Aperture 2.0 Stacks

Unless I'm missing something (and that's possible, if not likely) when you open a stack in 2.0's browser, it does nothing but tell you what number of how many photos are in the stack and put a gray box around it; it does not expand the stack. I realize there is the option to show the stack in the viewer but it used to work in the browser and now I'm not sure what it's suppose to do in the browser.
Anyone else seeing this?
Sam
Message was edited by: SamKva

I'm still confused. I have a Smart Album created in 2.0 that includes a Stack created in 1.5, this Stack will not expand like the new Stacks I create in 2.0. Instead when you click on the version number box it just goes to the next version instead of showing them all. How can I get it so that the stack expands to show all images in that Stack?
-Kirk

Similar Messages

Aperture syncing all stacked photos to iPhone.

Aperture is syncing all stacked photos in my library to my phone. I was under the impression that only the pick photo would be synced.
After some trial and error I noticed that just the pick photo is stacked when syncing a normal album.
Syncing smart albums and projects will transfer all the stacked versions.
Has anyone else experienced this issue?

Hi Lukejc1
As far as I know stack picks are ignored when syncing therefore the whole stack gets synced. What you want to do is assign album picks.
If you have an album and stacks in that album choose an album pick for the stack. then only the album pick gets synced.

Users of iPhone photo sync, Aperture, and stacks

For those who use Aperture and the stack feature, do you have the same problem as me when syncing to your iPhone?
Here is the thing:
Stacks in Aperture are used to group related pictures (usually variants of the same picture). In a stack, you then choose the best picture of the stack and identify it as such. This picture is then the only one that is shown in an album once the stack is closed.
Now if you sync such an album, containing stacks, to your iPhone, the problem is that all pictures in the stack, and not only the best one, is displayed in your iPhone album.
(Note that I also posted this under the category "iPhone" in this forum.)

More info:
This problem exist not with sync of albums on iPhone/iPad, but when syncing SMART ALBUMS.
If you sync a smart album that contains a stack of pictures, all pictures are put on the iPhone (not only the best picture of the stack as it should).
Please let me know if you have this problem (or not...)

Disable automatic stacks in aperture

I would like to disable Aperture from creating automatic stacks. They are not stacks I would create and I do not want to have to "Unstack" all the time.

Yes, I found that short cut after using the menu option a few times. I just re-imported to test your solution. I have so many Aperture assigned auto-stacks in some albums, it will definitely be quicker just to re-import those.
I work with referenced files so it's a quick process.
Well, again you are correct. I just figured out I could select all the files in the album and apply the unstack command to all. Great.

How do I copy only the flagged image in a stack to an album?

Within a project containing many stacks, I want to make an album showing only flagged images from some of these stacks. But when I try to do this, I end up with the stacks in the new album - which is not what I want.
For example, from a small gathering I have 94 photos in 24 stacks. (Among other things, I auto-bracket.) The correct image is the "pick" in each stack. I flagged 8 photos and uploaded them to a Picasa Web Album, for people to see. I want to make an album inside the project showing only the photos I uploaded, but I have not found how to do this.
I can view the 8 flagged photos by filtering, and though each has a badge showing the number of photos in its stack, the remaining photos do not appear if I click on the badge or press Shift-K or select Open/Close Stack: all that happens is that the badge toggles between the number of images in the stack ("x") and "1 of x" - say, between "4" and "1 of 4", if there are 4 images in that stack.
But when I put a flagged image into an album, I get its whole stack. It does not matter whether I drag it or choose New > Album and click the "Add selected items to new album."
This seems like such an obvious task that I feel I must be missing something.
Any help?

Just to expand on Frank's answer: that's how Aperture works. Stacks travel together. You will see the same behavior regarding filtering in the Album that you see in the Project. (Album is a container. As with a Project, you can filter the Album container to show only items that meet your filter criteria, but the contents of the container don't change by being filtered.)
This is why Album picks are so useful. In Projects, the Stack Pick is the left-most Image in the Stack, and is the Image that shows when the Stack is minimized. In Albums, you can specify an Album Pick. (The default Pick is the Stack Pick.) When a Stack in an Album is collapsed, the Album Pick is the Image that shows on top.
Added the following paragraph:
So you could have a Project with Stacks of bracketed exposures (an excellent use of Stacks), you could make the best of these the Pick, and then you could make an Album showing, say, the second best ones by putting them in an Album and designating the second-best Images as the Album Pick of each Stack.
You should have no trouble creating an Album of your selected Images (in this case, you are selecting by "is flagged"). With Stacks collapsed, you should see what you seem to want, which is a group of the Images you selected to be in the Album.
denke wrote:
I want to make an album inside the project showing only the photos I uploaded, but I have not found how to do this.
That the rest of the Images in the Stack are there shouldn't be a concern. Why is it?
Message was edited by: Kirby Krieger

Sorting of images within a stack

When working with stacks some strange things happen:
- When trying to duplicate one image out of the stack into an album the whole stack is moved to the album. When I than delete this stack in the album the order of the images of the same stack in my projects is changed.
- When rejecting images within a stack my rejected images are not automatically moved to the rejected images folder. Instead these images stay in the stack even so they are marked as rejected.
- When sorting images within a stack by using different ratings and than trying to limit the image view by showing for instance only images with 3 stars or more nothing happens. Also showing rejected images only does not work within a stack. Instead showing images by rating is applied to the whole project and not only the stack
Do I do something wrong or is this a known apperture bug?
MBP Mac OS X (10.4.9)

David, your understanding (use) of stacks is causing a conflict. The whole idea is basically to group a series of similar images and choose the best one of that series, called the Pick. Then, within that series you can rank those images in an order of Pick to next best, and so on. You can view stacks open or closed - when closed, the Pick is the one on top.
Here's some info from the Help Menu that will help answer your questions:
Note: When you place a stack in a book album or web gallery or web journal album, Aperture displays the stack pick. If you drag a stacked image that is not the stack pick into the book or web gallery or web journal album, Aperture reminds you to select the stack pick. If you don’t want to place the pick in the album, but want to use a different version from within the stack, select the version you want and then make it the album pick by choosing Stacks > Set Album Pick.
Dragging Stacks
You can drag an entire stack to a new location, and you can drag specific images within a stack to a new location. When a stack is closed, dragging the stack moves the entire stack. When a stack is open, you can drag individual versions to new locations in the Browser. You can also drag images into a stack. If you drag a stacked image into a different project, however, the entire stack moves to the new location.
If you still want to be able to use a stacked image as you have stated, then take that image out of the stack, split the stack, or create a version of the image and remove it from the stack.
Take a quick refresher through the help menu - it will give you some further details and ideas so you can accomplish exactly what you need to do.
Hope that helps!!

LR vs. Aperture

I've just started playing with the demo that is now available and I'm looking for reviews/and or opinions on LR vs. Aperture.
I posted in an older thread how I'm considering LR and is there any conversion software. For now the easiest approach for me (since I'm sill playing with it) is just export the masters out of aperture.
Here's some things I'm wondering if LR has
What I like about aperture
1. Stacks
2. easy rating system (I type 1, 2,3 etcs and the image is rated with 1 star, 2 stars, 3 stars etc.)
3. Smart albums.
4. lift & stamp tools
I'm not sure which package does a better job on sharpening and/or exposure. I use the lift & stamp tools quite a lot and I've not been able to mimc its ease of use in LR. I generally set the WB to a specific setting for a group of shots and its easy to just keep stamping in aperture. I don't know if there's any short cuts with LR, but I have to chose each image and then click on paste, a little more cumbersome.

There are a lot of Adobe insiders/loyalists on this board, so don't expect Aperture to get much love. I'll try to give a more balanced reaction, although bear in mind that as I'm not an Adobe insider, I've only been using the v1.0 Lightroom release since yesterday.
What I think you'll find is that overall, both programs offer ways to accomplish the same things. They both give you good tools for examining, comparing, and rating images. Both of them now let you make stacks and work with your existing file structure (Lightroom betas had no stacking, old versions of Aperture couldn't handle files in place.) You may find you prefer one way or the other, but you can get most jobs done in both. For example, Aperture has 'albums' and Lightroom has 'collections' -- they're a bit different from each other and each implementation has some minor advantages over the other, but both give you ways of arbitrarily grouping your images into various sets.
Of the two, Aperture probably will be a bit more daunting at first (unless you've previously used another Apple pro app such as Final Cut) because a lot of its power features are most easily invoked by keyboard shortcuts. Once you've used it enough to learn the shortcuts you need most, it's very, very slick and you can work quickly. Lightroom looks a bit more cluttered but also is a bit more approachable at first glance because most of its features have visible interface elements (although there are still a lot of shortcuts to speed things up.) Again, you'll probably prefer one interface over the other, but you can get your work done with either one.
Aperture's hardware requirements are somewhat taxing, especially for older machines -- although the latest 1.5.2 release seems better, and it should run fine on any current-model Mac. At the entry level, Lightroom seems to run better on lower-end machines -- although my own (limited) experience is that once you get a few thousand images in the database, that advantage disappears. Again, it'll probably come down to cases -- some operations will seem snappier on one than another, and which you prefer depends on which operations are the most important to you.
Aperture still offers a few key features that aren't available in the v1.0 release of Lightroom. Dual monitor support is one (although you won't care about that if you don't have two monitors.) I still think Aperture's loupe
tool is more useful than Lightroom's loupe
view. And if you often deal with groups of images (in layouts, for example) and need an easy, freeform way to see which ones work best together, Aperture's lightbox is a very intuitive way to do it. Lightroom's synchro-scrolling compare view (new in v1.0) is very, very nice and much appreciated, but doesn't do quite the same thing -- it's great for picking which image of three is best, but doesn't help with "how does this one look next to these two?" decisions.
On the other hand, I personally feel that Lightroom has better exposure controls, and that its printing options are more flexible and more useful (although Aperture's ability to generate and order presentation books is appealing; the books are beautiful, if a bit pricey.)
So I suspect that for most people, the choice will come down to individual "must have" or "can't stand" features. For example, I preferred just about everything about Aperture - the interface, the slick shortcuts, the easy ability to move editing projects from one machine to another - but its limited camera support was a deal-breaker for me. I'm a heavy user of an Epson R-D 1 camera, and there's just no way to get Aperture to recognize its raw files.
Apple rolls its own highly-optimized conversion code for the cameras it
does support, which is nice -- but that also means Apple probably never will be as responsive in adding support for new camera models as Adobe can be (Adobe has more incentive, since its libraries support not only for Lightroom but Photoshop, ACR, and Bridge.)
It's great that both programs offer 30-day trial versions, and they'll be similarly priced once Lightroom's introductory price goes away. So I think the only way to find out which is "better" is to give both trial versions a real workout, and see which one feels better to you. It's kind of like choosing Canon vs. Nikon -- they'll both get good shots, but one is going to feel better to you than the other.

How to- default to "open all stacks"

when i import images i set rapid fire pictures to be imported as stacks... i dont' know why, but that's what i've been doing.
i just noticed when aperture opens it defaults to keeping the stacks closed. this is a problem for me because then i don't realise i have more pictures under the stacks. i just want to see them right away. so i can open all stacks, but is there a way to set aperture so all stacks start off opened?
thanks,
max

You can also use option page down and option page up to skip between stacks, automatically opening them as you go.

Aperture 3 update. Why is there still no eraser for the retouch tool?

Perhaps I'm missing something, but: Why is there still no eraser for the retouch tool?
I realize you can delete retouch strokes, but they are in linear order so you often have to delete useful ones to go far enough back to get the one that you've decided no longer works.
I would rather have the ability to erase strokes back to the original image, much like the way the History Brush works in Photoshop, and indeed the eraser tool works in many other Aperture bricks.
Example, I retouch an eye, and then move on to retouch an ear. Then I decide I don't like the eye brush strokes. In order to remove one stroke on the eye retouch, I have to delete all the successful brush strokes I've made to the ear (i.e. those that came after the stroke I wish to remove from the eye). This is needlessly complicated and inefficient.
Many of other bricks in Aperture have an eraser tool to selectively remove brushstrokes. Why not the retouch tool?
Also, many other bricks in Aperture allow for stacking or layering bricks of the same adjustment with different brush choices. Why not the retouch tool?
Am I missing something?

We are just users here. Feature Enhancement requests need to be made via Apple's official approved channel. You can get there from within Aperture by clicking "Aperture➞Provide Aperture Feedback".
Retouching (and cloning) involves not just applying a transformation to the selected pixels, but basing that transformation on _other, non-contiguous_ pixels sampled from the image. This leads me to think that there may be intractable technical problems setting up the kind of workflow you propose.

Sharing from Aperture to iCloud

Hi,
I recently enabled iCloud in Aperture preferences and selected an image then clicked the iCloud icon on the toolbar. The image zips into the iCloud folder on the left as it's supposed to.
However, when I go to the iCloud icon in system preferences it shows 0% of 20 GB backed up and Aperture doesn't appear in the list of apps sharing to iCloud.
what am I doing wrong here?
Jon

OK, now I'm confused.
So in Finder what's the difference between dragging the "Aperture" lens icon into the external HD or the "Aperture Library" icon (stack of photos with a pink flower)?
Well I dragged the pink flower icon over earlier and got prompted to upgrade something, got into a muddle and found this old version of Aperture, then thought I'd lost all my photos. There was a box with a "tip" to hold down the option key as I opened Aperture, which I did, and got the box below, which I've never seen before.
The one highlighted is up to date with 1885 originals. Highlighting the one above that (saying current default), shows only 588 originals and it's on the Mac HD>Applications (see below)
When I highlight this and click "choose", it's just a load of old stuff, basically as my Aperture library looked about 2 years ago when I had the previous version of Aperture including things I thought I'd deleted.
Obviously I know what the Mac HD is, but what is the little house icon with my name after it in the first screen shot holding the 1885 originals?
Do I have 2 libraries in different places?
I'm sure this is basic stuff I should know, so sorry if these are daft questions!
Jon

Does Aperture 3 include a merge HDR editing tool?

Does Apeeture 3 include a "merge HDR editig" tool?

No, it does not. Aperture's adjustments are to make individual photographs as good as possible. Combining photographs in any way (compositing) must be done with an external editor. Many use Aperture to group, stack, prepare, and export shots for HDR (and focus stacking, etc.), and then import the resulting file into Aperture and place it with the Stack. In this way you save your source material as well as your result, and you can use Aperture to administer (and prepare for publication) your HDR picture.

Interesting speed test - Aperture vs Lightroom

Still noodling on the whole Aperture v Lightroom thing and I as I mentioned in an earlier post, I like the corrections (develop) portion of Lightroom but pretty much like everything else in Aperture, especially the workflow and organization. The thing that I find troubling is the SLOW speed of Aperture.
So, I have Windows running on my 1GB Macbook via Parallels and installed Lightroom for Windows and it FLYS. The speed is the same or faster under Parallels/Windows than Aperture is natively and may be faster then just OSX version of Lightroom. . .wow.
This leads me to believe (hope maybe) that a performance bump for Aperture is in the works and probably won't be that hard for Apple. It almost seems like some debug/logging has been left on. . .
Adam

I totally agree that in real life working conditions that Aperure is a faster program. I think we have to qualify this speed issue...Lightroom has less system requirements that Aperture so it appears to be faster on the surface. The best way to test the program is to run it through its paces with your current workflow.
I posted the following findings on anoher forum...
LIGHTROOM
PRoS
- Easier to pick up and use
- Slightly more in depth Editing Tools (Curves, more color sliders, Black Level etc). Can acheive the same with Aperture, but not as easily.
- Fast (but with a few gotchas - must let the program finish building previews etc)
- Can create and share Presets with other users and apply Presets on Import
- History - can go easily back to Prior state
- System requirements not that stringent. Can also Mac & PC
- Healing Brush/Clone Tool is nicely done
- More Camera support...
CoNs
- File Management (DAM) seems to be the least in depth part of the program.
- Stacks/Virtual copies could be more intuitive. This seems more to be an after thought in this program and I am not sure what Adobe was doing here. Aperture just does a much better job in its exectuion. People that use both prorams will understand what I mean. Lightroom Also doesn't handle the import of Raw/Jpegs with same name well. Need to do a workaround.
- Modules (forces you into set way of doing things). The best part of the program is how easy it is to figure out due to the modules, but that is the part of the program that limits you the most once you figure it out. You end up hating the thing you love the most. The modules slows down your workflow to the point that it is counter productive and negates any speed increase the program has on the surface.
- User Interface is somewhat customizable, but you cannot customize the view as much as in Aperture...I actually found the interface too restrictive with the modules.
- Email feature and watermark feature not as intuitive. Sends images for email to a folder.
APERTURE
- Best FM/DAM Features of the two. Program clearly geared more towards File Mgmt
- Loupe - This tool alone gives Aperture an advantage
- Stacks - Extremely well done
- Versions etc...
- Can get CLOSE to Canon DPP (colors) conversions when using this program much faster than Lightroom. The best way to describe this is Aperture has less editing tools, but they are all very functional.
- Faster to Navigate and do things on the fly due to open nature which greatly speeds up your Workflow. Program geared more towards managing large amount of images IMO. The open nature of the program makes it much faster tool to get a final product when working with large number of images.
- Emailing functions are very intuitive (e.g. adding watermark etc). Click on email and my image goes straight to mail resized and with a watermark just add the persons namde and hit send. This is one feature that illustrates why with Apple you feel as if you are working with one big program, than a bunch of seperate programs.
- More Customizable UI..Can display images a multitude of ways
- Presets for each section
CoNs
- Learning Curve. The program is daunting at first due to its wide open nature. I suggest buying a book or you will miss out on many of its features. Many folks are not aware of the depth of the program.
- Focus was on clearly more on File Mgmt features than on editing features. The Editing features needs to be more in depth and improved. E.g. The Lift and stamp Tool is extremely difficult to use. Lightroom also has a few features that Apple should a good look at. I.e. Curves, History, More sliders etc.
- POWER HUNGRY - The program requires way too much computer (GPU) to run it adequately. I think Apple focused too much on using Aperture in the beginning to promote hardware. The program still cant get pass that stigma.
- The program locks you out once you start your conversion to Jpegs (you can’t work in the program during this time). Apple has to correct this because it really cuts down your productivity.
Conclusion
The best way to figure out if a program works for your particular needs is to test it under your working conditions. I had a week of down time and I decided this was the time to learn and test Lightroom vs. Aperture because I was looking for an alternative to Cannon DPP mostly due to how it handled shadow details and also sorting through pics etc.
Background: I am a fashion/model photographer and in my field we shoot a lot of photos to ensure we have that Money Shot . A shoot with over 1000 images is quite common. From this I have to narrow down to the best photos to send the presentable sample to the client without overwhelming them. One week turnaround is customary. I shoot only RAW so I have to do some edit to get the pictures to a state where they POP. Photoshop is not used in this phase unless I see a shot that needs something done that my DAM software cannot do and I HAVE to send it to the client because it is a winner.
After testing both software, I chose Aperture. It has some drawbacks, but I found it t be the better program for my needs. It helped me tremendously to sort through photos, apply keywords and create smart albums. For Example I came up with a key word Submission Package and I created a Smart Album tied to that keyword. I went through the images and tagged all the shots that caught my eye immediately with that keyword. This was while deleting the obvious bad shots, and editing the pictures and lift and stamp. Click over to the smart album titled Submission package and all the shots I want to send was sitting there already edited and ready to go. This made the program much FASTER in getting a final product.
I tried this with Lightroom, but the modular nature frustrated me because I don’t do things in a set order...For Example I might be applying Keywords, then see a pic I want to crop, then I decide I want to stack a few pics, then I want to tweak a photo. I was so tired of switching between modules and trying to remember what I could do where that I just gave up and went back to Aperture.
Ultimately I found that Aperture was a faster program in exection. At the end of the day it is all about of getting a great product in the shortest amount of time to my client and Aperture helped me the most to meet this objective...
Macbook Pro Core Duo 2.16 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Aperture and Olympus E-1

I just purchased a MacBook and are waiting for Aperture 1.1. I have no experience with Apreture other than a quick test run in the Apple store.
I've scanned the web, but there is no information on the two working together. Anyone here using this combination?

My main concern is the raw conversion, how it handles
details, color and noise. I did some testing with Oly
Viewer, ARC 3.3 and iPhoto with iPhoto being the last
on the list. ARC has been on the market for a while
so it's not a surprise it is better. Viewer come out
a clear winner, but is it slow and very limited.
Guess I've just have to hang in there and wait for
the first review
Thanks for your feedback.
Andre,
We've traded a couple notes on the OLY SLR forum on DPReview. Nice to see you here.
Anyway, I've been using Aperture since it came out. When it comes to the RAW conversion, the colors are spot on compared to Viewer/Studio. However, there is some noticable artifacting when you zoom in to 300 or 400%. I'm greatly anticipating the v1.1 release to check out what improvements Apple may have come up with.
I've been sticking with Studio for now when it comes to RAW. I've still benefited with workflow enhancement with Aperture - proofing, keywording, stacking, quickie B&W conversions for "first run thru" proofs for customers. I just do a quick export to Studio and batch process the RAW conversions. For the shots I want to do additional cleanup, a quick trip through PS is all it takes.
A little mentioned secret on this forum is the rotation feature in Aperture. Much easier than PS.
Again, hopefully there will be some nice improvements on the RAW conversion with the next version. If so, I will be even happier spending even less time on the old PBG4.
Powerbook G4 Mac OS X (10.4.3)

Since the 3.3 update all photo's sync not just top of stack

Since updating to 3.3, all version of photos in my Aperture library now sync to my iPhone, not just the top of the stack (or picks photo.) Has anyone else had this issue and/or figured out a way to resolve? Or is this a bug introduced in the update???

Yep, this is a *horrible* bug. At least we hope it's a bug and not the worst feature ever. It's definitely something occuring in 3.3 and not in 3.2.4 or earlier. It's also inconsistent with how Aperture handles Picks/Stacks in other aspects.
There may be a fix for some people. iTunes will only sync Previews. So you could delete the Previews of all the non-Picks. Of course this could be unreasonably time consuming.
But... There's also a Preview bug in Aperture 3.3!
There are inconsistencies in when Aperture will generate Previews in 3.3. It should not generate Previews for images less than the preset Preview resoluton set in Preferences. However, this isn't always the case. In fact, it may generate Previews, or not, depending on the portrait/landscape orientation of the image. The bottom line is that if the Preview isn't generated due to this bug, then it references the Original as the Preview. This means that for a given image that is affected by the bug, you can't delete the non-existent Preview...
Which means even the "Delete Previews You Don't Want Sycn'd" work-around also won't work since you can't delete Previews that haven't been generated.
This is a total nightmare because you may find yourself syncing lots of multiple versions of the same image to the preciously small storage of an iOS device, but also browsing on the device (especially Apple TV) is annoying because of the duplicates. Additionally, you may be sync'ing extremely large sized Originals (and duplicates thereof) instead of Previews.
Please send a bug report on the Aperture feedback page here:
http://www.apple.com/feedback/aperture.html

Merge imported iPhoto stacks?

Hi,
In the olden days, I used to use iPhoto. In my library were some 8000 pictures, and to many I have manually added GPS data, captions, faces and so on.
Now I have purchased Aperture and imported my iPhoto library into my brand-new Aperture library. For about 3000 of my iPhoto's, Aperture has created stacks (a very handy feature btw). Every stacks contains two pictures:
1: The original iPhoto with keywords generated by Aperture ("iPhoto Original"), plus the metadata, such as faces and places from iPhoto
2: The definitive iPhoto with keywords "iPhoto Edited" (or "iPhoto Externally Edited"), without the metadata
I want to keep only one version of each set. The problem is that the picture I want to keep is the edited one, and the metadata (which I also want to keep) is in the original picture.
So I need to merge the metadata from the original picture with the edited picture and then delete the original. Is there some way to do this automatically? The algorithm would be something like:
For each stack in library:
Does the stack contain exactly two versions and are the version names the same and has one of them keyword "iPhoto original" and the other one "iPhoto edited?
If so, copy metadata from original to edited version and delete (or reject) original
Does anyone know if a script or program exists that is capable of doing the above?
Many thanks in advance!
Wopke - Aperture newbie

Hi Wopke. Welcome to the user-to-user forum.
A few thoughts, but you'll have to work this out yourself, it seems. My thoughts aren't even enough to build a scaffolding, let alone an arch.
If you can merge the files in iPhoto, do it. Then delete the ones in Aperture, and import the newly merged.
I would look into other ways of solving this prior to importing into Aperture.
You cannot merge photos in Aperture.
In Aperture the process of copying metadata from one image to another is done by a process known as lifting the metadata from the source image and then stamping it onto the target image. Look these up in the help file. The Lift & Stamp has several useful options. Unfortunately for your predicament, it is always a one-to-one or a one-to-many operation. There is no way to lift the date from one member of each of ten pairs, and then stamp it onto the other member of each of the ten pairs, or to automate doing one pair, then the next pair, and so on.
You can quickly turn the mouse cursor into a "lifter" and a "stamper", which for even 250 image pairs might be useful. For 3,000 ... no.
There is no way that I know of to query Aperture "is image in Stack", or anything like that. The lone exception is the curious checkbox in the Filter HUD, "Stack Picks Only". That won't do what you want (I suggest ignoring it for quite awhile).
To script your algorithm, you'll have to replace the Stacks query with something else. I don't use iPhoto, but perhaps the original and the edited version have similarly differentiated file names.
If you do solve this, please post your solution. Good Luck. Sorry not to have actually helpful.

Aperture 2.0 Stacks

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for