Use of Adobe DNG with Aperture

It seems to me that with Adobe keeping up very well with new and old cameras being enabled in their DNG converter, Aperture users can relax and wait patiently for Aperture raw conversion to catch up. It means an extra step temporarily but it allows us Aperture users to process raws from many cameras that Aperture is not yet set up for.
Now am I missing something? Is there a quality difference in the ensuing raw conversions, comparing a conversion from DNG to one from the raw file itself? Let's forget camera profiles for this question. I already admit that it means more work for the user...

There simply aren't that many cases where Adobe comes out with RAW conversion far ahead of Apple. In some cases they're out with a converter for a new camera a couple weeks sooner, in some cases, about the same time, and in some cases, Apple comes out with support for a new camera sooner.
And... all of these are really only applicable if you have a brand new camera.
For me, it's not worth it, given there's some information loss (such as auto-focus sensors used) when converting the RAW file to DNG format. And the upsides of DNG aren't really "wins" to me.

Similar Messages

When using printer Epson R1900 with Aperture 3 and if I mistakenly choose the wrong paper such as, epson's luster instead of glossy, does that change the exposure? Like make it too dark one or two stops!

When using printer Epson R1900 with Aperture 3 and if I mistakenly choose the wrong paper such as, epson's luster instead of glossy, does that change the exposure? Like make it too dark one or two stops!

Hi,
If you choose the incorrect settings for printing, yes - the print quality will be affected.
Different papers absorb the ink differently, so you can end up with prints that are too light, too dark, or have a colour cast if you make incorrect choices in your Aperture or printer settings.

Problem with Adobe DNG in Aperture 2.1.4

I've never had a problem with DNGs until now. I have Pentax DSLRs and can import their RAW format (PEFs), but my workflow involves converting PEFs to DNGs using Adobe RAW Converter, then importing the DNGs to my managed Library.
Just got a Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 which has RAW format of RW2 which I understand is not supported by Aperture 2.1.4. However, given my workflow, I simply converted the RW2s to DNGs using ARC v.5.6. The problem is Aperture doesn't recognize the DNGs. This doesn't make sense as I would think the DNG coming out of ARC should be readable irrespective of what the original RAW file format was.
Any ideas on what the problem is (short of upgrading to Aperture 3)? This seems like an Adobe DNG problem, not an LX3 file format issue.
Thanks for any help anyone can provide.
Steve

The buttons are on the same line. I would like to upgrade to 2.2 and I'm sure that we will at some point, but it won't happen without some time dedicated to testing. I'd like to get this figured out with version 2.1. The strange part is that it just showed up after the portlet was enhanced. I looked at everthing changed and I can't figure out what could have caused it. Anyone have any idea what would cause 2 buttons in one TD tag not to both receive the onclick event?

Using Places in iPhoto with aperture photos

If we have a picture in aperture with the City and Country Name attribute filleds, this picture in iphoto will not have the info. So, iPhoto no uses the EXIF City and Country Name fields.
are there any solution to use the exif info filled in apeture with Places in iPhoto?
Thanks.

I am not familiar with Aperture so I don't know what it can do or if any helper programs/plug ins will do with Aperture.
However there are other Geotagging programs out there. One that is very easy to use in conjunction with Google Earth is Graphics Connverter. With GC, you can open Google Earth, find the location of you want to tag your photo with, then switch over to GC and use the menu item to geotag the selected photos (you can do many photos at once) with the currently displayed Google Earth location. In addition there is a menu command to simply type in coordinates if you do not want to use Google Earth. GC can also tag using GPS data logger files.
GC will write the coordinates to the EXIF data and I have done it myself on both normal JPGs as well as Olympus RAW format. I know when I geotag with GC and then add the photos to iPhoto, iPhoto sees the tags just fine and show their locations. I assume Aperture would do the same.
iPhoto can tag photos as well, but it only writes the data to the database and doesn't actually add the info to the EXIF of the photos themselves until you export the photos out of iPhoto. Do to do it with iPhoto is a multi step process that would require adding them to iPhoto, tagging them, then exporting them back out of iPhoto. I think CG would be an easier solution.
Patrick

Use of ADOBE form with Workflow...

Hi All,
Can you help to understand the integration between ADOBE forms and Workflow?
I want to understand how to use ADOBE forms with workflow? and in which scenario's we can use it?
Regards,
Yogesh

Hi Yogesh,
Check if the following link gives you direction:
Adobe forms with Work Flow
https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/1098f36e-304f-2a10-7092-96a74210aa8d
Hope this helps!
Regards,
Saumya

Using a MacBook Pro with Aperture 3

Anyone using the newest 13" MacBook Pro with Aperture 3? I'm wondering how you like the performance of that laptop with AP 3. Are you using the 2.4 or 2.6 GHz?
I'm considering a new Mac and want to know how this holds up with Aperture.
Thanks.

micro43 wrote:
Did post #2 not already answer this? I would think someone who actually uses this machine would be more inclined to give you an accurate answer...
The point is that there is no per se "accurate answer" to the general performance question. E.g. we hear performance complaints regarding all kinds of boxes stronger than the 13" MBP as well as some reports of users satisfied with MBs or Minis. The more feedback the OP gets the better able he/she is to come to a satisfactory personal conclusion.
Personally I consider the display an important part of what characterizes graphics app performance. Any +"actual user"+ has already decided against the additional *70% more pixels of the 15" size* with high-rez matte display and also has conluded that glossy is OK for them. IMO a potential new buyer of a laptop for graphics should have those differences firmly in mind when decision making. *Clearly a trip to physically compare 13" glossy vs. the 15" size with high-rez matte display is in order.*
A user like cbandes doing the heavy work on a MP with real display is much more likely to be happy with the tiny glossy 13" display part-time in the field than is someone trying to run a full pro Aperture workflow from a 13" MBP. Personally I like pixels and dislike glossy, so I would never go from 1.7M matte pixels to 1M glossy pixels just to save 1.1 pound of weight. IMO.

I have Aperture 3 now and can't use my iPhoto library with Aperture.

My version of iPhoto is 8.1.2. Aperture says I need iPhoto 9.1 or somewhere around there. How do I do this. Is this another purchase I will have to make? I downloaded the upgrade for iPhoto 9.4.2 and it told me that I need iPhoto 9.1 or later for the upgrade to 9.4.2. Come on man!!!
I just spent $100 for mountain lion and aperture. What is the oldest upgrade I can make to iPhoto 8.1.2 so it will work with aperture 3? Or am I just stuck with having to purchase iPhoto 9.1?
Thanks

As documented you must have iPhoto 9.3 and Aperture 3.3 or later - if you do not meet the minimum requirements then you must upgrade to meet them - in your case purchasing iPhoto '11 in the App store
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5260?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US
With Aperture 3.3 you can directly open and work with libraries from iPhoto 9.3 or later.
LN

Using Canon Wireless *** - E3A with Aperture?

Anyone gotten these canon wireless contraptions to work with Aperture in a tethering mode so you see the pic within a few seconds of it being shot?

http://tinyurl.com/5wrrkw

Can I use multiple iPhoto libraries with Aperture?

I've been using iPhoto to manage my photos (successfully) for many years. I have multiple themed iPhoto libraries with many thousands of photos in them (ten years' worth of digital plus another fifty years scanned). I am thinking of downloading Aperture and giving it a try (thanks to an App Store gift card).
Can I use Aperture to edit photos within these iPhoto libraries? Do the libraries become "common" to both applications, or does duplication occur? I have limited hard drive space and don't want to create large duplicate files on my iMac.
Thanks.

luba petrusha wrote:
I have some 50-100 libraries (haven't counted recently) which occupy most of my hard drive. I find it easiest to manage my photos with themed libraries (annual, trip, subject).
You could make each of your "themed Libraries" a Folder in Aperture, with all your current Projects and Albums intact. In this way, you could search across all of your Image at once (e.g.: a Smart Album showing all Images in which you've identified a Face as "Mom"; or filter for the keyword "Sunset"). In general, the more Images in a Library, the more useful that Library is. I strongly recommend one Library for each photographer (or group of photographers working as a business). Aperture has no trouble handling enormous Libraries (officially, it supports up to 1,000,000 Images, iirc).
A more advanced Library organization would replace each "themed" Folder+Projects with Albums. There is no reason to limit your "themes" to the Images in just the Projects contained in a Folder.
My general recommendation has always been to put all your Projects in one Folder (with sub-Folders as needed); and to put all your Albums in another top-level Folder. In this way you build two structures: a _storage_ structure, in which you put all your Projects, where each Project = one shoot, and an _access_ structure, where you have Albums organized by Folders into whatever groupings you need.
The newest version of Aperture (3.3.1) leans in this direction. For the first time there is a default division between Project storage and Album storage (one the Library tab of the Inspector, there are now two built-in top-level containers, one for Projects and one for Albums).
A separate issue is where on your system your Library and your Originals are stored. Aperture allows you to move your Originals to storage on external drives or other non-system drives. The limitation of the storage available on the system drive is something that all active photographers encounter at some point. (In Aperture-speak, you would convert Image's Originals from Managed to Referenced using "File➞Relocate Originals". This isn't something I'd look into right away, but rather after you become familiar with the Aperture interface.

Re: Leone's post May 2014 about how to best use an external drive with Aperture

I am trying to find Leone who had a great post May 2014 to Diane. I posted tho same message as a 'Reply' to the Leone/Diane posts but then was worried it would not show up since that was some time ago so I decided I should post it as new. Apologies if it comes through twice. I am having trouble as indicated below:
I found this response to the question about Aperture and external hard drives from last May. I bought a WD My Book 4TB and need to back up photos I have in Aperture (many!) to free up space. I am a photographer and need to be able to plug the external drive in as needed, pull a photo out from the WD and back into Aperture to work on it if needed.
I read your directions to Diane and have the external drive formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled). I read the two ways you suggest to move part or all of my library to an external drive and still be able to use it in Aperture with all the metadata saved, as I need to continue to work with the images. I am not completely clear about the advantage of the 'referenced' method but decided to go with the Split Library because it sounded like the Referenced method would still keep originals (and take space) in Aperture. I'm not sure about this, but that was what I chose.
I have backed up my computer, formatted the drive then went to Aperture to begin. I do the 'Export' and it shows the external drive it will go to but when I click 'OK', it says "EXPORT LIBRARY FAILED - Library could not be create because the file system of the destination volume is not supported." I doubled checked to be sure the drive was Journaled which it was. I did call WD and talk to them but they told me this was outside their area.
Also, in Aperture, I have my photos in Projects by yymmdd. Is it possible to transfer Projects into the ext. drive without having to break them out of the Projects?
Any direction anyone might give would be greatly appreciated, Sandy

Hi Sandy,
I suggest taking a week or two to get to know Aperture better before proceeding. Aperture can do many things, and can do what you want. It's important to be specific about what you want, however. From what you've said, it appears that you don't yet know.
bybeeler wrote:
[1] I found this response to the question about Aperture and external hard drives from last May. I bought a WD My Book 4TB and need to back up photos I have in Aperture (many!) to free up space.
[2] I am a photographer and need to be able to plug the external drive in as needed, pull a photo out from the WD and back into Aperture to work on it if needed.
[1] A back-up is a copy of digital files stores on a separate device. A back-up is recommended because drives fail, and humans make mistakes. A back-up is not used to free up storage space.
[2] Aperture can be set up in many equally-usable ways. The program files reside (almost always) on your system drive. The data files can be anywhere you want them, as long as they are on locally-mounted drive(s). The main data file is your Library. The best place for it is on the drive that has the fastest throughput to your logic board. This is, in nearly 100% of machines, the system drive. But Aperture functions well with Libraries of secondary drives — internal or external — with sufficient throughput. USB-3 and Thunderbolt I (& II) provide sufficient throughput for using an Aperture Library on a secondary drive.
Nearly all photographers will fill whatever storage space is available (making data is what photographers do). The question is: what do you do when your Library no longer fits on your system drive? (And remember, you should leave at least 10% (I recommend 20% for heavy users of Aperture) of your system drive free.) The answer depends, primarily, on whether your computer is portable or fixed in location.
If fixed, just buy a more-than-large-enough secondary drive of USB-3 or faster throughput, mount it permanently, and move (using Finder) your Library to it.
If your computer is portable (and you can't increase the on-board storage), you have to select the best from several confusing alternatives:
• Put your Library on an external drive with throughput at least as fast as USB-3
— Pros: Easy to maintain and back-up.
— Cons: Must have drive with you in order to use your Library.
• Leave your Library on your system drive, but relocate your Images' Originals to an external drive.
— Pros: You can work on your Library without having the external drive available.
— Cons: You can't export (except Previews), Print, or make adjustments until your external drive is mounted. Significantly more difficult to administer, especially importing and backing-up.
• Leave your Library and and _some_ of your Images' Originals on your system drive, and relocate most of your Image's Originals to an external drive.
— Pros: You can do any work on those Images whose Originals are stored in the Library regardless of where the external drive is.
— Cons: Yet another level more difficult to administer.
If you are comfortable with the administrative overhead, the third set-up will be the most rewarding. Keep all _current_ Images Originals inside your Library, and routinely relocate the Originals of Images no longer current to the external drive.
In no case is it recommended that you at any time remove from your Library an Image (not the Original — the Image in Aperture) that you expect to ever use again.
HTH,
—Kirby.

Use of ADOBE form with SAP workflow for R/3 4.6C

Hi All,
We are thinking of usage of ADOBE form feature as one of options to design workflow for creation and maintenance of Info record like Material Master creation. BTW the existing systems are EP 7.0 with the back end SAP ERP system 4.6 C
We would like to just check the feasibility of usage of ADOBE interactive form for above scenario. Would it be possible to go ahead with the above concept or what would be pre-requisites or risks involved?
1. How would system identify the role to direct the Adobe form for approval in case the form is raised by multi department?
2. How can the data validations in ADOBE form happen with reference to SAP std. tables?
An early reply would be appreciated.
Rgds,

Hi,
If you use EP 70 you can used guided procedure for your requirement .
Regards

Using Plugin NIK SOFTWARE with Aperture 3

I used the NIK SOFTWARE's plugin.
after finishing my job, I save and automactilly it store the image into the Aperture Library.
The problem is that Aperture does't recognize the tiff files just stored and it changes some IPTC lables like "Creator" It uses the licence's owner name compiled in the proper flield.
I had to cancel from the library and import again.
Yes this is a woraround but it's boring and time expensive.
Any other solution?
tks a lot
Alberto (Italy)

micro43 wrote:
Did post #2 not already answer this? I would think someone who actually uses this machine would be more inclined to give you an accurate answer...
The point is that there is no per se "accurate answer" to the general performance question. E.g. we hear performance complaints regarding all kinds of boxes stronger than the 13" MBP as well as some reports of users satisfied with MBs or Minis. The more feedback the OP gets the better able he/she is to come to a satisfactory personal conclusion.
Personally I consider the display an important part of what characterizes graphics app performance. Any +"actual user"+ has already decided against the additional *70% more pixels of the 15" size* with high-rez matte display and also has conluded that glossy is OK for them. IMO a potential new buyer of a laptop for graphics should have those differences firmly in mind when decision making. *Clearly a trip to physically compare 13" glossy vs. the 15" size with high-rez matte display is in order.*
A user like cbandes doing the heavy work on a MP with real display is much more likely to be happy with the tiny glossy 13" display part-time in the field than is someone trying to run a full pro Aperture workflow from a 13" MBP. Personally I like pixels and dislike glossy, so I would never go from 1.7M matte pixels to 1M glossy pixels just to save 1.1 pound of weight. IMO.

Using new iPhoto facilities with Aperture 2

I am new to Aperture 2 and, so far, have imported my old iPhoto library and done a bit of gentle rummaging to organise things. I've archived my old iPhoto library and removed it from my MacBook Pro. However, I now have iPhoto '09 and am eyeing the face-recognition and geotagging features.
Is there a simple way to utilise the features from within iPhoto without having to completely re-import the Aperture library? And, if so, will the tagging created in iPhoto be added to the metadata in Aperture? Maybe I'm asking too much.....

There is no integration between the products that would enable that, for now. No facial recognition in Aperture, and the metadata won't go from Aperture to iPhoto '09.
Some people here have posted enhancement requests asking for it... but there's no guarantee that Apple is reading these forums and taking down the feature requests. I'd recommend if you (like I...) want those features in Aperture, that you use Aperture's built-in "Send Feedback..." menu option.

So, to be able to use my new cameras with Aperture on my iMac with Snow Leopard I have to upgrade to Mountain Lion just to be able to read the RAW files?

Must I upgrade to Mountain Lion just to be able to use Aperture on my new cameras? I am using Snow Leopard now and have upgraded to Lion but didn't like it and didn't like that I was required to upgrade a couple of my other programs (Power PC stuff). Seems a bit of a rip off to me. I've just gotten a Canon 6D and have a Fuji X Pro 1, neither of which RAW files are readable by Aperture.

The RAW converter Aperture uses is part of OS X (and is, therefore, system-wide). Updates to the RAW converter are, effectively, OS updates. If that update is not available for your OS, then you cannot use it.
Darthfeeble wrote:
Must I upgrade to Mountain Lion just to be able to use Aperture on my new cameras?
Depends on your camera, but it is certainly possible.
The Fuji X-Pro1 sensor does not use a Bayer array. Afaik, there has never been a non-Bayer-array sensor camera supported by Apple.

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

Use of Adobe DNG with Aperture

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for