2 Replies Latest reply: Feb 16, 2010 7:04 AM by Kim Hill1
Kim Hill1 Level 2 (165 points)
Aperture 3 has made some great strides in making the following possible ( I posted this originally in 2007):

What I'd like to do is shoot everything in raw + jpg, and then keep the raw files only for the important shots.

I really like having the option of raw processing, but the storage demands are very heavy. If I could just make a selection of photos in a roll, and have a command to delete any unneeded raw files from the selected photos, while keeping the original jpgs as master, that would be great.

Also, it would be great to be able to manipulate a raw file, and then when I'm satisfied with the image, to render a high-quality jpg from that raw file & make the jpg the new master, and then delete the raw file to free up disk space.

Basically, I want the raw file safety net for everyday images, without gobbling up gigabytes of disk space <<<<<

With Aperture 3, I can finally change the master to the jpg file, which solves part of the problem. But I still want to be able to manipulate my raw file, and render a new high-quality jpg master.

Why don't Aperture / Lightroom do this? To me at least, it seems an obvious feature.

MacBook Pro 15" 2.66/4GB, Mac OS X (10.6.2), iPhone 3GS
  • drfrogsplat Level 1 (5 points)
    Agreed, this would be an incredibly useful feature for me...

    I took about 2000 photos for a friend's wedding, all in RAW (including a lot of duplicates, etc). I've gone through and made the adjustments I want and am happy with the photos as they are now. I'd like to keep about 20 RAW files 'just in case' but apart from a few special shots I have no need for well exposed photos of guests to be kept in RAW.

    Unfortunately I didn't take them in RAW+JPEG (I believe Aperture 3 now makes it fairly easy to switch masters and get rid of the RAW files now?) so there doesn't seem to be a way of converting the master to the JPEG...

    I could export JPEGs, delete the RAWs and re-import the JPEGs but I'll lose my modified metadata (and all the metadata that Apple don't bother including in exported files) and faces tagged in the photos, so that tactic doesn't seem too useful...
  • Kim Hill1 Level 2 (165 points)
    I had a chance to talk to product managers from both Apple & Adobe about this at PhotoPlus Expo in NYC a couple years back. Both seemed receptive, but here we are - years later - no progress.

    I think part of the problem is that there's a purist mentality about RAW files. One should always shoot them - and then keep them forever- after all- they're your negatives!

    But what about event photography? Or weddings, as you pointed out? It makes no sense to burden your workflow & backup system with 4GB of RAW files of people grinning into the camera. Once the adjustments have been made, the RAW files are just a ball & chain on your data management. And let's not forget, once you really know what you're doing, your jpegs should be good most of the time anyway.

    I want RAW files as a safety net for errors in exposure and white balance. Once I know I have good photos, I don't need the safety net anymore- at least not at the price of all that hard disk space and transfer time for online backup. Of course, for my fine art stuff and important documentary work, I'll always keep the RAWs permanently. But not for routine parties/events.

    You put your finger on the problem with re-importing jpegs as a solution. You lose your metadata- rankings/album memberships, etc. This is no solution!

    What I want is simple, and it would be immediately useful to countless photographers:

    1) Let me batch-delete RAW files when the jpegs are ok.
    2) Let me do adjustments on my RAW file, render out a high-quality jpeg, and make the jpeg my new master.

    Whoever does this first - Aperture or Lightroom - that's the product I'll use.