Aperture and ACR

Duffy PrattDuffy Pratt Registered Users Posts: 260 Major grins
edited February 2, 2008 in Finishing School
I have a question about how Aperture fits with ACR (if at all). If I use Aperture to organize, and do raw processing in ACR, will the changes appear in the raw file in Aperture as they do in Bridge. Or will Aperture be blind to those changes until they are rendered into a Tiff or JPG?

Duffy

Comments

  • Duffy PrattDuffy Pratt Registered Users Posts: 260 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2008
    Bumping thread since it got moved to Finishing School. Anyone know the answer?

    Duffy
  • RichardRichard Administrators, Vanilla Admin Posts: 19,962 moderator
    edited January 15, 2008
    Duffy Pratt wrote:
    I have a question about how Aperture fits with ACR (if at all). If I use Aperture to organize, and do raw processing in ACR, will the changes appear in the raw file in Aperture as they do in Bridge. Or will Aperture be blind to those changes until they are rendered into a Tiff or JPG?

    Duffy
    Aperture does not import XMP files, which is where Adobe puts the instructions for RAW processing, so the answer (as of version 1.5) is not at all. Rob Galbraith discusses the situation here. I took a quick look at the specs of 1.5.6 but saw nothing to indicate that anything has changed regarding import.
    My Pics
  • arodneyarodney Registered Users Posts: 2,005 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2008
    rsinmadrid wrote:
    Aperture does not import XMP files, which is where Adobe puts the instructions for RAW processing, so the answer (as of version 1.5) is not at all. Rob Galbraith discusses the situation here. I took a quick look at the specs of 1.5.6 but saw nothing to indicate that anything has changed regarding import.

    Even if it did import XMP, it wouldn't know what to do about the processing of the Raws. Each converter is proprietary in how it rendered a Raw.

    I don't see how Aperture and ACR would be useful together. If you want a Raw processor that has the DAM capabilities of Aperture, then you'd be looking at Lightroom. Now since ACR and Lightroom DO share the same processing engine, they can swap XMP (you can move back and forth). But why?
    Andrew Rodney
    Author "Color Management for Photographers"
    http://www.digitaldog.net/
  • Duffy PrattDuffy Pratt Registered Users Posts: 260 Major grins
    edited January 15, 2008
    Well, here's the short answer to why I'm exploring this.

    I got Aperture from a friend who isn't using it. Neither Aperture nor Lightroom is worth the $300 price of admission for me. However, there are some convenience features of Aperture that appeal to me. For example, the ability to select a few shots for e-mail and have the program automatically resize and package them for the e-mail. That's alot more convenient than any solution I've found in bridge.

    I like the idea of the picture management in Aperture. But from what I've seen, I think the ACR controls are superior, especially in Shadow and Highlight recovery, and in the Vibrance and Clarity sliders. Ideally, I could separate each of the functions that interest me, and then have them work seamlessly together. With proprietary raw converters, it doesn't look like that is now possible.

    So I'm left with deciding whether its worth running Aperture side by side with Bridge, having them each do separate tasks.

    Duffy
  • happy-imphappy-imp Registered Users Posts: 28 Big grins
    edited February 2, 2008
    my take
    Duffy Pratt wrote:
    Well, here's the short answer to why I'm exploring this.

    I got Aperture from a friend who isn't using it. Neither Aperture nor Lightroom is worth the $300 price of admission for me. However, there are some convenience features of Aperture that appeal to me. For example, the ability to select a few shots for e-mail and have the program automatically resize and package them for the e-mail. That's alot more convenient than any solution I've found in bridge.

    I like the idea of the picture management in Aperture. But from what I've seen, I think the ACR controls are superior, especially in Shadow and Highlight recovery, and in the Vibrance and Clarity sliders. Ideally, I could separate each of the functions that interest me, and then have them work seamlessly together. With proprietary raw converters, it doesn't look like that is now possible.

    So I'm left with deciding whether its worth running Aperture side by side with Bridge, having them each do separate tasks.

    Duffy

    I currently use aperture for sorting and cataloging images, and ACR/photoshop to edit them. Sample workflow looks like this:

    Import to Aperture (stored on external mirrored RAID drives in enclosure)
    Upload proofs to SmugMug (yay smugmug!)
    receive list of picks from client
    Put picks in their own album (inside of project)
    Export picks
    Edit picks in ACR/Photoshop
    Reimport psd's into Aperture, place in stack with original.
    Upload final to smugmug

    I am not thoroughly satisfied with this workflow. It is annoying to have to export/reimport photos all the time, and occasionally aperture doesn't render psd's correctly if they have several layers, masks, etc. There are other gripes, too, but they mostly deal with a multi-user environment.

    All told, I am considering lightroom, but last time I used it (yes it was the final version) I found a few annoyances that drove me crazy and I stopped.

    As far as I could tell in Lightroom there is no way to relocate a folder/project without re-finding the files 1 by 1. Yipes...
    www.enkophoto.com
Sign In or Register to comment.