Aperture 3 - Scandalous release

Hold down the command and option key while you open Aperture. You'll be give a dialogue box that gives you the option of running a consistency check or rebuilding the library.

DO make sure, of course, that you have a backup before doing this.

ALWAYS have a full backup before upgrading, and ALWAYS before doing extensive database maintenance.

I am not a professional photographer, nor do I need Aperture for my business. I know my way around computers and software. When a major company like Apple releases something like Aperture 3.00 there is an expectation of some bugginess.

There is not, however, a need to becoming a programming expert just to get the software functioning at an acceptable level. I tried AP3 on two machines, a 17" MacBook Pro and Mac Pro, different libraries, different applications for photographic use. They are both disasters. I don't have the same issues on both, just unique, deal killing issues on each. Most of the issues are on the laptop. I though the desktop was manageable until I just spent almost three hours trying to export 28 photos to a folder on my desktop. No matter what I did, 5-8 of the pictures, never the same ones, on each try came out as garbage. This has been a terrible experience.

I'm an Apple fan, stockholder, etc. but I am now a confirmed Lightroom user. Aperture in any version is no longer on any machine I own. I really wanted to use Aperture too.

Shame on you Apple.

I understand this "computer stuff" but the behaviour that I have seen A3 shouldn't be in a beta trial. I have tried to import approx 40,000 images referenced from an internal HD that is only 40% full. I'm not importing from an A2 library and it has crashed at least 6 times. I've disabled face detection. This is on a imac i7. Is this normal bug territory, would you release a programme to the public that can't even import? I have never had any software crash as this has on the Apple platform. Looking at the posts I'm not the only one having these issues. I think it is scandalous that a company that I have a great deal of respect for should release something so poorly tested.

I've just completed upgrading from A2 to A3. I had no problems upgrading a library containing nearly 30,000 images. I did not process the images during the first launch. I unchecked the box asking me if I wanted to do so. It did take an hour or so for the database to be rebuilt. After that, and the application actually launched into a usable state, I processed my images into A3 format by right-clicking projects and selecting 'Reprocess Masters." I took things a few thousand pics at a time to play it safe.

Painless, overall. Still knocking on wood though.

Well I am just playing along with A3 until I run out of 30 days grace on the trial version. Then at some point I will buy the boxed version and take every precaution offered including a SuperDuper backup and Time Machine run before I consider trying to convert a library to A3.

I do find it strange that people with huge, huge archives of important images are so cavalier in their approach when step-change upgrades come along. Its no surprise that so many are in trouble.

But I do agree Apple should be more upfront in the general advice and caution the user accordingly.

And yet many of us had zero problems. Why not come here for help solving what you yourself said was expected bugginess? None of these solutions proposed has anything to do with programming. You installed a x.0 release and had problems that many people don't have, and you want to blame Apple. Not sure what to tell you. Good luck with the new LR the first day it comes out.

Just for sake of clarity here - I have not upgraded an A2 library. I have initially imported reference files on a FW800 drive with plenty of space on it and on my Macbook. I have this evening finished doing the same using new libraries following various processes of illumination that included importing referenced in ones event and embedding in another, 2500 Raw files into a new library each time. This included doing it with both images and library on the mac book etc - basically in all ways that could throw up a chance that this could be overcome. However in all efforts everything imports but when A3 starts processing after the import it gets to 600 to 800 images and crashes. I have manually looked through the image files and cant see any corrupt images, as confirmed by the lightroom catalogue. SO I am at a loss in thinking that my files are the problem.


SO as I see it the issue is in the processing engine that fails irrespective of reference files or embedded files, irrespectective whether this be between drives or on the same drive.

This is a very poor start for what should be a good package.

I'm trying Aperture 3 and find it difficult to understand it's utility. It's marginally better than iphoto as an organizer, marginally better (than iphoto) as a image editor but not compellingly better to spend one penny for it.

It's presumptuous program that is not intuitive, no straight forward saving of a image or save as function, but rather a system of obscuring the original while saving it.

You cannot select part of the image; it won't use the iphoto library but rather duplicates everything again; it's not as complete a image editor as photoshop elements, much less the full photoshop or lightroom.

It seems a useless overpriced partially functional program. I'm ending my trial today.

you should try trolling somewhere else. These forums are for people looking for assistance.

Just have a look here
http://forums.adobe.com/community/lightroom

Funny, when I got the e-mail from Apple that Aperture 3 was released, I did not read anywhere that you should not update from Aperture 2 if you have a database over this or that size. If fact, I did not read it on the website either. When a major company like Apple does an upgrade, I expect it to work. Yes I do expect some minor bugs, but not like this.

I also should not have to be a programmer for really good at computers for that matter, just to install and run software. The software has a manual, I expect the software to behave as stated in the manual or video tutorials for that matter.

I have been an Apple fan for 3 years with no major problems. Aperture 2 ran fine, with some minor bugs in the beginning for me. Seems that I was the only one in my photo group of 200 photographers that was using Aperture - I swore by it and stayed with it.

Aperture 3 is different. I cannot export a simple jpeg file that is only 900x600 at 72 dpi (80 kb). It takes upwards of 15 minutes to get one shot out. No matter who the heck you are, that should not happen. I can live with some issues, not this. I did repair my permissions and rebuilt my library with no solid gains in time.

I expected Aperture 3 to work - period.

You have a lot to learn. You NEVER upgrade upon first release when your business depends on it. And if you want help solving your particular problems, you'll need to muster up a slightly better attitude.

My business is not dependant on one software. I also have Photoshop - it is rock solid. I use Aperture to keep track of my photos and basically not to have to use 2 programs or more to achieve a certain look in my pics. What I used to do 100% in PS, I now do 95% in Aperture - more like 100% when you take into account I use the Nik plug-ins. Aperture allowed me to increase my speed of processing.

I have 3 back-ups of my library, I can turn Aperture 2 back on.

I don't need a better attitude, I need a computer program that works and a company that backs it.