Skip navigation

Why is there no confirmation when deleting master?

329 Views 6 Replies Latest reply: Dec 28, 2012 11:48 AM by Ernie Stamper RSS
aapl.crox Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)
Currently Being Moderated
Dec 27, 2012 11:49 PM

Why is there no confirmation when deleting master? Isn't it a bit too dangerous? Especially with keyboard shortcut? I expected this to happen to a version but not the master...

  • léonie Level 8 Level 8 (46,355 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 28, 2012 12:03 AM (in response to aapl.crox)

    I expected this to happen to a version but not the master...

    Deleting is always dangerous - deleting a version will delete your work, deleting the master will delete the original image file to free space.

    I can only speculate why there is no warning, but I find the safety measures are sufficient - you have two safty lines:

    • The deleted items are moved to Aperture's trash, where you can retrieve them.
    • And after emptying Aperture's Trash you can retrieve them from the Trash inyour user folder.

     

    See Frank Caggiano's user tip for more information:

                     Deleting version also deleted the master

     

    Regards

    Léonie

  • Kirby Krieger Level 6 Level 6 (11,550 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 28, 2012 8:35 AM (in response to aapl.crox)

    aapl.crox wrote:

     

    Why is there no confirmation when deleting master? Isn't it a bit too dangerous?

    Yes, it probably is "too dangerous".  I can speculate why it was set up this way, and I can recommend a workflow that removes the danger.

     

    Aperture seems to have been designed with Stacks used for Versions.  (Called in the User Manual, "Version Stacks".)  When used this way, every Stack represents one Original, and every Image that is not in a Stack represents one Original.  When you delete all the Images in a Stack, or any Image that is not in a Stack, you know you are deleting the Original as well.

     

    The workaround involves using my recommended Aperture Library set-up:  Store your digicam files in Projects following the rule that one Project is used for every out in the world "shoot", and think of the Projects as the old-time "binder of slides" or the more recent "operating system file browser folder of files".  (The mis-naming of "Projects" is the worst interface decision made by Aperture's designers, imho.)  Use Aperture Folders and Albums to set-up and organize your actual output projects (small "p": e.g.: Test Shots of Adam; Wedding Ceremony, Smyth-Burns; Xmas 2012).  _Remove_ Images from Albums.  Delete Images from Projects.  I use the color labels to indicate level of development (being worked on, done, detail of done, abandoned but save, etc.).  When a "shoot" -- a "Project" in Aperture-speak -- is done being processed, I go back to it, group all Images that remain un-labeled, review them, and delete those I am sure I don't need.

     

    HTH.

     

    --Kirby.

  • léonie Level 8 Level 8 (46,355 points)

    Yes, it probably is "too dangerous".  I can speculate why it was set up this way, and I can recommend a workflow that removes the danger.

     

    A very good speculation, Kirby. For me the drawback of the stacking approach is, that I simply do not use version stacks. I need stacks to get redundant shots of the same scene out of the way, until I can make up my mind which of them I will keep and which to delete. If I create different versions of an image, I do it because I need both versions for different purposes, mostly different crops of the same image, and I do not stack them.

     

    So whenever I delete an image, I know I probably will delete the original master as well, because there usually is only one version. My safety strategy is - if I like an image, I do not delete it.

     

    Aperture has so many badges, why is there no badge for the number of versions an image has? Apple, do you listen? But if you sort your projects by date, you will always see versions of the same image side by side.

  • Ernie Stamper Level 8 Level 8 (37,430 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 28, 2012 11:29 AM (in response to léonie)

    I don't use Stacks, either, prefering to additively edit to a final Version, but if wanting another edit, use either New Version from Master, or duplicate that version.

     

    Earlier versions of Aperture did in fact warn that if you were about the delete the only remaining Version you would be deleting the Master.  I think that was more prudent.

     

    Ernie

  • léonie Level 8 Level 8 (46,355 points)

    Earlier versions of Aperture did in fact warn that if you were about the delete the only remaining Version you would be deleting the Master.

    In some workflows that could be quite a nuisance. if you know, that each delete will delete an original image file, it is pointless to warn. How about giving a warning, when emptying the Aperture trash - "xxx versions, yyy originals, zzz books will be deleted, do you want to continue?". Then you could always reconsider and put back.

     

    Or introduce a preference setting - an option to warn, when trashing the last version, like in the Finder, when you empty the Trash.

  • Ernie Stamper Level 8 Level 8 (37,430 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 28, 2012 11:48 AM (in response to léonie)

    All those are good choices.  But I wonder how careful I would be if I had not experienced the dire warnings in the earlier versions

     

    Ernie

Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Legend

  • This solved my question - 10 points
  • This helped me - 5 points
This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. Apple disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions and conduct of any third parties in connection with or related to your use of the site. All postings and use of the content on this site are subject to the Apple Support Communities Terms of Use.