Is Aperture more stable w/ larger libraries (esp. Faces)?

I have a large library of nearly 30,000 photos that has been with me essentially since 2005. I've made several attempts at going through and tagging faces, but continue to find iPhoto slow and that it occasionally forgets faces that I've tagged. I've gone through events as many as three times only to come back in a few months to find that there are faces that I *know* I tagged showing up as untagged.
I'm wondering if Aperture's more professional nature and that it's developed on a more modern 64 bit codebase would mean that it would be more stable with Faces in larger libraries? This is my personal photo library, but I am quite familiar with Apple's more professional offerings in Final Cut Pro X, which I use nearly daily.

+1 to William's post. I kept Faces off until 3.1.3 (iirc). It's been stable since then. Afaict, if you don't use Faces even though it is enabled, it doesn't slow you down much (and then, only at import). On large Libraries (more than 100,000 Images) Faces runs a little bit slow. When using Faces, it is best to use it at the Project(s) level rather than the Library level. (Léonie has posted some helpful hints on the forum -- try a search.) And of course many problems and confusions can be avoided by reading the User Manual. Here is the section on Faces.
All-in-all, I find it only moderately more useful than simply keywording Images with the names of people in them.
IME, it has been completely reliable since I turned it on (no lost or misplaced data). I suggest running "Repair" and perhaps even "Rebuild" on your Library before turning Faces on. Back-up first (always, but just a precaution; I have yet to hear of a single case of Libraries being vitiated by either action.)

Similar Messages

Aperture best practices for large libraries

Hi,
I am very new to Aperture and still trying to figure out the best way to take advantage of it.
I have been using iPhoto for a while, with just under 25,000 images. This amount of images takes up about 53 gig. I recently installed and built an Aperture library, leaving the images in the iPhoto library. Still, the Aperture library is over 23 gig. Is this normal? If I turn off the preview, is the integration with iLife and iWork the only functionality lost?
Thanks,
BC
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.10)

Still, the Aperture library is over 23 gig. Is this
normal?
If Previews are turned on, yes.
If I turn off the preview, is the
integration with iLife and iWork the only
functionality lost?
Pretty much.
Ian

PLL Library Size - Few Larger Libraries Or More Smaller Libraries

Hi
I am interested in people's thoughts on whether it is better to have fewer larger libraries or more smaller libraries. If you do break into smaller pll libraries, should the grouping be that some forms will not use modules in library, ie do not have to attach to all forms. For common modules that all forms require access to, do you achieve anything in having many little libraries, rather than on larger library?
Is it correct that pll libraries are loaded into memory at run time when form is loaded and library is attached?
What are issues to consider here
Thanks

Hi Till,
My honest opinion...do not merge the libraries. Switch between them using iPhoto Library manager and leave it at that.
A 22 gig library is way too big to run efficiently.
Lori

Best storage set-ups for large Libraries?

Let's say "large Library" means 500 GB and/or 500,000 Images, and above.
What set-ups for storage, on a Mac maximized with RAM, will provide the best Aperture performance? The best bang-for-the-buck? Assume Thunderbolt is available. I don't know much about hardware: RAID, hybrid drives, etc.
What sensible considerations should one make for backup and data-redundancy?
How can I determine if the storage media is a bottleneck in the performance of Aperture on my system?
I run most libraries off of external USB-3 drives mounted (sometimes directly, often via powered USB-3 hubs) to my
MacBook Pro
Retina, 15-inch, Early 2013
Processor 2.7 GHz Intel Core i7
Memory 16 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB
System Drive APPLE SSD SD512E
This works well for small and medium-size Libraries, but for large Libraries, I'm spending costly time waiting for the system to catch up.
Some of that, demonstrably, comes when I run a three-monitor set-up. (But this provides some welcome advantages to me.)
Additionally, some back-ups and database repairs now take 12 hr. or longer.
Thanks.

Thanks William,
I kept my c. 2011 MPB and use it for making back-ups, which is done automatically after I leave for the day. My early-2013 MPB is so much faster (and has such a higher-resolution screen) that I don't use the older computer at all.
William Lloyd wrote:
Probably the fastest storage you can get is the La Cie "little big disk" which is a pair of 512 GB SSDs with a Thunderbolt 2 connection. The issue is, only the newest Mac Pro, and the newest retina MacBook Pros, have Thunderbolt 2 right now.
OWC tech explained to me that TBolt2 allows 2x the throughput, but that the drives have to be able to provide it. TBolt1 should provide 1,000 MB/s (do I have the units correct?), which is faster than most drives can provide. So the bottleneck, for me, isn't likely to be the port, but rather the drives. USB-3 can move 500 MB/s, which is still faster than -- afaict -- what my WD Passport drives can provide.
As I currently see it, I need faster throughput, and I need to either trim my large Libraries or find a way to manage them so that the regularly used files are more speedily available.
Regarding faster throughput, an external SSD comes to mind.
The problem, for me, is that the large Libraries are close to 1TB (with Previews). While I don't expect them to grow (the data acquisition phase is, for now, done), it would be short-sighted to assume they won't. That brings up the second consideration, which is how to best use spanned drives that contain an Aperture Library.
As I see it (with my limited understanding of hardware), what I really want is _a lot more RAM_, or, barring that, a huge SSD scratch disk. I have 200 GB free on my system drive, which is an Apple-supplied SSD, but it doesn't seen to be used as effectively as I'd like.
WD is now selling a new portable TBolt SSD, the "My Passport Pro", available with 4 GB of storage, and with a throughput of 230 MB/s. My current largest Library is on WB Passport drives, whose throughput is not faster than 480 Mb/s (Max) (I assume BITS, not BYTES, so 40 MB/s). That's a huge difference, while still only 1/4 of the speed possible with TBolt1, and 1/8 the throughput possible with TBolt2 (which my early-2013 MBP does not have, afaict).
These are the questions I am trying to answer:
- How can I measure my current throughput?
- Can I determine the bottleneck in my use of large Libraries in Aperture?
- Will new storage give me faster performance?
- Which storage will give me the best "bang-for-my-bucks"? (The La Cie "little big disk" seems to have it's bang limited by my computer, which greatly lowers its quotient value.)
In short: how can I get 900-1000 MB/s throughput on my machine, and is there any way to set up my Library so that, even though it is close to 1 TB, I can use a smaller very fast drive for the most read/written files?
--Kirby.

Repair itunes library (damaged) file. Multiple iTunes libraries on an external harddrive. All libraries have been working fine. Do some "housecleaning" on a one of the large libraries 296GB. iTunes quit and now has damaged file. 296 GB still on HD.

How to repair itunes library (damaged) file. Multiple iTunes libraries on an external harddrive. All libraries have been working fine. Do some "housecleaning" on a one of the large libraries 296GB. iTunes quits and now has damaged file. 296 GB still on HD.

The duplication is unnecessary. Exporting creates a duplicate of the file. So now you'll have a duplicate of a duplicate. Exporting is not "working on" a file.
No it's not merging, it's exporting from one to the Finder and into another. No matter what lose something. If you export the Original you leave behind all the work you've done in iPhoto. If you export anything else, you lose the non-destructive editing and the ability to revert to the original. With merging you preserve that work. Yes, you can trash the old Library when you have completed the manoevre but no it's not the same thing as merging.
This User Tip
https://discussions.apple.com/docs/DOC-4921
has details of the options in the Export dialogue. But in brief:
Current gets you the iPhoto Preview, used for sharing via media browsers. It's a jpg, medium quality missing metadata. Original gets the file you imported, unchanged and then you can export different version of the current version at different qualities. If you choose to export anything except the Original you do not get a Raw. There's no such thing as an "edited Raw", and you lose the connection between the original and the exported version. That means you've taken a non-destructive workflow and turned it into a destructive one.
The Tiff will certainly be higher qulaity and less likely to suffer generational loss in future editing but the file sizes are vast, often more than 10 times the size of the jpeg.
Put it this way, it would be cheaper to buy Library Manager than the disk you'll need to contain all the Tiffs. Unless you plan on a lot of editing, I'd go for a high quality jpeg as a reasonable compromise.
To be clear:
So, I guess my new question is, how can I edit the Raw image and keep it in a RAW format that IPhoto recognizes so that I can reprocess without any loss at a future time, or is it that once you edit a RAW image, then it is no longer a RAW image?
Once you edit a Raw it can no longer be a Raw. End of.

Is Apple Mail more stable than Entourage? which mail client do I want?

I can't take Microsoft Entourage (2008) any more - the constant garbling of the enormous single database file (and the database "repairs" which always seem to lose data) are driving me crazy. Our institution is going to upgrade to Exchange 2007 (or perhaps 2010) in a few weeks, and I need to move to a more stable client. I'm running the latest 10.6. Can someone advise me: do I want Apple Mail, Thunderbird, or something else? My criteria are:
1) I need to be able to access the Exchange server's email, Calendar, and Addressbook, but not necessarily with the same application.
2) I have a very large database of emails - 22 Gigs or so, and I need to be able to view and search them all. So,
3) which client will make migration from Entourage easiest/most reliable?
4) which one is the most stable, so that this huge (and growing database) won't get corrupted? It's insane that one bad action can ruin the whole thing. Surely there are clients that store emails separately so that even if something gets damaged, the whole thing isn't munged... Is Apple Mail pretty bulletproof for large databases?
5) is there any way with Apple Mail or anything else to control (or at least see) what gets deleted/copied to the server? With Entourage, I never know whether my stuff is getting deleted off the server or not (no way to specify "1-way sync" or even see a log of what it deleted, like appointments etc.).
Any hints greatly appreciated!
thank you,
Mike Levin

but it doesn't seem possible that 22 GB of that data is live.
Either that, or you get an awful lot of attachments.
it's live in the sense that I search through it often. It's not kept on the server though - most of it is in local folders (which also get trashed when the database gets corrupted). I do get some attachments, and it's emails since 1989 or so.
You have done rebuilds of the database I see, but I don't recall if that
function gets rid of deleted items. When you delete files from the Deleted
Items folder, they don't actually go anywhere. They just get moved to a hidden
So if you've never compressed the data, a very large portion of your Entourage
database could just be old deleted items. Close Entourage and Option+launch it
to get the Database Utility. Use the "Compact database" choice on your file.
This will remove all fully deleted items from the database.
interesting!! I'll try this for sure.
thanks,
Mike

CPU Power - Large libraries

Hello
I'm in the middle of an exercise of archiving my CD collection. The iTunes library counts nearly 20,000 at the moment, and I've noticed that since approx. 12-14,000 songs, the system is having problems. When I look in the system properties, iTunes takes up to 98% of the CPU power (plus an awful lot of memory, but I have plenty of that).
The import process is pretty slow. Although the meter says something like 14-18x, it frequently stops in the middle before it continues (I guess it chokes on its own processing). Any other application running at the same time struggles and the mouse no longer moves smoothly.
Does anyone know if or why iTunes seems to go into CPU overdrive with large libraries/databases? Does the size of the library have any impact at all?
Or is it just a flaw of a recent iTunes update?
Cheeers

Indeed, I use another well known program for ripping Cds too.
On performance and large libraries, I get the impression that the more memory you have the better. A recent poster claimed that the lost library syndrome, that some people with large libraries suffer from, was cured by doubling memory.
Also some people have found that excluding the iTunes directory from virus checking helps performance.
Personally I found that earlier versions of iTunes 7 were terrible processor hogs, but the latest incarnation 7.1.1.5 doesn't seem too bad. I get 0-5% most of the time while playing with the occasional blip to 10% between tracks. But... my library is tiny compared to the OP's, only about 2000 tracks.

How does the sync functionality work with large libraries on small devices?

How does the sync functionality work with large libraries?
Say I sync 100gb of photos with the new Photos app and turn on sync on a 16gb iphone. Will it fill the device up to 16gb? Can I tell it to limit to xgb so I leave room for music and apps? How does this work? Will it slow down my phone if its trying to sync 100gb across smaller devices?

"Will the Apple TV now read directly from the Time Capsule?" ATV does not 'read' from the TC. It connects to the Mac and itunes library associated with the Mac. Of course the itunes program can 'point' to a library on the TC. You'll still need to have itunes open and the Mac powered on and not sleeping with the TC mounted to the Desktop to use ATV properly. So bottom line the use of TC just adds one more step to view files on the ATV.

Cannot resize the albums in album view in Itunes 11. For those of us with large libraries (160gb), this is extremely frustrating. I want to make the artwork smaller. This seems to be a serious oversight.

Cannot resize the albums in album view in Itunes 11. For those of us with large libraries (160gb), this is extremely frustrating. I want to make the artwork smaller. This seems to be a serious oversight.

I agree.
It was very useful to reduce everything to small and quickly scan down looking for missing artwork.
Particularly useful when I only connect to the machine with iTunes via screen sharing, so everything can be a bit slower to scroll through at times.
In fact, itunes 11 when used purely as a server for Apple TV etc is a downgrade in usability IMO, as they've got rid of some of the useful views that helped me manage my library remotely.

I'd like to alter my Airport Extreme/Airport Express wireless network so that the 3 Expresses connect to the Extreme via Ethernet. I've been told this will create a more stable wifi signal. How do I configure this using Airport Utility? Thanks.

I currently have an Airport Extreme Base Station connected to my DSL router by Ethernet. Because I have a long, sprawling home, I have 3 Airport Expresses configured to "Extend the Wireless Network" I've established. Because of my home environment--thick walls encompassaing wire mesh, sprawling rooms, etc., it is hard to maintain a continuously-strong, stable WiFi signal. I've been told that I can create a much more stable network by connecting the Express units to the AEBS via Ethernet cable. Since my home is already wired for Ethernet, I'm considering making this change. If I proceed to establish the Ethernet connections, how do I then set up Airport Utility to accomodate this switch from a Wireless-based WiFi network to an Ethernet-based WiFi network?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Phyllis

I don't see anyplace in the Utility to designate HOW the Express units are connected, only how they relate on the network to the Extreme,
As I mentioned in the previous post, when you click the Internet icon in AirPort Utility:
Connect Using = Ethernet (This tells each Express to connect to the Extreme using the ethernet connection)
Connection Sharing = Off (Bridge Mode) (This setting allows your AirPort Extreme to function as the "main" router on the network, as it must for the setup to work correctly.
You do not need to configure anything differently on the AirPort Extreme (as long as it is working correctly now) to connect the AirPort Express devices.
The only other question I have is the following: I'm currently already using one of the Ethernet ports on the back of the Extreme-- for my husband's iMac. I really don't think he gains much in performance over how the iMac would run through wifi, so I could disconnect the iMac. If you think the iMac would do better to stay on the Ethernet connection, should I use a switch/splitter to add an extra connection?
Since each AirPort Express must connect using ethernet, you will need to use the 3 LAN <-> ports on the AirPort Extreme for the AirPort Express devices.
I would suggest that you try connecting the iMac using wireless to see if that will work. If the wireless connection is not satisfactory, then you can add a 5 port ethernet switch to one of the LAN ports on the Extreme and then plug all the devices connecting using ethernet....the iMac and the 3 AirPort Express devices...into the remaining 4 ports on the switch. That will leave you with 2 open ports on the AirPort Extreme for any future devices that may need to connect.
When you test out the system, here is a trick to find out which device your computer is actually connecting to at any given time as it "roams" around the house.
When you have AirPort Utility open to configure each AirPort Express, jot down the AirPort ID for each Express. You can do the same for the AirPort Extreme.
As you move around with your laptop, hold down the option key on your Mac keyboard while you click on the fan shaped AirPort icon at the top of the screen. Look for the BSSID. That is the AirPort ID of the device that the laptop is connected to at that time. it should also be the ID of the closest AirPort Express (or AirPort Extreme if the laptop is close to the Extreme at the time).
Let us know how things are working when everything is up and running.

Using Aperture, I printed a large hardcover book. Upon delivery, I found a gross error in wording on the cover. Is there a way to get the cover only reprinted?

Using Aperture, I printed a large hardcover book. Upon delivery, there was a spelling error on the cover of the books. Is it possible to get just the cover of the books reprinted correctly?

No. If Aperture works similar to iPhoto as far a creating PDFs of the book you can create a pdf of the book and using it find a printer like Kinkos that could print a new cover. The PDF file that gets created by Control-clicking the background in the book mode will create the correct type of pdf file for this:
Click to view full size
In iPhoto the PDF that gets created when you try to print the book and select PDF ➙ Save as PDF creates the wrong format for what you want. If you have trouble creating that PDF file ask over in the Aperture forum.
OT

Working With Large Libraries

I use a portable hard drive for music storage (no music is stored in the Macbook). My library is 14,000+ and until 8.1 I have never had issues of any kind. Today I downloaded 8.1.1 and I still have the same problems. Beach ball spinning forever, HUGE delays in starting of songs, and delays in dragging songs to playlists. Does anyone have any suggestions to fix the problem? Kind of frustrating when 8.1 was supposed to be better for large libraries.

Hold down the option key while you launch iTunes. This presents you with an option to choose a Library (or create a new one). Navigate to your current Library, & with a bit of luck iTunes will stop looking in the wrong place.
Usually these problems are caused by the User moving something or other… not that I'm accusing you of anything!
If that doesn't work, go to +Preferences > Advanced+ & make sure that the folder iTunes uses for storing your music is the right one.

Final Cut 10.2 keeps crashing when trying to update my larger libraries

My Final Cut just updated to 10.2 and each time I attempt to load one of my larger libraries, it crashes. Does anyone have a work around or fix?

My Final Cut just updated to 10.2 and each time I attempt to load one of my larger libraries, it crashes. Does anyone have a work around or fix?

Which driver more stable???

which driver more stable???
before i used msi cd (default driver 84.66),but i find got problem ,the system suddenly restart,any one got this problem or not??
now i using 91.33 is ok....any one got other driver or can suggest a good driver for me ,plz..
thanks...
and nforce driver ,which is stable ??ver 7.13 or 7.15??can i used nforce 570,or 590 SLI intel edition or not???
thanks

from my experiance with 7900GTX , the nvidia's 9x.xx series is a piece of crap, I am using 84.21 which gives me 15% more FPS than 91.33..
Regarding the PC restart issue.. it might not be the driver problem, it could be a heat problem or even a small screw hanging in your PC case can cause a short circut & for the system to sudden restart (It happend to me once)..
Have a nice day...

Which is more stable for Encore: XP 64 bit, or Vista 64 bit?

Which is more stable for Encore: XP 64 bit, or Vista 64 bit?
Any thoughts on this, most appreciated!
Thanks,
-Stuart

If Encore CS4's transcoder can run on more than one thread (and if you of course have a multicore system), then I'd say yes. Otherwise, probably no advantage.
I don't use Vista 64, so I don't know whether there are any disadvantages.

Is Aperture more stable w/ larger libraries (esp. Faces)?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for