Aperture and Bridge

I have avoided using Bridge (much to my annoyance) as I cannot access the folders within my Aperture library (which are in the Pictures folder).
Can someone take pity on this photographer here, whose workflow has become rather cumbersome of late.....
Much much appreciated!!

Easy solution; don't import files into Aperture. Use referenced files so 1) your Aperture library isn't huge and 2) you won't lose files if or when Aperature totally crashes/blows up.
With my images securely located on their HDDs I can work with them and make corrections in CS5 Photoshop as well as work with them in Aperture. The Aperture libraries are backed up twice (on separate drives) and Bridge/Camera Raw corrections and metadata are backed up with both xmp files and a cache download into the files' folders. The HHDs are also backed up
It works great and gives me complete freedom to use or not use A3 and CS5 at will.

Similar Messages

  • Aperture and Bridge interface

    I cannot access photos in the Aperture library from Bridge. When I click on the Aperture cube icon (Aperture Library.aplibrary") from Bridge, Aperture opens and nothing more. Is this usual? Or do I need to do something to get Bridge to recognize all the files/albums, etc which were originally imported into Aperture? I can access all the Aperture files from Photoshop but sometimes I just want to view them in Bridge first.

    zelsha
    Welcome to the Apple Discussions.
    No, there is no way to access the files from Bridge. Bridge and Aperture don't play well together (nor does it play well with iPhoto) because Bridge attempts to do part of Apertures job.
    I can access all the Aperture files from Photoshop but sometimes I just want to view them in Bridge first.
    Well that's exactly where you would use Aperture and not Bridge.
    Regards
    TD

  • File adjustments in aperture and bridge

    Why are mey aperture adjustments won't follow when I open them in bridge camera raw
    Thanks

    hello, barto
    quote: "Why are mey aperture adjustments won't follow when I open them in bridge camera raw"
    Because you're opening a RAW file instead of an adjusted Aperture photograph.
    What is your workflow?
    How are you exporting them? Are you exporting a Master or Version?
    victor

  • PowerMac DP 2 Ghz vs 15" Powerbook & Aperture vs Bridge-ACR and 10 D2X nefs

    10 D2X nefs, equal settings(including sharpening) on each file.
    Test: Time the export/saving 10 full sized JPGs(level 10) on both systems under both Aperture and Bridge/ACR
    In Aperture, stamp the same settings to 10 nefs, wait for the changes to appear on each thumbnail, then select the 10 nefs, and select export versions.
    In Bridge, paste the camera raw settings to the 10 nefs, wait for the thumbnails to show changes(building cache), select the 10 nefs, open ACR under Bridge(not CS2) by pressing CMD-R, in the ACR dialog, select all images on the left, click "Save 10 images".
    PowerMac: G5 dual 2 Ghz, 2 GB RAM, X 800 XT vid card, Aperture library and Bridge cache on separte SATA 7200 RPM internal disk
    PowerBook: 15" 1.5 Ghz, 1.5 GB RAM, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700, and 80 GB disk
    Aperture results:
    PowerMac: 2:07
    PowerBook: 5:06
    Bridge/ACR results:
    PowerMac: 1:18
    PowerBook: 2:12
    As you can see Aperture requires 2x the time to export/save when compared to Bridge/ACR.
    Further, it is amazing that the Powerbook could plow through the images in Bridge in the same time it took the Powermac to export the Aperture images...
    Hmmm, then that would imply the best money is on a Powerbook running Bridge/ACR/CS2?
    Sooooo, if you can cull/sort the images and apply raw settings in Aperture three to four times as fast as in Bridge then it is a wash...

    zozi56 wrote:Can you reproduce the problem without Skype, Bastian?
    From what I remember I have also had this issue when Skype wasn't open.
    Yesterday my computer started up beeping - I took the harddisk out and it started normally (initramfs tho). Then I put it back in and the laptop have been running fine so far. I suspect it might just have been a bad connection, but I am giving it time..
    EDIT: Still experiencing the issue..
    Last edited by Bastian (2014-01-19 18:09:08)

  • How do I transfer photos from aperture and iPhoto to bridge?

    How do I transfer photos from Aperture and iPhoto to Adobe Bridge.  I am using Photoshop CS6.  Many of my original photos were stored as raw files.

    Here's how to access Mac iPhoto images for use in Photoshop
    and so that they may be viewed by choosing that folder in Bridge..
    1. In the Finder, navigate to Users > [user name} > Pictures > iPhoto Library.  
    2. Control-click (Right-click) the iPhoto Library file and choose Show Package Contents.
    3. A Finder window opens that shows the contents. The Masters folder (or called Originals folder) contains all of the photographs that are in iPhoto.
    Photoshop cannot access this folder, but if you make a duplicate of the folder, the dupe will be accessible -- so:
    4. Control-click (Right-click) the folder named Masters (or Originals) and choose Duplicate.
    5, Drag the duplicate folder which is named "Masters copy" or “Originals copy” from the iPhoto Library Finder window to the Desktop.
    6. Open images in Photoshop from file on desktop or view them in Bridge.
    7  Rename the folder and move it elsewhere (probably to the Pictures folder), if desired. 
    And here is a Forum thread related to Aperture-to-Bridge
    How do I transfer Apple Aperture library to Bridge?

  • Aperture 3 library, CS6 and Bridge Library

    I have been using Aperture for a long time. I just got CS6 CC and Bridge. Question: Is it possible to keep two idenitical ORIGINAL library's - one in Aperture and the other in Bridge?

    Of course it is possible but you do realize that each library will be independent of the other. Changes made in one will not affect the other and your storage requirements will be doubled.
    Running two completely different programs that do basically the same task seems wasteful both in terms of system resources and the time needed to maintain and use each program efficiently. Why are you looking to do this?

  • Aperture Metadata and Bridge Metadata

    I am a photographer and my workflow is to import all my images into Aperture library and add metadata.
    When exporting an image is it possible to integrate Apertures metadata with Bridge metadata? This is important feature as most people do not import images with Aperture. The issue is that many of the field names are different or non existent between the two programs. For example Location field in Bridge is Sub location in Aperture.
    Can you add fields such contact info such as URL, email that are included within Bridge ITPC Metadata?
    Is there a way to customize the metadata fields to work with CS3?

    Unfortunatelly, not really.
    I am currently using Nikon Transfer (latest version) to download the pictures from the camera. This software allows me to enter quite a number of IPTC data (including contact information, url, mail, phone, etc.), but maybe not all which are available in CS3.
    Then I do import the pictures from the folder into Aperture where I only add contact information in the respective IPTC field. From the tests, I did I do know, that with this step I am using the "old IPTC standard" with Aperture and the new IPTC standard with Nikon Transfer. Clearly the newer is better and meets the needs you described.
    In Aperture, I do only see the IPTC data fields, which are common between the two standards (copyright, keywords and description).
    When I go to CS3 Bridge, I can see the IPTC data from both, but only of you turn on the "IPTC old" in the Photoshop Bridge settings.
    This is how far I have come. I have tested the export with the original and the aperture work copy. As a test reader/viewer of the pics I used Photoshop Elements 5.0 ... but except the copyright information, key words and description, I could not find "my" IPTC data. So there was no contact info. This may be a problem of the old version, so I also checked on a windows PC the file properties (picture viewer), which has more or less the same information.
    So the only work around maybe to add contact information into the copyright field - which is not ideal.
    Regards
    Diethard

  • Annoture - Metadata Bridging Solution for Aperture and iView

    Aperture and iView users:
    I just released Annoture, a metadata bridging solution for Aperture and iView MediaPro! With Annoture, you’re just a click away from sharing metadata between these two popular image management and cataloguing applications. Spend more time working with your decisive moments than worrying about double-entry and incomplete metadata!
    Annoture lets you transfer annotations from iView MediaPro catalogs to Aperture projects and albums and back. This two-way transfer of IPTC and metadata information means you are not tied to any one application for your image management and workflow needs. Annoture also features a modular interface that can be extended to support additional applications in the future.
    http://www.tow.com/software/annoture/
    Users of Aperture and iView can download a fully-functional version of Annoture. The unregistered version will occasionally display a reminder to register, and all images processed in Aperture by Annoture will have a custom “Annotated with Annoture!” tag added. You can remove these items with the full version after purchasing and entering your license code.
    Enjoy!
    -adam

    Congratulations on getting this working and available so quickly! I bet many late nights went into this
    It's definitely providing some motivation for me to learn more Applescript...

  • Aperture + Adobe Bridge: does that increase amount of storage per image?

    I recently installed Aperture after using Photoshop CS3 and Bridge for some years. When I import images into Aperture that have already been downloaded into Bridge, does that increase the amount of storage space I'm using and if so by how much? I am saving all files to the same folders but what about the various versions created. How much storage are they taking up. My iMac 24 w. 320 Gig is almost full so storage is important.
    Also, if I start using Aperture 3 to download from my camera, do I need Bridge? Any danger in getting rid of Bridge?
    Thanks,
    Cliff

    Cliff,
    The first question is whether you want to run a Managed or Referenced library. The difference is that Managed copies and stores the images inside the Aperture Library package, where a Referenced library locates the master images in Finder somewhere.
    The import procedure is done in both cases, but you use the 'Store Files' drop-down to tell Aperture where to store the master image files.
    With Bridge, you were probably using 'Photo Downloader' to import the files to a selected folder, name the files using some options for format and counting, and perhaps adding basic or predefined metadata on import. This results in a Finder folder structure of your choosing (as well as file names).
    With Aperture, you can do the same thing by selecting 'Choose' under the 'Store Files' drop-down (where you choose or create a new folder). Once you select a location, two other options become available; (1) to move or copy the files and, (2) to pick a sub-folder preset - or choose 'Edit' at bottom of list to design your own folder preset.
    Once you have your location and folder settings selected, you can then use the 'Import Settings' drop-down to select 'Rename Files' option. This gives you a 'Version Name' drop-down in the pane which you can again select a preset or use the 'Edit' at bottom to design your own.
    The items I listed would allow you to keep working like you have been with Bridge to import your images. If your current folder structure can be replicated in the Folder Naming preset dialog, then you could easily continue as you were with Aperture.
    If you want to run the Managed Library, then importing your folders is possible, but you will need to decide how you want to organize the library structure when compared to your current hierarchy.
    The thing to remember about Aperture is that 'Projects' are the only part that actually contain images (whether masters inside or references to masters outside). So, for example; you could use a 'Blue Folder' named 'Year 2010' and then have a 'Project' for each month under the Blue Folder. You could then make an 'Album' for day inside a month Project.
    The result of the aforementioned structure would be a top level folder which then contains projects for each month (where each project is divided up using Albums). Because Projects are the only thing holding images, the albums use aliases for the various images inside that project. Clicking on a days' album would show just the images of that day, where clicking on the Project name would show all images for that month. The blue folder is just an organization tool to help control the clutter.
    Before mentioning my workflow or suggesting another, I would like to compare Bridge/ACR/PS to Aperture work flow.
    With Bridge, you import and organize images in a folder structure, then add metadata (keywords, personal info, etc.) You can also create collections and smart collections for quick references (which are generated by Bridge when asked, which can be a bit slow with smart collections). You then use ACR plug-in to make 'non-destructive' parameter decisions before sending to Photoshop for rendering and more specific edits and output.
    With Aperture, you import into the library (where most of the processing is done on the front end for previews and database storage). You are then in a one-stop workshop where you just use the Inspector pane and toolbars to add metadata, create albums and smart albums, and add adjustments to the versions. At this point, you are set to decide on any output (using the print, image export or web/book album features).
    In essence, and IMHO, you are changing from three separate programs to one program with three Inspector panes.
    Workflow:
    I use a managed library because I have the disc space. I also like the fact that I can copy the library package once a month (at least) to an external drive and have a full working backup which can be run from that drive or copied onto a new drive and double-clicked to load it. The downside to this approach is space. I typically shoot RAW + JPEG and import just the JPEG's to start > decide on the keepers and reject the rest > import the matching RAW's to the project. I use JPEG as Master, because they are all that is needed in many cases. I can switch to the RAW version at any time if I want something more than the JPEG can provide.
    My first suggestion to you would be to create a new empty library as follows:
    1 - Launch Aperture while pressing the 'Option' (Alt) key
    2 - Select 'Create New' button
    3 - Select a location and name the library with a unique name
    This will allow you to import say a few folders (make sure to copy images, not move) and test out how you want to organize the library. You can always delete the library and start over. Look in to the File Naming and Folder Naming items under 'Aperture menu > Presets' to get a feel for the options you have and perhaps create a custom preset or two. These become options in the 'Rename Files> Version Name' and 'Store Files > Subfolder' drop-downs in the Import Pane.
    Here are a few links from the online User Manual that might help clarify:
    *Import folders of images*:
    http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/#chapter=4%26section=9
    Pay special note to the statement under step #5: *"The top-level folder is converted to a project. If the folder you imported contains a hierarchy of subfolders and images, the subfolders appear as albums."*
    That may address your importing of current image folders (or will give you a good test scenario for the empty library).
    *Planning import strategy*:
    http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/#chapter=4%26section=3
    *General importing files on computer*:
    http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/#chapter=4%26section=5
    *Working with Referenced Images*:
    http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/#chapter=5%26section=16%26 hash=apple_ref:doc:uid:Aperture-UserManual-91292BSR-1037525
    This last link should give you an overview of the options for working with and troubleshooting a referenced image scheme.
    Okay, that should be enough for you to think about for a few. Feel free to ask more as needed. There are many here who know a lot more than I.

  • Aperture and iPhoto...a marriage?

    Do you mean it would be great if Aperture behaved like Adobe Bridge? Meaning you can open Bridge, point it to the iPhoto library execute changes within Bridge or PS (version whatever) and have it reflect the changes in iPhoto. That would be very cool, very cool indeed. As it stands I don't think it can, I hope I can be proven wrong. Because both programs are designed to run independent I don't think you will ever have the two programs work off of one "Library" and reflect changes respectively in either program. A work around I have tried using is set Aperture as your main import/edit manager. Work on your images and when finished drag them over to iPhoto. As you can guess the problem here is now you have two copies of the same image, even more given the extensiveness of your edits. If anyone can solve this problem (looking in your direction Apple) I would think there would be a great deal of happy people and more would be inclined to give Aperture a go. The End....I'm off to try and point iPhoto to the Aperture Library and see what happens.

    QUOTE: "I don't like all this reference and non destructive editing stuff. Have one copy, back it up somewhere and work on the original. The way Aperture is set up you end up with too many edits and "stacks" there for bloating your work flow and perhaps HD space. I'm not sure how this applications functions in "real world" use by photographers but I would be interested in hearing about it."
    Where to begin??
    For one thing, Aperture's soon-to-be main competitor, LightRoom, works on the same principle, so there seems TO BE merit in this type of software (some say it's the wave of the future). It's a marriage of DAM (digital asset management) with meta editing. You are working with a different paradigm, pixel editing individual files, not meta editing. The master file in Aperture is the "root" file for all derivatives. You only need to have that one (pixel-based) file stored on HD, all other versions are merely instructions (meta data) that tell the software how to display the master with global changes applied. This data requires much less disk space. What you are doing is making a copy of an original and pixel editing it, resulting in another huge file being saved.
    QUOTE: "As I wrote before I would love to be able to use any image editor working off of one central folder of images having any changes reflect in the central folder reflected in any image organizer (Aperture, iPhoto). "
    Again, you are looking for the editor to make permanent changes to a file that any other editor/organizer can read. If that's what you want, then Aperture (and Lightroom, Lightzone, and other new photo-based editors) is not what you want. If you accept the concept of non-destructive editing, then a database is essential, and once you have that built into an app, then you need other apps to be familiar with that database in order to read the edits. Since we're at the beginnings of this new paradigm, your other apps will not have the capability of reading Aperture libraries, and may never. (Adobe is now updating Photoshop and Bridge to be compatible with Lightroom - they've been in the same boat.) As it is, Aperture can send a tiff file off to Photoshop for tweaking. That file then becomes a new master in Aperture. The original master is still there in Aperture, allowing you to make more versions.
    Using your system, if you had many tens of thousands of images, you'd soon get lost in a sea of backed up originals, and derivatives. With no database component (DAM) available, you'd be left to your own devices - with folder and file naming conventions your only way to find your way around.
    - Pierre

  • Aperture and ACR workflow

    For those who find Aperture's Camera RAW conversion too primitive, the program can be used in a simple workflow that maximizes your productivity while insuring maximum quality conversion.
    1- IMPORT your RAW images into Aperture and add keywords and other tags.
    Aperture brings in the RAW image UNALTERED.
    2- COMPARE AND SORT your images using the EXCELLENT TOOLS in Aperture.
    You can also freely experiment with versions to test ideas for everything from exposure to B&W conversions.
    3- SELECT YOUR BEST IMAGES inside Aperture.
    Most of us working in the professional world are really only interested in using the top 1% or less of a typical shoot. It is only those that need to be converted as output for Giclee printing or as digital masters for retouching and CMYK printing.
    4- EXPORT THOSE BEST IMAGES using the export "DIGITAL MASTERS..." command.
    Many of us find Aperture's RAW conversion to be excellent but for those who don't, you can choose at this point all your selected images, which by now should be a very short list, and export them as UNALTERED RAW files to a folder outside of Aperture.
    5- CONVERT those exported camera RAW images using whatever conversion program you want, for many it will be ACR, and do any extra retouching in Photoshop.
    And for those worried about Aperture's filing system, you can store these exported "Best Images" exactly like you used to do, in old fashioned folders on your hard disk, in whatever categories make sense to you.
    For those of us producing professional work on always shorter deadlines, Aperture is an outstanding tool that makes our job much easier.
      Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    Tom, first allow me to congratulate you on starting a practical thread. Now that many of us own Aperture, and I'm not saying the issues threads aren't useful, figuring out where it fits in our workflow is a fine idea.
    Here is my (pre-Aperture) workflow, and some ideas for an interim (working with what we have) post-Aperture flow. I'd really appreciate any advice or suggestions.
    Pre: Conversion mostly in ACR/Bridge (occasionally in C1Pro-generally fleshtones). Color Space generaly set in camera as Adobe RGB, same for PS. Preliminary sharpening with PhotoKit, noise reduction if necessary with neat image or noise ninja, adjustments, aspect ratio crops, etc. Save as TIFF/16bit layered if necessary/add "Base" to filename when saving. Reopen in PS for output specific sharpening, save flattened copy. Open in ImagePrint-Print. Library has been on external HDs, backed up to duplicate HDs which are taken off premises. Current library size:700Gigs and growing fast.
    Post: Import into Aperture from Card, also backup RAWs to DVD. As suggested here, do sorts and picks in Aperture. Maybe do some crude adjusting for low res images for client proofs (web or contact sheets-sorry, haven't tried using Aperture with Epson drivers or tried the web posting). Export RAW picks for conversion and editing elsewhere (I have tested and the camera EXIFs are still there in PS (I'm not sure they will be on re-import?). So, now I've got a RAW with an attached .xmp, one or more Tiffs. I can reimport the TIFFs, but can I re-associate them with the Master? Is there any way that I can import the .xmp and associate it with the master? So, I can pick, web, go to printer and archive (although I'll hit a disk space issue-ideas there?)
    I tried to do this without asking for changes in Aperture, but not using Aperture where I felt it was immature. There are already enough discussions about conversion, editing and storage. The interface is promising and I would welcome any shortcuts you can come up with. Meanwhile, I'm going to try with new shoots, and a few existing shoots for experimanetation, but leave my old library intact. Then I'm going to put Aperture's library on an 800Gig external eSATA RAID0 -two disk; and back up to another. Wish me luck.

  • What to do with Aperture and iPhoto now?

    Now that I have Photos on my computer (OS X 10.10.3), can I uninstall/delete iPhoto and Aperture?
    I have no need for their functionality, since I will just use Photos (to replace iPhoto functions) and Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop for more advanced functions (including what I could do with Aperture).
    To clarify, I should say, is it safe to delete the two apps (iPhoto and Aperture) without affecting my photo library?

    I mean the apps. They don't take up 'minimal storage', instead aperture and iphoto apps take up around 2.5gb of space. I have a large SSD, but I would still like this space back.
    Make a bootable clone or another full backup of your SSD. You may not be able to ever reinstall iPhoto or Aperture otherwise, since they have been pulled from the App Store.
    If you should discover later, that the migration of your libraries has been faulty and you need to repeat it after repairing your libraries, you will be out of luck.
    Remember, it is is just one day after the first release of Photos as version 1.0.  There are very likely some bugs and I would not burn all bridges before the library has been thoroughly tested and you are very confident, that this release is working well on your Mac.
    My concern is that there is a shared library, and by deleting the two other apps, the ones the new one relies on, that the there might be some data loss. I wanted clarification. If an app is intended to replace two other apps, then why doesn't it replace it?
    The links between the library are hard links. As long as one of the libraries is still referencing one of the linked image files, that file will not be deleted from the disk.   Six Colors: The (hard) link between Photos and iPhoto

  • Importing into iPhoto after CS and Bridge.

    I have moved from a PC using PS7 to edit and ACDSee to manage my photos.  I am now on the latest iMac using CS6 to edit and Bridge to manage my photos.  Many of my photos started out as scans by ScanCafe.
    I can successfully load into Bridge an old photo file that started as a scan then was renamed by ACDSee ( and possible editied by PS7).  i can also further edit the photo in CS6 and rename in Bridge.  However, when I try to import the result into iPhoto (I want to use Faces) the file name is not properly picked up by iPhoto and called a Title.  I can successfully import the original file (scan plus ACDSee rename) and iPhoto pickes up the Title from the file name.
    When this doesn't work properly, I can slect the photo in iPhoto and click on Info but the Title field is blank on the top RHS of the screen.  If I scroll over the blank title, a pop-up shows the correct Title.  So there appears to be a disconnect as the file is passed between these software packages.
    I could send some sample photos but can't attach them.
    I hope that this reaches someone with Adobe and iPhoto experience so I don't get into finger pointing between the two products.

    dmoffat323 wrote:
    Let me summarize more clearly… 
    Oh, I understand you, dmoffat323. 
    Let me try again:
    dmoffat323 wrote:
    …With Bridge I am able to go through my folders and files with no problems. File names are visible and correct, and renaming works fine…
    Bridge is only showing you the embedded low-res JPEG thumbnail/previews that iPhoto leaves exposed after swallowing your actual image files into the entrails of one of its libraries/packages.  Just like Curt Y says.
    If you still want to use iPhoto, Curt Y has the right advice for you, i.e. to check out the Apple discussion boards, specifically the iPhoto forum.
    https://discussions.apple.com/community/ilife/iphoto
    You are not addressing Adobe here.  We are all users just like you, and we are not here to defend Adobe or to apologize for them.
    What I am also telling you is that Curt Y is a Windows user and yours truly an avid Mac User of three decades' standing who nevertheless detests iPhoto.   Personally neither one of us gives a darn that iPhoto and Photoshop don't play nice with each other.  We're just trying to give you the best advice we can.
    Also remember that Apple banned the use of Adobe's Flash, and is actually a competitor to Photoshop with its Aperture application.  Not really a flawless relationship there.

  • Newbie asks: Aperture and PhotoShop - why have both??

    Though this is more of a general question regarding photo editing, I'll post it here as this seems to be where most of the shutterbugs hang.
    I just bought my wife a Nikon D200 for Mother's Day. Though she's definitely not an expert photographer (she barely knows how to use her current Nikon N60 film camera), she seems to have a real knack for taking beatiful shots of the kids, vacation vistas, etc.. I bought the D200 not because I felt she needed all of it's features, but more because I wanted something that was built like a tank, and would hold up to years of use in a variety of outdoor/indoor environments. Though very expensive, I thought the D200 was worth it if it lasts longer than the more affordable offerings. ..I mention all this only to avoid being criticized for "over-buying".
    Anyway, what is the ONE essential picture editing software package that we should buy to take advantage of this wonderful camera?? I say one, because I don't think my wife will be too keen on moving images through three or four different applications to make fairly minor adjustments. ...She may take 30 pics/month, so were not talking huge project sizes. ..Perhaps a starting point would be if someone could briefly explain the differences between Aperture and Photoshop and why someone would have both. ..And if forced to pick just one of them, which would you chose? The iPhoto that came with our new iMac is outrageously cool! ..But it offers very limited adjustment tools.
    IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram
    IMAC (early 2006)   Mac OS X (10.4.4)   1.5 G Ram

    I'll relate how I use both Aperture and Photoshop and why I do what I do so you can come to your own conclusions. I have been using Aperture since it first came out and Photoshop for 10 years.
    Though Aperture was originally thought to be a Photoshop competitor (back when it was first released), it is not. Rather, it is a very good front-end to Photoshop. I use Aperture to read in my digital photos from my Nikon camera so I can easily go through them and pick out the ones I want. I should note that generally when I go out and do a "shoot", it is not uncommon for me to run through 200 or more pictures. So I have a significant sorting and selecting process when I get home to my computer. Photoshop is NOT good at this, that is why Adobe added Bridge a couple of years ago. Aperture is more of a competitor to Bridge (though Bridge comes free with Photoshop). I should note that though I like Bridge, Aperture has it beat hands down when it comes to letting me review my photos.
    As I have learned to use Aperture, it has taken over many of the front-end adjustments I used to make in Bridge and Photoshop. Things like adjusting the saturation, brightness, contrast, levels, cropping, leveling and sharpening were what I formerly did with my Adobe products, but now instead very easily do with Aperture. I prefer doing these adjustment in Aperture since they are non-destructive to my original file, and the adjustments are kept in a XML sidecar file so the adjusted image file is very small and saves me lots of disk space.
    If I like what I see in Aperture, then I can easily publish (books or web) or print from there. Aperture has some great web generation features in it. But, these features are not flexible with their format styles and are geared for use by professional photographers who want to show their work to their clients. But still, it is fun to easily create a web site. And if you have a .MAC account, there is a very nice fit between the two productions. (Note: you can also get this same functionality with more page creation flexibility with Apple's iWeb and to a certain degree with iPhoto).
    Aperture has also helped me organize my photo library so that I can easily find that one photo, or set of photos, I want, when I want them.
    So, if I'm using Aperture more-and-more, what am I using Photoshop for? As good as Aperture is, and it is getting better, it is no competitor for what Photoshop does best. I wouldn't think of using anything but Photoshop when I need to do "serious" work on my photos. Image repair and restoration, patching, touchups, very fine adjustments, special effects, application of filters, noise reduction, to name a few things, are (to me) Photoshop only. Also, for now, Photoshop has a much better zoom and image inspection feature than does Aperture. Though the loop in Aperture is useful, I find it to be a bit more klunky than the zoom feature in Photoshop.
    Both programs are pricey, though Apple has made Aperture a lot more attractive with the recent price reduction from $499 to $299.
    And, I agree. Elements is also an excellent choice, though I'm not sure if it supports RAW files the same way Photoshop does. I'm sure the Adobe site will have that information.
    Good luck, and congratulations on the new D200. Your wife will really like it.
    Jeff Weinberg

  • I have been storing my Aperture and IMovie Libraries on an external hard drive that recently died.  Fortunately I've been using Time Machine to back up to a 2nd external drive.  How do I restore my libraries to a new external hard drive?

    I have been storing my Aperture and IMovie Libraries on an external hard drive that recently died.  Fortunately I've been using Time Machine to back up to a 2nd external drive.  How do I restore my libraries to a new external hard drive?

    This is a tricky one.
    Open up Time Machine and go back to a date using the timeline on the right side of the window when you know the drive was working and was backing up as part of Time Machine backups.
    Click on the name of your Mac under the Devices heading on the left side of the window in Time Machine, and if things are working correctly you will see Macintosh HD (or whatever you have named it) and the name of the external hard drive that was backing up in the past.
    Right-Click on the name of the external hard drive and then click on "Restore (name of drive) to....."  You may be asked for your adminstrator password at this point.
    It might be easier to restore the drive contents to your desktop if you have room on your Mac, and then copy things over to the new external drive where you want to store the Aperture and iMovie Libraries.
    Once the libraries have been moved over the new external hard drive, you will likely need to "point" Aperture and iMovie to the location of the libraries on the new external hard drive.

Maybe you are looking for