A Good Reference for Aperture, Versions, File Names, Changing & Moving

Apart from the user manual and the APTS book I haven't found anything else that adds much to the conversation.

One thing to keep in mind is that Aperture and the Finder (or more accurately the file system outside of the Aperture library) have no real relationship.

If you have managed masters there is no need to worry about any of this. If you have referenced masters the Aperture library will keep track of where they are. If you need to move them use the Aperture command File->Relocate Masters.... (or to turn managed masters into referenced masters).

To turn referenced masters into managed masters use Consolidate Masters.

If Aperture looses track of the referenced masters use Locate Referenced Files..

This should et you started.

Hi Frank.

I hope I am not hijacking this thread but is there a method for changing the name of "Versions" (in Albums) and the name of "Masters" (in Projects) at the same time? If I change one I would really like the other to be updated! I was pointed to Metadata > Batch Change and to check the "Apply to Masters" checkbox which /appears/ to allow me to change the name or one or the other and have the related item change name but the box keeps defaulting to unchecked which is basically unmanageable since I am just selecting the Image and changing the name manually in the Metadata Tab (which I assume is the correct methodology for this?).

Also, the title for all of these in the Metadata Tab is "Version Name" (in both cases) which I assume is the correct way to refer to these and that "File Name" ostensibly is what one would use for the actual item in the Aperture Database (managed library) or the actual item in Finder (referenced libray) - does that sound correct in terms of terminilogy? "Version Name" is what we use for the image when shown in the Aperture UI?

One thing I have found very confusing in the reference material is that they seem to use Version and Master interchangeably (among other things) and this gets confusing for me when going back and forth between the printed literature and the UI.

Thanks

hotwheels 22 wrote:

I hope I am not hijacking this thread but ...

No need to hope. One assumes you control yourself. Please advise if this is not the case.

As you well know:

- you have a currently active thread on the subject you just interjected into this thread, and

- I specifically asked the OP to start a new thread instead of jacking your thread. The OP oblidged, and ... BAM! ... you land with a flutter on his/her wire and start cawing like a jackdaw.

Open Loop,

Okay, there are a couple of misconceptions to clear up first.

Aperture does not require you to have all your photos inside a managed database. You can *either* have Aperture manage your images as Referenced (staying right where they are or moved to a specified location *or* as Managed, where Aperture imports them into a managed library.

There are pros and cons to both approaches, but in either case there is a fundamental principle: you have chosen to use Aperture to manage your collection of images. You DO NOT use Finder for this any more: in effect you are then doing stuff without Aperture's knowledge.

Frank has covered the rest already, so I won't re-hash that.

One final thought: if you are going to send your images to somebody else or post them on the web, you get to choose the filename at export - so what they're called by filename on your hard disk (or indeed what name you subsequently decide to give them in Aperture) is largely irrelevant.

could you please refrain from the personal business Kirby and try and keep responses to my posts factual?

if the OP needs me to post elsewhere they will ask me and if others want to respond to my inquiry here or elsewhere they will.

this personal business is getting really old, really fast and i would really like to ask you to stop it please.

thanks.

Kirby.

Also. the "snarky snip" business is really annoying. If you could respond to the /substance/ of the post and not snip some small part out of it to make a point it would be great.

This is a forum where folks that are willing have a conversation and I am not having this problem elsewhere on the mac boards.

Please don't ask me to try and have to keep asking on this kind of thing.

Thanks.

It's more a primer than a reference, and it doesn't address only files, but this book --

Focus On Apple Aperture

-- is one I recently purchased and plan to review here. It is the best single-volume introduction to Aperture I know.

Two things here if it is OK.

First, the OP may be helped by knowing that there seem to be a reasonably large number of Aperture plug-ins that allow you to upload to ftp and to attach to GMail etcetera without exporting from the Aperture database. I haven't had time to look to far into this but these seem to be nice timesavers if you are doing a lot of attaching or uploading.

Also, one thing I have found confusing is the usage of "Master" and "Version" and I would be interested to know if long time users feel that "Version" is effectively a usage for anything you see within the Aperture UI (i.e. in an Album or in a Project) whereas "Master" is usage for anything you have outside of the Aperture UI (i.e. "Files" as shown in the "File Name" section of the Metadata List View)...

Anyone know if that sounds about right?

TIA

I never understood why you'd want to change the name of a photo in iPhoto, when it never changes the file name.

This may help or not but here goes.

There's a distinction to be made between files and the data they contain. The example I use is as follows: In my iTunes Library I have a file called 'Let_it_Be_The_Beatles.mp3'. So what is that, exactly? It's not the song. The Beatles never wrote an mp3. They wrote a tune, some lyrics, recorded it and a copy of that recording is stored in the mp3 file. The file is just a container for the recording. That container is designed in a specific way attuned to the characteristics and requirements of the data. Hence, mp3.

Similarly that Jpeg / tiff/ raw/ whatever is not your photo, it's a container designed to hold that kind of data. And along with that data comes opportunities: Metadata, for a start. Exif and IPTC contain vast amounts of information - some it very basic, like the date and time the shot was taken - some of it quite complex, like a lot of details of the settings used in the camera.

Aperture, iPhoto et al are all about the data and not the file. Import the file and forget about it. Process the image - crop it, fix red eye, run it through the whole gamut of tools in the App and the file never changes at all. Create multiple versions of the image. But there's still only one file. Name it. You name the photo - and that is an entry in the Exif or IPTC. The name of the photo has nothing to do with the name of the file. Because the file is just the tin for the beans.

Even when you export, unless you specifically choose to export the Master, you are exporting the processed Photo into a different container - that's why you can export Raw as Jpeg, or Jpeg as Tiff. Because the process of export just puts the image into a new container.

Basically, if you want to manage files you need to use a File Manager. But you're using a Photo manager and expecting it to behave like a file manager.

And, of course, apps like Aperture and iPhoto have the option to use the Title of the photo as filename on export to the new file.

Does that muddy the waters?

hotwheels 22 wrote:

First, the OP may be helped by knowing that there seem to be a reasonably large number of Aperture plug-ins that allow you to upload to ftp and to attach to GMail etcetera without exporting from the Aperture database.

Interesting. Could you point me to some? I'm unaware of any. The reason I'm asking, of course, is to prevent the OP and others from being misled.

hotwheels 22 wrote:

Also, one thing I have found confusing is the usage of "Master" and "Version" and I would be interested to know if long time users feel that "Version" is effectively a usage for anything you see within the Aperture UI (i.e. in an Album or in a Project) whereas "Master" is usage for anything you have outside of the Aperture UI (i.e. "Files" as shown in the "File Name" section of the Metadata List View)...

Anyone know if that sounds about right?

It neither sounds right nor is right.

Once again, what a Master is, and what a Version is, and how they work together, has been explained to you several times by several people. It would be a good exercise for you to return to those posts and work your way through them instead of publishing ungrounded hypotheses and asking for corroboration.

Hi Terence. Thanks very much.

Also a link: http://www.apple.com/aperture/resources/plugins.html

misled? are you an ex-cop?

http://www.apple.com/aperture/resources/plugins.html

seriously kirby. watch the language a little. i still haven't heard a good explanation of masters and versions, your post here notwithstanding.

why not take a stab at it...

hotwheels 22 wrote:

First, the OP may be helped by knowing that there seem to be a reasonably large number of Aperture plug-ins that allow you to upload to ftp and to attach to GMail etcetera without exporting from the Aperture database. {Emphasis mine.}

I asked you (Jon) to provide examples, as I am unaware of any plug-in that does that.

You linked to Apple's Aperture plug-ins page.

Here is a screen shot from the top of that page:

(I added the red arrow and the red underlining.) Note the emphasis on "export".

Here, for instance, is my "File→Export" fly-out sub-menu:

Here is another screenshot from further down the page. Note that there are 29 plug-ins listed under the section titled "Export Plug-ins" -- so many, that Apple has seen fit to further sub-divide "Export Plug-ins" into five sub-sections.

I don't see listed any plug-ins that fit your description. Please accept my apology if I have overlooked them -- and offer me and the users of this board your apology for posting information that is mis-leading.

I ask you for the last time: please stop posting things that are wrong on this forum. In advance -- thank you.

hotwheels 22 wrote:

misled? are you an ex-cop?

http://www.apple.com/aperture/resources/plugins.html

seriously kirby. watch the language a little. i still haven't heard a good explanation of masters and versions, your post here notwithstanding.

why not take a stab at it...

Here is the "Master" definition in the Glossary of the Aperture 3 User Manual:

master The source media file that was copied from either your computer’s file system oryour camera’s memory card. In Aperture, the master is never modified. Whenever a changeis made to an image, a video clip, or an audio clip, that change is applied to the version.See also memory card, project, version.

And here is the "Version" definition

version The file containing all the metadata and adjustment information applied to animage, a video clip, or an audio clip. In Aperture, only versions are changed. Aperturenever changes masters. See also master.

listen. this is some kind of game for you. let the OP ask questions if he is confused about what I am offering him and in the future why not just stick to offering factual info about Aprerture and staying off the personal cripes.