Apple Event: May 7th at 7 am PT

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

Aperture D600 Raw Files too dark?

Is anyone else seeing that their Nikon D600 raw files stink in Aperture? I realize that Apple backwards engineers Raw support but if I look at a file from my D600 on Aperture and Capture NX2, the difference is 10-fold. I can see detail in the shadows in the NX2 conversion and nothing but black in the Aperture conversion. I have never seen this much of a disparity and I have used well over a dozen different DSLR's. I am curious if anyone else is seeing this? I mean in one image I can see a staircase in the NX2 conversion and nothing but black in Aperture?

Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.6.8), 16GB Ram

Posted on Dec 11, 2012 4:10 PM

Reply
93 replies

Jan 8, 2013 10:02 PM in response to Mike Bisom1

I just got a D600 a couple weeks ago, and yes, my RAW files are coming out a bit dark in Aperture. Perhaps Aperture's D600 contrast curve needs some adjustment, but I think the bigger issue is the default black point setting.


For my D60 RAW files, Aperture's default black point value is 3.0. I sometimes back off on that a bit, but it's a good default. On the D600, Aperture's default black point is 5.0, which I find a bit too dark, more often than not. I'm guessing the higher default black point is intended to compensate for the larger dynamic range of the D600's RAW files (14 bits per channel instead of my D60's 12 bits per channel), but I think they have erred a bit on the dark side.


In any case, it's not too hard to fix. My suggestion is to turn on the hot/cold overlay, then scale back the black point until any blue overlay areas have disappeared (you may want to allow some small isolated blue areas to avoid weakening the overall contrast too much). I also recommend going into Preferences > Advanced and setting the hot/cold thresholds all the way to 100% and 0%, respectively; this makes the hot/cold overlays only appear where pixels are actually clipped.


Fortunately, dark areas that look completely blown are actually totally recoverable, and usually pulling back on the black point is all you need to do. In some cases you might also want to add a tiny amount of contrast (even 0.01 is quite a bit).


This is what I've found so far, anyway. I still have a few things I'd like to test to get a better picture of what's happening here:


  • Enable RAW + JPEG (FINE) and compare RAWs to the JPEGs for the same shot
  • Try capturing some 12 bit RAW files (there's a setting for this) and see how those look in Aperture (is the default black point still 5.0?)
  • Install the current version of ViewNX and see how Nikon's own RAW processing compares (the RAWs should end up looking the same as the JPEGs)
  • Check out all this stuff in Lightroom (I don't really use LR, but I do have it installed, as it's included with Adobe Creative Cloud)


If you guys have done comparative testing of any of the above, I'd be interested to hear about your results.

Jan 8, 2013 10:22 PM in response to Jason Sims

By the way, some people have suggested just using ViewNX to convert the RAW files before bringing them into Aperture. That'll use Nikon's conversion process instead of Apple's, so this should indeed make them look the same as the JPEGs, but if you're going to do that, you should really just shoot JPEGs in the first place. If you convert your RAWs before importing them, you're losing all of the benefits of directly editing RAW files in Aperture — namely, the fact that you're working with the full 14 bits per channel throughout the entire editing process (Aperture doesn't convert the image to the standard 8 bits per channel until you actually export it).


So if you aren't going to edit the actual RAW files, you might as well not waste the space on your memory card or hard drive. If you prefer, you could also shoot RAW + JPEG, work with the JPEG files for now, and keep the RAW files around for when Apple (hopefully) addresses how Aperture handles them.

Jan 9, 2013 5:57 AM in response to Jason Sims

Just following on from this I did a comparison of the results from Aperture to a test version of LR and can now fairly consistently replicate the results from LR by making the following changes. The adjustments below are specific to a particular file, but give an idea of changes to be made.

Hue Boost from 1 to 0.90

Detail from 0.00 to 0.10

Saturation from 1.0 to 0.95

Vibrancy from 0.0 to -0.05

The Saturation and Vibrancy settings make a dramatic difference for me in the files I was using taken under mixed lighting. A different set of pictures may require a new range of adjustments or in the case of normal daylight I am fairly happy with it as it is.

Annoying as it is having to do this I suspect that once a few adjustments are worked out to the RAW profiles that can be saved as canned settings this is going to be quicker and cheaper than migrating systems.

Jan 9, 2013 12:39 PM in response to Tigereel

Sorry, but these adjustments do nothing to recapture the dynamic range of the image. Near as I can tell, shadows are hopelessly crushed in the "standard" Aperture conversion when they aren't with Lightroom or NX2. The only way to come close is to blend two (same image different edits) files in Photoshop and that is simply far too time consuming when you are dealing with hundreds if not thousands of images. There is no doubt that NX2 will provide the best default conversion, but then I lose all the value behind using Aperture. Not to mention NX2 is extremely clunky, slow, with horrible dual screen support. Which leaves me with Lightroom. In my case, as a Cloud subscriber, Lightroom isn't costing me anything. However, after having used Lightroom on a few projects now, I can say that I really, really miss Aperture and hope that Apple will eventually solve this issue... before I become so use to LR that there is no reason to turn back. I don't need two management programs. Just one that gives me a reasonable RAW conversion! For heavy lifting I can always go back to NX2!

Feb 11, 2013 11:42 AM in response to Mike Bisom1

I have exact the same problem. RAW files from D600 are far too dark and clipped when opening in Aperture. No way I can recover the information. In ViewNX I get the correct conversion. This really is a shame! I like Aperture for fast processing, but the way it is now, it is next to unusable for many D600 images 😟

How do I report this to Apple?

Feb 11, 2013 12:50 PM in response to ddierick

How do I report this to Apple?


http://www.apple.com/feedback/aperture.html


I even offered to send them files, but to date haven't heard anything. I am getting familar with Lightroom as I have no choice, but I really miss Aperture. Unless something changes very soon, I am afraid my entire 2013 library will be with Lightroom as I don't want to switch half-way through a wedding season.

Feb 11, 2013 1:19 PM in response to Ernie Stamper

After lots of fiddling around with controls, I had to throw the towel in the ring on Aperture. It's just not working as it should. Went back to Nikon NX for conversion. But that is a lot slower than Aperture, and far less convenient.

I have sent my feedback to Apple, really hope they can fix this nuisance. Got Aperture for my D600, as it costed a lot less than buying a new PS version to get the RAW converter for the new camera, but now it seems expensive 🙂

Feb 11, 2013 2:59 PM in response to ddierick

There is no doubt that it is a major concern for me as well. Arguably, Capture NX will always have the best Raw conversion since Nikon engineers know best how to read their own files. But NX offers zero image management. I fail to understand Lightroom's popularity on the Mac side; Aperture is a much better, more thoroughly thought out program. However, Lightroom currently offers a better conversion. And the greater picture is that Apple may simply be abandoning professionals. No new Mac Pro in several years? It's getting hard to run a business when you can't count on one of your vendors.


As far as the black point goes, yes the default for a D600 is 5. But changing it to 3 doesn't really help, Aperture is simply crushing the dynamic range of the file.

Feb 12, 2013 6:21 PM in response to ddierick

That's something at least. There was another discussion about whether Apple even cares (they never asked for my files!). The last major Mac Pro update was in 2010. The last major Aperture release was Feb. 2010. The last major Pro Logic release was 2009. Final Cut Pro X was released in 2011 and by almost any measure it wasn't ready for release. However I understand the current (.3?) release is better. Not to mention the entire re-think FCPX presented to, well, everyone (how do I burn a profressional DVD again?). I can't imagine that anyone anywhere can look at this timeline and feel as though Apple cares about it's professional user base.

Feb 28, 2013 11:12 AM in response to ddierick

Nice to know I'm not the only one seeing this. I thought I was seeing things. I sent feedback to Apple, but I have not heard back. In the meatime, I was already thinking about making the switch to Lightroom, but I keep hesitating because I don't want to loose all my RAW edits. Now, I'm starting to wonder if I should bite the bullet and make the switch even though I really like Aperture. However, I can't continue to use it if it is going to crush my D600 files.

Aperture D600 Raw Files too dark?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.