Aperture and RAW+JPG

bwana

bwana

MyBroadband
Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
98,262
Reaction score
38,694
Location
Plz
I've got to shoot this weekend and due to various constraints have decided to use JPG, however, since I might want to tweak the photos a bit having the RAW as a back up (and for my archive) would be handy.

My problem is that when Aperture sees RAW + JPG it only imports the RAW file. Do any aperture users know a way around this?
 
It imports both if both is on your card. Once you've imported it, select the picture/pictures and click "Images" --> "New Version from Master JPEG"

This will create a stack with the RAW and JPEG in. The RAW will be the primary, I'm not sure how to promote in batches - you'll have to fiddle with that.
 
Interesting - thanks.

Now I just need to d/l and install aperture on the missus' macbook and work on jail breaking my iphone for tethering.
 
After some messing around today I've decided to skip the RAW+JPG - it locks up the [-]phone[/-] camera for too long while the buffer clears.
 
Last edited:
koffiejunkie said:
Locks up the phone? :confused:
Click to expand...
Sorry . . . long day . . . camera.

I'm now in the process of trying to figure out a safe way to use my 150-500 in the rain should the need arise. Best I can come up with so far is one of the long, narrow plastic bags my morning newspaper is delivered in.
 
Last edited:
Aah, right. So you've just discovered one of the advantages of the xxD bodies :)

A faster card might help.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Aah, right. So you've just discovered one of the advantages of the xxD bodies :)

A faster card might help.
Click to expand...

You'd better explain it to me.

Got a extreme III which really doesn't make a difference.

When I can pull as much detail pith of the shadows with jpg as I can by shooting raw I'll think about making it the rule as opposed to the exception.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Bigger buffer, so the camera doesn't "lock up" as easily. The higher frame rate, btw, doesn't matter, because you can set it to be lower - roughly the same as the xxxD bodies.
Click to expand...
Doesnt really matter - I'm planning on using one camera with the 150-500 shooting jpg and the other with the 70-200/16-35 shooting RAW. One of the advantages of the xxxD bodies . . . affordability :D

I'm hoping there is a EOS-1D Mark III in my future anyway. :)
 
Update - ended up reverting to RAW about halfway thought the day - the lighting was tricky and it just made more sense. I had two cameras going so the limit of 9 consecutive shots wasn't an issue.

The MB was a little underpowered but it got the job done. :)
 
What does raw have to do with tricky lighting? :) My dad took my 300D to his school reunion in 2007. I put the thing on jpeg for him. He does not know jack about exposure compensation or digital cameras. I fixed them up for him, just like I would have with raw.

Very harsh light + Canon 300D (auto eveything & jpeg) + my dad :(:D
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3545/3434461387_cfbb6424dd_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
ldmelsa said:
What does raw have to do with tricky lighting? :) My dad took my 300D to his school reunion in 2007. I put the thing on jpeg for him. He does not know jack about exposure compensation or digital cameras. I fixed them up for him, just like I would have with raw.

Very harsh light + Canon 300D (auto eveything & jpeg) + my dad :(:D

[]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3545/3434461387_cfbb6424dd_o.jpg[/IMG]
Click to expand...
Just think how nice they might have come out if you'd set the camera to RAW. ;) :D

I had 45 minutes to sort through the shots I took, post them, and finally settle on a handful so what you were able to do in the luxury of your home at some later stage wasn't possible, nor desirable truth be told.

BTW Ken Rockwell has some fair PS hints on his site - I've played with them all and some are better than others - if you're not going to shoot in RAW it might be worthwhile for you to have a look at them assuming you already havent http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/ps.htm.
 
bwana said:
BTW Ken Rockwell has some fair PS hints on his site - I've played with them all and some are better than others - if you're not going to shoot in RAW it might be worthwhile for you to have a look at them assuming you already havent http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/ps.htm.
Click to expand...

The introduction is enough to put me off reading the rest of the article. Listing iPhoto and Picasa as alternatives for Photoshop? What's this guy smoking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X