Previous 1 2 Next 17 Replies Latest reply: Oct 31, 2013 9:42 AM by philhudson91
T-squared Level 1 Level 1 (10 points)
I have a referenced master on my hard disk with file name "mike.jpg". I would like to edit the file "mike.jpg" in Aperture, and then save it back to the same location on the hard disk replacing the current "mike.jpg" with the edited "mike.jpg". I want the edited "mike.jpg" to be the new master in Aperture. I don't want to save the original "mike.jpg" in Aperture or on the hard disk.

Is this possible in Aperture and how would I do it?

I'm interested in purchasing Aperture but I first need to know if I can accomplish the above. Thanks!
  • Mr Endo Level 4 Level 4 (1,005 points)
    No, that is not the job of Aperture. Aperture's number one priority is not changing your master. If you think you need to do that, you would have to change your workflow to use Aperture. Why, may I ask, is that so direly important in your decision to buy Aperture? A new version in Aperture is very, very inexpensive. In other words, you have your master file, several Megabytes long, and a new version is several Kilobytes.

    nathan
  • CalxOddity Level 3 Level 3 (680 points)
    Hi,
    Aperture treats the original as your negative, and nothing you do ever over-writes the negative - this is the whole rationale of non-destructive workflows.

    In your case, you process your mike.jpg and have a new version. That's all you need to do - all the deleting etc is unnecessary time and effort. Aperture show you the negative (the original mike.jpg) and the version you created, which exists only as a set of processing instructions kept in Aperture's database.

    If you really really really wanted to delete your negative and replace it with your processed version, it can be done by exporting, deleting and reimporting, but this is all so very pointless.
  • T-squared Level 1 Level 1 (10 points)
    The main reason is I only need one version (the edited version) and I would like to be able to view the edited file in other apps such as the Mac OS Finder, Mac OS Preview, and attach the file to e-mails when using my web browser to send mail. I don't need to see the old master ("negative").

    It sounds like one option is to export the edited version, delete the old master, and then import the edited version as the new master. Is that my only option?

    Message was edited by: T-squared
  • Terence Devlin Level 10 Level 10 (133,205 points)
    t sounds like one option is to export the edited version, delete the old master, and then import the edited version as the new master. Is that my only option?


    Yes.

    But all so unnecessary.

    There is no "edited version" to view in the Finder or Preview. The edited version in Aperture is an entry in a database.

    But why do you want to view the photos with Finder or Preview? Th whole point of Aperture (and similar apps like iPhoto and Lightroom) is that they are used instead of the Finder and Preview. Aperture is your "go to" app for anythign to do with your photos.

    And, for attaching your photos to an email: you're entire library is available in the Attach dialogue.

    But I wonder if Aperture (or iPhoto or Lightroom) is the app for you.

    Regards

    TD
  • Mr Endo Level 4 Level 4 (1,005 points)
    T Squared,

    It sounds like one option is to export the edited version, delete the old master, and then import the edited version as the new master. Is that my only option?


    If you truly, absolutely, definitely want to work with the same concept that you currently work with, then yes, that is your option.

    However, you should think about all the rest that Aperture has to offer and re-think your need to access edited versions directly in Finder. Most people (including me) needed to get over the hump of "That's how I've always done it" when they start using Aperture. Remember that with destructive editing (like you are looking for) the edit-save-edit-save cycle is like making a photocopy of a photocopy. It will always degrade your picture if you decide, after your initial edit and save, that you need to do something extra.

    With non-destructive editing, like in Aperture and iPhoto, all edits are applied to an un-altered master. So, even if you keep piling edits on over time, it's like you did them all at once. There is no degradation.

    And as TD said, if you really, really need to see your photos in Finder and Preview instead of Aperture, then Aperture is probably not the tool for you since it is designed to replace those applications for your photos.

    nathan
  • Mr Endo Level 4 Level 4 (1,005 points)
    T Squared,

    I might add to my previous post: Now that I've used Aperture, using Finder to do anything with my images is just a pain in the butt. I avoid it as much as I can. The ability of Aperture to show you any thumbnail in no-time-flat is invaluable to using the photos outside of Aperture.

    nathan
  • thenextbutton Level 1 Level 1 (100 points)
    First time I have ever read anybody wanting to directly edit and replace the master file. I am not saying it is wrong to do so but, like everyone else is saying, you can not do it in aperture. It is not designed to work like this.

    I think what you are looking for is a Photoshop idea, open your image do all the changes and save it back and over write it.

    The other way, as you already have stated is, is edit then export and then delete the current master and re-import the new master.

    When I use Apple TV to view my photos all my photos displayed to me are the image preview pictures which already contain the edits I have carried out on Aperture.
  • T-squared Level 1 Level 1 (10 points)
    Thank you everyone for your replies to my question. I will take your comments to heart. You've been most helpful. Cheers!
  • nolamike Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)

    HI All,

     

    Just want to point out a very legitimate reason to occasionally want to replace a master with a version, even if one is devoted to the Aperture workflow. Say I'm on a photography trip, shooting landscapes in RAW with my SLR. We stop at a restaurant for a memorable lunch. I take a picture of the menu. Whoops, I left the camera on RAW. Do I really need 20MB of my hard disk devoted to a picture of a menu? Nope. A 3 megapixel JPEG will do just great.

     

    I like taking "documentation" images like menus, road signs, trailhead signs, etc. all the time. They are intermixed with aesthetic shots, and I usually don't bother, or forget, to take the camera out of full-res RAW mode.

     

    It would be very nice to shave a few hundred megabytes off a set of images by simply replacing selected RAW masters with JPEGs.

     

    Maybe an AppleScript has been written to make this easier?

     

    Mike

  • nolamike Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)

    Found an AppleScript for sale that does this at ApertureExpert.com (I have no connection to the site).

     

    Mike

  • Mr Endo Level 4 Level 4 (1,005 points)

    That is a good case... 

     

    For me, though, the problem is more often the opposite -- forgetting to put my camera back on "RAW" aftre my documentation images!  Phoey.

     

    nathan

  • Kirby Krieger Level 6 Level 6 (12,470 points)

    Hi Mike --

    nolamike wrote:

    I like taking "documentation" images like menus, road signs, trailhead signs, etc. all the time. They are intermixed with aesthetic shots, and I usually don't bother, or forget, to take the camera out of full-res RAW mode.

     

    It would be very nice to shave a few hundred megabytes off a set of images by simply replacing selected RAW masters with JPEGs.

    You do make a good case (as Mr Endo states).  How 'bout just tossing the Master and keeping the Preview?  (Show in Finder, delete, done.)  You can't adjust, export, or email-via-command the Preview, but you can always drag-and-drop it when you need it.  And if you ever do need to make additional adjustments, you can always do the export/re-import two-step.

     

    I'd like to see Aperture add a "Replace Master with Preview" command.  "Aperture→Send Aperture Feedback".

  • nolamike Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)

    This seems like a simple solution, and almost a supported way to do it, in that Aperture is designed to not always have access to its masters. In this case, the lack of access happens to be permanent.

     

    I'll try it, and compare to the AppleScript, which I went ahead and invested $2 in. The AppleScript is not fully automatic, as by design you have to manually delete the master at the end.

  • philhudson91 Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Hi,

     

    I cannot find this applescript but desperately need it! Could you please let me know if it's still about or where I could get it from please? As I've lost my whole library and this is now the only option.

     

    Many thanks.

Previous 1 2 Next