Becoming frustrated with Aperture 3

For the last month I have been using Aperture 3. I love all the new feature and I want it to work. I have own Aperture since version 1.5 and the story has always been the same. I use it for a while until I become very frustrated with its poor performance.
When Aperture 1.5 came out I purchased a MAc PRo with all the bells and whistles just so I could run Aperture 1.5, after a few month I became very frustrated because its poor performance and I was forced to move to Lightroom 1.
When Aperture 2 came out I was very excited thinking that Apple would finally figure out how to get Ap performance right. Once again, after a few month I was forced to switch back to LR 2.
Aperture 3 finally came out and it seemed to be a dream come true. Its feature sets rock, but once again, after one month I may be forced to switch back to LR 2.
What's more frustrating is hearing how many are running Aperture 3 with good (or at least acceptable) performance.
This post is my last hope, my last attempt to Aperture sanity. Any suggestion about what may be going on is very welcome.
I am running a MAC PRO 2 x2.66Ghz Dual-Core Intel Xenon with 11GB of memory. Aperture library and images (referenced) are in a RAID system (same place). The video card is an NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT. I am running Aperture 3.01 on Snow Leopard 10.6.2 with all the updated installed.
Ap3 is running so slow at times that going from image to image after adjusting one it may take up to 5 seconds (enough for the beach ball to show up). AT times it even slow down the system. Forget about working on 100% zoom with any of the brushes.
I just can't buy a new MAC PRO with every new version of Aperture, and, last time I did that it didn't make a difference, anyway.
HELP! Before I give up.

I agree with you that slow can be relative.
I am a working professional and I need my equipment to support me and not get on my way. When I say slow is because I compared to my previous workflow, how much it takes me and the software to do basic, global adjustment... WB, Exposure, Black point, Contrast, definition, white recovery, and then go to the next image. I am not eve talking about brushes or sharpening. I know how long it took me using LR 2 and to that I am compare how long it takes me in Ap 3. I can tell you right now that the only thing that kept me yesterday working on Ap 3 is that I truly believe its RAW conversion is better than LR 2or LR 3 because the slowness is unbearable at times.
And I say at times, because there are times that Ap 3 works just fine.
Having a Hardware issue has cross my mind.
The same HD that has the Ap 3 Library and images is the same on I use for LR 2. Yet, LR 2 does not have those issues. But I'll try the defrag suggestion.
As far as a bad image, this is a brand new library and not a converted one. I created it from scratch. But again, I will try anything. Not sure how can look for a bad image, but what I can do is create two new library, one in my current working HD and one in another HD. I will first import a new project and see what happens. Then, I will export a project from my working library and import it. Let see what happens. I may defrag any way, but that may help diagnose if that is the issue or not, or if I have problems with the raid.
One of the things that bother me is the inconsistency of experiences. I agree with you that for some it zip even in similar systems. For other the experience has been frustrating. That is weird beyond reason! Hopefully the more we keep doing this the more likely that we can get to the root.
Thanks.
Message was edited by: DavidPR

Similar Messages

  • Frustrated with Aperture - Can't edit pictures

    When I try to edit (like cropping) a photo in Aperture the wheel keeps spinning and the photo turns black.  I can't do anything with my pictures.  Any thoughts?

    Aperture 2 is not supported on 10.9, hasn't really worked well on any system since 10.6.
    But should I spend $80.00 to update Aperture, if Apple no longer supports it?
    First off Aperture is still supported by Apple and will be at least through Yosemite. So that isn;t an issue. 
    As to whether you should spend the money is really up to you, no one here can say if it is worth it for you. The only thing that can be said is you can't use Aperture 2 on 10.9
    regards

  • I've become increasingly frustrated with the ipad adobe app. I've subscribed to be able to convert my pdf files into word documents and it has yet to work I've paid for a service that does not work which in turn makes me a disgruntled customer to say the

    I've become increasingly frustrated with the ipad adobe app. I've subscribed to be able to convert my pdf files into word documents and it has yet to work I've paid for a service that does not work which in turn makes me a disgruntled customer to say the least very disappointed with such horrible service

    Which service did you subscribe to?  Adobe PDF Pack?
    Once I know the service that you subscribed to, I can move this post to the right forum so that you can get in touch with the folks who can assist you.

  • Having issues with Aperture while editing...Black Screen!

    I'm having problems when editing with Aperture...For example:
    -Picture goes black after applying an edit, then continues on to all other pictures untill I reboot Aperture
    -Exposure goes out of whack after applying an edit
    -Skin smoothing strocks are shown after being applied
    These are just a few. They do not happen the entire time I am editing, but about 30 minutes in everytime i get on Aperture something goes wrong and i have to reboot. It becoming incedibly frustrating especially when i have delines to meet with clients.
    I love using Aperture, but i can't afford for this to continue happeneing. I may have to consider using a different editing system if this problem contiues.
    Please help!

    I have 5 plug-ins that I never use...I need to delete them, but don't know how.
    At least check, if the plug-ins need updating - look at the manufacturer's website, if they are compatible with Aperture 3.5 and Mavericks.  (see: Aperture 3.4 and later: Some third-party plug-ins are no longer compatible)
    To uninstall plug-ins open the folders 
    ~/Library/Application Support/Aperture/Plug-Ins/
    (that is the user library in the Library folder in your Home folder)
    and
    /Library/Application Support/Aperture/Plug-Ins/
    (that is the in the Library folderat the top level of your MacintoshHD)
    Quit Aperture. Remove any "Edit" or "Export" plug-in, that you do no longer need.
    Your User Library may still be hidden. Open it from your "Home" folder:
    Select the "Home" folder icon in the Finder's sidebar and press the key combination ⌘J to open the view options. Enable "Show Library Folder".
    Then open the Home folder and open the Library folder inside and navigate to ~/Library/Application Support/Aperture/Plug-Ins/.
    For the second location, the system library on your hard drive, simply open the "Library" folder after clicking and opening the HD icon.
    After removing the plug-ins restart the system. Test, if removing the plug-ins will mitigate the problem.
    If not, check, if the problem occurs for all your Aperture libraries. Create a new Test library and check, if the problem depends on the library.

  • How can I use EOS 6D RAW files with Aperture 3.2.4?

    The EOS 6D RAW support for Aperture requires Aperture 3.4 or later. I tried to update to Aperture 3.4 but that requires OSX 10.8.3. I am stuck with OSX 10.6.8 for a while because I use Adobe CS5.5 and it is not compatable with newer OSX. So i do not seem to have a path for 6D RAW support. I can use my EOS 20D RAW files just fine. What is it about the 6D RAW file that necessitates OSX 10.6.8 or Aperture 3.4?

    The common way is to try converting to DNG and then use the DNGs with Aperture. The drawback (other than the format conversion) is you lose camera specific optimisations with the DNG (mostly noise reduction tweaks for specific ISO values and colour tweaks).
    In the past it would have been easy to edit a few config files to get Aperture to recognise new cameras with similar sensor tech as existing cameras, but this data is now encoded so can't be changed. It is a bit frustrating when you know there is nothing special about the sensor and Aperture would be able to process the data just fine.
    Andy

  • Can I use multiple iPhoto libraries with Aperture?

    I've been using iPhoto to manage my photos (successfully) for many years.  I have multiple themed iPhoto libraries with many thousands of photos in them (ten years' worth of digital plus another fifty years scanned).  I am thinking of downloading Aperture and giving it a try (thanks to an App Store gift card).
    Can I use Aperture to edit photos within these iPhoto libraries?  Do the libraries become "common" to both applications, or does duplication occur?  I have limited hard drive space and don't want to create large duplicate files on my iMac.
    Thanks.

    luba petrusha wrote:
    I have some 50-100 libraries (haven't counted recently) which occupy most of my hard drive.  I find it easiest to manage my photos with themed libraries (annual, trip, subject).
    You could make each of your "themed Libraries" a Folder in Aperture, with all your current Projects and Albums intact.  In this way, you could search across all of your Image at once (e.g.: a Smart Album showing all Images in which you've identified a Face as "Mom"; or filter for the keyword "Sunset").  In general, the more Images in a Library, the more useful that Library is.  I strongly recommend one Library for each photographer (or group of photographers working as a business).  Aperture has no trouble handling enormous Libraries (officially, it supports up to 1,000,000 Images, iirc).
    A more advanced Library organization would replace each "themed" Folder+Projects with Albums.  There is no reason to limit your "themes" to the Images in just the Projects contained in a Folder.
    My general recommendation has always been to put all your Projects in one Folder (with sub-Folders as needed); and to put all your Albums in another top-level Folder.  In this way you build two structures: a _storage_ structure, in which you put all your Projects, where each Project = one shoot, and an _access_ structure, where you have Albums organized by Folders into whatever groupings you need.
    The newest version of Aperture (3.3.1) leans in this direction.  For the first time there is a default division between Project storage and Album storage (one the Library tab of the Inspector, there are now two built-in top-level containers, one for Projects and one for Albums).
    A separate issue is where on your system your Library and your Originals are stored.  Aperture allows you to move your Originals to storage on external drives or other non-system drives.  The limitation of the storage available on the system drive is something that all active photographers encounter at some point.  (In Aperture-speak, you would convert Image's Originals from Managed to Referenced using "File➞Relocate Originals".  This isn't something I'd look into right away, but rather after you become familiar with the Aperture interface.

  • Apple TV 1st Gen + iTunes 10 + Photo Sync (with Aperture 3) = No Sync

    I recently started to experience the same issues that others have reported regarding not being able to sync their Apple TV classic (1st generation) with iTunes 10.
    I grudgingly disconnected my Apple TV from iTunes which wiped out all the content. Then when I started a new sync, the Apple TV (and my iMac) froze when trying to connect.
    So, I disconnected them again, and quickly set the sync preferences to a "Custom" sync. After an hour of playing around with the settings, and turning on (one by one) syncing of video content, music and podcasts, I've narrowed it down ... to Photo syncing with Aperture.
    All of the other content that iTunes will let me select, syncs fine. I've re-synced my entire music library, but if I even setup iTunes to sync 1 photo from Aperture to my Apple TV ... freeze-o-matic.
    Anyone else run into this issue and/or been able to find a workaround to fix it?

    Finally found answer, many thanks to:
    Winston Churchill Poulton-le-Fylde, UK
    This solved my questionHT1784 Re: In iTunes my Apple tv (1st Generation) only shows Summary and photos so I can no longer load a movie and sync to the Apple tv. Anybody else experienced options now missing ? Jun 13, 2012 5:04 AM (in response to Savlegs)
    Welcome to the Apple Community.
    Your library has become a secondary (streaming only) library only (it is possible to turn syncing off by ctrl-clicking on the Apple TV listing in the device list and choosing 'Turn Off Syncing" from the contextual menu) and you need to reconnect your library as a primary library.
    Navigate to Settings > Computers > Your Library on the Apple TV, you may be told you will lose all synced content, but you can sync it back afterwards, you won't lose any purchased content that has yet to be transferred. Then select Settings > Computers > Connect To iTunes, note the passcode that appears on screen, click on the device in iTunes and enter the passcode when prompted.

  • I ordered my new S5 online and after following the steps outlined in exact order, my old phone no longer works and the S5 will not authenticate.  Now I have no phone and I am becoming frustrating.

    I ordered my new S5 online and after following the steps outlined in exact order, my old phone no longer works and the S5 will not authenticate.  Now I have no phone and I am becoming frustrating.
    It downloaded all my contacts, photo's with no problem.  I called the number they gave me from my old phone and then turned it off.  I then put the sim card in and charged the phone.  I followed all the setup steps and no I cannot send any text or make any phone calls.  I get a message that they cannot authenticate my phone to dial #8899 but get the same message.

        Hello Notahappycamper1962
    Let's get that S5 up and running! I want you to love the S5! Is the old device powered off? What zip code are you in?
    I look forward to hearing from you and getting this addressed.
    JoeL_VZW
    Follow us on Twitter @VZWSupport

  • Questions on first time to backing up or achiving with Aperture

    Hi,
    I would really appreciate any tips/advice on how to start archiving my images in Aperture. Currently my whole library sits on my Macbook pro (I do a weekly back up on my Time Capsule). But I want to start reducing my library on my macbook pro and start archiving my images properly so I can find them at a later date when I need them. But I haven't a clue. So please let me have your thoughts.
    Thanks
    Catherine

    This is perhaps a partial answer leading into another question. I hope I don't derail your question. Because my MBP was getting overloaded with Aperture images I started REFERENCING my new images to an external portable hard drive (Western Digital 300GB FW800) that works flawlessly and fits in the palm of my hand. This works very nice but left me with the task of backing up the external FW hard drive.
    My approach has been to use to use one of the cloning software programs to clone my external FW hard drive. I have tried Superduper and Carbon Copy Cloner. I purchased a 1.5 TB external HD that connects to my MBP via eSATA with a Griffin Card. After much to do and frustration I discovered that I had to find a new driver for the Griffin Card and I finally got the hardware and software to work like it was supposed to.
    I partitioned my large Terabyte external backup harddrive and made a clone of my Aperature referenced libraries from the external FW harddrive. No problem in making the clone. All of the images are stored on the clone. The problem is that I can't get Aperature to see the clone of my referenced masters and access the clone as if it were the original referenced masters. If I could accomplish this feat I would feel confident that in the future I could simply use my cloned referenced masters as backup and retain all of my Aperture cataloging and adjustments.
    Catherine I hope that my additional question will add to your solution and not derail our initial question. Thanks everybody.

  • Too late to start up with Aperture?

    I'm aware of both Aperture and iPhoto being trashed by Apple in the near future. I have been using iPhoto on my MacBook Pro since it was introduced and usually do some additional editing as required using Adobe Photoshop Elements. But now I'm starting to shoot in RAW, and iPhoto won't even take RAW files into it's library without converting them to Jpegs. I think the best bet for me would be to upgrade to Aerture but I also know it's no longer going to be supported. In fact, I've read that Apple is no longer interested in the entire advanced enthusiast and pro photography spaces. Thoughts and advice for me? I have been spoiled by the wonderful Apple apps that work so nicely. By the way, I haven't upgraded to Yosemite, nor do I intend to. I think in my case it will take me in the wrong direction.

    Reasons for migrating to Aperture of course depend upon your intended use.  As pointed out here, development for Aperture has ceased.  Apple has decided to migrate to another application, using cloud based back end for image storage.  There has been more than one or two posts of disappointment on this course of action.  In the end it's Apples decision however right or wrong the users believe that decision to be.  Your best bet is to look at the features, determine if those are of use to you, scan the threads here for comments, then determine if the cost is worth it. 
    As opined Aperture probably has about a year of life left.  After that you may be able to use it so long as you do not upgrade your operating system.  But make no mistake - there will not be an Aperture 4.x.  Nor, in my opinion will there be any significant (or heroic) efforts to fix what are now significant issues with Aperture.
    The trade off, in my opinion is not worth it.  Especially when you can get Lightroom now for a modest price.  That is if you don't mind paying a monthly usage fee and really don't need facial recognition.  The former being the pricing plan Adobe is moving to and the latter being completely absent from Lightroom.  I don't know of any other viable professional package on the market right now.  On the upside, Adobe products do support IPTC extended metadata which Apple never adopted.  Understandable, it was an Adobe push - but the data stored is pretty nice.  Mostly dealing with model and release information (and others, read the IPTC specs if you are interested) - if you deal with that kind of thing.
    As for my experiences - Aperture use to be an incredible product.  Especially with the introduction of Facial Recognition - which is now horribly broke.  Here are some of my experiences.
    FACES:
    - Aperture now scans my entire photo library for new faces in every image every time the application fires up.  This isn't a problem if you have a few hundred images.  Once you start hitting about ten thousand (10,000) it becomes a nuisance.  It takes about 45 seconds.  Multiply that time out based on your library size.
    - Aperture now rescans every identified face for a match, every time you identify a new face.  Ok, I get this process.  You have marked this guy as John Smith, now we are going to look for possible matches for John Smith.  The only problem is that it appears to being in every face which it cannot justify as someone else.
    - Aperture often double tags a face.  To explain this you have to understand what the software is (probably) doing and how it records facial locations.  First it applies some order of facial recognition.  It  looks for things which appear to be faces.  Eyes, nose, mouth.  It then draws a box around that area.  You have the option to select that boxed area and in the upper left hand corner click on the "x" to close the box.  Except when two boxes are exactly on top of each other.  It's maddening.  You cannot get rid of either box.  Nor, can you identify the name of the person in both iterations of the box.  If you understand all the places where you can name people (every software package has multiple places to do the same task) then you can select one of the boxes and tell Aperture that this area "is not a face".  But since you are now telling the AI that the information contained within the defined area is not a face (when in fact it is) you are setting yourself up for a real HAL9000 moment.  And if you don't get that reference, you are simply confusing the system.  Especially when you leave box 2 in place and give that person a name.  So is it a face or isn't it?  Aperture appears to be using both decisions (is and isn't a face) in future iterations of facial identification (finding faces in an image) and facial recognition (is this face Johnny Smith or Jane Smith).
    PLACES:
    - A number of folks have reported problems with the geolocation of images.  With the upgrade to the latest OS I have also begun to experience this problem.  Images which I shot in my home studio were correctly mapped within a few feet of my home.  With Aperture 3.6 many of them are not even on the same block.  I actually have photographs which were previously (properly) mapped in central Maryland, that with the 3.6 upgrade are now tagged in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.  Yes you can manually move them to their correct location - but again, thats great with a few hundred images.  Thousands becomes a real nightmare.
    This same geomapping problem has reared its head in faces as well with some users reporting the placement of the facial identification box in the wrong location on the image.  Far be it from me to disparage software developers but it's almost as if the crew forgot that the image coordinates (whether for dropping a box on a photo or a pin on a map) start at 0,0 being the upper left corner of the display. /snark
    STORAGE:
    - A couple "upgrades" back Aperture migrated a reasonable and easily understandable storage methodology in which photos were filed (on your hard disk) in a directory architecture based on the date/time of image.  So, if something horrible happened a savvy user could open the Aperture package, navigate through the directory and recover lost or damaged data.  Not anymore.  I defy anyone to explain the system now.  It appears to have something to do with the ingest date, solar or lunar cycle and a hashed algorithm of some programmers mothers birthdate which is then translated into an XML filename.  All that to say - good luck finding your photo IF you need to AND you are storing images internal to the Aperture database.  But lets get serious about filing images under a directory system based on import date/time.  This is great - if you import your photos on the date of the shoot.  But, if you go on a two week trip of Europe and ingest all your photos the day you get home, well that's not too bad.  A year later when you have to recover all your photos from a significant system failure and end up ingesting 10,000 photos on 15 May 2014 that is another story entirely.  Now, good luck finding your photos on the hard disk (if you need to that is).
    SECURITY:
    - Apple applied the "sandbox" theory to image security.  Basically in a nutshell all your photos are locked from editing by only approved applications.  So don't even think you are going to download some awesome script to do some wonderful task and have it work.  Sorry.  It took me months of phone calls with apple support before one of those on the line even thought to walk me through my editing process and determined the script/app I was using was not apple approved and this was causing my problem.  I get it, new risks in computer data and all.  But there comes a point when you have taken security so far as to lock the user out of the loop.
    CRASHES:
    - We all have them, and they all happen at the worst possible moments.  In the past 2 days I have been working in Aperture with my data and experience Aperture crashes about every 45 minutes or so.  Yes, I have repaired my permissions, yes I have repaired the database and Yes I have rebuilt the database.  It just appears to be another nuisance of Aperture that wasn't there a couple years ago.  I have even gone so far as to completely uninstall Aperture, reload it from scratch and re-ingest all my images (that is how I discovered the whole ingest date/time versus shoot date/time storage della described above).  My entire library now (in the Aperture Package) falls under a single year (2014) when previously it was spread across 40 years (from the 70's to current date).  Yes, I have images from the 70's in aperture. I scanned a lot of film over the years.  Regardless, I could never track down exactly why the crashes were happening.  Some feedback from Apple would be nice - I have after all must have sent them a few hundred crash reports by now.  My RAM is good (yup, I have tested it), drive space is fine and I have plenty of it so ..... Im left scratching my head.
    Aside from all of that - I loved Aperture, while it lasted.  I will be saddened by it's loss and to date I haven't heard anything yet which gives me hope about Photos.  As someone who is occasionally paid, and who occasionally pays to shoot (read into that what you will) I refuse to store my image library on anyone else cloud.  I have my own storage architecture which has worked fine for me.  I haven't lost an image now in the many many years I have been using it.  If you shoot a lot I recommend you look into Drobo.  I was an early adopter and have never looked back.  I have two 16TB units on my desk - one for live data, one for TimeMachine.
    Cloud storage is simply too risky.
    1.  You are reliant on too many factors which are (a) out of your control and (b) are run by people who really don't care about your data or your business.  Not to mention the constant finger pointing.  If a switch goes out somewhere in Nebraska I hope you had a local copy of your data because now you can't work.  But then again, that defeats the whole purpose of cloud storage doesn't it?  How many Apple users signed up and put up web pages in what is now the cloud? You remember those days?  You data is your data and will always be there?  Until we change our ToS and now longer support personal websites.
    2. Pricing.  Seriously look at the pricing.  The cloud tops out at 1TB for $20/month.  Not bad.  What do I do with the other 15TB of data I have?  Oh, and after 3 months I could have purchased a Western Digital portable USB 1TB.  If Moore was right (and so far he has been pretty close) that 1TB next year will only cost me $30 at the local Best Buy.  If you can find it.  You know 6TB drives come out this fall?  Only a couple hundred dollars each.  About 1 years payments on the cloud. Now I realize I might get slammed there - not everyone has $60 extra dollars for a portable 1TB drive.  But I am assuming you do since you are tinkling about spending $70 for an app which is only viable for another year.
    3. Cloud storage really?  I don't know about you but the last time I ran an all day shoot I used up about 128GB of card space which took me a couple hours of transfer time (card to local disk).  Now, how long would it take me to run that up to the cloud before I can use it.  And that was on an older camera which was half the megapixels of what I am shooting now.  So, 1/4 of my storage maximum being transferred up to the cloud after only one shoot.  Awesome.  Ill get a coffee, take a road trip, and in a couple days my images will be ready for first draft editing.  Meanwhile my client will be ..... strumming his fingers?  Don't worry though sir - a couple more days and your proofs will be available online.  For everyone with any mad skillz to hack into.  The only secure computer is one not online. 
    So, there are the down sides from my perspective.  Yup, it's one sided.  If you want to know the good stuff (and there is a lot of good stuff) just read the sales brochures.  It's fine product - so long as you understand the limitations.  And overall I am happy with it.  And I will, again, be saddened when it leaves the market. 
    Aperture's days are numbered.  I am past denial and isolation. I guess this places me in the anger stage.  There is no use in bargaining.  It is Apples decision and they have made it.  Depression is next.  I doubt I will make it to acceptance - unless there are some significant changes to Photos and I don't see that in the works.  Apple appears to be dropping their professional line of products and pushing to the general market.

  • Problem with Aperture 3.6 preset exports.

    I use an export preset that exports at 225dpi. If I export an image with this preset and subsequently import it into Photoshop, the resolution in PS is only 72dpi. When I open the image using Preview and look under Inspector, I notice that the JFIF data shows X and Y density as 72. This has happened since Ver 3.6.
    Images exported with a previous version of Aperture show JFIF X, Y density at 225 (the export preset value) and open in PS with 225 dpi.
    I know that I can adjust the resolution in PS but this is an inconvenience I never had until Ver 3.6. Why has this behaviour changed with Ver 3.6? Is this a bug that can / will be fixed before Aperture closes down for good?

    Frank,
    My export preset limits the dimensions in pixels at a specific dpi, corresponding with an image size in inches. I do this for some images I wish to send to external printing shops to print. I might add text using Photoshop. All worked well before with the set dpi and resulting dimensions in inches. Now, Photoshop resizes the image at 72 dpi giving much larger measurements in inches. As I've said before, this is not a big deal and I can resample under Photoshop back to my dpi of 225. But it is an extra step which I didn't need before 3.6 was released. Also, I do wonder why Aperture allows the dpi to be set to whatever the user wants only to ignore it during the actual export.
    I reckon that Photoshop (and perhaps other software as well), picks up the dpi from the JFIF information for jpeg files. So if a user wishes PS to use a specific dpi, it is a bit frustrating that Aperture only "allows" 72 dpi with this latest version.
    I have found that this only applies to jpeg exports where Aperture 3.6 mashes up the dpi. An export from Aperture in TIFF formats using a particular dpi sticks. Photoshop will retain that dpi when it opens the file.
    I have submitted a report to Aperture. I hope they look at it and consider doing something to rectify the matter. Thanks for your comments.

  • Is Viveza compatible with Aperture 3?

    I have recently moved my digital world to a slightly bigger and faster iMac and have been experiencing some problems with Viveza. I had previously been using Viveza (v2.0.0.4), with Leopard OSX 10.5.8 and Aperture 2.1.4 with some good results. However, since upgrading to Aperture 3.1.3 and Snow Leopard OSX 10.6.8 I have been having problems. Has any body else found this? Mine seem to be, that after placing say six or so control points, the program just freezes and becomes totally unresponsive and the only way out is to force quit. I'm trying to nail this one, not sure if it is an Aperture problem, an OSX compatibility thing with Viveza?

    Tim Campbell1 wrote:
    Any Wacom tablet will work.
    The Intuos line tablets have a few unique feature advantages over the Bamboo line, but Aperture doesn't take advantage of any of those features.
    Aperture WILL take advantage of the fact that tablets are "pressure sensitive" -- so if you're applying a brushed on adjustment.  Say you're using the "burn" brush to darken an area --  a very light touch will apply a slight amount of "burn" but heavy pressure will apply a much stronger amount of "burn."
    If you're buying a tablet *just* for Aperture, then save yourself a few bucks and buy a tablet in the Bamboo line. If you also need support for drawing & painting apps, then spring for the more expensive Intuous line.
    (Emphasis added.)
    This is mildly misleading.  Aperture takes full advantage of all but two of the Intuos4's additional functions. 
    As I point out below, for these reasons I don't agree with Tim's recommendation.
    The Intuos4 is, compared to the Bamboo Pen & Touch (all based on specs at Wacom's site):
    2x more accurate
    0.5x more responsive
    2x more sensitive to pressure, and
    2x higher in resolution
    All of those are taken advantage of by Aperture.  Additionally, the Intuos4 comes with the TouchRing and  six ExpressKeys, all of which can be easily programmed to execute Aperture commands.  (The Bamboo has 4 ExpressKeys and no TouchRing.)  Also, the Intuos4 includes the fully programmable Radial Menu, which can be a workflow accelerator for Aperture.  (This may be available on the Bamboo -- I just don't know.)
    My recommendation is that, if your are regularly going to use a tablet for making Adjustments and using Aperture, get the Intuos4 Medium.  It that is outside your budget, get the Intuos4 Small.  If you are only going to occasionally use the tablet with Aperture (or only occasionally use Aperture), the Bamboo Pen & Touch may suffice.
    Note, as well, that Wacom's software bundles often completely change the value of some of their products.

  • Compatable GPS units with Aperture 3

    In the user manual for Aperture 3, there is a link for a list of compatable devices; http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs
    There is no list at this link. Does anyone know where I can get this info? I'm looking to use a GPS for upcoming shoots and would like to know what is compatible with Aperture 3. Any help appreciated

    Another AMOD user here - I posted a few times about this last week, but I'll borrow from that thread to talk about my experiences with the AMOD and Places.
    Had a 3 week shoot in Argentina and decided to try out Aperture 3's new GPS location tagging. So I bought an AMOD 3080 logger and faithfully used it the entire trip. Here's my story, plus a few issues with Places.
    First some notes on using the AMOD 3080 - at times it was hard to get to get it logging in Buenos Aires, I assume due to the building density blocking the satellite receptio. Sometimes took 20 minutes to start "flashing", meaning it had acquired the GPS signal and was logging, though it was much speedier out in rural areas.
    Charging the three NiMH batteries every night was a bit of a hassle for my charger, which recharges by pairs (I logged about 12 hours a day, so the batteries were usually out of juice by the end of the day). I had a second set of extra batteries, so I would recharge 2 batteries one night and 4 the next. A couple of times I misplaced which of the three was the uncharged battery from the night before, so that was another stupid thing to have to worry about. But be sure to factor in another $30 for a NiMH charger into your total price for the AMOD (plus the weight of the chargers on the road). It might mean a more expensive unit, with a lighter and integrated built-in charger, could suddenly look better. FYI, after returning I found the following unit that charges each AAA battery independently, which would be a better way to go.
    http://www.amazon.com/Crosse-Technology-BC-700-Battery-Charger/dp/B000RSOV50/ref =wlit_dpo?ie=UTF8&coliid=I38WY26GTFAAB0&colid=1JZG5Z0U956FB
    But other than remembering to switch it on and off, I'd just throw the AMOD in my camera bag throughout the day. One nice thing is no fussy settings beyond on or off - it just pulls time (UTC) and location from the GPS ttransmissions - only option is to choose a 1 second or 5 second log interval.
    I ended up with about 30 log tracks from the trip (everytime you switch on the unit, it adds a new track). This was more data than the 128 MB capacity, but I also was able to back up the AMOD to my NEXTODi Extreme 2700 units - I back up my images onto two different Extreme units every night before wiping my CF cards. Near the end I did a "move" onto the NEXTODi which copied the data over and then erased the AMOD.
    Regarding the import of the GPS logs into Aperture, the import for the AMOD files is fast and painless. I did sych the cameras to UTC before I left (within half a second), as I thought there would be some sort of auto import. But after the logs are inside Aperture (you select/load them on a map), you have to choose the images you want to place on that particular log, then drop them onto the track at the corresponding time for the main image you have chosen. Even though I set my camera to Argentina time, when I imported my images into Aperture 3 they defaulted to US PST, my home time zone. So i had to readjust all photos to -5 hours, Argentina time, to match the GPS data. So to implement the correct placement, in this case I had to drag the selected photos around the GPS track on the map until it showed 5 hours 0 minutes time difference, then drop the photos onto the map.
    Understanding this now, I suspect the Aperture team did it this way (all photos will be offset by the same time difference show when dropping) in case the camera is not set to the exact time used by satellites (UTC). But it still is a bit frustrating that I can only get a minute synch. Further, if you are in pone place for an extended time, you get a tangle of lines on your GPS track - finding the correct one wold be murder. Combined with the problem getting a signal in BsAs, I had to fuss with placing the images much more than I thought I would have to. I solved this by starting a group selection from an image that had a "cleaner" time to find onthe HPS path. Again, not a deal-breaker but a bit more hassle than i expected. All in all, I'd say I spent 5 or 6 hours getting the 7000 images on the correct tracks, at the correct times. Ths included some time for manually placing images that fell outside of the logs.

  • I have bought my MacBook since July 2011. It has now become frustratingly slow. What shall i do?

    I have bought my MacBook Pro since July 2011. It has now become frustratingly slow. I tried using the HELP key but did not seem to find any helpful information.  What shall i do?

    Things You Can Do To Resolve Slow Downs
    If your computer seems to be running slower here are some things you can do:
    Start with visits to:     OS X Maintenance - MacAttorney;
                                      The X Lab: The X-FAQs;
                                      The Safe Mac » Mac Performance Guide;
                                      The Safe Mac » The myth of the dirty Mac;
                                      Mac maintenance Quick Assist.
    Boot into Safe Mode then repair your hard drive and permissions:
    Repair the Hard Drive and Permissions Pre-Lion
    Boot from your OS X Installer disc. After the installer loads select your language and click on the Continue button. When the menu bar appears select Disk Utility from the Utilities menu. After DU loads select your hard drive entry (mfgr.'s ID and drive size) from the the left side list.  In the DU status area you will see an entry for the S.M.A.R.T. status of the hard drive.  If it does not say "Verified" then the hard drive is failing or failed. (SMART status is not reported on external Firewire or USB drives.) If the drive is "Verified" then select your OS X volume from the list on the left (sub-entry below the drive entry,) click on the First Aid tab, then click on the Repair Disk button. If DU reports any errors that have been fixed, then re-run Repair Disk until no errors are reported. If no errors are reported click on the Repair Permissions button. Wait until the operation completes, then quit DU and return to the installer.
    Repair the Hard Drive - Lion/Mountain Lion/Mavericks
    Boot to the Recovery HD:
    Restart the computer and after the chime press and hold down the COMMAND and R keys until the Utilites Menu screen appears. Alternatively, restart the computer and after the chime press and hold down the OPTION key until the boot manager screen appears. Select the Recovery HD disk icon and click on the arrow button below.
    When the recovery menu appears select Disk Utility. After DU loads select your hard drive entry (mfgr.'s ID and drive size) from the the left side list.  In the DU status area you will see an entry for the S.M.A.R.T. status of the hard drive.  If it does not say "Verified" then the hard drive is failing or failed. (SMART status is not reported on external Firewire or USB drives.) If the drive is "Verified" then select your OS X volume from the list on the left (sub-entry below the drive entry,) click on the First Aid tab, then click on the Repair Disk button. If DU reports any errors that have been fixed, then re-run Repair Disk until no errors are reported. If no errors are reported, then click on the Repair Permissions button. Wait until the operation completes, then quit DU and return to the main menu. Select Restart from the Apple menu.
    Restart your computer normally and see if this has helped any. Next do some maintenance:
    For situations Disk Utility cannot handle the best third-party utility is Disk Warrior;  DW only fixes problems with the disk directory, but most disk problems are caused by directory corruption; Disk Warrior 4.x is now Intel Mac compatible.
    Note: Alsoft ships DW on a bootable DVD that will startup Macs running Snow Leopard or earlier. It cannot start Macs that came with Lion or later pre-installed, however, DW will work on those models.
    Suggestions for OS X Maintenance
    OS X performs certain maintenance functions that are scheduled to occur on a daily, weekly, or monthly period. The maintenance scripts run in the early AM only if the computer is turned on 24/7 (no sleep.) If this isn't the case, then an excellent solution is to download and install a shareware utility such as Macaroni, JAW PseudoAnacron, or Anacron that will automate the maintenance activity regardless of whether the computer is turned off or asleep.  Dependence upon third-party utilities to run the periodic maintenance scripts was significantly reduced since Tiger.  These utilities have limited or no functionality with Snow Leopard or later and should not be installed.
    OS X automatically defragments files less than 20 MBs in size, so unless you have a disk full of very large files there's little need for defragmenting the hard drive.
    Helpful Links Regarding Malware Protection
    An excellent link to read is Tom Reed's Mac Malware Guide.
    Also, visit The XLab FAQs and read Detecting and avoiding malware and spyware.
    See these Apple articles:
      Mac OS X Snow Leopard and malware detection
      OS X Lion- Protect your Mac from malware
      OS X Mountain Lion- Protect your Mac from malware
      About file quarantine in OS X
    If you require anti-virus protection I recommend using VirusBarrier Express 1.1.6 or Dr.Web Light both from the App Store. They're both free, and since they're from the App Store, they won't destabilize the system. (Thank you to Thomas Reed for these recommendations.)
    Troubleshooting Applications
    I recommend downloading a utility such as TinkerTool System, OnyX, Mavericks Cache Cleaner, or Cocktail that you can use for removing old log files and archives, clearing caches, etc. Corrupted cache, log, or temporary files can cause application or OS X crashes as well as kernel panics.
    If you have Snow Leopard or Leopard, then for similar repairs install the freeware utility Applejack.  If you cannot start up in OS X, you may be able to start in single-user mode from which you can run Applejack to do a whole set of repair and maintenance routines from the command line.  Note that AppleJack 1.5 is required for Leopard. AppleJack 1.6 is compatible with Snow Leopard. Applejack does not work with Lion and later.
    Basic Backup
    For some people Time Machine will be more than adequate. Time Machine is part of OS X. There are two components:
    1. A Time Machine preferences panel as part of System Preferences;
    2. A Time Machine application located in the Applications folder. It is
        used to manage backups and to restore backups. Time Machine
        requires a backup drive that is at least twice the capacity of the
        drive being backed up.
    Alternatively, get an external drive at least equal in size to the internal hard drive and make (and maintain) a bootable clone/backup. You can make a bootable clone using the Restore option of Disk Utility. You can also make and maintain clones with good backup software. My personal recommendations are (order is not significant):
      1. Carbon Copy Cloner
      2. Get Backup
      3. Deja Vu
      4. SuperDuper!
      5. Synk Pro
      6. Tri-Backup
    Visit The XLab FAQs and read the FAQ on backup and restore.  Also read How to Back Up and Restore Your Files. For help with using Time Machine visit Pondini's Time Machine FAQ for help with all things Time Machine.
    Referenced software can be found at MacUpdate.
    Additional Hints
    Be sure you have an adequate amount of RAM installed for the number of applications you run concurrently. Be sure you leave a minimum of 10% of the hard drive's capacity as free space.
    Add more RAM. If your computer has less than 2 GBs of RAM and you are using OS X Leopard or later, then you can do with more RAM. Snow Leopard and Lion work much better with 4 GBs of RAM than their system minimums. The more concurrent applications you tend to use the more RAM you should have.
    Always maintain at least 15 GBs or 10% of your hard drive's capacity as free space, whichever is greater. OS X is frequently accessing your hard drive, so providing adequate free space will keep things from slowing down.
    Check for applications that may be hogging the CPU:
    Pre-Mavericks
    Open Activity Monitor in the Utilities folder.  Select All Processes from the Processes dropdown menu.  Click twice on the CPU% column header to display in descending order.  If you find a process using a large amount of CPU time (>=70,) then select the process and click on the Quit icon in the toolbar.  Click on the Force Quit button to kill the process.  See if that helps.  Be sure to note the name of the runaway process so you can track down the cause of the problem.
    Mavericks and later
    Open Activity Monitor in the Utilities folder.  Select All Processes from the View menu.  Click on the CPU tab in the toolbar. Click twice on the CPU% column header to display in descending order.  If you find a process using a large amount of CPU time (>=70,) then select the process and click on the Quit icon in the toolbar.  Click on the Force Quit button to kill the process.  See if that helps.  Be sure to note the name of the runaway process so you can track down the cause of the problem.
    Often this problem occurs because of a corrupted cache or preferences file or an attempt to write to a corrupted log file.

  • Netflix streaming has become frustrating

    Netflix streaming has become frustrating as it constantly stops to load. I have a Time Machine 802.11n 4th generation within site of my Mac and Sony television. Modem is 2 years old and operates fine as I had my ISP run a check on it. I have done all resets per troubleshooting sites, and all is wireless. My current download speed is 28.28 Mbps and upload is 5.81 Mbps per Xfinity. Any suggestions or items I should check on?

    Netflix operates with very little bandwidth, about 4Mbps as I understand it.. so 28Mbps download should be fine.
    Is anything else using the bandwidth??
    Bypass the TC and use ethernet direct to the modem and check that it works fine.
    I presume you are using wireless to download?
    Your TV might be too far away from the TC or might get poor signal due to walls or interference.
    Try placing the TC closer.. try setting manual channels and test on 11, 8, 6, 1 in that order.
    Make sure nothing else is using the wireless network when you are trying the netflix.

Maybe you are looking for