This discussion is archived
3533 Views 36 Replies Latest reply: Apr 26, 2007 7:28 AM by Karl Geiger
Currently Being ModeratedApr 23, 2007 12:04 PM (in response to Alan Williams)Alan, you say you can use the Imac 17" ??
The 17" is less spec.ed than my box, i guess specifically the graphic card.How does your adjustments sliders work ? Usable or sticky/non usable ?
What about full screen mode, adjustments ?Imac 20" Intel 2,19 ghz duo, 2gb ram, Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 23, 2007 1:45 PM (in response to Staxrod)Hi Staxrod,
I will not be back in front of my iMacs until tomorrow evening. I will test the machines again and post a detailed report.
I have been reading all your recent (and rather angry) posts and wonder if your iMac is somehow faulty. I can well understand your disappointment with Apple/Aperture because IMO Aperture was rushed to market. If you study the advertisements they cleverly mentioned matadata and keywording much more than speed because Apple knew the product was not nearly ready. However, I have faith that Apple will solve the problems and one day Aperture will run well on all the platforms listed as suitable.
Have you considered visiting an Apple dealer or store and asked for a demonstration of Aperture on an mid range iMac? Maybe you could do this using a few of your own files just to see how similar or different in performance it is to your own machine.
More here late tomorrow evening.
17 and 24 Intel iMacs Mac OS X (10.4.9) And an old white iBook still giving service
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 2:37 AM (in response to Staxrod)Hi Staxrod,
Aperture 1.5.3 Test
17inch iMac with 1.85 Ghz core duo, 1.5 Gb RAM with Radeon X1600 128mb graphics card
24 inch iMac with 2.16 Ghz core 2 duo, 3Gb of RAM with NVIDEA 7600 256mb graphics card.
Other applications running at the same time were:
Safari, Mail, iPhoto, Preview and Pages.
Observations generally on both machines were that ALL sliders were near instantaneous taking effect providing the movement was a modest increment. A large change demand would require a second or so to show on screen. All sliders were completely smooth operating but trailed behind the mouse if rapid dragging mouse movements were made. This was not in any way a problem, when the mouse pointer stopped moving the slider caught up.
However the slider button snapped to a new position immediately a click was made somewhere along its line of operation. The slowest slider was - as expected - the rotate, but still completely usable.
Activating presets for exposure, colour balance etc etc took about a second or less to fully take effect.
Full Screen and Zoom actioned within 2/3 of a second when selected individually but slowed by another second or so if actioned together.
Best speed was observed to be on the 17 inch machine. It was surprisingly fast and completely transformed by the latest upgrade. This may be that there is (1) less real estate to rewrite and update and (2) the Aperture and iPhoto libraries are tiny on that machine compared to the 24 inch. In most respects both machines work about as fast as I can so no major problems here.
Needless to say I am much happier with Aperture now and can defer my planned replacement of the 17 inch model. Performance on both machines is now is very similar to that of Lightroom that I used until the free Beta expired.
Staxrod, something is wrong with your machine, I venture to guess. Perhaps you have been unlucky getting that particular one.
17 and 24 Intel iMacs Mac OS X (10.4.9) And an old white iBook still giving service
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 9:53 AM (in response to Alan Williams)FWIW, this is also a good description of the performance I get on a 20" iMac 2GHz Core Duo with 2GB and a 256MB X1600 -- a machine pretty much midway between those two. (I also don't see a lot of difference on my MBP 15" 2.66GHz 2GB 256MB.)20" iMac 2GHz 2GB, Mac Book Pro 2.66GHz 2GB, Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 2:07 PM (in response to Charles Hartman)Alan, thanks for sharing... i would be in the heaven if i just could say the same regarding performance here....
(By the way, i have upgraded my model-info below in this post)
So - being new to Apple - i tried to search for any issues which could make life hard for my box.
I closed all running applications, then i removed Scribus (i need it), Comic Life, XNView, Democracy and unchecked a number of the preinstalled widgets. Then i repaired disc permissions (it didnt tell about any failures)
Starting Aperture, and BING performance as you described Big smiles...
But my happiness was very short....3 minutes after, i tried full screen, did some adjustments....really slow again. Back to the old, slow, really slow.
Repaired discpermissions again, reboot, still slow...
Removed histogram, almost "fast" again....but only shortly after some more adjustments....back to Sq one
Unchecked straighen....."fast" again, not as first time, but ok/usable.
Full screen, bad, but still usable.
Checked staighen, somehow slower again, but perculiar, full screen mode is somehow ok
Back to normal mode....full screen again....slow like h... ?
Unchecked straighen....a little faster, but not at its best
I really need the histogram, but it slows the whole thing down
......actually i dont know what to say....just much more confusedImac 20" Intel 2,19 ghz core 2 duo, 2gb ram, X1600 128mb ram, Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 2:58 PM (in response to Staxrod)Hi Staxrod,
This may surprise you. I also found my my 24 inch machine really slow for a while tonight after I added in a load of new RAW files. Once it had generated previews though it resumed its sprightly pace.
Having read this article I am going to apply its advice:
So, because I do not use reference images I am going to get rid of preview manufacturing and maintaining altogether and dump the preview library. I do not make slide shows either so I appear not to need previews. I just wonder if your problem is connected with Previews?
When I used Lightroom Beta as my RAW convertor, that too was dead slow until it had ground its way through making all the previews. After that it got into its stride. So Aperture with previews seems no different.
I shall let you know how things turn out in a day or two.
Dont loose hope the solution exists somewhere.17 and 24 Intel iMacs, Mac OS X (10.4.9), And an old white iBook still giving service
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 3:45 PM (in response to Staxrod)
Then i repaired disc permissions (it didnt tell about
Repairing permissions will NEVER have an impact on performance. If you're hitting permissions related problems, then you'll either see apps unable to start, unable to open/write files, that kind of thing - hard failures. Not performance degradation.Mac OS X (10.4.7)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 24, 2007 10:42 PM (in response to a.j.taylor)Thanks, for advise, Alan.
Read the article, I have a number of referenced files stored in external drives, need to dig a little around....
Previews was already unchecked in preferences.
Basically i think its wrong that it is nessesary to turn off functionality to get the software to do what it is supposed to do, anyhow, i´m desperate, really need the system to work.
A.J. Taylor, the repairing permission thingy, i dont know a clue of what it actually does, just following the advice from SierraDragon....it should not harm anyway ?. But thanks for clarificationImac 20" Intel 2,19 ghz core 2 duo, 2gb ram, X1600 128mb ram, Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 12:03 AM (in response to Staxrod)I have tried Aperture on several occasions on my PowerBook G4 1.5 Ghz with 1Gb RAM and a Radeon 9700 GPU with 128Mb of RAM. Each time I have cursed the app away almost trashing the entire computer in anger (yes, I have a temper). Still with each update I give Aperture a go again. This time I downloaded the 1.5.3 trialversion, expecting nothing, and immediatly imported all my 7053 pictures from iPhoto. And what the heck?! The app is suddenly usefull! It is nowhere blazing fast, but it is acceptable. The sliders move almost responsively, the library scrolls almost smoothly, each image pops up quickly and the editing is not exactly fast, but usefull. The only thing that works like ** is when I move to fullscreen. It takes at least 10-15 seconds, but once in fullscreen mode I can jump from picture to picture with great speed and ex. remove redeyes with an ok, but not impressive speed. My images are from a Nikon D50, so they amount to only 6MP, and I shoot in JPEG mode, but still...
Conclusion: As I'm about to move up to a MBP I can only see the future of Apertures speed being brighter. If it now runs acceptable on my 3 year old PowerBook it must improve greatly in speed with a brand new MBP.
Nagging thoughts: Why is Aperture still so slow compared to iPhoto? In iPhoto 6 my library scrolls with extreme speed, I go to fullscreen in less than a second and all other features work very fast. To me it seems as if Aperture needs ALOT of optimizing before it has earned its prizetag. As of now I will hold on buying the app until I have seen its performance on my new MBP. And I must admit that I'm a bit concerned about the successtories Apple show on their website, from pro photographers that only have positive things to say about the app. Their integrity is a bit flawed in my opinion (unless they have some sort of super secret Aperture-optimized Mac)Powerbook G4 1.5 Ghz, 15", 1,5Gb RAM, Radeon 9700 (128 Mb), Mac OS X (10.4.9), New interal Seagate 5400.10 160Gb hardrive + new internal dual layer dvd-burner
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 2:49 AM (in response to Staxrod)
A.J. Taylor, the repairing permission thingy, i dont
know a clue of what it actually does, just following
the advice from SierraDragon....it should not harm
anyway ?. But thanks for clarification
No, it shouldn't harm.
Every file (and directory) on your system has 3 groups of permissions associated with it - permissions for the file owner, the group, and "other" - anyone else.
Each group can be set to any combination of read/write/execute, so it's easy to set permissions on a file such that the file owner can read/write, everyone in his "group" can read only, and everyone else can do nothing, for example.
All that repairing permissions does is compare the on disk permissions with the permissions as set in the package receipts (i.e. the permissions as set by the developer), but only for those files that are included in a package (which isn't very many), then set them back to what the developer "thinks they should be".
That's it. No other magic. No cure for world hunger.Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 9:40 AM (in response to a.j.taylor)Although many times repairing Permissions has little effect, other times (on a box full of Adobe apps, multiple scanners, multiple printers, etc. in constant use) a simple thing like repairing Permissions after (often required) installation of an Epson printer driver may report thousands of repaired Permissions.
On the Photoshop forums for years there have been many instances of some folks getting poor or unstable performance out of setups that other folks get good performance out of. We see the same thing here on the Aperture forums. The suggested protocol of repairing Permissions is one of the routines that those of us with long term good Adobe performance have tended to follow.
Without disagreeing with the description of what repairing Permissions does under *nix, I will simply state that there are many tens of thousands of files with Permissions settings. IMO maintaining them in a consistent state immediately before and after each installation of any kind is a potentially useful protocol with no down side risk.
-Allen Wicks17" 2.33 GHz 3 GB C2D MBP, 15" 1.67 GHz G4 PB, DP G4 tower; Nikon D2x & D100., Mac OS X (10.4.9)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 12:02 PM (in response to SierraDragon)I have not done the 1.5.3 upgrade yet but as I've said before, performance has always been brisk with my 20" CoreDuo iMac with 2gb ram. With RAW files from a D200 I never see a beach ball for anything. Sometimes there is a little lag with the sliders when sharpening. All other sliders are instant.
I have previews turned off.
Imported TIFFs are another matter. They range from 10-30mb and things start to drag a bit. Get beach balls sometimes with sharpening and rarely just when opening. There is significant delay when using sliders in levels.
I doubt 1.5.3 is going to help that. Fortunately, the TIFFs are from scanned film which is only a small part of my work these days.20" Core Duo iMac, Mac OS X (10.4.7)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 12:53 PM (in response to SierraDragon)
Although many times repairing Permissions has little
effect, other times (on a box full of Adobe apps,
multiple scanners, multiple printers, etc. in
constant use) a simple thing like repairing
Permissions after (often required) installation of an
Epson printer driver may report thousands of repaired
So what? Just because the permissions are not what the original package receipt says, it *doesn't matter* ! Point me to one example where you've actually hit a REAL problem that was actually caused by "incorrect" permissions?
On the Photoshop forums for years there have been
many instances of some folks getting poor or unstable
performance out of setups that other folks get good
performance out of. We see the same thing here on the
Aperture forums. The suggested protocol of repairing
Permissions is one of the routines that those of us
with long term good Adobe performance have tended to
Out of ignorance, stupidity, or just stubbornness? I hate to get personal, but really, anyone who recommends this procedure as a general "maintenance" procedure clearly doesn't understand what it does and what the implications of it are. And, they clearly don't understand what kinds of problems incorrect permissions could cause.
I will simply
state that there are many tens of thousands of files
with Permissions settings.
EVERY file has permissions!Mac OS X (10.4.7)
Currently Being ModeratedApr 25, 2007 2:41 PM (in response to Staxrod)Hi Staxrod,
I have again compared speed between my iMacs after deleting the previews and using both entirely without generation and maintenance.
Now the 17 inch is way quicker than the 24 inch model. Obviously this is disappointing. When you buy a new top end machine you expect it to be faster than a year old base model. The 24 inch takes several seconds to load an image. On the 17 inch its near instantaneous. I am testing with the same RAW pics in each computer. Rotation is smoother too on the 17 inch.
I do not know what the problem might be. So I am now thinking of bringing the 24 inch Vault up to date and then clearing the entire library before retesting with a smaller set of Raw files.17 and 24 Intel iMacs, Mac OS X (10.4.9), And an old white iBook still giving service