Deleting a version in Aperture also deleted the master

Question

Level 7

25,979 points

Deleting a version in Aperture also deleted the master

Disclaimer: Apple does not necessarily endorse any suggestions, solutions, or third-party software products that may be mentioned in the topic below. Apple encourages you to first seek a solution at Apple Support. The following links are provided as is, with no guarantee of the effectiveness or reliability of the information. Apple does not guarantee that these links will be maintained or functional at any given time. Use the information below at your own discretion.

So you just did *File->Delete Version* (or pressed ⌘⌫) and not only is the version gone but so is the master! What happened?

*File->Delete Version* (⌘⌫) is terribly misnamed it should be Delete Version and Possibly Master. While it does delete the version it also *deletes the master* _if this was the only version of that master_ . What is even worst is that no additional warning is given.

So what to do? In this case the version and master are still in Aperture's trash if you haven't emptied it. If they are there you can click on the trash icon, select the image and select put back from the menu. If you have emptied the trash they will be in the system trash and you will need to import the image again.

To prevent this from happening in the future remember if there is only one version of a master in the library then deleting that version will also delete the master. If you want to get back to an unadjusted version of the master you can either remove all adjustments from the version or else duplicate the master (not the version) and then delete the adjusted version.

This is the 1st version of this tip. It was submitted on February 8, 2011 by Frank Caggiano.

Do you want to provide feedback on this User Contributed Tip or contribute your own? If you have achieved Level 2 status, visit the User Tips Library Contributions forum for more information.

iMac Intel 3.06 GHz 8GB Mem; Macbook5.1 2.4ghz 4GB Mem, Mac OS X (10.6.6), Aperture 3.1.1

Posted on Feb 8, 2011 3:34 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Nubz N.

Community Moderator

Feb 10, 2011 7:04 AM in response to Frank Caggiano

Hi Frank,

Yes, that works, reply update.

I almost want to add a parenthetical comment in the line:

To prevent this from happening in the future remember if there is only one version of a master in the library then deleting that version will also delete the master,{color:green} (that version is the Master).{color}

i.e.
It seems like if there is only one version, the Master itself, deleting it deletes the Master. If there is only one version, the Master, it implies if you delete it, the Master is in fact deleted.

I wonder if "Deleting a Version" is expected to delete only Modified versions? If there is no modified versions, then "Delete Version" (the Master) should do nothing?

In any event, it does look like this can catch people by surprise and should be highlighted. Thanks.

Thoughts on the addition?

Thanks,
Nubz

Reply

Answer 2

Frank Caggiano Author

Level 7

25,979 points

Feb 10, 2011 7:47 AM in response to Nubz N.

Nubz N. wrote:
Hi Frank,

Yes, that works, reply update.

I almost want to add a parenthetical comment in the line:

To prevent this from happening in the future remember if there is only one version of a master in the library then deleting that version will also delete the master,{color:green} (that version is the Master).{color}

i.e.
It seems like if there is only one version, the Master itself, deleting it deletes the Master. If there is only one version, the Master, it implies if you delete it, the Master is in fact deleted.

I wonder if "Deleting a Version" is expected to delete only Modified versions? If there is no modified versions, then "Delete Version" (the Master) should do nothing?

In any event, it does look like this can catch people by surprise and should be highlighted. Thanks.

Thoughts on the addition?

Thanks,
Nubz

Hi,

But thats the thing about Aperture the only version of a master isn't the master _*it is a separate thing*_, the version. It just so happens that the only version of a master has a special relationship with the master in that if it is deleted than the master is also deleted.

Stating that if there is only one version it is the master would be factually wrong and get me ostracized from the group (only slightly kidding about that last part).

As for what the command should actually do, again the master and the version are separate entities, even if there is only one version. What I think delete version should do in the case where there is only one version is to reset all the adjustments on it putting you back to where you were when you imported the master.

As a minimum it should pop up a waring to the effect *This is the last version of this master. If you delete this it will also delete the master, do you want to proceed?* As an added bonus it could even given you the option to reset the adjustments.

I think someone dropped the ball on this especially given that there is a separate command *Delete Master and all Versions* which specifically address deleting the master.

regards

Reply

Answer 3

Nubz N.

Community Moderator

Feb 10, 2011 8:12 AM in response to Frank Caggiano

Cool, thanks for the enlightenment. 🙂

Obviously, I haven't used Aperture much, was just making an (un)educated guess.

Processing now,
Nubz

Reply