short cut keys it isn't a huge deal but still too much for me to do on a regular basis to save a couple megabytes.
RB

Working with Raw Files: Workflow question

I am seriously a novice and need some advice. I have a Nikon D40x and I'm using Aperture software. I am shooting in raw (nef)+ jpg. I have uploaded the pics via aperture. When I import, a pop-up import menu says RAW + JPEG PAIRS: BOTH (JPG as master).
No problem here. Now I want to do some "fancy editing" but all I see is the jpg copy. How to I get to the raw (nef) file? And once I do and make changes, do I need to convert it to something else? HOW?
Any and all advice welcome! (Preferably in layman's terms, though. I'm already overwhelmed by all of the techie jargon).

My advice:
Stop wasting your time doing jpg and nefs - just do nefs.
You also need to read the introduction to Aperture and possibly the Aperture manual if you want to get competent in the use of Aperture. Some of the principles and concepts need to be understood before you can use Aperture effectively - forget about "fancy" - you need "fundamentals" first. Might sound like I"m telling you to suck eggs, but this understanding is really important. Who knows - reading the manual might even answer the question you just asked...
Regards,
Calx

RAW image workflow problem

I originally posted a similar question about a strange behaviour when using Adobe DNG files. The issue first appeared some time between 6 and 21 December when converting Minolta RAW files to DNG; before that conversions had gone smoothly and it took some time to establish that the problem was not with DNG but lay deeper.
I have done some experiments and so now can clarify the problem and hope that someone can help to find a solution.
Looking at a 2-year collection of photos I find that the DNG files are in the iPhoto package and the size and dimensions (around 12 MB & 3264 x 2448) look normal, and the photos are displayed correctly in iPhoto. When I export (or copy) one of these photos the size remains the same, but strangely the dimensions are shown as 256 x 192. These can not be displayed properly using Preview nor can they be re-imported successfully into iPhoto. The original dimensions and quality can be recovered by opening in Photoshop and re-saving, and also by copying to another computer. Terence Devlin in another forum tested the files and reported, "I think the clue is in the tiny dimensions that the iMac reports. That 256 x 192 image is the thumbnail within the dng, and that suggests to me that the Raw support on the iMac is damaged in someway."
A sample file can be downloaded at http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3747562/PICT0004.dng
Thanks for any help.

I tested your image and I can't find anything wrong with it. When I double-click it to open, it opens in Photoshop CS4 (since it's an Adobe file) by default. I can also drag it into the iPhoto library, then export it, but it exports fine and re-opening the exported file shows it's full-size.
Are you exporting in a format other than "Original" (e.g. converting it to JPEG or TIFF, etc?)
It is possible for iPhoto to convert and resize images when exporting (very common when you want to mail someone some snaps you took but there's really no reason why they need the full-size since they probably wont print it and it'll just make the email unreasonably large (many mail servers cap email attachments at 10MB anyway)) -- so I'm wondering if maybe the mechanism you're using to export is doing this without you realizing it.
What steps are you doing to perform the export?

My panorama workflow

Here's my first pass technique for working with panoramas in an Aperture friendly way:
- Stack all the component images together
- Export a version of each image in the stack to a temporary folder
- Stitch the panorama
- Pick the best representative image for the panorama in Aperture and open it in Photoshop (which creates a new version)
- Resize to match the panorama (i.e. much wider)
- Open the panorama in Photoshop copy/paste it over the resized 'version'
- After saving, promote the panorama to be the pick for the stack
You end up with a stack that has a panorama as the pick and all the component images under it.
If anyone has any ideas on streamlining this let me know.
Dual 1.8 G5 Mac OS X (10.4.3) 1GB RAM, Sony Artisan Monitor, Sony HC-1 HD Camera

I've been trying to figure out how to deal with panoramas as well. Stacking panoramas doesn't always work for me, as sometimes there are bracketed or multiple versions of one specific frame, in which case I prefer to stack that one image so I only see the one I'm using in the final panorama.
For now I'm using albums and the stitched image is my album pick. I'm about to submit a feature request in BugReport for grouping images as well as stacking, with the ability to have a group pick ... sorta sounds like stack of multiple images that can also contain other stacks. It would also be nice to be able to say that one image (stitched panorama) will consist of 5 master images.
mayo

As an asset management tool it should manage all images but only adjust raw

Is Aperture an image management tool, raw converter/workflow tool, or both?
Let it be both! Restrict what is is ALLOWED to ADJUST, but manage it all.
When I do a shoot, I start out with 300-1000 RAW images.
By the time I am finished with the client I will have narrowed the pile of image assets down to 20% of the original RAW files, JPGs of all of those, AND 10% of the selected originals will also end up as layered PSD/TIFF files. But when I go back in and want to open a PSD file then why not allow just that Then save it back as the same or a version..
OR when I tell it to open a PSD file in CS2 it will as "make a version(full or flat), or edit original?" and of course a "don't ask me again for this format" check box!
So why not leave the layered PSD/TIFF files alone and NOT allow them to be adjusted, only managed?
Think about it, IF I want to adjust my multilayered PSD file I will most definitely only trust that to CS2 where I retain full creative control over the layers, and I can output a version if I want!
IF I am crazy enough to feel the need to use the shallow tools of Aperture to tweak the brightness/level/curves/saturation/WB/etc/etc of a flattened COPY of my layered PSD file then I will make a copy and drag it into Aperture. By shallow I mean that CS2 and layers has much more control than the single layer tools of Aperture.
As an option leave it open as a configuration choice in the prefs... "Adjustable image formats: RAW, JPG" and even on a per image basis, right-click--> image status-->Adjustable or Unadjustable.
Yes, I sent this idea off to Apple!

Moki,
Right there with you. Here's my rough scenario:
1. I shoot 500 RAWs.
2. Cull down to 100 keepers.
3. Client culls down to their 50 selects.
4. Anywhere from 25-50 become layered PSD files, depending on the presentation the client wants (sizes, packages, borders, special effects, etc.).
5. In addition to those 25, there may be *completely new* composites (PSD's) created from combinations of the 25 -- this isn't a version of one of the original masters -- it is a *completely new* image that Aperture needs to manage in the project (so import of PSD without flattening and/or allowing Photoshop to Save-As into the Aperture library is a must).
I'd even add to your request about allowing adjustments. It would be totally cool if the adjustment tools were context-sensitive, enabled when working with an image (like RAW or JPG) where Aperture can adjust, and disabled when working with an image (like layered PSD or TIFF) that it won't adjust.
Anyway, I have complete confidence that eventually, the RAW conversion will be fixed, so even though that's an immediate glaring issue, it doesn't seem to me to be the long-term workflow killer. Being able to traverse this editing stage of the workflow with Photoshop is crucial. Without this, its basically
a complete project export after the initial organization stage, and the rest of the workflow is either managed entirely in another tool, or a complete pain to bring back into Aperture for output, which leaves files strewn everywhere for backup and archiving.
Brad

Should Apple punt with RAW and/or DNG support ?

It seems that Apple is taking a very detailed approach to profiling cameras before adding support to Aperture. Consequently Aperture may always be later than others apps to add new camera support. Also there will always be legacy or specialty cameras deemed not worth the trouble that don't get added too. I wonder if rather than asking Apple to support every camera made past and present it wouldn't be better to punt and ask for feature changes that make it easier to integrate other RAW developers into an Aperture workflow.
Further for a few of my most valuable images, maybe 1 out of 1000, no matter how good Aperture's RAW conversion I will always want to try other RAW developers to see if they might do slightly better on a top select image. An professional app that wants to host my entire photo archive must logically offer a workflow that supports any camera past or future that I may use even once.
The tools already exist to export a master and develop it with other RAW converters also to manage different master files of the same image using stacks. All that Apple would need to do to make the unsupported camera workflow in Aperture a useable alternative is make a few minor changes to already existing features:
1. In the RAW + JPEG workflow the JPEG is the second class member. You can expose it and have it stacked with the RAW master but you have to manually make it the stack pick. Otherwise when you close the stack you see only the unsupported master file which means nothing. It's not a problem restacking one image and not thinkable with thousands of images. I haven't found a way to get around this with Automator/Applescript. MAYBE: If the JPEG were the first image in the stack then I could still use Aperture for sorting, DAM, keywords, rating, etc. and just process my unsupported images with an external application.
2. I can use Export Master to save out a master file but the process of doing that then reimporting the master file and stacking it with the original is a tedious manual effort. Again Automator/Applescript can help here but more would be needed. MAYBE: If I could duplicate a master file inside a project or stack and if Aperture had an 'Open Master file with external editor" command then it would be easy to have a duplicate master file stored by Aperture that might be used with any other RAW processing application.
3. When I use 'Export Master' now to process some images with ACR or Nikon Capture then I can reimport the TIFF file or JPEG that I create but I can't easily associate them as versions or as externally edited files with their proper masters. MAYBE: There should be a way to link master files with the rendered versions of those files created by external RAW processors.
4. I started my photographic life with film. Most current 'pros' did the same. If I want to have one home for all my photo archive then it has to support film scans of larger sizes and export them to an external editor in something other than Adobe RGB. Automator and Applescript are will make this work in v1.5 but just barely. MAYBE: Give me a way to have my hi-res film scans stored in Aperture and send them to Photoshop without compressing them to Adobe RGB or downsampling to fit Aperture's current filesize (aprox. 250MB) limitation.
I can't imagine having many different databases and apps for unsupported images from a camera I may only use once. If Apple would just streamline and tweak a few features that exist in v1.5 then Aperture could be the home to all my digital images even if some of them had to be developed by another program.
I can't imagine a better workflow than using Aperture with any of it's supported cameras. That shouldn't stop Apple from opening the door for making use of Aperture's great database and DAM features with unsupported cameras too.
Pro Mac 2.66Ghz/8GB/250GB + 1TB RAID 0 wi SoftRAID in bays 2,3/X1900 Mac OS X (10.4.8) MacBookPro 2.16Ghz/2GB/100GB 7200rpm

Eric: Great, Aperture 3 might be out by spring 2010? That's only 6 months or so from now. [/sarcasm]
I appreciate the pointer to the AI article, but personally I'm more interested in whether Apple is working on adding additional RAW support for Aperture/Mac OS X any time soon, and certainly before Aperture 3 is out. Both Aperture 2 and Lightroom 2.5 are more than capable for my workflow and editing needs.
This week only added to my dismay re: Aperture v. Lightroom update likelihood and frequency; still radio silence from Apple, and Adobe releases a public beta of Lightroom 3, even as Lightroom 2 was released subsequent to Aperture 2 and has had more updates since its initial release than Aperture 2.
Brian, can you elaborate on the DNG conversion process that worked for you? Having tried every possible profile (I believe) in the latest release of the DNG Converter app, I have to say I'm skeptical that there's a setting that works with the GF1. But I'm ready to be pleasantly surprised!

Why doesn't a RAW image placed in a Photoshop Document pick up changes?

I have just noticed that if you place a RAW image in a PSD(CS6), then tweak the RAW image using Camera RAW, the changes are not picked up by the PSD.
I always try and keep my PSDs as open to change as possible and placing is a big part of this. Usually I place an image in a PSD, then if I edit the image outside the PSD, the changes are picked up in the PSD.
With RAW this doesn't seem to happen. I have the following file-structure:
     -- someFolder
        -- somePSD
        -- someRAWFile
        -- someRAWFIleXMP
What I'm doing:
1. I drag the RAW File into the PSD.
2. I open the RAW File and tweak it.
3. Photoshop does not reflect the changes
4. I drag the RAWFile into the PSD
5. I then have the same placed RAW File with the changes reflected as well as the old placed RAWFile without them.
So even though both placed images are the same image, they reflect the RAW File at the time it was placed, not at its current state which is surely the whole point of placing a file. It seems that the image is encoded with the RAW settings at the time it is imported, but these are never updated.
What am I missing? Is this a bug or is there no point placing a RAW file?

If you need a "non-destructive" alternative, you can import the raw as a Smart Object. You can set this in Camera Raw's Workflow Options, or you can do this 'on the fly' by holding down Shift when you click on Open.
If you want to change a develop setting after adding the image to a PSD, double-click on the layer thumbnail to reopen the ACR session, and the OK or Cancel when you're finished.
Thanks Yammer,
this is very good to know.

Jpeg Displays pick up Raw file sxif info when displayed

After creating a jpeg images as the last part of a raw -> psd workflow I noticed that the jpegs were not displaying correctly in CS5's bridge.
This can be corrected by opening the jpeg in RAW, setting everything to 0, and clicking on DONE. This erases the info about how I processed the CR2 file - but is a REAL drag.
Am I missing some setting somewhere to fix this oddity?

By the way I spelled Exif wrong.
What I mean is that, if e.g. I increase an image's exposure by 1 stop in raw, process the image, then the final jpeg is displayed overexposed by 1 stop.
It displays correctly (i.e. like the psd file it was created from) if, as I say, I reload the Jpg and UNDO the saved info (that the file was processed with a +1 exposure in raw).
Thanks for your interest.

RAW panorama workflow

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for