andybarton Posted February 12, 2008 Share #41 Posted February 12, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Realy easy with Aperture 2 too. File/New/Web page (How easy do you want it? ) Drag all your images to the new web page and Bob's your uncle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 12, 2008 Posted February 12, 2008 Hi andybarton, Take a look here Aperture 2 is out. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 13, 2008 Share #42 Posted February 13, 2008 I just downloaded Aperture 2.0, and found that tethered shooting works perfectly with the M8. So now I have an option for that as the Leica capture does not work on Leopard. Why on earth can Leica not fix this. So we can shoot tethered now with Aperture. Hmmm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #43 Posted February 13, 2008 Guess what? Works with DMR files too. Well, almost... Very slight issue where highlights are blown, but at least the files are now supported. And, it's much, much quicker. That's the native DNG support, have a look up in the raw fine tuning and you'll see 2.0. Try setting this to 2.0 DNG and see it it improves things, just an idea. There is no DMR support in the raw.plist....still Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted February 13, 2008 Share #44 Posted February 13, 2008 Realy easy with Aperture 2 too. File/New/Web page (How easy do you want it? ) Drag all your images to the new web page and Bob's your uncle. Mmmm, yes, but I'm talking about a nice flash slideshow style site. I'll check out what plug-ins are out there for that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff Posted February 13, 2008 Share #45 Posted February 13, 2008 Just found that Aperture 2 is now available in the US Apple store... Hanas I’ll pick up the Aperture 2 update later this week. Now as a suggestion, it would be nice if the new Vignette control could be expanded upon, in a future version, to allow for adjustments to hue as well as exposure and gamma. Then add the ability to save out and recall custom settings for this tool. I know this would be rather esoteric but it could be used to address the IR cut-off filter issue with uncoded lenses. Geoff MySpace.com - g e o f f - 101 - Männlich - PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA - www.myspace.com/geoffotos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoff Posted February 13, 2008 Share #46 Posted February 13, 2008 Guess what? Works with DMR files too. Well, almost... Very slight issue where highlights are blown, but at least the files are now supported. And, it's much, much quicker. Yes, but look at the new function of Recovering Highlights. Geoff MySpace.com - g e o f f - 101 - Männlich - PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA - www.myspace.com/geoffotos Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted February 13, 2008 Share #47 Posted February 13, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is what I'm talking about in reds and purple.First is Aperture 1.5.6 and second is Aperture 2 White balanced to 6200k with a little contrast and sharpness to both Eoin, that is a tragedy. I have been trying so hard to find something that has a better interface than Aperture 1.5 or C1 version anything, and a better red rendition than Lightroom. You've just demonstrated that Aperture Two turns reds to wrongs (assumptions made here about the red of that coat) :-( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted February 13, 2008 Share #48 Posted February 13, 2008 Yes, but look at the new function of Recovering Highlights. Geoff Yes, but does this work when the blown areas have gone green? (Which is what happens) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #49 Posted February 13, 2008 Eoin, that is a tragedy. I have been trying so hard to find something that has a better interface than Aperture 1.5 or C1 version anything, and a better red rendition than Lightroom. You've just demonstrated that Aperture Two turns reds to wrongs (assumptions made here about the red of that coat) :-( Tim, that was a quick and dirty conversion, same defaults colour temp and so on in both applications. I'll assume Aperture 2 is using a different raw engine for the moment but like any raw converter they all have different looks. It's not as warm as Aperture 1.5.6 but I'm sure there is a slider there which will return the warmth to the red. But in saying that I much prefer the skin tone in 2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #50 Posted February 13, 2008 Andy, are you just importing the native DMR DNG or are you running it through the Adobe DNG converter, It might be worth a shot as the proper procedure is to run non supported cameras files through ADNC then import according to Apple. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted February 13, 2008 Share #51 Posted February 13, 2008 How is the soft proofing? I saw they listed that as a feature. And what is the best way to convert your library from LR to Aperture if you have a ton of LR edited images? Does someone make a tool for this? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted February 13, 2008 Share #52 Posted February 13, 2008 Andy, are you just importing the native DMR DNG or are you running it through the Adobe DNG converter, It might be worth a shot as the proper procedure is to run non supported cameras files through ADNC then import according to Apple. I was just importing straight from the SD card. I will try running through DNG Converter later this evening, but if that adds or takes away something to/from the image, it sort of defeats the object really. If it works, I'll probably pony up the £69 for the upgrade. I have m.u.g. tattooed on my forehead for just these occasions Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #53 Posted February 13, 2008 ... it sort of defeats the object really..... So true!, but the real question is.... is the DNG from the DMR a true DNG with correct marker notes and flags?. AFAIK and I'm quite possibly wrong, Leica only ever claimed the M8 DNG was to the DNG standard. But either way if Aperture does not support the camera natively, Apples recommended path is to convert the file via ADNC with the Jpg preview size you wish (Max IMO) compression on or off (Off IMO) and preserve raw image selected. No need to imbed original raw file. Then when imported into Aperture change the 2.0 in the raw adjustment to 2.0 DNG. I think this is method is forcing Aperture to read the DNG file natively or a decode preset somewhere. I've noticed bringing in two identical files from the M8 into Aperture one directly and the other through ADNC and changing the 2.0 to 2.0 DNG gives a slightly different base conversion. The 2.0 DNG setting seems to apply slightly more pre sharpening, has slightly more chroma noise in in the shadows. The colour is however very slightly less saturated and a little cooler in tone. I don't think this is a byproduct of ADNC as the normal M8 DNG shows the same results if you simply apply the 2.0 DNG setting rather than just the 2.0 FWIW. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandymc Posted February 13, 2008 Share #54 Posted February 13, 2008 So true!, but the real question is.... is the DNG from the DMR a true DNG with correct marker notes and flags?. AFAIK and I'm quite possibly wrong, Leica only ever claimed the M8 DNG was to the DNG standard. The DMR DNG passes Adobe's dng_validate software without problems. I'm also not aware of any problems with it. When it comes to decoding DNGs, there are actually two distinct parts to the process (1) decoding the raw data and ( turning the raw data into and image - basically, the color conversion process. V1 of Aperture only did (1) correctly for a very small number of cameras, and used its own plist based conversion for (2), for the same small number of cameras. What V2 seems to do (not yet confirmed), is that it will do (1) for most any DNG, rather than the very small number of supported cameras previously. For (2), the color conversion, it will use its own conversion if it recognises the camera, but default the the DNG's embedded color parameters if it doesn't. So, on a DMR, it will read read the raw data, but rather than using a plist based color conversion, will use the DNG embedded values. This, btw, is exactly ACR/LightRoom's behavior. See here: ChromaSoft: ACR, Lightroom and DNG color Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted February 13, 2008 Share #55 Posted February 13, 2008 How is the soft proofing? I saw they listed that as a feature.And what is the best way to convert your library from LR to Aperture if you have a ton of LR edited images? Does someone make a tool for this? Thanks Hi Russell, I've been wondering the same thing: I have tried opening the same files in both Aperture and CS3 and switching between proofing view and normal view. There seems very little difference between the two views in Aperture, more so in CS3 but this will obviously vary according to the file itself. The proof of the pudding will be in the printing. I am about to embark on a comparative print test, using the same file developed through LR and then given my usual workflow for large printing in PS, which involves upres, upres sharpening in Photokit, soft proofing and adjustment thereafter by eye for saturation and DR, final output sharpening and printing. The version I do in Aperture will remain in Aperture throughout and use only it's tools. The purpose for this is that with LR, if you want to print large in a calibrated workflow, the files has to round trip through PS for a variety of things but most importantly for soft proofing and for output sharpening. If I can get results as good all within Aperture, I'll switch to it. I'll report back! Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #56 Posted February 13, 2008 Thanks for the clarification on this Sandy, we seem to be suspecting the same thing except you put it clearer than I could. If Andy is still having problems via either route then perhaps we're back to the 16bit issues we were having before your excellent corner fix 16bit to 14bit conversion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #57 Posted February 13, 2008 Russell / Tim, the proofing view is more applicable if using custom paper icc profiles or changing the output embedded profile to sRGB for web. I can see huge differences if I select say a hahnemuhle photo rag for printing which can make the shadows blotchy or skintones posterised , by selecting the proofing profile and then turning it on (2 steps) I can compensate with adjustments during the processing of the image. Tim, I'm interested to hear what you think on the print output from that beast you have now LOL, don't forget to disable colour management in the printer settings within aperture print settings and save it as a preset. Then select the paper icc profile form the colorsync profile dropdown and save again. The output sharpening is new and I'm curious as to the results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted February 13, 2008 Share #58 Posted February 13, 2008 On the M8 are you using 2.0 or 2.0 DNG. Playing with it now and i am very limited on usage of Aperture Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eziomi Posted February 13, 2008 Share #59 Posted February 13, 2008 Anyone is having very funny results in duplicating a pic version already with some adjustments on it ? On my iMac the colors are totally different on the duplicating version. Thanks. EM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted February 13, 2008 Share #60 Posted February 13, 2008 Guy, the default should be 2.0 for a standard M8 DNG file. 2.0 DNG is for camera raw files which are not natively supported within Aperture and passed through ADNC before import. However using 2.0 DNG with a M8 file not passed through ADNC give a decode based on the actual colour matrix and camera calibration details inside the file rather than Apples settings. It's very subtle in it's difference but it is different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.