Why Duplicate A Master?

Why duplicate a Master, as opposed to creating a new Version form the Master?

You are right, usually it is wasteful, to have several master image files for different versions of the same image.

But in some situations it makes sense to me to create a second master:

• If you edit using an external editor, and Aperture cannot reproduce these edits internally,
• If you want to finalize your edits, because you need to ensure that these edits never, ever will get changed (for legal or scientific reasons),
• If you need the same image in two different projects and you can't achieve what you want to do by using different albums (sometimes I need to do this, if I want to export a part of the Library),
• If you want to create a new, smaller master from a cropped image version.

And I'd really like to hear different opinions! 🙂

Regards

Léonie

My feeling about duplicating a master is if you think of a work flow that is going to duplicate masters then go back and rethink it because it is in all likelihood not the best work flow. If you can't think of another work flow then post it here and someone will most likely come up with a different work flow for you.

Allan

😉 o.k. Allan, what might be your suggestion for this problem: scientific test data for published results ?

I like to store my test images in Aperture for easy retrieval, but I have to make sure, that each time I export them to reproduce the experiment I get exactly the same image as previously - this can only be ensured by exporting a master, not a version, for the algorithms to render the versions may change between Aperture versions or OS versions.

So for all these test images versions I create new masters to ensure they can be retrieved from the database always exactly the same.

Cheers

Léonie

So just export the original master, why bother duplicating it?

So just export the original master, why bother duplicating it?

Because quite often the test images are versions, that need to be rendered - raw processing may change, sharpening may change. And I want Aperture to store my images, and not bother with a second image library parallel to my Aperture library.

So you're exporting a version and then importing that in as a new master? If so I wouldn't classify that as copying a master, you're creating a new master.

In my mind copying a master implies making an exact copy as you get when you option drag a master from one project to another.

If so I wouldn't classify that as copying a master, you're creating a new master.

Yes, a new, different master for the same image - but I really would like to be able to avoid that too, for I find it wasteful, but I see no way around it. 😟

If you duplicate a Master, don't you simply wind up with two identical Masters?

Is's still annoying to be forced to have two master files for essentially the same same image

If so, then you don't need to duplicate a Master, since the process does that for you.

That's what I meant. You are forced to accept a new master, even if you do not want it.

Or are you referring to exporting a Version that's cropped and then importing it as a new Master?

yes, if you want to change the master