Aperture running at a crawl since lion upgrade

I read about that on Aperture Professional Network. Aperture 3.2 will not be found if you don't install Lion 10.7.2 first. You must do the Lion-Update before because Aperture 3.2 depends on Lion 10.7.2

GodefroyB wrote:

Talk about timing! I did check for upgrades twice this week with nothing available. After I read your post, I checked again and Lion 10.7.2 was now avaialble, but not Aperture 3.2. A couple of hours later Aperture 3.2 was now available for upgrade!!! I'll try these upgrades and let you know. Thanks

That is correct. You must install 10.7.2 and then run Software Update again to pick up Aperture 3.2.

I had the same problem as well. I have a MacBook Pro17" with 4gb ram. I just installed 8gb of ram and my aperture 3 seems to be working fine for now!!!

Hope this helps.

Make sure you update Lion first, then update to Aperture 3.2. These upgrades will resolve your memory issue. Regardless, having more memory is better and not a loss! I upgraded my iMac to 16 gb and all is great now.

Yes, the updates must happen that way. My machine had been running well until tonight. Is anyone else having similar issues to what I describe below?

After importing 94 Raw files, NEF format from a Nikon D300, I turned off photo stream from the preferences, as that’s been taking a long time, and then left the computer for about 30 minutes as I see that Aperture likes time to process raw files. However, perhaps not enough time had been given for it to do that, as when I started adjusting white balance followed by brushing in some sharpness, Aperture just hung. I left it for another 30 minutes and saw that nothing had changed. Option-Command-Escape didn’t do anything, so I forced a shut-down from the power button. The only other application open at the time had been Safari, but I had also turned off wifi to make sure that photo stream or any other internet activity wouldn’t be running.

The previous couple of times that Aperture ceased working on my system before the recent update was when I was applying sharpening. That seems to be very memory intensive.

Does anyone have any suggestions?

Cheers

Shane

--

iMac

24-inch Mid 2007

Processor 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo

Memory 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

Graphics ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro 256 MB

Serial Number W8809045ZCT

Software Mac OS X Lion 10.7.2 (11C74)

Shane, just upgraded from the system you're running to a 27" i7. Although your Mac can run Aperture and Lion... You're hardware is right on the edge of being too slow. Don't pay attention to the system requirements on the software... Read the forums. A core 2 duo and 4 gigs of ram is just too slow. Sorry man. I still use my mid 2007 iMac for iLife programs, but Aperture is just too much of a memory and processor hog.

It's not correct.

I have an iMac 2007 C2D 2.0Ghz, and with 6Gb of RAM Aperture is still usable at 99,9%!!

With a D90 NEF, so similar files.

Just for the record I agree with ayrtonoc. It is not correct that you need the absolute top of the range to run the latest version (important) of Aperture. I have a similar iMac 2007 Core 2 Duo 2.4GHz with 4GB memory. All the latest updates of Lion and Aperture fixed it all for me (or safer to stick to the 99.9%). Canon RAW files here and a sizeable library.

To clarify, I'm not saying you cannot run Aperture with a 2007 iMac and 4gigs of ram... I'm saying it was very slow and problematic for me. I have a library with 25k images, roughly 1tb of data. I shoot a Nikon D7000- RAW. My older system has major performance issues running Aperture.

Having said that.... Apple still has some bugs to work out with Aperture. I imported 40 raw images this morning, did some editing, and after a few hours my usable ram had dropped to:

I'm running 12gb of ram and down to 2.8gb free... 9.4gb used.... and I'm only running Aperture. I'm all up to date with Lion and Aperture and have the newest/fastest iMac Apple makes. Even Final Cut X never uses more than 7gb of ram, so something's going on here.

That's true - with the latest updates you can work with 4 GB if you shut down most of the other software. Maybe I'll update my iMac 2009 i7 to 8 GB, but that should be enough. Even the RAW photos have "only" 30-40 MB so I don't understand why 1-2 GB for Aperture should not be enough. Keep the next 20 photos in memory and a part of the library and put the rest back on harddisk. And if you have 16 GB keep more photos and the whole library in memory.

I split up my libraries (< 10000 photos each) because I always had the "feeling" that Aperture is getting slower with big libraries.

I use Apple because

• I never had any hardware problems with my MacBook Pro and iMac
• With every OS-Update before Lion the system was getting faster without clean installation
• You never had to do things to speed up system like on Windows (tune up, searching TMP files)
• I'm writing software but I prefer if all the things like installing driver oder checking disks are done automatically and you don't need to search the whole internet for hints
• The hardware is always state of the art so you don't need to buy a new computer every 2-3 years

If Apple is no more easy to use or if you have to buy new hardware with every new OS update, there is no reason for the high prices on hardware anymore. So please Apple fans (and I'm a fan too) don't blame the users who don't want buy new hardware every year or can't search in the deep of the system for user rights. The biggest advantage of Apple was always that is was easy to use.

Sven, I fully agree with what you are saying. As I mentioned in many earlier posts, there have been many posts where incorrect advice was dispensed, essentially trying to resolve normal code defects with increased system resources, citing Moore's law. While it is normal that, as applications and operating systems become more rich in functionality there is a SLOW upward trend in system requirements, older systems will still perform similar tasks the same way they did when they were born. I am writing this on a Xeon Mac Pro and at the same time I am running a bunch of centralized functions on a 2001 Mac G4. Back to Aperture and Lion, as expected, the first two maintenance fixed resolved most, if not all performance issues related to the new O/S. Together with Aperture 3.2.x we are back to normal levels of performance:

- 4 GB systems work fine with Aperture if we take care of system resources and optimize the workflow

- 8 GB is what most users will need to run Aperture and some other app, like Photoshop or Capture NX 2

- 12 GB should be more than enough for the most complex workflows

As for CPU speed, it is normal that older, slower CPUs with fewer cores will run slightly slower, but the relationship is not linear. There are many factors that come into play other than raw CPU speed.

In conclusion, to users of all of Apple systems, old or new, relax: Apple is still light years ahead of their competition and it will take a long time for Steve's legacy to vane.

I've been pretty unhappy with my Aperture performance since upgrading to Lion. Now that I'm upgraded to the latest/greatest OSX and Aperture versions I'm working through some of the performance optimization suggestions. I'm hoping this all helps make Aperture usable again, but I'm having flashbacks to my days of trying to optimize and regain performance back in the old days of Windows.

Any more tips beyond repair / verify permissions, turning off faces, disabling web accounts and adjusting previews are greatly appreciated.

In conclusion, to users of all of Apple systems, old or new, relax: Apple is still light years ahead of their competition and it will take a long time for Steve's legacy to vane.

What competition are you talking about?... photography workflow applications or operating systems? I just downloaded the Ligthroom demo and was going to give it another shot under Lion, but I may give it a whirl on my Win7 machine as well. And what do you mean when you use the word "vane"?

Have you updated Lion to 10.7.2?

And I think he meant wane, not vane.

Hey all,

i picked up this tread in it's earlier itterations. Just wanted to throw in. I read about excludibg the Pictures Dir from spotlight. I did this and instantly my system cam to life. The fans stopped sounding like a jet. mdworker was no longer in the list of CPU sucking apps.

If i nee t find photos I use aperture not spotlight so this shouldn't be an issue..

Well see.

Cheers

I read somewhere that suggested switching Aperture to run in 32-bit mode ("Get Info" for Aperture.app in Finder). I can't draw any conclusions yet, but with 4GB RAM in my machine, it seems to be helping.