Want to highlight a helpful answer? Upvote!
Did someone help you, or did an answer or User Tip resolve your issue? Upvote by selecting the upvote arrow. Your feedback helps others! Learn more about when to upvote >
Did someone help you, or did an answer or User Tip resolve your issue? Upvote by selecting the upvote arrow. Your feedback helps others! Learn more about when to upvote >
I have been trying to do this for years, but have not been able to because Aperture does not seem to handle large scan neg files. What I mean by large files are 800mb and up. After editing they can be almost 2Gbs. Lightroom does not seem to have a problem, but Aperture just seems to choke. I have tried import single projects, and files at a time, but no go. Lightroom 4 Beta has just come out, so I wonder if I should even worry.
that *is* large! What size are the negs?
Some are Medium Format, 6x45 - 6x9, some are Large Format, 4x5-8x10. I know they are large so this makes me wonder if this problem is a size issue. For my Digital, or 35mm formats, no worries.
Why are you going from Lightroom to Aperture?
Stick with Lightroom and maybe go for Photoshop. What sort of Mac are you trying to do this on?
Since me OS is, and therefore 90% of my workflow is Mac based it makes since to me. I website is build using iWeb, I do project books using Apple. Updating to my facebook, flicker, are all easier using Aperture. I like the Face and places functions. I prefer the way Aperture handles projects. Over all, it is a better workflow for me. Now trust me, there are a couple of things Aperture can learn from Lightroom, but on balance, and at the end of the day, I think Aperture will work best for me.
I am testing Lightroom Beta 4.
The main reasons I stick with Lightroom are, it seems to be able to handle my larger files. Also I can use more than one external editing program, while Aperture limits me, from what I know, to only one.
Apple has a superior workflow but requires strong hardware. Please specify hardware, RAM, and how full (in %) each hard drive is. Also where the Library is located, how it is connected, and whether managed or referenced files.
-Allen
Which system my Quad4 G5 with 16gbs of memory, and roughly 80% of boot drive available. The iMac 2.5 Intel Core i5 w/ 12 Gb of memory w/ roughly 70% of the boot drive available. The entire Aperture, as well as Lightroom Library sits on a 18Tbs Drobo systems connected by firewire 800. I have done the relevant Ping Testing of the Drobo system, so trust me, it is not a hardware issue. All files are referenced. My hardware is set up the way we set things up on a Unix system, as much data as possible is kept off the boot drive.
If you are suggesting a hardware issue, then Aperture is a hog, while Lightroom is not. Based on what I deduce, Aperture has issues with certain sized files, and if it is referenced, I can not see why it should.
I only use Lightroom, and Aperture as photo managers, and light editing. My heavy editing is done in Photoshop. I use Nikon Nx2 for basic colour correction, and this is one of the reasons, outside of the choking issue, I stay with Lightroom, I can use two external editors. In Aperture only one.
cashaww wrote:
If you are suggesting a hardware issue, then Aperture is a hog, while Lightroom is not.
Yes, Aperture is a hog. IMO not a bad thing for a pro graphics app when strong hardware is readily available.
You did not specify graphics. Strong GPU support is important to Aperture.
I do not know what specifically bottlenecks with extra-large files.
What happens with a single one of your large files on the internal drive with Aperture, the Master and the Library on the internal drive?
Personally I put Aperture and the Aperture Library on a boot SSD; Masters also on the SSD until editing is complete.
If you have a fast Aperture/Drobo operation it is the first I have heard of. Ping results do not interest me, I am interested in Aperture performance.
-Allen
and this is one of the reasons, outside of the choking issue, I stay with Lightroom, I can use two external editors. In Aperture only one.
You can only define one default external editor, but you can use more than one editor: there are editing plug-ins, and you can call other image editors using Services.
For example:
I have the Aperture preferences set to use GraphicConverter as external editor, but when I want to edit in Photoshop, I use an Automator Service like this, and activate it from the Aperture -> Services menu:
The AppleScript passes the images to Photoshop and waits for the edit to finish, the reimports the edited images to Aperture.
I put the workflow and the script on this webpage for download: http://dreschler-fischer.de/FAQ/Scripts_Services/Entries/2012/1/12_Additional_Ex ternal_Editor_in_Aperture.html
Regards
Léonie
leonieDF wrote:
I put the workflow and the script on this webpage for download: http://dreschler-fischer.de/FAQ/Scripts_Services/Entries/2012/1/12_Additional_Ex ternal_Editor_in_Aperture.html
Regards
Léonie
Nice. Thanks for that.
-Allen
I concur with Allen. I have yet to hear of anyone being able to use a Drobo and get any kind of performacne with it.
Allan
Thank you. I will give this a try.
What performance, I am editing photos. If I was editing video, then I see the point. The Drobo is nothing more than a descent little RAID system used for storage. But still, Lightroom does not have this issue.
I do not think speed is the issue, due to editing photos. But the point still is Lightroom has not problem with any of my files, while Aperture does.
Switching from Lightroom to Aperture
