Curves and how Aperture evaluates tonality

[maverick28]

From Aperture's Help:

When you want to automatically adjust the tonal curve of an image based on individual evaluations of the red, green, and blue channels, you use the Auto Curves Separate button. Red, green, and blue channels are adjusted based on an evaluation of each channel. The Auto Curves Separate button corrects the colour cast in the image in addition to the contrast.

Does that mean Aperture uses separate (per-channel) luminance values to derive the average luminance as opposed to Combined Auto-adjustment which the same Help page explains as the one that's based on the sum of the luminance of each channel which is then added to the colours? What is adjusted exactly?

Next. Considering the meaning of nodes positioned against the histogram mountain in the Curves adjustment tool :

The horizontal line of the graph corresponding to the Ox axis represents the tonal range from the darkest to the brightest spot of the image. In such applications as Aperture, it's In field (for input). If by dragging nodes vertically we re-map dark and light tones then:

1. Does that mean that the vertical axis (Oy) (values in the Out field) represents the amount of the tonal value corresponding to the node's position on the Ox axis?
2. What is changed when we drag a node horizontally, along the Ox axis?

 

[Clix Pix]

Um.....Aperture has not been extant for rather a while now. It was killed off a few OS versions ago. Current versions of MacOS do not allow for it and so the only users who still are hanging in there with it are those who have old machines and old versions of the OS and/or have managed to finagle some kind of hack in order to keep Aperture still going even in a more recent Mac.

I for one loved Aperture and was very sad when it met its demise but since have moved on to other editing software and I think most others have as well, so, sorry, but the answers to your questions may be hard to come by now.....

 

[maverick28]

Um... excuse me, did you read the question? I believe it concerns every digital image manipulation software but your response is clearly off. And if you as an Aperture user were experienced enough to know its ins and outs then it wouldn't be difficult to give a clear cut answer addressing all points of my question.

 

[MevetS]

Um... excuse me, did you read the question? I believe it concerns every digital image manipulation software but your response is clearly off. And if you as an Aperture user were experienced enough to know it ins and outs then it wouldn't be difficult to give a clear cut answer addressing all points of my question.

The response from Clix Pix was pretty spot on. Aperture had been dead for quite some time. Your title references Aperture and your questions are asked not about “digital manipulation software” in general but rather specifically about Aperture.

Thus the lack of responses here. Clix Pix made a mistake trying to be nice explaining the lack of responses.

Your rude response to her will do little to help your cause.

 

[maverick28]

Curves and auto-curves or their analogues are the functions of every digital software and if you're the user then it doesn't pose a difficulty to explain it. Even if Aperture is dropped then for the one who was using it actively there's still no problem today so that's just a lame excuse for the lack of one's competence, plain and simple, rude or not regardless. Either you know or you don't. Other than that it's just flooding.

So do you know the explanation?

 

[MevetS]

Yes, I do.

 

[maverick28]

Yes, I do.

Then why not share it instead of preaching?

 

[Allyance]

Then why not share it instead of preaching?

Sounds like you are more intent on trying to impress people of your technical prowess than being a willing participant in a forum of friendly photographers who may not have the technical knowledge that you seek. I have not seen to many of your photographs in any of the threads. ClixPix is an excellent photographer and has actively participated almost on a daily basis. I think her answer was being extremely polite and she is well liked.

 

[maverick28]

Oh, c'mon. Nothing friendly here, much less productive, only dull statements and strawman arguments. For one: I'm not obliged to show you my input: I just want what I want - a relevant response to a relevant purely technical question, not exercises in politness. That's it. You guys and gals may extend this thread any further but just so you know, I'm unwatching it so your comments won't reach me. Take care and enjoy the conversation!

 

[Allyance]

Nothing friendly? You are the hostile party. Don't care if I am blocked by you.

 

[r.harris1]

relevant purely technical question, not exercises in politness.

It may have been relevant in 2015. It may have even been interesting to a few people. You seem interested in old operating systems and the minutia of keeping them going. We tend to be interested in image making here and certainly post processing, but my eyes glazed over at your question. Context is always helpful as opposed to raw fact seeking. I also think politeness is a muscle that does well with regular exercise.

That's it. You guys and gals may extend this thread any further but just so you know, I'm unwatching it so your comments won't reach me. Take care and enjoy the conversation!

That’s probably for the best.

 

[MacNut]

It may have been relevant in 2015. It may have even been interesting to a few people. You seem interested in old operating systems and the minutia of keeping them going. We tend to be interested in image making here and certainly post processing, but my eyes glazed over at your question. Context is always helpful as opposed to raw fact seeking. I also think politeness is a muscle that does well with regular exercise.

That’s probably for the best.

It's amazing at how so many people get so defensive over a 10 year old outdated piece of software. What was so special about Aperture in the first place?

 

[dimme]

I never liked Aperture, I felt I never new where my image really was. If I wanted to use Aperture in conjunction with other image editing software it felt impossible.

 

[deep diver]

It's just another train wreck. Nothing to see. Move along.

I'm actually pretty impressed. So many of us have been unfriended here in some way twice in the past month.

Shame on us for trying to be friendly and helpful.

 

[bunnspecial]

It's amazing at how so many people get so defensive over a 10 year old outdated piece of software. What was so special about Aperture in the first place?

I still have it installed on my old MBP 9,1 and on my MP 5,1. I'm pretty sure I have the physical disk/license for Aperture 3, or maybe it was Aperture 2(since I know 3 could also be an app store purchase).

I've played with it, and I can see why people like it. At the end of the day, though, it feels clunky to me as someone who started with LR 2(which I think was about contemporary to the first version of Aperture). Using it on a G5 Quad, I found Aperture, or at least the newest PPC version, a lot "snappier" than LR, which in 2008 would have been a reason for me to use it if I'd been a Mac user. LR CC is plenty fast even on my 2012 MBP 9,1 so that's not a concern.

If I remember right, back in the days of iPhoto, Aperture did have some nice integration/tie in(IIRC, the face recognition/people tagging worked in both from the same database). iPhoto is long dead, though, and I don't think that Photos does the same stuff.

 

[OldMacs4Me]

I have Aperture as part of my ElCapitan boot partitions, but seldom use it. As mentioned earlier, I don't like the Aperture approach to storing, aka hiding, images. I have three apps that all do a better job of editing, and I much prefer Graphic Converter or even Preview for doing slide shows.

I have never used iPhoto, Photos, Aperture, Lightroom or any other app for organizing photos, but that's just me.

 

[r.harris1]

Aperture was for me a fine program but it's "dead Jim". The world has moved on and there are a lot of great options out there.