How to save processed photo

Question

How to save processed photo

I know I just started using Aperture, but my question shouldn't be this difficult. If I process a photo in Aperture (use Noise Reduction as an example), it gets saved and I only see one version of the picture in my Library (the processed version)...unless, of course, I revert to the original. But if I use a Plug-In like NoiseWare to clean up the photo (and it obviously does a much better job than Aperture at noise reduction) I'm then stuck with two photos in my Library...the original and the one from NoiseWare. If I try to delete the original, I get a warning that I'm going to lose all versions of this photo, and I presume that means also the version I processed with NoiseWare, so I didn't try clicking ahead with this.

If I clean up a photo there's about a .00000001% chance I'm ever going to touch it again, so why am I forced to have two copies of it in my Library, doubling its size and making photo management a nightmare? I'm surely missing something here and hopefully someone will enlighten me as to what it is. I just want to be able to clean up a photo and move on. Thanks for any suggestions.

MacBook Air, OS X Mountain Lion, + 24-inch LED Cinema Display

Posted on Jan 5, 2013 7:56 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Best reply

Yer_Man

Level 10

162,308 points

Jan 5, 2013 8:16 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

Stack the two images. Then you only see one and no nightmare.

Reply

Answer 2

léonie

Level 10

194,743 points

Jan 5, 2013 8:34 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

Larry,

stacking the images, as TD suggested, will get one copy out of the way.

The problem you are describing, is something that will always happen when you are not doing your edits inside Aperture. Then the lossless workflow will be broken. Aperture is designed to enable you to always revert to the original image. As long as you are doing all edits with Aperture, the program will know the steps to create your edited version from the original, and it is sufficient just to keep the original image file and the list of adjustments that need to be performed.

But if you use a plug-in or external editor, Aperture first has to render the current version as an image file to send to the external program and the program will send the edited image back. But Aperture does not know the editing sequence the external program performed, so it will not be able to recreate the original image from the externally edited image, and so it will keep both image files. The original image you imported with the last version you edited in Aperture, plus the new, externally edited version.

Regards

Léonie

Reply

Answer 3

Jan 5, 2013 8:45 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

Thanks to both of you for your comments. I guess I have to make a decision to keep the workflow simple, and as Aperture intended, or go with the better noise reduction plug-in. After I purchased Aperture I did some further reviews and they clearly stated that "good" noise reduction is one of Aperture's shortfalls. I found the NoiseWare plugin cleaned up a test phot almost twice a good, just using it's defaults and not even tweaking.

This brings up an Aperture orginational question, though. If I stack the images and have the NoiseWare-edited on top, what havoc does this wreak with Faces and Places? If I edit 500 pictures of "John Doe" and then search on for "John Doe" pictures in Faces...will I see the NoiseWare edited pictures that are on top...or the Aperture pictures I don't want to see?

Reply

Answer 4

léonie

Level 10

194,743 points

Jan 5, 2013 9:04 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

If I stack the images and have the NoiseWare-edited on top, what havoc does this wreak with Faces and Places? If I edit 500 pictures of "John Doe" and then search on for "John Doe" pictures in Faces...will I see the NoiseWare edited pictures that are on top...or the Aperture pictures I don't want to see?

The Faces Stack will contain both versions side by side.

Reply

Answer 5

Jan 5, 2013 9:12 AM in response to léonie

Well, my decision keeps getting more difficult, as now I'm thinking that with all these duplicate images from the external noise reduction editor, my database will likely double in size...or at least be a lot large considering the number of photos I would have to process with the plug-in.

I guess I could try keeping the plug-in and then if I decide I don't like the workflow inconvenience I can uninstall it. I hope when I do this the extra stacked images will disappear? If not...then I'm just going to learn to live with Aperture's less-than-good noise reduction and keep my workflow and organization in tact, which is the reason I moved to Aperture from iPhoto in the first place.

Apple could fix this by simply bringing their noise reduction feature up to par with some of the plug-ins and external editors. It wouldn't be that difficult.

Reply

Answer 6

Neil G

Level 3

764 points

Jan 5, 2013 10:24 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

I expect the NoiseWare round-trip is creating another "original image", so deleting the from-camera original and its versions won't affect the NoiseWare version. (I don't have NoiseWare so can't confirm this.)

Does the NoiseWare image display a 'bullseye' overlay? If so, that signals that "The image has been edited with the external editor, and is therefore represented by the master file created when the file was exported to the external editor." If you use Photoshop as your 'external editor' it does this and you can later filter on "File Type" in Aperture.

Photomatix and Nik HDR software plug-ins return a new file, also not connected to the original or its versions.

As others have cautioned, if you delete the pre-NoiseWare original and its versions, you've lost the original "negative" (whether RAW or JPEG) and can't decide to reprocess it in the future.

Reply

Answer 7

léonie

Level 10

194,743 points

Jan 5, 2013 10:39 AM in response to Larry McJunkin

I guess I could try keeping the plug-in and then if I decide I don't like the workflow inconvenience I can uninstall it. I hope when I do this the extra stacked images will disappear?

Uninstalling the noise reduction plug-in will not deleted the image versions you created with it.

You will have to delete them manually.

my database will likely double in size...or at least be a lot large considering the number of photos I would have to process with the plug-in.

It may even be worse: The quasi-masters sent to the plug-ins will be PSD-files or TIFF, depending on your preferences, and that file format usually has larger files than the corresponding raw format.

You might consider to change your workflow a bit, so you can delete the imported original image and still be able to revert:

Make sure, you backup all imported images to your backup location, before you start editing them in Aperture.
Do the noise reduction, before you do any other edits, so that the original versions are not used in any album or product.
Then delete the original version, after you have convinced yourself, that the edited image and your backup of the original are o.k.

But you will have to take good care of the backed up originals, since they will be the only copies of your original files, if you ever need to revert to the original.

If you are worried about the size of your library, it might be a better approach to convert images that are not used very often into referenced images by relocating the originals to an external drive.

Regards

Léonie

Reply

Answer 8

Jan 5, 2013 11:24 AM in response to Neil G

Neil, there is not a Bull's Eye overlay on the photos produced by the NoiseWare plug-in. I guess I need to experiment with a test photo to determine:

1. The NoiseWare photo is actually an original

2. If I delete the Aperture original, the NoiseWare original is treated the same as other iPhoto/Aperture originals in my database

3. If the NoiseWare original that remains after deleting the Aperture original is referenced the same in Faces, etc.

I'm not a professional photographer, I shoot JPEG...not RAW, and I know after I de-noise a photo I will not have even the remotest need to re-edit it again. But even if I did, if the NoiseWare photo is the only one remaining...I'd think Aperture would perform other edits on it (WB, saturation, etc.). I'll have to test this, also.

Worst case, I'll dump the trial version of NoiseWare and simply live with the limited noise reduction capabilities of Aperture and hope they improve them down the road. The reason I'm so concerned with NR is the number of indoor shots I take without flash and the higher ISOs that requires...hence some degree of noise is always going to be inherent even with a very bright lens.

Reply

Answer 9

Neil G

Level 3

764 points

Jan 5, 2013 12:54 PM in response to Larry McJunkin

I think the bullseye only appears if you round-trip to your designated 'external editor', not plug-ins, but YMMV.

Okay on #1, that's what I thought. Same for #2. Faces should work the same for the NW version but GPS or other metadata may be stripped. NW images will be edited in Aperture like any other image, whether from a camera, scanner, or other source.

As mentioned by Léonie, the NW file might be bigger than the original JPEG but so it goes. If you're concerned about filesize and database size, investigate using a Referenced library.

As suggested by Scott Kelby, Chase Jarvis, Joe McNally, et al, if people comment about noise in your photos rather than the photos themselves, that's a whole different problem. ;-)

Reply

Answer 10

Jan 5, 2013 1:05 PM in response to Neil G

Thanks, Neil. No, there are no complaints about noise in my photos...I'm the one who is hyper-critical of noise :-) That's why I shoot with cameras that typically generate the least noise possible, but sometimes under low-light, no flash (read high ISO) conditions, even with a lot of glass, there is going to be some degree of noise, even if small.

I think I've about decided to use Aperture without plug-ins and just do the best I can with it's own tools to eliminate noise. I somehow think that Apple is surely working on better NR tools for Aperture's future...there are just too many complaints about it to leave it un-improved.

Reply