7 Replies Latest reply: Jul 10, 2012 11:41 PM by lindsayfrombc
TechAddict Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

Apologies if this has been covered before but I've used numerous searches and don't seem to be hitting the right combination of terms to bring up what I want.

 

I currently have a flagging 2007 MacBook (OS 10.6.8; 2.16 GHz, 2MB RAM and only 7GB free of the 160 GB HDD). Aperture is struggling.  Time to upgrade.

 

My Aperture Library is currently on the Mac and is 'Managed'.  I have contemplated moving the 50GB or so of Aperture Library to an external HDD and going 'Referenced', mainly because I still have some images I need to work on (even though Aperture is for obvious reasons ponderously slow with frequent SBOD on this machine) until I decide what to upgrade to (Macbook 15" or iMac with more bangs for the buck) and wait for the latest refresh of the line that I choose.

 

Upon getting the new machine I plan to use the Migration Assistant to help with app/doc/settings transfer but what about Aperture?  I am not sure if it's best to:

 

1) Get the new Mac now, migrate everything across (including Aperture and its Managed library) THEN move the Aperture library off the internal HDD to an external and going Referenced, or;

 

2) Go Referenced now.  In which case when I eventually do then migrate Aperture to the new machine will it automatically 'point' to the correct location of the external HDD referenced library when what is left of Aperture copies across or is there and easier (or indeed more convoluted) process I will have to go through if I switch to Rferenced before getting the new Mac and migrating? 

 

Accept of course with the new Mac the HDD will be so much bigger so there may actually be no need to go Referenced, at least yet.  Try as I might, save for HDD space I don't see that many benefits to Referenced

 

On the new Mac front, while I like laptops, I find that the iPad and this Mac do most of what I want (e.g. surfing, mailing and running the odd few apps).  While a new MBP would be appreciated part of me still thinks that the more bang for the buck iMac is the better investment.  The only thing I MAY need to do is upload the occasional photo shoot on the move (by creating a new project) which, if stripped back to basics, this Mac miight still be OK for until I get back home and move the project to the iMac, reloacting to the masters to the referenced external HDD after.

 

Any help appreciated.


Aperture 3, Mac OS X (10.6.8)
  • léonie Level 9 Level 9 (68,165 points)

    Hi,

    some consederations you may want to keep in mind. There is no definitive answer for the perfect library setup - it will depend on the size of your Aperture Library,  the amount of available disk space, on your workflow, and on your backup strategy.

     

    I currently have a flagging 2007 MacBook (OS 10.6.8; 2.16 GHz, 2MB RAM and only 7GB free of the 160 GB HDD). Aperture is struggling.  Time to upgrade.

     

    On that machine you really need to relocate your master image files to an external drive or free disk space in a different way. With only for 4% of empty space on the system drive, even a newer Mac will be very slow. Try to keep 20% to 30% of your system volume free.

     

     

    My Aperture Library is currently on the Mac and is 'Managed'.  I have contemplated moving the 50GB or so of Aperture Library to an external HDD and going 'Referenced', mainly because I still have some images I need to work on (even though Aperture is for obvious reasons ponderously slow with frequent SBOD on this machine) until I decide what to upgrade to (Macbook 15" or iMac with more bangs for the buck) and wait for the latest refresh of the line that I choose.

     

    For best performance the Aperture library should reside on your fastest drive, usually the System drive. If you want to go referenced, relocate the masters, but keep the library on the internal drive. Only if you have a very fast connection to your second drive, or two internal drives, it may be advantegous to move the whole library to the other volume.

     

    Managed, referenced, or mixed?

    • Managed: A managed library is easier to handle, as long as it is reasonably small. With 50 GB Aperture Library you can continue with a managed library, as soon as you have more disk space available. The advantage of "Managed" is that you do not have to keep track of your masters on your own, and that they will be included in the vaults. You will need an incremental backup scheme that looks inside the library package however - like Time Machine, otherwise you will need to backup the whole library over and over again, even if you only changed one single image.
    • Referenced: If your Library gets larger, and you have several hundreds of GB, then a managed library becomes a nuisance and it is time to go referenced. Very large libraries are difficult to move or copy  between disks; It will be wasteful to have several vaults, for each vault will include the same masters over and over again.
    • Mixed: The Aperture library on the system drive, most of the masters on an external (or second internal) volume. This setup is perfect for laptops with limited space on the internal drive, but it will require that you have a well ordered strategy where to keep your masters, since Aperture will not manage them for you. There are two pitfalls to avoid: Accidentally deleting or modifying masters from the Finder, or accidentally relocating them to a place where you store other images that are not your masters. When you have several similar images in the same folder, it can be very hard to tell which image is the master that you need to keep and which is a redundant copy.

     

    The "mixed" setup is great, if you are on the road (bt will put mre strain on your memory or master management skills)- you still have your Aperture library with you and the master image files you are currently working on, but not the bulk of your masters. If you create high quality previews, you probably even will not notice, that most of your master image files are still at home.

     

     

     

    Upon getting the new machine I plan to use the Migration Assistant to help with app/doc/settings transfer but what about Aperture?  I am not sure if it's best to:

    1) Get the new Mac now, migrate everything across (including Aperture and its Managed library) THEN move the Aperture library off the internal HDD to an external and going Referenced, or;

     

    2) Go Referenced now.  In which case when I eventually do then migrate Aperture to the new machine will it automatically 'point' to the correct location of the external HDD referenced library when what is left of Aperture copies across or is there and easier (or indeed more convoluted) process I will have to go through if I switch to Rferenced before getting the new Mac and migrating?

     

    Accept of course with the new Mac the HDD will be so much bigger so there may actually be no need to go Referenced, at least yet.  Try as I might, save for HDD space I don't see that many benefits to Referenced

    From my experience, it is less troublesome to migrate a managed library with Migration Assistant. If parts of your Library are referenced, and you migrate the referenced masters as well, you may need to reconnect them, unless you only have to plug in the volume with referenced masters. Then Aperture should reference them correctly without extra trouble.

     

    Try as I might, save for HDD space I don't see that many benefits to Referenced

    Then stick to the managed setup until your library really becomes huge.

     

    On the new Mac front, while I like laptops, I find that the iPad and this Mac do most of what I want (e.g. surfing, mailing and running the odd few apps).  While a new MBP would be appreciated part of me still thinks that the more bang for the buck iMac is the better investment.  The only thing I MAY need to do is upload the occasional photo shoot on the move (by creating a new project) which, if stripped back to basics, this Mac miight still be OK for until I get back home and move the project to the iMac, reloacting to the masters to the referenced external HDD after.

     

    Any help appreciated.

    I am still waiting for my iPad to be delivered - right now I take a MBP on the road. For the new shoots I create a new Aperture library, do most of the tagging while I still remember how the images have been taken, and when back home I import the new project into my main library.

     

    Reagrds

    Léonie

  • TechAddict Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Thanks for the comments.  I'll most likely mark this as the 'Solved' solution, tend not to do it too early as I find others tend to not bother with threads marked 'Solved' and it can prevent other ideas / suggestions.

     

    On the new Mac approach I'm thinking of waiting for the 2012 MBP refresh which will hopefully bring some useful updates and lessen the gap between the MBP and MBA.  I don't really NEED MBA portability to be honest but I also like to do my editing and such like where I chose, rather than tethered to a desk, hence me erring away from the iMac solution.  Unlike Windows machines I also see somewhat less or a price / performance issue between the MPBs (laptops) and iMac (desktops) with the latter seeming to offer (mostly) larger screen, and somewhat (rather than exceptionally) faster CPU and GPUs, at the expense of being tied to a desk.  For me the portability (even around the home) is preferable if not essential, even at the increased risk of RSI!!! I do have an iPad already and not yet got to fathoming if I can, or want to, factor that into the equation.

     

    I have seen a few articles about the use of MBAs with Aperture, some seeing the MBP line as redundant but for me, the lack of need for such portablility, the prohibitive (still) cost of SSD, less powerful CPU and integrated graphics make the MBA only suitable for Aperture as part of a two machine set-up.  Something I'd rather avoid. 

     

    Not long ago I actually purchased a fairly high end Windows machine as for gaming and much digital music management I prefer Windows software.  That said, part of me regrets not going for the iMac for the main Aperture library etc, allowing me to just create a project when on the road, importing the project in entirety once home.  That's water under the bridge now though, I certainly don't want two high-end desktops.  As a complete aside, given that the Windows desktop is very high spec I did even consider binning Aperture and going over to LR etc, but that's another story and I'm not sure I want to over to Windows for photo management and lose the usability of Aperture in terms of cataloguing (I use the entire Nik Software range for editing).

     

    With a 500 or 750GB HDD I suspect the current 50GB library will go across and be able to stay as 'Managed' for some time. Perhaps once that swells to 200+ I could consider migrating masters to go Referenced but keep the library on the MBP.  I'd likely use and external HDD dedicated to masters to avoid confusion with one more for back up.  In the meantime I will likely use Time Machine for the incremental back-up of the current Managed library which I will migrate upon purchase of the new machine.  Until then I think I'll try a rigorous HDD free-up with some file deletion, maybe even converting older RAW images to JPG, deleting RAW files.

  • TechAddict Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    As a quick aside, I've seen countless artciles saying how good, for instance a 2011 MBA is at working with Aperture with comments like ".....and it's way faster than my 2007 MBP or 2009 iMac".  Apples and oranges to a degree really IMHO. The best comparisons in terms of benchmarking come from the CURRENT machines across the whole range because almost any upgrade, particularly on machine that is 2-3 years behind will almost always mean significant performance increase.  But how does that 2011 13" 1.7 i5 MBA, even with its 250 GB SSD, stack up against a 2011 2.8 i7 MBP which even with an upgrade to 8GB RAM comes in at the same price, at least here.  That's the issue, not whether an 2011 MBA trounces a 2008 MBP.

  • léonie Level 9 Level 9 (68,165 points)

    I find others tend to not bother with threads marked 'Solved' and it can prevent other ideas / suggestions.

    Exactly so! Keep the thread open.

    And I really would love to see the input of our co-posters here - there are so many things to be considered. I don't have a MBA, so we'll wait for others to chime in.

     

    With a 500 or 750GB HDD I suspect the current 50GB library will go across and be able to stay as 'Managed' for some time.

    You should have no problem to keep a 50GB library managed, if you feel more comfortable with a managed library.

     

    That is what I have now: 500 GB SSD internal drive in my MBP, and I exchanged the optical drive for a second internal 1 TB disk. Plenty of diskspace and very fast.

    Look for Sierra Dragon's posts on the best hardware setup.

     

    Message was edited by: leonieDF, added "managed library"

  • léonie Level 9 Level 9 (68,165 points)

    Apples and oranges to a degree really IMHO. The best comparisons in terms of benchmarking come from the CURRENT machines across the whole range because almost any upgrade, particularly on machine that is 2-3 years behind will almost always mean significant performance increase.  But how does that 2011 13" 1.7 i5 MBA, even with its 250 GB SSD, stack up against a 2011 2.8 i7 MBP which even with an upgrade to 8GB RAM comes in at the same price, at least here.  That's the issue, not whether an 2011 MBA trounces a 2008 MBP.

    You will find that the OS will make a big difference when working with Aperture. The new process system in Lion with "Automatic Termination" added a significant demand on the RAM.

     

    I have several MBPs at work and two private ones:

     

    Compare:

     

    1. MacBook Pro, (15-inch late 2009) Mac OS X (10.6.8), Intel Core 2 Duo, 2,53 GHz, 4 GB:
      on this MBP Aperture works quite well, even with only 4 GB RAM, I don't see the beachball often.
    2. MacBook Pro (17-inch Early 2011), I.Core i7, Mac OS 10.7.4, 8GB RAM, 1TB HD:
      This MBP I had to upgrade to 8 GB RAM after I installed Mac X OS Lion; with Snowleopard no problem with the previous 4GB RAM
    3. MacBook Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.4), 2.4 GHz I.Core i7, 16GB RAM, 500GB SSD, 1TB internal hard drive:

      My current private MBP for music, video, and pictures: For the first time I can keep GarageBand, iMovie, Aperture, and even Safari open at the same time, without noticable loss of performance, also larger image files (60 MB +) load very quickly.
  • TechAddict Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Thanks.  Yes, accept fully OS changes and performnce impacts but often you will see articles with people questioning, for instance, if they can use a Macbook Air with Aperture or if a MBP is better.  Comments will come back saying "My 2011 MBA is way faster than my 2007 MBP".  Highly likely, question is, for someone making current buying decisions, how well does a 2011 MBA stack up against a 2011 MBP, not one from 4 years before.

     

    Interesting about your current MBP though not sure I'll be going with a mega-bucks 500 GB SSD.  I'll likely opt for 8 GB RAM too.

  • lindsayfrombc Level 1 Level 1 (0 points)

    Hi Leonie,

     

    I've been looking all over the Apple forum for days now, and it seems as though you may have a good idea as to how I should approach a similar problem I'm having? Would you mind taking a look at my question here: https://discussions.apple.com/message/18884904#18884904 (i've tried various things after looking all over the Apple Forums; however, have had no luck). Any advice is much appreciated! Thank you