Switching from Managed to Referenced Library - Advice needed

Question

Switching from Managed to Referenced Library - Advice needed

I currently have a 1.7TB managed library. Not much to complain about speed and I actually like the ability to use the Vault feature for backup. However, in preparation to move to a new MacPro later on this year, I was advised to switch to a Referenced library (since it won’t fit on the internal HD anyways). I have a few questions regarding this move and would appreciate any help to prevent headaches during this migration.

My plan is to first make a backup copy of my library in a second drive just in case everything goes bad. Then I will use the “Relocate Originals”, year by year just to make sure things are going well. Few questions: what “subfolder format” do you use? I was thinking of using year/month/project since this kind of mirrors the way I currently have my library organized. Any downside of using this scheme? Once I relocate the originals, if I move a photo from one project to another, it does not change the folder where it is stored, correct? And last, I am still able to delete a photo from the library and have it moved to the OS trash, right?

My library is currently sitting on a 3TB drive. I should be able to relocate the images to that same drive. Once I have all the images relocated, I want to move the library file to a SSD drive I have on my current MacPro (120GB). Is this going to cause the images to be unlinked? Will the library still be able to locate the images or I will need to “locate referenced files” for all images?

The final step on my migration, once the new MacPro arrives, would be to move the library file to the 1TB SSD inside the MacPro and the folder with all the images to an external TB1 6GB drive. Again, will the library link be broken by such move?

Any tips on how to make this migration smooth?

Thank you

Raf

Aperture 3, OS X Mavericks (10.9)

Posted on Mar 22, 2014 10:04 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Best reply

léonie

Level 10

194,755 points

Mar 22, 2014 10:51 AM in response to Rafael Perini

Hi, Raf,

I want to move the library file to a SSD drive I have on my current MacPro (120GB).

.....

1.7TB

Before you go referenced, check the size of the "Masters" folder" inside your current library. I am not quite convinced, that relocating the originals will reduce your Aperture library to a size, that it will fit onto your 120GB SSD.

Reloacting will remove the contents of the "Masters" folder, but nothing more.

Ctrl-click your library, and then use the command "Show package contents". How much space are your original image files in the "Masters" folder using?

Once I relocate the originals, if I move a photo from one project to another, it does not change the folder where it is stored, correct?

Correct.

And last, I am still able to delete a photo from the library and have it moved to the OStrash, right?

If your drive is directly connected and formatted for Mac, yes.

Once I have all the images relocated, I want to move the library file to a SSD drive I have on my current MacPro (120GB). Is this going to cause the images to be unlinked? Will the library still be able to locate the images or I will need to “locate referenced files” for all images?

Moving the library will not cause the originals to be unlinked, only moving the original image files manually using the Finder or modifying them may unlink them.

The final step on my migration, once the new MacPro arrives, would be to move the library file to the 1TB SSD inside the MacPro and the folder with all the images to an external TB1 6GB drive. Again, will the library link be broken by such move?

As I said, you can move the library, but to move the referenced originals you need to let Aperture do it by relocating the originals.

My library is currently sitting on a 3TB drive.

It might be easier to leave the library on this drive and not to move it temporarily to the 120GB SSD. Just relocate the originals to the same drive, but keep the library there.

When your new MacPro arrives (envy! 🙂) open the library in Aperture, repair the permissions and repair the library by opening the library from Aperture on your new mac, and only after this safety measures copy the library to the internal SSD. Repairing the permissions and the library will ensure, that the library copies well.

Is your current 3TB drive formatted for Mac - MacOS Extended (Journaled)? If not, you may encounter copy errors, when copying the Aperture library.

I have no recommendations for the folder naming scheme. You just have to make sure, that your names are unique and you do not accidentally overwrite originals. I use the project name as the subfolder name.

Ask back, if I forgot to answer parts of your question.

-- Léonie

Reply

Answer 2

Mar 22, 2014 12:56 PM in response to léonie

Thank you very much Léoni,

léonie wrote:

Before you go referenced, check the size of the "Masters" folder" inside your current library. I am not quite convinced, that relocating the originals will reduce your Aperture library to a size, that it will fit onto your 120GB SSD.

Reloacting will remove the contents of the "Masters" folder, but nothing more.

Ctrl-click your library, and then use the command "Show package contents". How much space are your original image files in the "Masters" folder using?

Just checked. Very helpful advice. My Master Folder is 1.5Tb and the rest is 203GB (won't fit). I have a 1TB SSD ordered (that will be used later on for the external HD). Once it has arrived, I will move the library to the SSD. I understand that having the library in a SSD drive should speed up Aperture, even if the masters are referenced elsewhere, correct?

As I said, you can move the library, but to move the referenced originals you need to let Aperture do it by relocating the originals.

This is the part that is getting me a bit confused. Let me know if I got it right:

1 - On the old machine, open Aperture and relocate the Originals to an external drive.

2 - Copy the Library file from the old machine to the external drive

3 - Connect the Ext HD into the new Mac, repair the permissions on the drive using Disk Utility

4 - Hold Command+Option keys while double-clicking the Aperture library inside the Ext HD, and repair it.

5 - Finally, move the Library to the SSD inside the new MacPro.

6 - Then if needed, I can use Aperture to relocate the Originals to the final drive it should eventually be located.

I have no recommendations for the folder naming scheme. You just have to make sure, that your names are unique and you do not accidentally overwrite originals. I use the project name as the subfolder name.

This is an excellent advice. I need to make sure the scheme that I choose is bullet proof, the worst thing it could happen is overwrite the originals. If I use YEAR/MONTH/PROJECT I just have to make sure that there is no projects with the same name in that particular month, correct?

Once again, thank you very much for the invaluable advices.

Raf

Reply

Answer 3

léonie

Level 10

194,755 points

Mar 22, 2014 2:09 PM in response to Rafael Perini

This is the part that is getting me a bit confused. Let me know if I got it right:

1 - On the old machine, open Aperture and relocate the Originals to an external drive.

o.k.

2 - Copy the Library file from the old machine to the external drive

o.k.

3 - Connect the Ext HD into the new Mac, repair the permissions on the drive using Disk Utility

No, better use Aperture's First Aid Tools to repair the permissions. Aperture's tools are better designed to fix permissions on photo libraries.

See this manual page: Repairing and Rebuilding Your Aperture Library: Aperture 3 User Manual

On your new Mac Pro: Close Aperture, if it’s open.
Locate the Aperture library you want to fix, then hold down the Command and Option keys while double-clicking the Aperture library. The Aperture Library First Aid dialog appears.
1. To repair the permissions of the files within your Aperture library: Select Repairing Permissions.
2. To repair your Aperture library file: Select Repair Database.

Finally, move the Library to the SSD inside the new MacPro.

6 - Then if needed, I can use Aperture to relocate the Originals to the final drive it should eventually be located.

o.k.

I need to make sure the scheme that I choose is bullet proof, the worst thing it could happen is overwrite the originals. If I use YEAR/MONTH/PROJECT I just have to make sure that there is no projects with the same name in that particular month, correct?

o.k.

Just make sure to avoid characters in the folder name, that are used by the operating system in path names, e.g. don't use the "/" as part of the folder name, better use the underscore.

Good luck!

-- Léonie

Reply

Answer 4

Mar 22, 2014 8:01 PM in response to Rafael Perini

You're in good -- excellent! -- hands.

Rafael Perini wrote:

I was thinking of using year/month/project since this kind of mirrors the way I currently have my library organized. Any downside of using this scheme?

The Finder sub-folders that you can specify in Aperture for storing the Originals of Images in your Aperture Library are for you convenience. Since you shouldn't do any file maintenance on these files except through Aperture by selecting the Images for which these files are Originals, you don't need, or likely benefit from, any sub-folder organization at all. In fine, you would just as well stick them all in one Finder folder with no sub-folders at all.

I have done this with hundreds of files named, for example "1.jgp". No problems with Aperture.

Finder is already a human-centered view of the storage of your data. "Y/M/D" is a look-up table for _you_, not for your computer. It is _not_ how your computer stores the data. Since you have committed to using Aperture as an Image manager, there is little reason to worry about how those Image's Originals appear to your in Finder.

There is no downside I know of, but there is no reason, either. IME, it is easier to filter (or search) a large container than it is to drill down through multiple date-based containers. And -- this is why Aperture is great -- it is easy and direct to do this in Aperture.

Moving on -- I also find it helpful to know that "Referenced" and "Managed" describe the storage location of each Image's Original. They are _not_ qualities of Libraries, except in the cases that _every_ Image's Original has the same status.

Reply

Answer 5

Mar 24, 2014 12:54 PM in response to Kirby Krieger

Thank you Kirby,

Very good points, glad you pointed that out. Quick questions:

The Finder sub-folders that you can specify in Aperture for storing the Originals of Images in your Aperture Library are for you convenience. Since you shouldn't do any file maintenance on these files except through Aperture by selecting the Images for which these files are Originals, you don't need, or likely benefit from, any sub-folder organization at all. In fine, you would just as well stick them all in one Finder folder with no sub-folders at all.

I have done this with hundreds of files named, for example "1.jgp". No problems with Aperture.

So you are saying that Aperture will rename the original file to somenthing else so the "1.jpg" won't get overwritten? This neat.

Finder is already a human-centered view of the storage of your data. "Y/M/D" is a look-up table for _you_, not for your computer. It is _not_ how your computer stores the data. Since you have committed to using Aperture as an Image manager, there is little reason to worry about how those Image's Originals appear to your in Finder.

There is no downside I know of, but there is no reason, either. IME, it is easier to filter (or search) a large container than it is to drill down through multiple date-based containers. And -- this is why Aperture is great -- it is easy and direct to do this in Aperture.

Agree and agree. I should not be worried about finding the images with the finder since I use Aperture 100% of the time. I don't use any other RAW converter and no need for other programs to find the original files. I use plug-ins (mostly NIK but OnOne sometimes), and Aperture takes care of the roundtrip.

Question: with Originals that are referenced, what does Aperture does with the TIFF when they are back from the plugin? Are they stored inside the library (managed) or does it automatically relocate the new TIFF/JPG to where the Original was stored (referenced).

I agree that drilling down folders and subfolders is way more difficult than looking and searching through a long list. If this is how it is stored in the computer/finder, won't matter since I won't be looking for the pictures using the finder anyways (like epleined above). I just want to make sure, as previously pointed out that Aperture won't overwrite files because I have two projects (or Originals files) with the same name.

I know that the way each one organizes the Aperture library is very personal. Aperture is very powerful on that aspect and let you choose any organization scheme you want. Unfortunately I started organizing my library by year/month/project since that made sense to me in the beguinning (probably when I upgarded to AP2). Aperture has evolved with such a powerful and comprehensive search tool that makes this type of organization obsolete (and difficult to find projects/photos). I wonder if you would mind sharing how you organize your library (or point a link to where you have discussed this).

Moving on -- I also find it helpful to know that "Referenced" and "Managed" describe the storage location of each Image's Original. They are _not_ qualities of Libraries, except in the cases that _every_ Image's Original has the same status.

Very good point. What I meant was all my pictures are currently Managed and I want to make all my images Referenced. Most likely I will use a hybrid model, where newly imported images will reside inside the Library (SSD) and after metadata and image editing I would relocate them to a RAID (freeing more space on the SSD for new images).

Thank you again for your input.

raf

Reply