Roundtrip to Photoshop?

I'm a bit confused about the round trip process. If LR is non-destructive, what happens when a virtual copy photo is sent to Photoshop? I notice that Photoshop seems to be working on the original photo.
Question #2: How then is photo routed back to LR for further editing? Does LR track editis made in PS?

OK, I ran some additional experiments yesterday, but couldn't post them due to the Adobe outage. It can't be a monitor calibration issue. The photos are being viewed on the same monitor. There definitely is a difference between the various values in Lightroom vs. Photoshop CS6. The changes are getting carried forward into CS6, but then when coming back to LR as a .tif the values are not the same. So, I took a throwaway photo from my archives that I don't wish to process just to experiment. Here is the procedure, followed by the data:
Import photo into LR
Make a virtual copy
Within LR, adjust a few of the exposure and other settings.
On the virtual copy, Edit -> Edit in Photoshop CS6, but make absolutely no modifications to the photo in CS6.
Save from CS6
View resulting .tif in LR and compare values to modified virtual copy and the original in LR.
Here are the resulting values:
Original Develop settings in LR
WB: As shot
Temp: 3000
Tint: +1
Tone
Exposure: +0.30
Contrast: -24
Highlights: -50
Shadows: +50
Whites: +7
Blacks: -35
Presence
Clarity: 0
Vibrance: 0
Saturation: 0
Adjustments to virtual copy in LR
WB: As shot
Temp: 3000
Tint: +1
Tone
Exposure: 0.00
Contrast: -24
Highlights: -100
Shadows: +71
Whites: +7
Blacks: -35
Presence
Clarity: 0
Vibrance: 0
Saturation: +12
Values in .tif file resulting from save in CS6 with no adjustments to the virtual copy at all
WB: As shot
Temp: 0
Tint: 0
Tone
Exposure: 0.20
Contrast: -6
Highlights: -15
Shadows: +15
Whites: +8
Blacks: +1
Presence
Clarity: 0
Vibrance: 0
Saturation: +0
I apologize for the formatting change. Cutting and pasting from Evernote doesn't seem to work very well with this Adobe Forum input editor. Anyway, it is clear that the general trend is for the transition from CS6 back to LR via the .tif is pushing the histogram into overblown, bringing up the shadows and blacks, blowing out highlights. This is what I observe visually, as well on all photos.

Similar Messages

How to achieve a roundtrip with Photoshop

Is there a method to re-import a PS file in Captivate? The problem with existing roundtrip with PS is that it is limited to layers that exist in PS during import. So after importing PS file (either as Flattened Image or as Multi Layer) and making some adjustments to the original file, the adjustments are not reflected in Captivate after Updating from Source. I guess that re-importing the file would do the job, but there seems no way of doing it. This makes the "roundtrip" very limited. Sure I can delete the file from Captivate and import once again, but then all effects and time settings are lost and needs to be re-applied.
[Edit] It seems that using Layer Comps *does* allow to make adjustments in PS and have them reflected in Captivate. So far it works for me, fingers crossed, hopefully it won't break sometime after making more adjustments. But still, importing without Layer Comps (only using Last State) is not working as expected.

First of all, good to hear that it's working for you. There is hope then. Maybe I just do something wrong. Here is what I do:
1. Use eLearning suite 2.5 (the newest one)
2. Create a PS file with one layer. No layer comps (it works ok with layer comps, so no point in testing it)
3. In Captivate Insert->Image and choose the PS file, import as Flattened Image (it doesn't work importing as Layers, either)
4. Add an adjustment layer in PS, like Hue/Saturation
5. Save in PS
6. In Captivate, right-click the file and Update from source. No change in hue - **roundtrip not working**.
7. Save Captivate project, close everything, just in case.
8. Open Captivate project and right-click the imported file and Edit PSD Source file.
9. In Photoshop, see the file has the hue adjustment, as it should. Change something, only to be able to save.
10. Save the PS file and return to Captivate - no change at all. **Roundtrip not working**.
11. Eventually right-click in Captivate and Update from source. See a message saying that source is up to date.
I just did all these steps once again. Why isn't it working?
[Edit] I just discovered that it is not working correctly with layer comps, either. Working ok in some simple cases. But in a file where I added new layers, deleted some old ones etc, the new layers are not visible in Captivate. I'll re-import with layer comps but this time import as Layers and not Flatten Image and see what happens.
[EDIT] *** an idea ***
Hmmmmm... Maybe I understand the roundtripping incorrectly. Here is an idea: after first importing as Flatten Image, there appears FlatImage1 item under filename.psd folder in Captivate. This item is on the slide. OK.
Then, after adding a new layer in PS and Updating from source, there are additional items in filename.psd folder in Captivate, Layer3 and Layer4 (the new layers). Perhaps the "roundtripping" expects me to add those new layers to the slide ?? Is it the designed, correct way to do it? It works then, when I add new layers to the clide, but of course the layers act as new images, so coordinates, timing and effects are gone and must re-create the stacking order. I was expecting that the image already existing on the slide will get updated, so actually, that the FlatImage item will get updated as a snapshot of what is in PS file

Roundtripping to Photoshop to use Photomerge for panoramas

I have multiple photos in Aperture that I want to merge into a panaroma. I use Photoshop's photomerge feature to do this. If select the photos in Aperture and right click to "edit with Photoshop" I end up with a new version of all the individual photos that are being merged. I don't want these duplicate I just want to get them into Photoshop. I realize the resultant merged photo (pano) in Photoshop will be a new photo that needs to be imported into Aperture.
I am trying to find the simplest way to get the individual photos to be merged into Photoshop. I am using a managed library in Aperture so I can't simply open the photos from Photoshop (and if I could it would be a pain to dive down through Apertures folder structure).
I can export all the photos from Aperture and then select them in Photoshop to be merged. But then I end up with a duplicate set of photos to be deleted.
Just searching for a better way.
Thanks any assistance,
Jim
If I select multiple photos

Unfortunately, there's no super easy way to do this. You can open all the photos in Photoshop individually and then merge them there as you noted.
I usually export the masters and then run those through ACR and Photoshop, and then import the merged photo into Aperture and stack it with the masters, and later delete the masters that I exported specifically for this purpose. It's a bit of a pain, and I'll say this is a lot easier with Lightroom.

Roundtripping to Photoshop and metadata

I'm surprised I never noticed this before, but it looks like if you haven't saved your metadata before editing a copy in Photoshop, any metadata that has not been saved is not in the copy. Is this the way it should be for any reason? You do not have to have saved metadata when you export (well, am I sure about that?).

>I've found I get the develop adjustments from lightroom without editing with lightroom adjustments. All I have to do is enter develop, click on edit in external application i history, and they are there............... I have to do a reset. I commented on this some time ago and nobody answered. So now I'm using this to my advantage.
Yes, and it confused me as much then as now. The only thing I can think of is that you have auto adjustments switched on at import. When a non raw file is imported there should be no develop adjustments of any kind applied to the file (see attached screenshot).
>Ian, your explanation that it's a feature doesn't explain why if we save the metadata then it does get applied to the edited copy (except ratings).
When you "save" the metadata, etc you have written in back into the
original file outside of Lr (inclusive of ratings, keywords and labels). Until such times as you use "save" the metadata, etc are unique to the Lr catalog and internal previews (think of them as virtual metadata and/or adjustments, they live in the catalog, not the actual file). In the case of PSD, TIFF and JPEG the adjustments will not even be applied to the file until you export it, thus creating a copy or overwriting the original. In other words, "saving adjustments" to a PSD, TIFF or JPEG does not alter the rendering of the original.

Problem Re-applying Develop settings after roundtrip to photoshop!

I am having a very annoying problem with re applying develop settings back to an image after touching up in photoshop.
Here is my basic workflow.
1 - import camera files to lightroom (Raw .cr2 Files)
2 - make slects and experiment with color develop settings.
3 - Rest all develop settings.
4 - send to photoshop for skin touch ups via edit in photoshop. OR export .DNG files for my touch up artist.
5 - Re import into lightroom via saving from photoshop to up date the copy it makes or just re-importing if it was a DNG i exported
6 - copy the develop settings from the original then pasting onto the edited version.
When I do this paste the develop settings the image gets totally blown out and is not at all close to the original develop settings I had decided on.
Note: before pasting the develop settings the touched up file is IDENTICAL to the reset original.
This is a Major problem for me and totally makes it impossible to match the original effect.
What am I doing wrong here?

So what should the workflow be?
Do your best on RAW in Lightroom, edit in Photoshop (16bpc, ProPhoto) for final touches that Lightroom cannot accomplish (retouch skin etc.).
if I do an effect then send to photoshop to edit and then back to lightroom is some of the color information lost? say if my effect is really blowing out the whites and I want to change it post photoshop edit am I able to get that color information back?
No, if you blow the highlight in raw, you cannot get them back from a PSD. The point is not to blow them if you don't wish to, then there will be nothing to recover fro a PSD. But if your artistic choice was to blow the highlights in a picture, then there's on difference when you blow them and no point in wishing
to recover them on a latter stage.
Do the photoshop files have the same color range as the raws?
Yes, if you use the ProPhoto RGB space and 16bpc bit depth.

RAW Support in InDesign and Roundtrip to Lightroom

Julianne Kost suggested I suggest this feature when I spoke to her yesterday at PhotoPlus in NYC. I am currently designing wedding albums using InDesign and I like being able to roundtrip to Photoshop and back. But most images in the book are not brought into Photoshop and are instead edited in Lightroom where I tweek some things and then export to overwrite the current file in my layout. This requires me to click on the image, find its file number, search for it in Lightroom, make the edit and then re-export. Doable but time-consuming. If I could simply drag DNG files from LR into my layout and then use LR as the editor, it would make for an incredibly fast workflow. How about it?
Forgive me oh mighty mods but I am going to cross-post this in the Lightroom forum since I'm not sure which one is appropriate.

Rob, my reading of your site is that this plug-in copies settings from raw to jpeg, does it work the other way around as well?
Rob Cole wrote:
One of the great things about the new 0-based defaults and linear tone curve is:
You can develop the jpegs now, in Lightroom, and then sync the settings to the raws later (e.g. using RawPlusJpeg), and provided you select a matching camera profile, they will look almost the same (white balance won't translate over, but everything else will, more or less). Beware lens corrections applied to the raws might alter the registration of precision local adjustments.
Note: I recommend shooting with ADL off in order for this to work better, and consider turning sharpening off in camera as well, and noise reduction and everything else to whatever extent is possible.
Rob

Adding text to Photographs

I am totally new to Aperture 3, so be gentle!
I would like to add some text to a picture, rather like you can do with photoshop! I realise that you can add text if you were producing a book, but I only want to do it to up load the picture to flickr and or print it!
Thanks in advance for you help!

cmyk01 wrote:
I am totally new to Aperture 3, so be gentle!
I would like to add some text to a picture, rather like you can do with photoshop! I realise that you can add text if you were producing a book, but I only want to do it to up load the picture to flickr and or print it!
Thanks in advance for you help!
not like photoshop. but you can roundtrip to photoshop from aperture 3.
or,
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/aperture/apertureborderfx.html
or,
you can export the version to a folder or desktop. open it in Preview & use Tools/Annotate/Add Text
or,
use Apple's Pages to add text
victor

Separate luminance and color white balance

I know this is a quite peculiar idea, but i roundtrip to Photoshop a lot just for this..
we all know white balance affects how contrast and luminance of different image areas are interpreted by the software, and at times, especially in low or mixed light, I find that the 'color wise correct' white balance is often different to the 'luminance wise best' one..
i hope this doesn't sound too tortuous, and i really don't know if it would be hard to implement, but it would definitely help a lot with image quality..

ok..
I usually do this for low light portraits or mixed light situation, but it really works for everything, and is quite similar to the "tone" part of topaz detail plugin, for example..
we always choose WB to have a pleasant or correct color rendition, right?
but if we are in black and white, different WB settings affect different areas of the image, lightwise..
and i find out that there is always a sweet spot, depending on the lighting, where noise is better and shadows are better distributed, and and that usually doesn't match to the color WB sweet spot..
this is the original auto wb image
and its bw equivalent
here wb is tweaked to better balance shadows and contrast
but you can see colors are way off..
to give a better idea..
original:
two wbs, obtained with layers color blend mode of original onto bw tweaked
i realize at this size the difference may look small, but it really changes the balance of light, especially with low light or underexposed or mixed light shots..
hope now it's more clear..
cheers
Tommaso

Strange behavior after using NIK plug-ins

Every once in a while I encounter this strange behavior of Aperture. I first process the NEF's in Aperture (white balance, Exposure, Enhance... and, when needed, Cropping) and then I fine tune the image with the NIK plug-ins; when needed DfIne 2.0, Viveza, Color Efex Pro 3.0 and Sharpener Pro 3.0 Output Sharpener.
If I look at the processed picture then, I get a perfect presentation of the photo;
!http://users.skynet.be/fc419085/Aperture-1.jpg!
But when I press Z to zoom into a 100% preview I get this;
!http://users.skynet.be/fc419085/Aperture-2.jpg!
When I select the Loup in the normal view mode I get this;
!http://users.skynet.be/fc419085/Aperture-3.jpg!
This doesn't happen with all my pictures, yesterday I processed a series of 8 pictures an 6 of them showed this behavior the other two acted normal and I can't see what I did differently whit these last two.
When I export the strangely behaving photo's to a Tiff or a Jpeg, I get perfectly normal pictures.
The original NEF behaves normal. I have seen this behavior with NEF's from a Nikon D200, D2x and a D300. I have Aperture 2.1.2 running on a 2.33 GHz Intel Core Duo MacBook Pro running Mac OS X 10.5.6
Does anybody know what's happening and if so, how to solve this problem?
Cheers,
Ivan

I did some testing and what I found is too weird to be true.
First this mashed up look doesn't only happen after using NIK plug-ins, it also happens when making a roundtrip to Photoshop, given that certain conditions are met.
Give it a try yourself. Crop an image to an uneven pixelcount dimension, for example 4227 x 2797 and make a roundtrip to Photoshop. Then have a 100% view look at the new image in Aperture. You'll have a mashed up view, at least I do.
Now crop the same original image to an even pixelcount dimension, for example 4228 x 2798 and make an roundtrip to Photoshop once more. When you have a 100% view of the new image now, you'll see a perfectly normal photo.
Do you think Aperture developers are reading this forum?

Lightroom 4.1 RC and Canon 5d Mark III Cropping Info/ratio bug

Today I imported RAW images I shot on the Canon 5d3 with the camera set to Add Cropping Information set to 4:5 ratio. Crop lines are displayed on the camera LCD but you see the full frame outside of the crop when review files. Alarmingly, when I imported them to LR 4.1 RC, the images appeared cropped to 4:5. I though ok, I'll just go to the crop tool and I will see that a crop has been applied and I'll remove it. Unfortunately, there was no file beyond the crop lines, it could not be removed as far as I could tell. I called Canon and they told me to try Digital Photo Professional, a program that I never pay attention to. Sure enough, the images were intact when viewed there. There appears to be a bug when LR 4.1 RC encounters the crop tag on the raw file. I have posted this on the Adobe Forums. I am running OS X 10.6.8 on a Mac Pro.

I got 'caught' by this feature today.
I used my new 5D3 in the same way I normally use my 7D which is to turn on the aspect ratio 'display' on live view so that I can frame my image for alternate format (ie. 1x1). The 'choice' is made in post-processing. On the 7D, RAW files imported with this setting are FULL size. On the 5D3 the RAW files have the aspect ratio applied and it cannot be 'removed'.
This is contrary to the 5D3 manual which says JPEG are saved with the crop but RAW are saved full size. In fact, viewing the RAW file with the Preview.app shows the full size so this is in fact a 'feature' implemented by Lightroom to 'bake in' the aspect ratio set/used in camera.
In Canon Digital Photo Professional the aspect ratio is 'applied' in the default view but can be easily removed. However, changing this on the RAW file doesn't cause Lightroom to 'detect' the file modified outside LR and allow you to apply the changes making the full frame image available in LR4. The ONLY way I could get the full version into LR4 was to export as TIFF with DPP and then import the TIFF in LR4.
I don't 'normally' use TIFF files at the beginning of my workflow although sometimes they end up in LR4 after roundtripping to Photoshop and/or other plugins that require a TIFF file.
This is NOT ideal and should be changed to make the behavior consistent with other Canon bodies and CR2 files and/or with DPP. I personally like the idea to 'display' the image with the aspect ratio on import but ALLOW you to back it out giving the full frame image if you wish. The added benefit is that you get access to the RAW data beyond your original crop that can be used for cloning into the desired crop/aspect ratio.
Please implement this modification in the next update of LR4.
Thanks

Collaboration with captivate

Hi,
We have just set up a team of 5 using Elearning suite 2 and other Cs5 projects
Previously we all went our own seperate ways and each person did everything for their project
Now we want different people to get images, sound video and put them together.
So how do people work collaboratively with Captivate
1. What do people use to assign tasks/track bugs to people ?
2. What do people use to book in assets/control versions ?
from adobe help
From Bridge, you can place selected assets in Adobe Captivate by dragging them into Adobe Captivate or using the In Captivate option from the Place menu
Select File > Place > In Captivate.
thank-you
Nymicat

Hello Nymicat,
Some of the workflows which might help with this kinds of situation is Roundtripping with Photoshop, Soundbooth and Flash. For Ex, if Graphic Designer creates a PSD image and shares with the person working with Captivate and he imports the PSD, next time when the PSD is changed, Captivate can alert the user who is using captivate that the PSD has changed and whether he wants to re-import. Same thing happens with Flash Roundtripping also.
Also, reviewing is very easy with Captivate's features like SWF Commenting and Collaborating with Acrobat.com.
Currently Captivate cannot do version control and there are many softwares available for the same.
Thanks,
Vish

Captivate 7 - Browse in Bridge greyed out ??

Just purchased and installed Captivate 7 (with assurance program). "Browse in Bridge" is greyed out under "File" pulldown. I also have CS4 Production that has Bridge CS4.
User manual says "Adobe Bridge is integrated with Adobe Captivate 7 and later." Also, "Alternatively, you can click the Browse Bridge Connection tool button". However I can't find that button.
I can drag photos from Bridge CS4 onto a slide in CP7, but no back and forth, etc. It doesn't look like Bridge CP got installed on my machine.
Any help appreciated.
Tom

Hello and welcome to the forum,
I have trial CP7 installed and have Creative Cloud, which means also Bridge CS6. The option Browse in Bridge is available to me. Maybe that is not the case for you because CS4 is 3 versions back...? Captivate doesn't include Bridge itself, the option will be only available if you have already Bridge installed (same with roundtripping Audition, Photoshop, Flash).
Lilybiri

More color nasties

First of all I LOVE the Aperture workflow. Taking photos from my camera (30D RAW) into the app is a breeze. Managing versions and making a roundtrip to Photoshop and back is smooth and easy. I love stacking, I love comparing images on a second screen (I have 2x 23-inch cinema displays); I love keywording and sorting, searching... makes my handling over 15,000 images very manageable and enjoyable. Every thing is nearly flawless... except:
I am really getting quite sick of dealing with color issues.
1: Sometimes my images look muddy with no detail in the shadows, sometimes they look fine. When viewing them on a second screen, the detail is there, then after a few seconds of 'loading', the detail is gone. This includes looking at the original RAW files without any adjustment. I haven't been able to pinpoint the issue, but RAW 2.0 seems to have helped a bit, although the color between RAW 1.1 and RAW 2 is quite different.
2: Onscreen proofing looks AWFUL; and for me it has always looked awful. I used to run Aperture 1/1.5 with a "Cinema HD" profile... later calibrated both my displays with a Huey Pro. Awful before, awful after. I am using Aperture 2 and have switched between the "Cinema HD" and a new Huey profile I made... still awful. I am using various profiles from my Canon IP9000 (Canon Pro9000 SP1-SP4; Canon Pro9000 PR1-PR3)and each one has it's own awfulness to it. Colors washed, shadows murky, etc... awful.
3: Why is printing from Aperture such a royal pain and why are good results, if you're ever lucky enough to get them, so hard to reproduce? Latest prints came out with the shadowy areas of a red leather couch having a distinct green hue. Same with a shadow from my subject's clothing on her skin... Same images printed from Photoshop: fine and crisp, beautiful shadows, no green. It's obviously not the printer.
There are numerous threads about people experiencing problems printing with Aperture: mostly about color, and some about borders on prints even when borderless printing is selected (another intermittent and mysterious problem that affects me, as well)...
Last year I bought the "Aperture 1.5 Book"; helped a lot with workflow; practically useless with regards to printing. That book recommended reading "Color Management in OS X" which I recently picked up, learned a bit about Gamut and ICC (most of which I knew already) but it was published in 2004 and the Leopard ColorSync utility lacks a dedicated 'Preference' pane which this book makes a great deal of reference to.
So, can anyone tell me what the deal is with Aperture and color? Why is it so difficult to get consistent results? Why don't the same issues occur in Photoshop or even Apple's iPhoto (printing from iPhoto seems to produce far superior results to Aperture and is a lot easier to manage, as well). I have spent $$ on decent software and hardware, bought a decent printer, read the books, spent a LOT of time in the support threads, etc... I know there are a lot of variables involved, but it shouldn't be THAT difficult to print from Aperture, should it?
here's what I'm using:
Aperture 2.0.1
Leopard 10.5.2
G5 quad 4 x 2.5GHz
8 GB RAM
2 x 23-inch Cinema HD displays
Huey Pro 1.5.0
but like I said, I have had many of the same problems in Tiger with Aperture 1/1.5

Hi Rich. Way to stick with it
I know the purpose of proofing is to give you somewhat of an idea of what the printed output will look like, however, I doubt the awfulness I kept referring to on screen is due to the printer limitations, as the same photos that will proof awfully, are quite capable of being printed faithfully (as experience from Photoshop and iPhoto can attest). The only time that the prints DO somewhat match the awful proofs (muddy, color casts especially in shadows, etc...) is when I print them from Aperture, but, again, from other applications the same photos will print much more faithfully.
The part to get your head around, is that the goal here isn't to make great looking prints--it's to make prints that match what you see on screen. Only when you know that what you see on screen is what's coming out of the printer can you make adjustments to the image--then when the image looks great on screen, it will look great off the printer. Note that you have to calibrate your monitor for any of this to work.
and in terms of the second : Printing
{quote:title=Eoin Kavanagh wrote:}That being said, where are you setting up this profile to use. What I mean by that is I presume you have set the colour option to none from the print settings only in the Aperture print dialogue box and set the correct ICC profile for the paper you are using later in the Colorsync Profile drop down menu on the main print dialogue. {quote}
This is another gripe I have... Why are there so many places to set printing preferences (and therefore, make a mistake)? Eoin, if I am understanding, you have suggested not using the Aperture print dialogue for choosing settings, while Janet below suggests the opposite: using Aperture's print dialogue and NOT the other one. I realize that you are both saying the same thing: set in ONE PLACE and not the other... the fact that it is possible to set it (and screw it up) in more than one place is not only confusing, but quite unnecessary. A very 'Microsoft' way of handling printing, don't you think?
LOL. It has a very Microsoft feel to it. There are way too many places to set this and mess it up. You are correct that you should select color management in one place, or your colors will be "double-managed". I believe that Eoin is mistaken about the right place to do this (and the Ap manual will back me on this).
I did a test to print from Aperture. The first time I set the Printer profile with Aperture, the second time I left it as "System Managed"
Here are the steps I followed:
1. select the photo
2. command+p (print) > Aperture's print window shows up
3. (ignoring any saved print settings that I have, here's what I would do next) choose my Pro9000
4. Clicked "Print Settings" > "Quality and Media" selected "Photo Paper Plus Glossy" and ticked "Printing a top-quality photo"
4a: checked out the "Color Options" pane, but there is nothing in there that lets you choose a profile (Color Mode drop down greyed out)
5. click "Save" ... (returned to Aperture print dialogue)
6. Choose paer size: 5x7 (borderless)
*note: border still shows in preview image
7. Orientation: best fit
8 ColorSync Profile: Canon Pro9000 PR3
9. left Black point Compensation Checked
10. Gamma 1.0 (unchanged)
11. Sharpen options both left at 0
12. Scale To: Fill Entire Page
13. Border Options: Width: 0 in
*note: border disappears from preview image
14. Click "Print"
*special note: if you try to go back to step 4 and click "Print Settings" a second time, Aperture 2.0 crashes
First note: make sure the paper that you're using matches the profile that you've selected. It has to be the exact paper, or all bets are off. I think the problem here might be the order in which you're choosing your settings. You might think that you'd do it in the order it's presented in the Aperture print dialogue, but that would be way too logical. Choose the Colorsync Profile first, then open the Print Settings. Now you should be able to turn off printer color management. From your description of printing from photoshop, it seems that the correct setting to turn off color management in your driver might be ColorSync > Profile: Automatic ("Canon Pro9000 PR3" is displayed), rather than none. (I don't have a Canon printer, so knowing the specifics of where the settings are and what they're named can be tricky--but this setting sounds like it's picking up the profile from what photoshop is sending it, and it should work the same way for Ap). As you've described what you've done, Aperture has adjusted the data for the PR3 profile, and sent it to the printer, which was expecting un-corrected data and applied whatever canned corrections Canon printers apply.
What did I get? a muddy and over saturated photo WITH A BORDER
Followed the same steps, only this time set the ColorSync Profile to "System Managed" (step 8 from above); everything else remained the same
What did I get? An slightly better quality image without a border (still slightly over saturated)
In theory, in this case, you sent un-corrected data, and got the canned corrections, but I think that the black point compensation might not have been expected by the printer, and that's where the over-saturation comes in.
If you did want to try what Eoin suggested, after selecting "System Managed", you'd want to re-open the printer dialogue and select the profile from the colorsync drop down, if you can. The reason I don't like this is that you're now potentially involving two devices in managing color, where if you turn it off in the printer, then you know it's off. Also, you can count on either Aperture or Photoshop having much better color management conversions than the printer itself.
So let's do a test to see if Canon Pro9000 PR3 isn't the right profile for the paper....
Do the same thing in Photoshop...
1. File > Print with Preview (print preview window opens)
2. click Page Setup (printer driver dialog opens)
3. Format for: Canon Pro9000
4. Paper Size: 5" x"7" (borderless)
5. click "OK" (returned to print preview window)
7: I want a borderless print and the orientation is not 5x7 so I set the scale to 66.89% to fill the paper with slight cropping
8: tick "Show More Options"
9: select "Color Management" from dropdown
10: Source Space: Document: Adobe RGB(1998)
*note: other choice is "Proof Setup: Generic CMYK Profile"
11: Print Space: select "Canon Pro9000 PR3" from Profile dropdown
12. Left "Relative Colormetric" selected in Intent dropdown
13: "Use Black Point Compensation" was ticked, I left it on
14: click "Print"
15: click "Proceed" from a cropping warning modal box
16: standard system print window opens
17: Printer: Canon Pro9000
18: Presets: Standard
19: select "Color Matching" from dropdown and use ColorSync > Profile: Automatic ("Canon Pro9000 PR3" is displayed)
20: choose "Quality and Media" from dropdown
21: Select "Photo Paper Plus Glossy" from Media Type
22: Print a top-quality photo is ticked, I leave it that way
23: click "Print"
What do I get? A pretty darn good quality print very close to what I see on screen
Source space only gives you a choice between the color space of the document and the one that you currently have set for proofing. Use the document one (in this case Adobe RGB). It sounds like this might be correct. It all hinges on whether that ColorSync: Automatic setting in fact means that the printer understands that it's being passed profiled data from the application. But if the print matches what you see on screen when you have soft proofing turned on, then it's probably right.
I haven't commented at all about the whole border thing. I know it's wacked and it's differently wacked on different printers, so I can't help with that
cheers,
jt

No problems to report!

Because I see people with problems with Aperture, I just want to say, I've been using Aperture for professional wedding, concert, and personal work, editing since it was first introduced. I have had as many as 60,000 images in the library, and had no problems other than speed when browsing/searching the entire library. I never have problems when dealing with real world editing of a single project. I now use iPhoto as my main import program, and reference files in Aperture for editing. Still... no problems with the database, or anything else. I'm guessing there are a few others out there who will also confirm that Aperture is a great and very usable application, even in this, it's early incarnation.

I'm another huge fan. I hope this thread gets read by people considering buying Aperture. Because Aperture had a distastrous first release, and because Adobe has a savage PR machine, there's a lot of misinformation out there about Aperture.
I bought the first copy of Aperture available in Toronto, and was extremely disappointed with how it ran on my G5 with its puny video card. Really wanted to like it, though. Transferred everything to Lightroom because of the performance issues. Truly hated everything about Lightroom, from it's modal operation to its ugly interface, to its nasty white balance on NEFs, but it got the job done until I bought a new computer. As soon as I had a shiny new MBP with a fast video card, I transferred everything back.
Aperture just thinks more the way I do. It's easy to compare multiple images, to adjust images while you're sorting and rating, to compare versions while you're adjusting. (Try comparing three images at 100% in Lightroom--oops, can't). You're not locked into a linear way of working through your pics. Love the loupe tool and the tooltip metadata display. Also find it very useful that the previews are so easily available to other apps in the media browser. I frequently roundtrip to Photoshop and from time to time to Capture NX (this is still an export/re-import situation).
There are a couple of develop tools I'd love to see in Aperture (lens/perspective correction, chromatic aberration fix/purple defringing). And in my fantasy world they'd implement something like the upoints and masks that Capture NX has.

Are they serious? Captivate is not creative enough for Creative Cloud?

What are they thinking??? My thoughts are in chaos right now...I was about to buy in to the cloud, even though I'm not able to truly use it yet, so I could continue working and learning, as my trial is ending. Thank God I did a last minute check! WOW. This is wrong on so many levels.
And an extra-special thank you, Adobe, from teachers, many of whom create more each day than some folks do in a lifetime. Guess I'll get that squirrely little subscription for it, wondering all the while when they'll pull it out from under me. I was so hoping to combine it with the other programs bit by bit. Now I'm reading it's incompatible with so much here. Or do I have it wrong somehow?
Adobe, you have some very serious concept issues! Or I'm a bubble-wad and have no clue about what I thought the CC was. Entirely possible.

Wondering if you both can read my thoughts and hear what I'm telling everywhere
Adobe Captivate is the most underestimated application by Adobe itself. In the Adobe Education Community (I'm an Adobe Education Leader, very surprising because normally expertise in Captivate will not get you approved, but I play also with Photoshop, InDesign.... and that helped) they already gave me the nickname of 'Captivate Defender'. Reason is that I have been asking so many annoying questions everywhere like: 'why do you want me to present all the features of Captivate in 20 minutes, and do you not ask that for Photoshop or Dreamweaver?' 'Why do you always only show very basic features of Captivate and in-depth features of the other applications?' 'Why are you not using Captivate for your tutorials' etc...
I discovered Captivate, thanks to an article somewhere, when I was looking for a tool as a teacher to innovate my way of teaching, and as you probably know, became a big fan. But in education, Captivate is almost not known, see that famous 'Education Community'. And leaving it out of the CC that has very interesting prices for students and teachers is indeed IMO a big mistake.
@Kurrykid, I really hope that your fear will never become reality, because where is the alternative that can replace Captivate, inclusive its roundtripping with Photoshop, Audition (and hoping on roundtripping with Illustrator for shapes in the future, and better integration of Edge Animate)? I have been using a lot of tools, but never discovered that 'white blackbird' yet.
Lieve

Roundtrip to Photoshop?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for