Here’s how:

——–
Originally Posted by Eoin on Leica User forum:
——–

If you want to use Apple Aperture to process M8 DNG’s you’ll need to do the following…..

1. I downloaded the free Adobe DNG Converter app (ADC) from Adobe’s website. Using The settings to use for the converter (available in the ADC’s preferences) were:
JPEG Preview->None
Compression(Lossless) checked
Image Conversion Method->Preserve Raw Image
Original Raw File->Embed Original Raw File->unchecked
You’ll also need to point to the source M8 DNG folder and where you want to output the Adobe DNG’s to
2. If you try to import an Adobe converted M8 dng file into Aperture. It imports, but says that it is an unsupported image format. You’ll need to do the following…
3. I started up my plist-editing application. I used PlistEdit Pro. You can download it as a free trial
4. In the finder, I navigated to
System/Library/Frameworks/ApplicationServices.framework/ Versions/A/Frameworks/ImageIO.framework/Versions/A/Resources/Raw.plist and copied (not moved) that file to the Desktop in case I made a mistake. I then opened the original file in its original location in PlistEdit Pro. You may have to unlock this file to allow you to save it depending on your security setup. To unlock right click and select get info, go to ownership and permissions and change from read only to read and write.
5. After opening in PlistEdit Pro I found the entry for the Nikon-D200 in the upper panel, highlighted it and clicked on duplicate. A new entry is created called Nikon-D200 2. If you click on the name and edit it to read Leica Camera AG-M8 Digital Camera, the name must be entered exactly as I have typed it here. It’s probably easiest to cut and paste it
7. I saved the edited Raw.plist file in its original location, closed all my apps, started up Aperture, and imported the Adobe converted DNGs without a hitch.

What you will find is aperture is able to display and edit the Adobe converted DNG file like any other raw file. The only thing you may notice is the colour saturation will need to be increased slightly if you happen to like the what I consider over saturated C1 profile.
I find the conversions to be excellent and what’s more I’m enjoying being back within the Aperture workflow.

LR is able to write the metadata into RAWs (if the format supports it, otherwise it will write sidecar files). I prevent using applications who lock my pictures in. This is a reason why I don’t use Aperture. Apple has the guidline that they never alter the RAWs (to prevent damage), because of that metadata can only be applied on export. Maybe there are thirdparty tools to write metadata into the files.

Then you aren’t helping yourself save time. A few minutes adding caption and keywords to a new project will save considerable time down the road when you’re trying to find specific images. Even in a “non-stock” library.

It may also make the folder structure less relevant. I have to admit, I have not looked at Lightroom yet, so maybe it is important.

Maybe your digital image library is manageable now, but in 5-10 years or later? Even with extremely tight editing you will end up with tens of thousands of images.

This is where DAM software comes into play. But you can get some of that functionality, and probably enough of it for simple image searches, even from Spotlight built into OSX. Other apps have incorporated Spotlight functionality, such as Photo Mechanic, which will open a contact sheet with all images found based on a keyword search. Quickly checking the specs for both Lightroom and Aperture, it appears they both support keyword searches (I would be surprised if they didn’t). Even if it only takes you a minute to find an image, a keyword search will take a second or two…

It also appears both Lightroom and Aperture are similar to DAM software in that they apply the caption/keyword to the database referencing the files rather than embedding directly into the image files. This is fine if you only plan to use one app for all of your organizing. While you can embed the metadata to images upon export from either app, it will mean that while files are within the Lightroom or Aperture system, they are essentially hidden from caption/keyword searches made by other apps and probably also Spotlight (Spotlight searches metadata embedded within files).

My point is that adding caption and keyword info has value, even if your current library is manageable without it.

I think this can make sense if you have a lot of subjects, or perhaps are trying to ornanize a stock library. I am sure it works for you, and i like the non-reliance on proprietary software to do your organizing for you.

I gave up on stock a long time ago…

Hope you understand what I mean. English isn’t my first language.

I messed with renaming files in the beginning and was put off by the resulting string of numbers, it is just too confusing in the finder to look at a folder containing 2007_5_10_L10001xxx.DNG’s over and over. So the original L1001xxx.dng is fine for me. Plus enclosing folders, year, month day, I really don’t get as I said.

Basically, I have street work which is ongoing, a gowanus project which is ongoing, some mall stuff which is stalled, and then jobs, unique to the client, plus just a random unflied folder for whatever stuff. But pretty much if I am shooting it is in one of these areas, so the date is irrelevent.

I think what i am avoiding saying outright is if you can only think to catalog your work by day, then maybe you need to spend some time thinking exactly what it is you are making? A way of catloging time?

We have lost the contact sheet in digital. Those indeed were numbered according to the year and successive rolls, ie 1991-125. But this was mainly because the images were anchored to rolls, cutting individual frames out was a no-no. Now, in digital, the “frames” are unanchored. There is no reason to keep them in shot-order. I know i am losing the pleasure of seeing how I was working on a particular shot to shot basis, and who knows, I might miss that ultimately. But the gain in seeing an idea build is worth it in my opinion.

Simon