Histogram - Waste of Inspector space.

Does anyone agree that the histogram, permanently placed at the top of the Adjustments Inspector, and which allows no adjustment functionality, is a waste of space.
Why not at least allow us to hide the histogram- freeing up space in the inspector. Or, when Levels is loaded, why not just place it at the top where the current unwanted histogram lies.

Personally I don't agree at all. The levels brick gets used on maybe 5% of my images- seldom enough that every so often I drop it it from the default list. The histogram, on the other hand, gets checked fairly often when using the Exposure, Black Point & Contrast sliders.
Horses for courses.
Ian
P.S. Having the Levels brick jump to the top would be extremely inconsistent with the 'bricks appear in the recommended order of use' paradigm of the Adjustments pane.

Similar Messages

  • Why the Tabbar and the toolbar are so high? What a waste of the space of the screen?

    For the new version of the Firefox(29), the height of the tabbar and the addressbar or toolbar is much bigger than before, not mention the new IE11. This is a big waste of the space of the screen, espicially for those who using a small laptop with an 16:9 screen which the height of the screen is not enough already.
    So please change this, and try you best to give more screen space for the web content, not your software.

    Thanks for you answer. The old GUI also had the issue I mentioned. I don't know why there isn't any configrations for the GUI, let users can change the height of the bars for them own faver, all of the designs are too waste space. Firefox should really start to study the designs of the GUI of IE11.

  • When will Apple stop binding their clients with wasted memory and space?

    There are many like myself that will never use some of the built-in apps yet they persist all The same.
    With no legal means of removal through iTunes, these apps degrade the product.
    When will Apple create the option many of their clients want and allow these superfluous apps to be removed?

    Until if/when Apple announce something nobody on here will know, and speculation about Apple and their policies isn't allowed here

  • Read this and free up 300GB or more of wasted After Effects disk cache space...

    I noticed on my MAC that the After Effects disk cache folders took up 400GB of space, even though I told it to only use 100GB. I run my disk cache on an SSD so space is valuable.
    I investigated and realized that every time After Effects has a new version update, it creates a new disk cache folder for that new version number (ie. 12.2). However, the disk cache folders for all the previous versions (11.0, 12.0 and 12.1) all remain on the hard drive wasting 300GB of space.
    If you're not using disk cache or didn't update from previous versions then none of this will apply to you.
    To empty the 12.x abandoned disk cache space...
    Just click on the "Empty Disk Cache" button in the After Effects settings
    You can also manually delete the 12.0 and 12.1 folders from /Users/(username)/Library/Caches/Adobe/After Effects/ assuming you have the current 12.2 version folder.
    To empty the 11.x abandoned disk cache space...
    This has to be done manually and is located in the /Users/(username)/Library/Preferences/Adobe/After Effects/11.0/ folder
    Delete the folder that starts with /Adobe After Effects Disk Cache... (ie. "Adobe After Effects Disk Cache - Peter’s iMac.noindex")
    In OSX, the User's library folder is hidden so you will have to first unhide it to manually delete disk cache folders...
    In finder, go to your user home folder
    Next, from the finder menu select VIEW -> SHOW VIEW OPTIONS
    Finally, add a checkmark beside "Show Library Folder" in the view options window
    -Pete

    The manual deletion of the 12.0 and 12.1 folders is not necessary with After Effects CC (12.2). The command in After Effects CC (12.2) to clear the disk cache will clear the 12.1 and 12.0 folders, too.
    http://blogs.adobe.com/aftereffects/2013/12/after-effects-cc-12-2-december-2013-update.htm l
    (Yes, that is implied in your steps above, but I wanted to make sure that everyone reading realized this.)

  • Does Spotlight use a lot of disk space?

    I'm new to Macs — in fact, my first one hasn't arrived yet — and I'm wondering if Spotlight will tie up a lot of disk space? I'm getting a MacBook Pro with a 100GB drive (modest by desktop standards), and I've noticed that Windows search products (e.g., Google Desktop, MSN Desktop) can create 3-5 GB of data after indexing even a modest 30GB hard drive. If Spotlight is going to "waste" gigs of space on my limited laptop drive, I might look into disabling it. Thanks.

    Do not worry about it. On my book disk (100Gb with 60Gb occupied) spotlight uses the following space:
    big:~ mtsouk$ ls -l /.Spotlight-V100/
    total 278972
    -rw------- 1 root admin 219443200 Apr 15 07:23 ContentIndex.db
    -rw------- 1 root admin 238 Feb 28 18:56 _IndexPolicy.plist
    -rw------- 1 root admin 304 Apr 3 23:42 _exclusions.plist
    -rw------- 1 root admin 378 May 28 2005 _rules.plist
    -rw------- 1 root admin 66211840 Apr 15 07:23 store.db
    big:~ mtsouk$
    Mihalis.
    Dual G5 @ 2GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

  • Out of memory: Java heap space

    Hello,
    I am working on a project, that simulates large populations, with each individual being a separate Objecta(a couple of kilobytes in size each).
    Once i reach a bug enough number of those Objects (stored in a Vector), i get Out of memory: Java heap space exception.
    Am i having a memory leak in Java? Or am i really reaching the maximal JVM limit and i need to reconfigure it, to support larger heap size?
    :)

    Am i having a memory leak in Java?Because of garbage collection there, by far and large, aren't memory leaks in java. However, there certainly is memory waste.
    If each of these objects you make room for are unnecessarily laden with references to other large objects creating huge networks of objects that never free their memory, and then you allocate 1 million of them, then, while not a leak, you are wasting your memory space.
    Look through your class and inspect each field to see if any of them could be holding more data than you intend. If so, multiply the amount of that data by 1,000,000 or however many objects you are going to instantiate to determine if this produces and absurd amount of memory. You should be able to predict ~how much storage your data will need...each char is 2bytes, each int is 4 bytes, doubles are 8 etc

  • Photoshop not seeing export color space setting in Lightroom 4

    MY LR or PS programs are not acting as expected.
    When my Lightroom 4 is set to export to Photoshop in either the sRGB color space or the AdobeRGB color space, and Photoshop is set for the sRGB space, Photoshop gives a color mismatch error in both cases, saying the image is an AdobeRGB embedded image.  However, if the color space in PS is set for AdobeRGB, even if the export setting in Lightroom is sRGB, there is no mismatch error. 
    Apparently, PS sees every image as embedded with AdobeRGB.
    I have a Sony NEX6 camera.  I have taken pictures in the camera sRGB color space and the AdobeRGB space, which I used for this test. Since I shoot in RAW, this should not matter, so I don’t think it is the issue, and, in fact, I get the same result no matter which color space the camera is in.
    If LR export and PS color space are the same, why should there be a mismatch, and why is PS not seeing the sRGB space?  Might there be a setting in Lightroom or Photoshop that I am missing?

    howdego wrote:
    I am, however, trying to decide on the right color space to use, which is how I noticed this problem. I rarely make prints of my photos.  I make bluray movies using Proshow Producer.  I recently got a new monitor and Samsung LED HDTV, and found that my photo videos did not display right and I am trying to find out why.  I found the normal viewing settings of the TV have too much color and sharpness, so I established another group of settings for photos, which helped.  However, I am still not satisfied.
    These are two separate but related issues.
    1) It's almost impossible to get accurate Color and Luminance level rendering inside LR if you don't use a hardware monitor calibrator to adjust your computer monitor.
    2) LCD TV's use settings to "enhance" color, brightness, and contrast that is usually very, very inacuuarte. But this is what most non-photography people seem to like so TV manufacturers crank up the "default settings." I also have an older 52" Samsung TV (LN-T5265F) that I've manually adjusted for more accurate color. Try using the 'Movie' mode, which is the most accurate mode and turn the Backlight setting down. Here are the settings I use with my Samsung TV. I assume your Samsung TV's controls are similar:
    Setup Screens
    HDMI 1 (Cable Box) & Coax (Cable)
    HDMI 2 (Panasonic Blu-Ray Player)
    PICTURE - 1
    Movie
    Standard
    Dynamic
    Movie
    Standard
    Dynamic
    Contrast
    82
    82
    82
    82
    82
    82
    Brightness
    43
    45
    45
    43
    45
    45
    Sharpness
    25
    25
    35
    15
    15
    25
    Color
    42
    45
    45
    44
    45
    45
    Tint
    77 R
    77 R
    84 R
    77 R
    77 R
    84 R
    Backlight
    5
    6
    7
    5
    5
    6
    PICTURE - 2
    Color Tone
    Normal
    Normal
    Normal
    Normal
    Normal
    Normal
    Detailed Settings
    Black Adjust
    Off
    NA
    NA
    Off
    NA
    NA
    Dynamic Contrast
    Low
    NA
    NA
    Low
    NA
    NA
    Gamma
    -1
    NA
    NA
    -1
    NA
    NA
    Color Space
    Auto
    NA
    NA
    Auto
    NA
    NA
    White Balance
    R-Offset
    13
    NA
    NA
    13
    NA
    NA
    G-Offset
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    B-Offset
    17
    NA
    NA
    17
    NA
    NA
    R-Gain
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    G-Gain
    12
    NA
    NA
    12
    NA
    NA
    B-Gain
    17
    NA
    NA
    17
    NA
    NA
    My Color Control
    Pink
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    Green
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    Blue
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    White
    15
    NA
    NA
    15
    NA
    NA
    Edge Ehnacement
    On
    NA
    NA
    On
    NA
    NA
    xvYCC
    Off
    NA
    NA
    Off
    NA
    NA
    Digital NR
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Active Color
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off
    Dnie
    Off(NA)
    Off
    Off
    Off(NA)
    Off
    Off
    SETUP - Screen 2
    Energy Saving
    Off
    Off
    Off
    Off
    Off
    Off
    SETUP - Screen 3
    HDMI Black Level
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Low
    Film Mode
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    Off(NA)
    howdego wrote:
    So it occurred to me that some colors might be wrong, or too saturated, because I am not seeing them on my monitor as they will appear on the HDTV.  I am thinking that since sRGB is my final color space, I would try to do everything in the sRGB space, including setting my monitor to sRGB (I have a Dell 2413 which supports adobeRGB too).  I was inn the process of trying this when I found the issue at hand.  Might you have any thoughts about this color space choice
    If you have a wide-gamut monitor you are better off using it in Adobe RGB mode with a monitor calibrator. But then the monitor will not look correct in non-color managed applications:
    http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/srgb_wide_gamut.html
    You can circumvent this issue by using your monitor in sRGB mode, but I'd still suggest you use a hardware monitor calibrator. Either way it is imortatnt that you have a proper monitor profile assigned in Windows or OS X Color Management. The monitor manufacturer provides these, but they don't always work well with LR for numerous reasons.
    To insure the best image quality you should do all of your editing in PS using 16 bit TIFF with ProPhoto RGB profile format until you are ready to Export. For use with ProShow you can use TIFFs or JPEGs, but use sRGB color profile to avoid any color management issue. JPEGs are fine and a LR Quality higher than 80 (10 in PS) is a waste of disk space for slideshow images.
    In short you've got a lot of "variables" between the uncalibrated monitor and out-of-the-box non-adjusted TV. The former requires a good hardware calibrator aad the latter a good "eye" to adjust it.

  • Info window takes up too much space

    It used to be that you could keep the info window open at all times, residing at the bottom left of the page. But now, if you open the Info window, it robs you of almost a third of the screen. The info about each photo is now in a nice compact window (although it seems to give much less information), but that window is above a vast area of mostly wasted space.
    How about the option to return the info window to the bottom of the Library list, where it doesn't waste any screen space?
    Please send feedback to Apple: http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphoto.html

    Good that you like the new info window, Michael.
    I see no camera manufacturer (I see the model of the camera, but not the brand). This may not be important to most people, but if you are gathering photos from a number of different people to make a slide show, it's nice to see the brand of camera.
    The only flash info I see is the little icon with a lightening bolt - that's pretty slim info.
    What's the point of working full screen if you cannot move the window? It's fixed now. Before, the adjust window was floating, and could be moved anywhere, even to a second monitor. Now it just eats up the screen space, with a lot of black space below for faces, keywords and location.

  • Disk Space not restored after deleting iphone backup

    Hi,
    Today while restoring my iphone i realised that itunes had made multiple copies of ~3gb of my iphone data. Since my iphone was restored successfully I decided to remove all the backups and make a fresh new backup. After deleting the multiple backups I found that my available disk space had not increased at all. I even went to ~/Library/Application Support/MobileSync/Backup and ther was nothing in there. So I went ahead and made a new backup which consumed additional ~3gb. And just to test if it was only itunes that was doing this I deleted my photos from iphoto ~5gb and even that did not give me back my 5gb. I went to trash and I dont have anything there.
    So, here I am confused as to where my deleted stuff is going to because it does not seem like its getting deleted.
    Anything that i can do get my space back?
    Thanks,
    Yogi

    Local snapshots are hidden copies of files that have been changed or deleted in between Time Machine snapshots. They are stored in free space that would otherwise be unused, and therefore wasted. The space occupied by the snapshots is managed automatically. When free space starts to run low, the snapshots are deleted. The Finder reports the space occupied by local snapshots as "Available," which it is.
    If there are unwanted changes to your files in between Time Machine snapshots — which may be far apart when you're moving around with a portable computer — you may be able to revert the changes from a local snapshot. If you disable local snapshots, you lose that protection, and you gain nothing. There is no offsetting benefit whatsoever; merely added risk.
    Empty storage space is simply wasted. You paid for it to be there, but it's doing you no good at all. Local snapshots put it to use.
    Very rarely, if ever, you might need to delete the local snapshot store in order to add a large amount of data all at once. If that need ever arises, which it probably won't, all you have to do is turn Time Machine OFF in its preference pane, and then turn it back ON immediately.
    You should ignore the bad advice that circulates on this site to disable local snapshots permanently by running a shell command. If you ran such a command, ask for instructions on how to reverse it.

  • Lightroom Color Space Problem.

    Hello,
    I am processing my photos in Lightrrom. The histogram in Lightroom looks ok without any clipping, but when i export them to AdobeRGB or sRGB (for web) the photos have clipped shadows or highlights or both. I belive that the problem is that the histogram in lightroom reflect the data of the photo in ProPhoto RGB, and when you export to a narrow color space the clipping happens.
    Is there any way to fix this? I will always have clipping if i export to AdobeRGB or sRGB? What do you do to not have this problem?
    Beside of the clipping problem. The diferece between the histogram in the develop module in Lightroom and the histogram of the exported photo in AdobeRGB or sRGB makes that you don't know what the exported photo will look like, is like working blind. I don't know about you guys, but for me the is a big problem. Well, maybe if you work all in ProPhoto RGB this is a little issue.
    I would appreciate a lot any help or comment that you could give me.
    Thanks, :)
    Marcelo.

    Another thing I sometimes do is to save the development settings (save metadata in metadata menu) to file in LR, and then open the RAW in Camera RAW. In camera RAW the histogram reflects the color space you set, so you can optimize the development settings there. Then I close Camera Raw, which updates the xmp file (or the stuff written into the dng) and in LR do read metadata from file, which will apply the changed settings. This does the trick typically.

  • Can't partition free space using Disk Utility

    So something went wrong when I tried to bootcamp.
    Now the situation is following:
    1) I can't install Windows using USB stick, it says that the free space is in GPT;
    2) I can't partition the free space with Disk Utility, tryied it also with recovery mode, the apply button is clickable and active, but it does nothing, it just stays like so and when I exit from Disk Utility it asks if I want to quit without applying but it doesn't work.
    So basically I have wasted 20GB of space and can't do anything with it.
    I don't want to format the hole disk, are there any other workarounds without need to reinstall OSX?
    I have MacBook Pro 13" Retina (late 2013), 128GB SSD, 8GB ram.

    markov-mac:~ markov$ diskutil list
    /dev/disk0
       #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
       0:      GUID_partition_scheme                        *121.3 GB   disk0
       1:                        EFI EFI                     209.7 MB   disk0s1
       2:          Apple_CoreStorage                         100.3 GB   disk0s2
       3:                 Apple_Boot Recovery HD             650.0 MB   disk0s3
    /dev/disk1
       #:                       TYPE NAME                    SIZE       IDENTIFIER
       0:                  Apple_HFS Macintosh HD           *100.0 GB   disk1
    markov-mac:~ markov$ diskutil cs list
    CoreStorage logical volume groups (1 found)
    |
    +-- Logical Volume Group 0F0D9268-58FC-4832-8FCB-4A11FB5675F6
        =========================================================
        Name:         Macintosh HD
        Status:       Online
        Size:         100335546368 B (100.3 GB)
        Free Space:   15724544 B (15.7 MB)
        |
        +-< Physical Volume 9B8968BE-CE97-4A66-B5B3-31B4EB87E21F
        |   ----------------------------------------------------
        |   Index:    0
        |   Disk:     disk0s2
        |   Status:   Online
        |   Size:     100335546368 B (100.3 GB)
        |
        +-> Logical Volume Family B29C277A-660B-41C4-8F5C-A1C5FB01B60F
            Encryption Status:       Unlocked
            Encryption Type:         None
            Conversion Status:       NoConversion
            Conversion Direction:    -none-
            Has Encrypted Extents:   No
            Fully Secure:            No
            Passphrase Required:     No
            |
            +-> Logical Volume 6736784D-A946-4EBF-BBA2-BC7DDC6C4EDE
                Disk:                  disk1
                Status:                Online
                Size (Total):          99999997952 B (100.0 GB)
                Conversion Progress:   -none-
                Revertible:            No
                LV Name:               Macintosh HD
                Volume Name:           Macintosh HD
                Content Hint:          Apple_HFS
    markov-mac:~ markov$ mount
    /dev/disk1 on / (hfs, local, journaled)
    devfs on /dev (devfs, local, nobrowse)
    map -hosts on /net (autofs, nosuid, automounted, nobrowse)
    map auto_home on /home (autofs, automounted, nobrowse)
    map -fstab on /Network/Servers (autofs, automounted, nobrowse)

  • How does one select the language of a piece of text in Pages 5

    I often work with multipel language in one document. In the pre version 5 Pages one could select the text and go in inspector and change the language. Not very handy, MS Word is always been much better at this. Even WordPerfect 1.0 was better. But in version 5 I can't find this function.

    If you live in the world outside the USA, you will find that there are a lot of different language. If like me, and this is the case for a lot of people in Europe you have to make document in several languages Pages 4 was already a user un-friendly program. The detection you manhunt will not work:
    If you take languages that are of the same family like Flemish/Dutch, English, German, enz… a lot of the words are similar but differ non the less.
    Languages tends to take on words from other languages, in the past a lot of French has gotten into English. Flemish/Dutch has taken on a lot of English words in the last several decennia.
    Hens Pages 5 has become a wast of HD space. There is something very wrong @ Apple.

  • How do you stop Mountain Lion from making endless copies and backups of everything?!

    I already have a similar topic on this when I needed to figure out how to stop Mountain Lion from making endless copies of my text edit files and I was going to try the disabling of it that someone in that thread suggested, but I can't find where the Versions backups are being stored.
    Anyway, tonight I cam across a new problem, when I went into "about this Mac" and looked at my Storage, I had almost 1gb of data in the "backups" section. I just happened to have Finder open when I went into the Time Machine in the status bar and when it entered Time Machine, I had dozens of copies of my desktop. Thing is, I don't have my Time Machine hard drive connected and I don't have a Time Capsule router/hard drive. And don't give me this garbage about how "It's not real backups, it's just a snapshot" or whatever, because the ONLY things that I have stored on my computer that I have altered since I got mountain lion is two Text Edit files and the Finder Desktop (and yes, I have checked almost all the programs I use, and of the things that Time Machine will open in, those are the only things that have backups listed that I can access) and almost 1gb is being taken up completely needlessly with the computer backing up things onto itself. Obviously these are more than just snapshots and are obviously the real files because after throwing EVERYTHING on my desktop into a file, that file is only 3.8mb in size, so that almost 1GB in backups is coming from SOMEWHERE.
    The solution I aluded to in my first sentence also depends on going into the Terminal to make each individual app stop auto saving Versions, however, since my desktop is being backed up, there's no program to stop Mountain Lion from doing that.
    Can anyone help me figure out how to make it stop backing up? Seriously, almost 1 gb is being totally wasted on a series of desktop items that are 3.8mb in size, one Text Edit file that is 250kb in size, and another text edit file that is 41kb in size. What person in Apple would possibly have thought this endless backing up of files onto the main hard drive would have been a good idea? So in a year if I did nothing but go on the internet, save one picture to one file on my desktop and did nothing else with my computer, would I have 200 gb of desktop backups that the computer saved onto itself? Are you kidding me? OR failing that, can anyone tell me how to find this damned backup file and delete it? I'm not an idiot, I know how to plug in a hard drive or flash drive and backup my information, I don't need my computer to be making hundreds of copies of every single file on my computer that I change slightly onto itself that not only needlessly eats up it's own space, but if the hard drive died, all those "backups" would be gone too because it wrote the backups to itself.
    I am so frustrated by this totally ridiculous and wasteful "feature" they put in, it does nothing but waste hard drive space with it's hundreds of copies of everything you alter slightly. And I am absolutely not starting any video editing projects until I figure out how to turn this off. If around 4mb of total text and desktop backups add up to almost 1gb in a few weeks, what the heck is a video editing project going to end up in with size? Am I the only one completely flustered by this ridiculousness? Is there any point in writing into Apple to complain or are they just going to say "No, we're brilliant, we think this is an amazing feature so you just have to deal iwth it and when your hardd drive fills up, too bad, jerk!"?? Help! Thanks!

    Well as I pointed out in my post, "Sadly, my Text Edit documents are still all there, every single time I opened them and made a small change, there is another copy stretching all the way back to the day I installed Mountain Lion." so if you can explain to me how July 26 - Aug 16 is a week, I will concede that it is a good idea. Short of that, no I have been capable of making my own backups since I was 16 years old (16 years ago) I don't need my computer to endlessly do it for me in a way I am completely unable to shut off. That's what I have external hard drives, flash drives, a DVD burner, Drop Box, E-mail (as in emailing copies to myself) and icloud for. If I am doing something and I don't have access to a single one of those options, I don't know why I brought my computer with me in the first place. And I don't see how you can say it's an illusory gain in disk space, hundreds of copies of text documents, garageband files, Final Cut files, Motion Files and basically any program that makes files onto my comptuer that I can myself make incremental changes to, those all need to be stored somehow. Again, if you can explain to me how July 26 - Aug 16 is a week, I will agree with you that that is a good thing because IF it only saved for a week, it wouldn't be an issue. Sadly, no matter how many links you post, I still have text edit backups stretching from today back to July 26. They're not going away and I have no reason to beleive any other file I edit is going to go away either since they haven't been. They're all there eating up HD space and this imaginary "week" limit is simply not coming into effect. I hate it and there needs to be a simple way to simply shut it off. I didn't spend hundreds of dollars on external drives just for my main hard drive to be filled up with hundreds un useless, undeletable backups of stuff I already have backed up.

  • Help/explanation needed - Using an external hard drive

    Hi everyone,
    I bought an external 250gb hard drive as my MBP was very close to full capacity. Yesterday, I had a bit of a scare...
    1. I backed up my Aperture Library onto the external hard drive.
    2. I had about 500 of my favourite images rated 5 star and so I selected these and set up a new project.
    3. I went through my Aperture library deleting folders/projects that I have completed.
    4. I went back into the 5 star ratings and they did not exist. I assume this is because I deleted the master files.
    5. I wanted to have the 5 star images on my laptop and so I connected my external hard drive once again. [This is where I felt I lost control and understanding of what was going on].
    6. I looked for the seperate Aperture files but could only find a file called Aperture Library. I clicked on this but nothing happened at all [I had thought that it would open up Aperture with the previous library].
    7. I dragged the library onto my desktop and waiting for all the images to reload onto my laptop. I then saw that everything was as it was previously, i.e. all the files and images existed. However, my hard drive space was even lower [I assume this was because the current workflow that I had left on the laptop was now duplicated?].
    8. Then I got a message saying my iDisk space is critically low and may damage my Aperture library. Moments later the majority of my images disappeared and a red space appeared where every photo had previously been. Since I have 2 weddings that I am yet to deliver I was very panicked. I tried to drag and drop the Aperture library once again and the message came back that the operation could not be completed due to the current file already existing.
    9. I unplugged the external hard drive and the photos re-appeared [much to my delight]. However, my concern is that I really don't understand what happened and more importantly why. I will need access to the data on the external hard drive in the event in the near future and am worried that the same thing will happen next time I connect it.
    As a result of all this I have some questions, as follows:-
    - Have I adopted the completely wrong approach to backing up data?
    - Can the master files be compressed as I shoot RAW and these are huge files?
    - Why could I not use the Aperture library stored on the external hard drive without downloading it back onto the laptop?
    and a more general question about file storage...
    - I am confused as to how much hard drive space is being used on my MBP. I have 13gb in Aperture, 1gb in iTunes and 1gb in iPhoto. However, I only have 50gb available, so half the capacity is currently being used. I know that Aperture and Garageband applications use about 10gb between them and there is of course the operating system, but 50gb in total seems a lot. On investigation in the finder screen I see that on my personal drive the Aperture, iTunes and iPhoto data is stored there. However, it is also stored under pictures and music respectively. Does this mean that it is storing duplicate copies of this data and that is the explanation for such high hard drive usage? If this is the case, can one be removed?
    I appreciate that this has been a long email, but I felt it was important to illustrate the steps I have taken. As you will no doubt glean from this post I am not the most computer literate person. Any help/explanation would be most appreciated.
    Many thanks,
    Jamie

    Hi Jamie.
    I am not sure what went wrong with your setup but I will let you know my configuration as an example and you can decide if you think it is a good way to have it. I am asuming you are using ver 1.5?
    Like you I have only a Laptop (G4 17" 1.5Ghz 2 Gig Ram - would love a macbook) so hard disk space is a premium. I also have an external firewire drive to hold all the HiRes RAW images. When I download my images from the Camera I do it manually into folders on the external drive (Cataloged by Date and maybe description of location). I then Import the images from those folders into Aperture but use the option when importing to "Store Files - In their current location".
    My Aperture library file is on my laptop so all that it has to store is the "Preview" file that gets generated automatically (in the preferences I have it set up to the resolution of my laptop 1440pix so that if I did a slide show it is only as big as my screen - anything more is a waste of disk space IMO.)
    I do it this way so that it is easy to find and work on my files with other programs such as Photoshop by going straight to the image rather than exporting from Aperture.
    Obviously I cant edit the RAW files while the drive is disconnected but I can still do ratings and keywords without the original files being there.
    I hope this helps.
    Regards
    Andrew
    G4 17inch   Mac OS X (10.4.8)   2 Gigs RAM

  • Mail's Account Directory - accessible from a different start-up volume?

    I have two internal hard drives in my PowerMac G4. One volume has Tiger 10.4.11 installed; the other had Leopard 10.5.6. I have not yet fully transitioned from Tiger to Leopard, but I want to do so. However, before I do so I want to know if I will be able to:
    (1) run the applications which reside on the Tiger volume when I boot up in Leopard (so that I do not have to waste hard drive space by installing the same applications on two different internal hard drives; and
    (2) access the email messages that reside on the Tiger volume when I boot up in Leopard (so that I can keep all my mail in one place, and so that I can access my email no matter whether I boot up in Leopard, or in Tiger, when I need to use older applications that may not be Leopard-compatible and which I do not wish to spend more money on upgrades).
    Since this forum addresses Mail and Address Book issues, I would like to get a definitive answer to the second inquiry, namely, if I boot up in Leopard, can I access the mailboxes and email messages that reside on the Tiger volume, or must I absolutely (somehow) bring all those messages into Leopard and be compelled to use only one Mac OS to access the Mail application on its associated start-up drive.
    In trying to figure this out myself, I notice that, in the Mail preferences panel, on the Advanced tab of the Accounts button, there is an option called "Account Directory:" that lists "~/Library/Mail" as the path to the directory where email messages are stored. While there is a "Choose" button next to the file path, both the pathname and the button are shadowed out, and I can see no way to activate that option.
    I am a little bit confused here, because the appearance of that option implies that one might be able to actually direct the Mail application to store email messages on a volume other than the start-up volume. However, the fact that the "Choose" button and the actual path name are shadowed out appears to cancel out that capability.
    Can anyone shed light on this mystery? Is it possible to access email that resides in Library of another volume other than the one used to start-up the Mac, and, if so, how is that accomplished?
    bowlerboy_jmb

    BowlerBoy_JMB wrote:
    I have two internal hard drives in my PowerMac G4. One volume has Tiger 10.4.11 installed; the other had Leopard 10.5.6. I have not yet fully transitioned from Tiger to Leopard, but I want to do so. However, before I do so I want to know if I will be able to:
    (1) run the applications which reside on the Tiger volume when I boot up in Leopard (so that I do not have to waste hard drive space by installing the same applications on two different internal hard drives; and
    it might work with some self-contained apps that are installed by drag and drop into /Applications but should not be done in general. It will definitely not work with any apps that use installers to install.
    (2) access the email messages that reside on the Tiger volume when I boot up in Leopard (so that I can keep all my mail in one place, and so that I can access my email no matter whether I boot up in Leopard, or in Tiger, when I need to use older applications that may not be Leopard-compatible and which I do not wish to spend more money on upgrades).
    Since this forum addresses Mail and Address Book issues, I would like to get a definitive answer to the second inquiry, namely, if I boot up in Leopard, can I access the mailboxes and email messages that reside on the Tiger volume, or must I absolutely (somehow) bring all those messages into Leopard and be compelled to use only one Mac OS to access the Mail application on its associated start-up drive.
    yes, you must transfer all your Mail to the leopard partition and use it from there. yes, you are compelled to do so and no there is absolutely no way around it.

Maybe you are looking for