Currently Being ModeratedNov 4, 2012 1:50 AM (in response to Ernie Stamper)
Really good news, Ernie. That is a great improvement when working with the top-of-the-line cameras. I'll ask Santa for a Nikon.
This made me try again really huge images, but Aperture is still not up to dealing with very large scans.
Importing an 21000 × 19718 pixel scan (jpeg, 124.9 MB) took about 10 seconds on my older MBP (i7, 8GB memory) and editing and browsing is still painfully slow.
Now I'll check, what happens on my new MBP with SSD and 16BG RAM:
It is o.k., zooming will take 3 or 4 seconds, but I can scroll and edit once loaded, and the Activity Monitor shows, that Aperture is not hogging all the RAM.
Currently Being ModeratedNov 4, 2012 3:48 AM (in response to léonie)
I can still see some similar issues with individual images, but the Inactive Memory gets released more quickly.
I currently do not have any images with such a large pixel count, but I have image files that exceed 1 GB that are quasi masters still containing multiple layers. Top pixel dimension of viewed image on those is 7360 however. Aperture seems to handle those OK.
The JPEG file size of your scanned images is likely not as important as the file size of the rendered image, once decompressed. The images I mention above are either TIFF or PSD as files in the data base, and thus not compressed.
My unfounded theory since I can't get that far under the hood, is that these large images overwhelm Graphic Memory while rendering, and somehow System Memory is brought into the mix. But all my previous issues were with Inactive Memory never getting released. That seems to have been greatly improved.
Currently Being ModeratedNov 4, 2012 11:24 AM (in response to Ernie Stamper)
Ernie -- thanks for these reports. Afaict, Aperture 3.4.2 loads much faster. Haven't tested any high MP or MB files (and likely won't, since you've done the work). .
My personal photos are all 24 MB (Sony) and 45 MB (Sigma DP2Merrill, converted to TIFF by Sigma's ungainly software). Like you, some quasi-masters are 100-200 MB. On my MBPr w. 16 GB RAM and SSD system disk, I haven't noticed any appreciable performance problems. (Sorting or filtering 250,000 Images is not instantaneous, etc. -- it's remarkable to me how quickly one adjusts to whatever power one has available. I already feel that I am working at the top performance of this machine. Give me more power, and I'll just change what I expect to be able to do.)
Currently Being ModeratedNov 4, 2012 9:26 PM (in response to Kirby Krieger)
The 45 MB NEF originals from the D800 are large, but the greater impact is likely from the rendering of the image being adjusted and viewed. If a resulting TIFF file export (16-bit as is the NEF) is any measure, that can be in the range of 200 MB per image.
File size alone is not the issue, or at least large video files imported into the library have never presented the same issues.
Mysteries remain, but behaving better, in my opinion.