Previous 1 18 19 20 21 22 Next 317 Replies Latest reply: May 13, 2014 10:42 PM by HC2010 Go to original post Branched to a new discussion.
  • M.A.Stough Level 1 Level 1

    Hear, hear.  Storage is cheap, don't let that influence your format/file sizes for photography.  Just buy another 2/3TB attachment drive, go for Lighting connector (on a Mac), and no problems whatsoever, in my experience.

  • cashaww Level 1 Level 1

    Are you doing a plugin that would allow files to be synched the way it is done in Lightroom?

  • cashaww Level 1 Level 1

    Even better, I say purchase a Drobo Drive.

  • léonie Level 10 Level 10
    Photos for Mac

    Even better, I say purchase a Drobo Drive.

    If you want to keep your Aperture library readable, don't put it on a NAS - wrong filesystem.

  • cashaww Level 1 Level 1

    I have never had this problem.

  • Terence Devlin Level 10 Level 10

    I have never had this problem.


    But one day you will:


  • DEFii Level 1 Level 1

    I have been using Aperture for about eight years. My Aperture library contains about 80,000 images. And because I bought into Apple's ecosystem, and actually like the intuitive interface, I resisted the trend of moving to Lightroom. I first tried Lightroom 4, but quickly went back to the familiar Aperture. However, that brief exposure allowed me to see some of the possibilities in Lightroom's develop module that Aperture didn't have. After Lightroom 5 was released, I bought it, but still didn't use it more than occasionally. I did end up getting a Creative Cloud subscription too.


    Finally I made the move to Lightroom. Strangely it wasn't because I wanted to, but because if Aperture's constant crashing and causing my two new state of the art Macs to crash with kernel panics. This was after the update to 3.5 and 3.5.1. Communication with Aperture's engineering team didn't resolve the issue.


    I traveled overseas as one of the accredited photographers covering Carnival 2014 in Port of Spain. Attempting to give Aperture one more chance, it embarrassed me. It continued to crash. I turned to Lightroom to curate the thousands of images I shot over a 3-week period. That was it.


    Aperture needs a backbone rebuild. I think there may be some legacy code in the software that needs to be tossed. The software is, in my view, significantly behind in its ability to post process images from large images that are produced in cameras like my D800.


    Apple has really disappointed me in their handling or lack of handling of Aperture. I won't ever out all my eggs in Apple's basket again.

  • SASanderson Level 1 Level 1

    Thanks for your story. I too worked with Aperture for years, only to end up disappointed that it was not updated with the tools that appeared in versions 4 and 5 of Lightroom. I have finally switched to LR5 and have stopped keeping one foot in each camp.


    I recently processed 14k files in LR5 in less than 3 weeks. Having adapted to LR's surly user interface and having memorized a bunch of key commands I was able to select and process a lot of files in a relatively short time, most of it while seriously jetlagged.


    Apple's fickleness and willingness to leave loyal customers in the lurch have made me very wary of trusting Apple to keep supporting software that I need every day. At least Adobe will still be there for me.

  • Don Trammell Level 3 Level 3

    Thank you SASanderson and DEFii for speaking what I have been saying for a quite a while in regards to Aperture being behind LR. Soon several Aperture apologists will come along and say the usual, leave the forum, Aperture is lacking but still light years ahead of LR, or that Aperture does everything they need. The one spot where Aperture simply blows LR away is in the ability to run the library on several different devices. I have a machine at home that I use for the heavy lifting and a brand new MBA that I maxed out to be as fast and as powerful as possible while I am traveling. With Aperture, you simply export the projects and then merge them with the larger library. LR has no such capacity. For me to use my library on two machines, I have to simply put my library on a fast externa drive (2 TB Thunderbolt) or on a high-speed SD/SDmicro card and then use this same library on the machine at home (all paths, file names, etc.. must be exactly the same on both machines). The million dollar question is: "what the heck was/is Adobe thinking?" Surely they have to know that LR is a one machine only app but many people have more than one machines. Anyway, outside of the obvious mentioned in several other posts, Aperture 4, Aperture X, is vaporware and Apple is content to let its loyal customers sit in the dark. Why would they care or worry about customers when shareholder value is more important. Anyway, thanks SASanderson and DEFii for your great posts.

  • ekobi Level 1 Level 1

    Holy smokes -- your story is both familiar and, unfortunately, depressing. I have been resisting the decision to abandon Aperture, which had been limping along on my 2007 [!] work horse MacPro (OS pegged at Lion). Much to my dismay, far from improving the situation, my recent upgrade to latest hardware and software has rendered Aperture completely unusable. If I had to turn a photoshoot around overnight, there's no way I'd get it done with this version. Ugh.


    Any experience with Capture One? I find its UI to be even more alien to me than LRs, but somehow its more productive. I'll be running both of these side by side until my LR5 trial runs out in a month or so.

  • SASanderson Level 1 Level 1

    Don, with regard to merging LR catalogues, I do that frequently. I travel with a retina MBP, start a new library for a given trip. I do a minor amount of processing, time permitting, while I travel. Then I export the project from LR on the MBP. I then copy the lrcat to my desktop Mac, along with the exported "negatives" which are located in the same folder as the catalogue. I store the "negatives" (raw files) on an external drive in a date-organized hierarchy so that it is arranged like all my other files. I import the travel lrcat as a project in my main LR catalogue. I then relink the raw files that I moved to the external drive to the images in the LR catalogue. All edits, keywords, etc. are there on my desktop Mac.They are also still there on the laptop until I delete them.

  • HC2010 Level 1 Level 1

    I just updated a few old Mac Pros from 2007 and 2008.

    I was amazed it worked, maybe try the Mavericks install it appears Apple has relaxed the requirements.

    Good luck!

  • HC2010 Level 1 Level 1

    I was importing some images recently to Aperture and the app hung.

    I went to quit the process and noticed that import/processing images process was only 32bit.

    It seems like there is quite a lot of scope to speed Aperture up.


    Also I went to an Apple store where they had the new Mac Pro base model on display.

    I opened up aperture and then found some raw sample images (nikon D3s).

    I then selected to reprocess them (generate previews).

    I was surprised how slow it was. It was taking about a second or more per image. Which was only marginally faster than my laptop.


    I really hope Apple updates this App soon. My latest cam is 24MP and I seem to be in front of the computer way more than I want to be. I also seem to put off Aperture work now, where as before I would love it.

    Please Apple, release the next version...

  • Brian.holder Level 1 Level 1

    I have followed this thread and would like to pose some related questions.. 


    I have no experience with LR or Aperture but would like to get one of those programs to use in conjunction with my iPhone to Geotag my photos.   Is it possible to use lightroom in conjunction with iPhoto?    


    iPhoto generates a lot of heat  and it appears to be really slow on my MacBook Pro (My system has a 2.6 GHz I7 processor with 8 Gb of fast ram).  Would Aperture and Light Room do the same?  


    I like the way iPhoto sorts my photos  and would like to keep that if possible, does iPhoto and Light Room work well together?


    Being an apple guy, my first choice would be to buy Aperture but I have heard that the program is outdated and that Apple have no plans to release a new version.  Any unbiased advice would be appreciated.





  • TreenM Level 1 Level 1

    No, LR does not play nice with iPhoto. Aperture on the other hand plays EXTREMELY nice with iPhoto.


    It plays nicer than two friendly twins.


    If you load Aperture on your machine you can open your iPhoto library from Aperture.


    Close it and reopen it in iPhoto. It's like Apple magic.


    That being said I personaly like LR better.


    If you'd like to see the other diferences between iPhoto and Aperture read my article; ture-aperture-4/


    If you have any other questions related to LR and Aperture ask me here or there.