Exporting Versions sends master and version files

For some reason when I try to export versions of my photos instead of exporting just the versions aperture sends both the master and the version. Any ideas of how this can be avoided? Do I have something wrong in a preset or preference?

Do you mean that you are getting the original RAW file as well?
Ian

Similar Messages

Aperture Facebook Uploader: Both Master and Version

I've searched the forums and see that others had this problem fixed with 3.1.1; but I'm running 3.1.2 and if I edit, crop and otherwise enhance and make a new version and make that version the stack pick, the uploader insists on uploading both (or multiple) master and versions to Facebook. I have to de-stack the images and delete from facebook, and this then reflects in my project/album.
What the heck? I should be able to upload one version. And if I choose to delete and unstack, why does it reflect in the master database?

I don't think Facebook is retaining all the Metadata from images uploaded by any means. However, it's definitely retaining the Version Name - And this is what serves as the caption for the photo in the photo album on Facebook.
Since updating Aperture to 3.1.1, I no longer get the entire 'stack' or multiple versions of the image uploaded. So the software update for Aperture HAS fixed this issue.
However, I have now noticed another issue since starting to use the Aperture uploader. I have about 10 albums/galleries on Facebook. All of these were created prior to the Aperture 3.0 release with the integrated Facebook uploader.
Now when I upload an image and subsequently Aperture accesses my Facebook photo albums, it begins to sync these photos and albums. The Facebook directory that you can see at the bottom of the Library now lists those albums that exist on Facebook and begins to sync those photos. However, when I browse photos by 'date' all those Facebook photos from those albums appear in my Library with the date listed as the date I first viewed them.
So if I click on one of the Facebook albums in Aperture, let Aperture go through its sync process, then review library "photos" and sort by date, all the Facebook photos I have looked at appear as the most current photos.
this is not a good thing because I have Albums, Projects etc. that are sync'd with iPhone or Apple TV that include date filters (projects in last month, photos last week etc.) Now all these legacy Facebook photos are appearing on these other devices.

Delete Master and Referenced Files?

Hi,
Can master and referenced files be deleted in Aperture?
Thanks,
Barb

Hi, barbfromedmonton,
why do you ask? The answer depends on what you want to achieve. Are you new to Aperture? You will need a basic understanding of the image management of Aperture, as described in the Aperture 3 User Manual, see the chapter on importing images.
In short, the master image files are very important to Aperture, and never should be deleted, unless you want to delete an image completely and to remove it from your database.
For each image you import Aperture will store (or reference) the master image file. This file will be used, if you edit your image to derive and create new versions of the image. One master image file can be used together with many versions of the same image. These version are represented in a very compact and clever way: Aperture only stores the steps how to compute these versions from the master image files, and not the final image itself. In this way Aperture saves space, since the versions are not full duplicates of the original master files, and you can have many versions of the same image without much additional storage required.
But a version without its master file cannot be exported in full resolution and cannot be edited. Without the master image files you will be left with previews in poor resolution.
In Aperture it is pointless to ask about deleting master files. If you want to edit an image in your Aperture Library you need the master image file too; and if you don't want an image in your library any longer, then just delete all its versions and you will delete the master image file too (there are advanced options too).
If the reason for question is, that your Aperture library is very large and you need to free space on your system drive, then post back and tell us what you want to achieve. Aperture offers the possibility to store the master image files outside the Aperture library as referenced masters, so that the library itself can be considerably smaller.
Regards
Léonie

Version 8.5 and Version 11.5 on same machine

Post Author: ashleyp
CA Forum: Older Products
I've heard that loading version 8.5 and version 11.5 on the same pc can be done, but the loading needs to be done in a particular order. Does anyone have experience with this?
Thanks, Ashley

Post Author: DPowell
CA Forum: Older Products
Assuming you are talking about Crystal Reports and not the Enterprise product, then yes, they can co-exist, and without any "tweeking". You should install Crystal 8.5 first, and then 11.5. Naturally, at that point, the default program for any .RPT file will be the 11.5 product, so, if you need to maintain the 8.5 reports but not upgrade them, you will have to open those files within Crystal 8.5 instead of double-clicking on them from Windows Explorer.

Master and Version sizes

Can someone please explain file sizes as they relate to Masters and Versions? I still get confused about this point. I would think my Master image would contain the most data, and therefore have the larger file size than its versions. However, perhaps I am mistaken on this point. When I export Masters, the file sizes are always a lot smaller than the associated versions that I export.
When I export a version, I am exporting it at JPEG Original size, so isn't this compressing the master? I thought this would cause it to have less data? I'm just really unclear about why the sizes differ and what is going on. For example, my Master JPEG might be 2MB, but an exported version of that image could be something like 4.46MB.
Mac

macorin wrote:
Corky,
Thanks, great stuff!
I have a few follow up questions. I hope it doesn't get too confusing.
1. The camera takes a picture. When I see an image size in Aperture of 2 MB, is that the same size that the image file was when the camera took it? Then it compresses it into a JPEG even if I was shooting in JPEG instead of RAW? So the 2 MB size image gets compressed to say 1 MB and then upon import into Aperture it gets uncompressed again and is seen at 2 MB?
With Aperture, the reported size of the file in the Metadata Inspector pane is about the size on disk (slightly smaller in my experience, but close). I am not sure what Aperture is doing here, but you can think of it as the space used on disk by the Master file. Aperture is not reporting the un-compressed (expanded) file state as Photoshop does when you work on the same file.
In the case of a digital camera, you capture an image and the sensor in the camera records the brightness value of the scene on the 'photo sites' of the sensor (the amount of photo sites on the sensor is expressed in Mega Pixels (means million pixels) by multiplying the number of sites in width by the number of sites in height). In this instance, Photo Site is expressed as pixel (3200 pixels x 2400 pixels = 7,680,000 pixels - or 7.68 Mega Pixels). The light captured by the camera travels through a color filter matrix where each site has a color value assigned to it.
When you shoot JPEG, the camera takes the brightness data from the sensor, combined with the color data collected and applies what is called a 'demosaic' process which predicts what color each adjacent pixel is to create a color image with smooth transitions between colors. The camera then processes this data (and applies compression in camera) to create a JPEG. This process does throw out data the camera software (firmware) decides is unnecessary to create a final JPEG image.
Current digital cameras do a good job (for the most part) of processing a nice JPEG image. If you shoot RAW, you are telling the camera not to process the sensor data and to save the uncompressed data for you to do the processing via a RAW processing program such as Aperture.
In short, the 2 MB file size you see in Aperture is what your camera delivered to the camera card after processing (although it might be 2.3 MB or something on disk).
2. If my scenario in #1 is correct, I still don't understand why a version being exported at a level 12 quality (which is where I set it) comes out roughly twice this size. Obviously I am missing something here. I understand about it being compressed less upon export if the quality setting is at 12, but it is still getting compressed, so how does it become bigger than the original size to begin with. Again, I am missing something there, so a little deeper insight would be helpful.
Based on my answer to #1, your Master file is 2 MB on disk and Aperture is reporting that to you. It is not telling you what size the uncompressed file size is prior to applying any adjustments and then re-compressing.
3. I do set my export quality settings to 12 as I want the highest quality file to be sent to photo processing sites for printing purposes. A) is this necessary and meaningful to get the best quality prints? B) Do I need to change the DPI settings to something higher than the default 72 when I export these versions for printing? I was always under the impression that 72 DPI was standard for viewing images on a computer screen, but not ideal for printing. Is it beneficial to change the DPI to something higher - 300 for example - for the purpose of exporting images to be printed?
For printing, you will want to export at 150 - 300 DPI. I have read many articles and some books which talk to this and most say that 240 DPI is as good as 300 DPI for all but fine art printing on high end machines. I typically use 150 DPI to start and see what the print looks like. There is no magic number for printing, it really is about verifying the result once printed and then you will know what setting you like the best.
One thing is that the higher the DPI you use, the smaller the size of the print at the native (original) resolution of your image. So for a 3200 x 2400 pixel image, you would exchange pixels for dots (in Dots Per Inch) which is used by the printer to put ink on paper.
3200/300 = 10.66 inches wide x 2400/300 = 8 inches tall
3200/150 = 21.33 inches wide x 2400/150 = 16 inches tall
In the examples above, you could print the same image at 10.66 x 8 inches or 21.33 x 16 inches depending on which DPI setting you export to print with.
4. I export versions and not masters when I am printing images. I do this because I generally make all of my edits in Aperture and I want those versions to be printed. It still seems odd to me that exporting versions gives me a larger file size than when I export masters. Don't the masters get exported with the same quality settings - i.e. 12 - upon export?
Exporting the versions is expected because that is when any adjustments are 'baked in' to your final file outside Aperture.
Exporting the Master is basically copying the original imported image file out of Aperture. There is an option to write IPTC information to the Master on export, but - to the best of my knowledge - that does not require any uncompress / re-compress process.
Aperture only reads the data in the Master once to generate an image on screen for you to work with (at least this is my understanding). It's the version that is subject to any re-compression on export, not the Master. In this way, Aperture protects the original Master file from destructive alteration.
Anyway, those are my understandings. There are many here who are way beyond my skill / knowledge level, so hopefully I have expressed the information accurately and adequately.

Master and version stack?

I have a master and its version (both have the same file id/name) - i wish to stack these but am unable to - when i try i get a response stating that they are from different projects and will not let me - thanks in advance for any advice or solution to my understanding

Welcome to the forum.
The Metadata View 'General' should show the master location (the name of the Project they are in) for each. Are they definitely in the same Project?
Ian

Delete Versions/Delete Master and All Versions w/ Multiple Images Selected

When I select multiple images from a project (one image has a thicker white line around it and the other selected images have a thinner white line) and then select Delete Master and All Version the ONLY image that gets deleted is the one with the thicker white line. Whereas if I were to choose Delete Version all of the images are deleted?
Am I not able to perform Delete Master and All Versions on multiple files? It is not working for me.

Try turning off:
Edit >> Primary Only
DLS

How do I show the master and version copy of a pic seperately?

I have downloaded the trial of Aperture 2, and seem to like what I see so far. I'm having a little trouble
learning a few things though. I wish I had a real book to study, but I know this software is so new.
Here is my problem, when I first started using the program, whenever I chose an image from the browser, and started editing in the viewer, a second copy was imediately put next to the master copy in my browser after i was finished. I like this because as i scrolled through my browser I was able to see
both copys side by side, same pic number, master and edited version.
Now in certain projects when i scroll through the browser I only see the edited version without the master sitting right next to it. I must have clicked on something, but I can't figure out how to get both side by side again in the browser. So far the only way I can see some of the masters in the project is by hitting the M key or going to toolbar, and clicking on show master, but I can't see the master by itself in the browser. Sorry if i'm confusing anyone, but if anyone can help I would really appreciate it. Thank you. Tommy

Thanks, sekoya, dave, and DY,
I tried what Dave said and it worked, but it's kind of weird, in one project when I edit it does create
the new version, but puts a stack box around it. Ian different project it just shows 2 seperate picture with the same numbers, but not highlighted for a stack.
I really appreciate the info, I know this is probably kind of petty, but I hate being stumped by things like this.
So how would I be able to show just masters in the browser without having to dig through the versions first? Again, this forum has always been very helpful to me in the past. Thanks to anyone who helps. Tommy

Versioning of fla and swf files

Hi there,
I am working on a small flash project with one other
developer and we email fla and swf files back and forth. So far
date/time stamps and file sizes have been good enough for "version
control".
I am familiar with versioning systems for development but
what about after a release? How can I determine a released swf
file's build version? Date/time stamps can change with copying and
development could have already progressed and multiple version of
the same swf file are out there...
I am surprised that there isn't a built in mechanism to
assign a version number to a fla/swf file (e.g. as part of the
publish profile) that one can then view via the files properties
dialog... or perhaps somebody has to show me the light... :)
Does anybody have a recommendation on how to give a fla/swf
file a version number that can be checked once the file has been
released?
Thanks,
Dan

.. or, Plan B), use QuicktimeX' ability of Screen-Recordings to record while you playback those files in their app.
The resulting mov can be treated as any other movie in iMovie.
Vector-graphics, interactive formats, etc are of no use in an video-editor ...

Export current format - JPG and MOV files

When exporting jpg and mov files in "current format" the mov files will be exported with only 1 second (ca 130kb).
If I export in "original format" it exports the mov files as they are, but the pictures are "original" and not show the last version.
Any idea?

If you dleted them you'll need to use a file recovery application like File Salvage
Regards
TD

Project version(current data and version data comparison not possible)

HI,
I am stuck up with project version we are using EHP7 and SAP HANA
When i create the version through CN71 or CNS41 system displays message "version is saved"
When i try to compare the same version with the current date in the same mentioned transaction codes system does not display the version data .
secondly when i am trying to display only version system displays message version does not exists.but in tables data is saved
In transaction code CN71 if i go to edit -->other selection versions-->enter user and press enter system displays all the saved versions for that project
selecting the project version it is displayed only
In the drop down list ,under VIEW--> choose project versions is also in display mode and is not editable .

hi Sushrut,
If the version only exists in table VSKOPF then it does not main the version is actually created. You need to check if the corresponding version data has been created in table like VSPROJ_CN, VSPRPS_CN and so on, these tables holds the real data of your versions, if there is no data in these tables, then you can't compare the data also.
Regards,
Rachel

Export to EPS, PS and SVG file formats

How can i export a document to EPS, PS and SVG file formats?

Mark:
See on-line traning session 15:printing. It will get you started.
Regards,
Noel Williams

IMovie, can version 10.0 and version 9.0 coexist

My MacMini came with iMovie version 10.0, which I dont like
How can I install iMovie version '09 without removing version 10.0

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you had iMovie version 9.
iLife '09 came with iMovie '09 which is version 8, not version 9. I don't know if this should instal in Mavericks. iMovie '11 (version 9) came with iLife '11. That definitely works for people who had iMovie 9.0.9 in Mountain lion and then upgraded to Mavericks. The Mavericks instal leaves imovie 9.0.9 in a folder called imovie 9.0.9 in the applications folder. iLife '11 is available from Amazon .
Geoff.

Export Version with Master date/hour file

Hi,
I did some modifications on some RAW files and i'd like to export them as JPG because it takes less space...but when i export it, it doesn't keep the RAW medatada, i mean, i'd like to keep the original date of when the picture was taken...is it possible ??
Thanks for your help !

If you're looking at the date in Finder, Finder reports the date of the file not the imge in the file. To get the image capture date you need to look at the EXIF data.

Exporting pdfs to word and excel file formats and translating

Hello, I am new to this forum and came here because I am a professional translator. Although we should be given documents in their original file format, in the real world translators have to convert pdfs such as manuals or annual reports into word or excel files. Given the fact we often work for agencies, and/or do not work directly with the people who created the original files inthe first place, with the best will in the world we normally have to make do with converting the pdf file, or lose the job.
I would like advice on the best way to learn more about pdf to word and excel conversion and ways of keeping formatting when it is helpful and removing what is not.
The general problem is (well the problem is really ignorance on my part!) of course getting the "look and feel" similar in the converted document and knowing more about manipulating the formating and elements which get converted.
Any help or pointers to online tutorials whether multimedia or text much appreciated.
David Hardisty (david1610)

Thank you Lori, this is so clear! I am a teacher as well and there are clear presentations and wonderfully clear presentations and this is in the latter category.
A tiny suggestion. You would not believe how many pdf files exported to word I have received that are Portuguese content and the sender has not set the language to Portuguese! So in your text entry you might want to mention the language setting. I know it is obvious, but as we know sometimes we cannot see the obvious!
I will need to look far more carefully at the final things in your video.
Are there any special considerations for exporting pdf files as Excel? My original doubt was I had to translate some accounting documents. 95% of the document was numbers which did not changing (except for commas to periods and vice versa due to different separator conventions). I did not now how to just select e.g. the vertical column with text. I will go back and try with this suggestion because in this case the look and feel of the numbers was important and the precise fonts etc. seemed to cause problems. But now I am getting out of my depth!
Thank you again!
DavidHardisty

Exporting Versions sends master and version files

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for