Library size difference

Any idea why my Music/iTunes folder in the finder would be 22 GB, while in iTunes it indicates my entire collection as being 17 GB? I suspect there are files in my Music/iTunes folder that are not in use by iTunes - that at some point large video files were deleted in iTunes, but not "moved to trash" in the process.
Is there a way to find files in the Music/iTunes folder that are not actively being used by iTunes?
I'd love to get that 4GB back.
Jay

The discrepancy in size is because the iPhoto Window reports the size of the resulting folder if you exported the current versions of the pics. The iPhoto Library in the Finder includes all the versions of your pics, the database files, caches, and metadata files. They are all required for iPhoto to work.
The iPhoto Diet was last updated for iPhoto 6, in 2006. It will not work on later versions, and even on the earlier versions it did a lot more harm than good. We very regularly saw folks who trashed their photos using it.
Before you remove your Originals remember that you will disable your Non-Destructive Editing feature and you will lose the ability to revert to the Original.
The only way to do this is to export your current (edited) versions, trash the photos from iPhoto (which will remove all the versions) and then re-import the exported versions.
This is rather a lot of work, and frankly, the risk of data loss is high. Much easier to use a different app, one that works the way you want.
If space is an issue you can run your Library from an external disk formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled)
1. Quit iPhoto
2. Copy the iPhoto Library from your Pictures Folder to the External Disk.
3. Hold down the option (or alt) key while launching iPhoto. From the resulting menu select 'Choose Library' and navigate to the new location. From that point on this will be the default location of your library.
4. Test the library and when you're sure all is well, trash the one on your internal HD to free up space.
Regards
TD

Similar Messages

Library size differences; working Lib vs. TM backup vs. Vault

My Aperture Library file is 81.5GB. On my TimeMachine Backup it is 55.47GB and the Aperture Vault shows 67.5 GB.
I am aware that using Vault in Aperture the thumbnails don't backup, that's fine. My curiosity is why is the TimeMachine backup a different size than either the vault or working Aperture Library?

If you are concerned about the validity of the backups then the best thing you can do and the only thing that will confirm the backups is to restore from them.
Opening up the library on the backup media with the Finder will not tell you if the backup is valid no matter what the Folder sizes show.

Aperture 3 vs. iPhoto '11 library sizes?

I wanted to switch from iPhoto '11 to Aperture 3, so I imported my iPhoto library to Aperture. It took a little while, but went without a hitch. I was about to delete my iPhoto library, but then I noticed that my iPhoto library is 94.68GB, while my Aperture library is 68.26GB. I've read that there is a discrepancy because of thumbnail sizes, but a 26GB difference seems to be pretty significant.
All my photos and videos seem to have transferred over and when I select random pictures in Aperture, right-click and select "Locate Referenced Files..." I get a pop-up saying "The selection doesn't have any referenced files." which seems to indicate that everything is in Aperture.
I just wanted to get your opinions on what the huge discrepancy might be due to before I deleted the iPhoto library. Thanks in advance!

Ah yes, I forgot about the iPod Photo Cache; I'm resyncing my iPhone and iPad with iTunes right now to sync photos from Aperture, and it's taking forever, since it has to resize over 12,000 photos. I can't imagine that would account for 26GB of data, though I guess those photos take up about 12GB on each device. I'll have to recheck the library sizes after both devices are done syncing.
I didn't specify a preview size. I didn't know you could. What exactly are the previews that one can change the sizes of? The thumbnails that show up in Aperture?

Aperture library size vs iphoto

My aperture library and iphoto library have the same photos in them. Photos seem to be the same size and quality (I imported all photos from aperture into iPhoto). iPhoto's library is 20GB, Aperture is nearly 60. I'm guessing that while Aperture might be a hair bigger because of the previews (default settings there), 3x the size means something is wrong.
Is there a way to rebuild the Aperture library without losing all my albums/libraries?
While 60GB isn't the end of the world, I'm trying to move my photos to my laptop. And between photos and music, I'm really pushing my hard drive's capacity. That 40GB difference is going to mean I'll use iPhoto (09) vs Aperture (2), and I'm still partial to Aperture.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
Message was edited by: unleashed

Thanks everyone for their help. Redoing the previews helped. I think I had the previews set to "do not limit" on my dekstop and had just pulled the aperture library to my laptop. Redoing those previews took 20GB off my library size.
I see where you're coming from with the referenced images, but for now, it just keeps things simpler for my to keep it all managed. It's a brilliant solution though, if I need to in the future I might go that route. Especially when you think about possibilities with having the referenced images on Time Capsule or something. I don't take that many photos, and I upgrade my computer every year or two. I'm hoping the laptop hard drive space will expand gradually with my photo and music library, and by the time I have to worry about it, there will be another solution.
As far as how I went from Aperture to iPhoto (Ernie), I did (from iPhoto) file > show aperture library > then pulled them all in. I know there are issues with this though, you might check the iPhoto forum if you have trouble, there are work-arounds I believe.

Huge Library Size!

I just imported my iPhoto library (3.75 GB worth of pictures) into Aperture selecting the option to keep the masters in the original location. In Aperture's preferences, I have the preview size set to the default 5. After importing, my Aperture package file is 2.28 GB! This is quite unacceptable in my book...is this caused solely by Aperture creating previews and thumbnails?
Thanks.

The unanswered questions here are: what are the sizes of your originals and how many do you have? If you have a lot of relatively small (in megapixels) JPEG files in you iPhoto library then you are not going to see a very small Library size. If you look in the Aperture Library package file you will see many housekeeping files are used to keep the necessary information for your images. Aperture does generate large thumbnails which I think are around 1000 pixels at the long dimension. You cannot turn these large thumbnails off. Then Aperture maintains additional files that keep the Keyword and Metadata information. Files are needed to keep track of what project each file is associated with, as well as any albums, etc.
You may see more of a difference with your XTi when you start shooting RAW because the ratio of RAW file size to the thumbnail size will be greater.
Also, just a thought, but have you checked to make sure you don't have any Managed images in your Library? You can check by making a Smart Album:
1) With the top Library highlighted in the Projects Panel, select File>New Smart>Album and name the Smart Album "@Managed". The @ sorts the Smart Album to the top of the Projects List, right underneath the blue Library Albums.
2) In the Smart Settings HUD, click on the "+v" button in the upper right corner and select "File Status". A new line is added that says "File Status Offline".
3) Click on the dropdown box and change the word "Offline" to "Managed".
4) Make sure the "Ignore stack groupings" checkbox is checked.
More interesting info related to your questions can be found on the Bagelturf website, a website chock full of usefull Aperture info:
http://homepage.mac.com/bagelturf/aparticles/library/library.html
http://homepage.mac.com/bagelturf/aparticles/previews/previews.html
-Karen

Aperture library size vs iphoto size

Good Morning. I imported my iphoto library to aperture and plan to dump the iphoto library. There is a significant size difference in the two libraries so I am worried that the aperture library didn't import something although all my photos appear to be there. The iPhoto library is 168 gb but the aperture library is 120gb. Is there something different about aperture that makes it a more efficient storage space? Thanks Dave

Terence,
When I originally imported iPhoto into Aperture I selected the leave in original location. If I want to make Aperture stand alone now, all I have to do is consolidate the masters correct? After, which I could delete the iPhoto library, or should I just leave things as they are and not worry that the iPhoto library holds the masters? Seems like this is just a user preference as I have not seen anything state one way is better than the other.
Thanks

IPhoto vs Aperture library sizes

I installed the Aperture tral, left the photos in iPhoto and created a book. Didnt add any new pictures to either library. I then deleted the trial and purchased Aperture from the app store. Copied over the photos from iPhoto. iPhoto had 1 book and Aperture 1 book. The iPhoto library size is 110Gb and the Aperture library size is 90Gb, a 20Gb difference. It appears that all my photos are in both libraries. So no issues. I was surprised and the 20Gb diffeerence. Comments or thoughts if there is an issue pending that I may not be aware of.

Hve you synced with an iPod, ipad or iPhone? The cache for these devices can easily account for that amount of disk space.
Regards
TD

Deleted 1tb of videos / No change in library size

Because my photos library will be too large to sync with iCloud, I elected to migrate the videos to iMovie in order to free up space. I thought this was a pretty ingenious way to shrink the library size since iMovie is better at managing this kind of content anyway.
Here is what I did.
1) Exported unmodified originals from photos into a folder.
2) Imported that folder into iMovie and made sure all the videos were accounted for.
3) Deleted all the exported videos from Photos
4) Selected "show recently deleted" and forced the immediate deletion of all these files by clicking "delete all"
5) Despite deleting what amounts to 980GB of videos from the library, the file size of the library remains the same at 1.68TB and iCloud still sees the library as too big to sync with.
I understand this might be the case if you don't force the files to immediately delete... but I can't imagine why I'm not seeing a file size difference now. Not only that, it's been about two hours since I did the deletion - so the chances of the delay being due to background file work is diminishing.
Anyone else dealt with this?

You import "Managed", if the Preference "Importing" is set to "Copy items to the Photos Library".
If this option is disabled, any video or photo you are importing will only be referenced outside the library and is not included.
iPhoto has a similar option, and if you migrated an iPhoto Library with referenced media, they will remain referenced in Photos.
Did you migrate an iPhoto Library, and does this library still exist on the same drive?

Aperture Library Size slowing iMac even when Aperture is closed

I recently purchased an iMac 22 quad core running Lion, with all updates. It currently has 12GB of Ram, and 190GB free on the hard drive.
The iMac would load programs like Outlook within a few seconds and was very fast.
I purchased Aperture and migrated about 38,000 images, using the exisitng file structure from my PC. This took about 12 hours yo process, update images, etc...
Even if Aperture is closed, all programs now load much more slowly. Outlook can take 20-30 seconds to open, and lists of email and contacts now take as much as a minute to load.
This is only true for the user account with the Aperture library, as programs for other users seems to work fine.
I tried running disk utilities, restarting machine, but no difference.
Activity monitor shows no unusual memory, CPU or disk activity.
I started a new user account, and all worked fine again...until I again created an aperture library, and again, even if Aperture is not started, everyting else runs slowly.
Is there a file indexing feature that is overwhelmed by the addition of a large aperture library? (Deleting the Aperture library doe snot solve the problem-only startign a new user accountdoes).

dphughes wrote:
...in both cases maintaining referenced files stored outside the catalog/library. The Aperture library is 500% the size of the Lightroom catalog - even with restricted preview sizes and no vault.
If this is true, there must be a logical explanation that is giving Aperture users some benefit for the increased Library size. Sorry been a long time since I looked at Lightroom. Does it store the same size previews and thumbnails as Aperture? Since you are using referenced files and Aperture is using non-destructive edits and even new versions do not create duplicate files (only a new set of pointers to the referenced masters), one would think previews and thumbnails must be handled differently. Since you use both, what could it be?
The Aperture Vault is a separate library than the Aperture Library so having a Vault of course should not impact the size of the Aperture Library.

After installing Aperture and leaving photos in iPhoto library, why did iphoto library size almost double?

I installed Aperture and chose to leave all my images in the iPhoto library until I became more comfortable/familiar with Aperture.
I was looking at my hard drive space and see that the available space went way down. In Finder, the Aperture library.ap library is 17.97 gb and the iPhoto library is 122.75 gb.
When I open iPhoto, it says that it contains 19349 images/87 gb.
What happened? Is that extra size related to the Aperture referencing the images? Should I delete and start over, and move all the images into Aperture so that they are managed there?
I'm just figuring my way around Aperture, and I'm trying not to over-think the organizational differences, but this size discrepancy seems a bit too much.

I wish I had more info for this but I'm stumped. As I said there is no reason Aperture would increase the iPhoto library size by importing iPhoto's library.
BTW how did you do the import, that might shed some light on the problem.
The image count between the backup and the live iPhoto libraries seems fairly consistent so why the jump in size I can't say. And as for the increase in the number of images in Aperture, you started with an empty Aperture library, correct? And did you import anything directly into Aperture since you did the iPhoto import?
I'm still a little confused on the whole thing where Aperture shows both original and edited versions of an image, and some show both RAW & JPEG versions of an image,
Well Aperture really doesn't show both the original and edited versions, all you ever see are the versions unless you specifically ask to see the master. When you import an image into Aperture a version of the master is automatically made and displayed. Because at this point the version is no different then the master (you haven't made any adjustments to it yet) the version looks exactly like the master but it is the version you are seeing.
As for the RAW & JPG thing, if you shoot both RAW + JPG's in your camera when you import them you have the choice of which to make the master or to make each one a master. Not sure if that is what you are referring to.
I'm wondering whether I would have been better off just moving the whole iPhoto library into Aperture at the beginning, and deleting the iPhoto library.
That is definitly one option and the option most users who switch eventually make. You're not going to want to have both programs handeling your photos. But you should probably hold off until you;re more omfortable with Aperture and make sure you have a good backup of the iPhoto library before you do anything.
Remember when you import the iPhoto library into Aperture you're only choice is to copy the images not move them. This is done so that you can make sure all went OK before doing anything with iPhoto.
If you have the room you could try bringing in the iPhoto library backup, and trying the import again into a new empty Aperture library.
regards

IPhoto crashed during file transfer. Cannot recover photos by rebuilding the library and there is library size discrepancies.

Hi,
I am using an iPhone 4S and running iPhoto '09 version 8.1.2 (204) on OS X (version 10.9.2).
I was transferring photos from my iPhone to iPhotos with the option of deleting the originals on the phone after transfer. IPhoto crashed at some point and I had to "Force quit" the application.
Now, 3/4 th of all my pics is deleted on my iPhone and they are not in iPhoto either! I tried repairing and rebuilding the library as suggested elsewhere on this forum but nothing has worked.
The library size is currently 11.6 GB but the rebuilt library is 5.6 GB. I think the library was around 5 GB as well before transfer. I also tried using the "iPhoto library manager" to rebuild the library. There is no difference between the pictures in the rebuilt library and the default library, but again the new, rebuilt one is 11.6 GB and the library it uses for rebuilding 5.6 GB! So, I think the pictures are there somewhere but I am not recovering it.
Any suggestions as to how to recover deleted photos from my iPhone or to restore the iPhoto library would be muc appreciated.
Many thanks,
P.S. I do not have a recent iTunes or iCloud backup.

If you sync photos between the Mac and other devices via iTunes there will be an cache folder created that will grow over time. That's what the new library doesn't include and, in part, is the reason for the size discrepance.
iPhoto 8.1.2 is only marginally compatilbe with Mavericks and, as Linc suggested, should be upgraded to iPhoto 9.5.1 to be completely compatible.
OT

Discrepancy between iTunes Library size and stored folder size

Hi
I'm looking around for ways to clear up my computer's hard drive, and typically it seems that my iLife libraries seem to be the bulk of it. The main problem is that iTunes claims that my iTunes Library size is some 21GB, when the size of the "iTunes Library" folder claims all the music accounts to 26GB. This doesn't include any content in the 'TV Shows' or 'Movies' folders.
The only thing I can think of is that not all of the music in my iTunes Music folder is in my iTunes Library... is there a simple way to check which ones aren't? Or is there another reason why there would be such a difference in the sizes?
Thanks in advance.

It may take some creative thinking rather than expertise to figure this one out.
Oh, and my girlfriend got herself a standard MacBook a month ago, which has possibly sown the seeds of envy since it has as much RAM and a faster processor than my PowerBook MacBook Pro-wise, let's see what MacWorld in 2 weeks brings
Then, it may be time to talk to the bank - or the finance people at Apple - about how best I can pretend I can afford one

SQL Server replication and size differences of source and destination databases

I set up snapshot replication for a DB between two SQL instances. On the source instance, the DB shows as 106612.56MB with 34663.75MB as available free space. I expected that the replica would then end up being 71948.81MB (106612.56 - 34663.75
because it wouldn't replicate the white space). The resultant replica database is showing as 35522.94MB. The required data appears to be present in the replicated DB as the SSRS reports that use it are able to find the data they look for. But
why the large discrepancy in size between the source and replicated DB? The replicated DB is less than 1/2 the size of the source DB. I've searched around and can't seem to find any explanation. I realize this isn't mirroring so the DBs will
not be identical in size but I did not expect to see such a large difference between the two. I am replicating all almost all articles (tables, stored procs, etc.) with the exception of a handful of stored procedures and user-defined functions that either
reference invalid column names in a table (vendor bug) or reference another DB that is not present on the replica's instance. I would expect these 4-5 articles can not account for a 37000 MB size difference between the two DBs.
Please note that this has nothing to do with transaction log size. I am specifically talking about the database size and am not looking at the size that combines both DB and TxLog size.
Any insight?

Another factor could be that on the publisher the data is distributed through pages, paragraphs and extents. Depending on your fill factor and the amount of deletes and your datatype, there could be space in the pages, paragraphs and extents which have not
been reclaimed.
During the bcp process which is part of the snapshot application process on the subscriber all the data will be in the tables in a contiguous fashion. I would suspect this would be why you have the difference in space usage.
looking for a book on SQL Server 2008 Administration?
http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Server-2008-Management-Administration/dp/067233044X looking for a book on SQL Server 2008 Full-Text Search?
http://www.amazon.com/Pro-Full-Text-Search-Server-2008/dp/1430215941

Time Machine Picture Library size is 2GB smaller in backup than computer disc.

Time Machine Picture Library size is 2GB smaller in backup than computer disc using Cmd I (Eye, not EL—don't we all love sans serif fonts as default) for both info.
Ah, this is readable at faster reading speeds.
Now ( oops the return key killed the font setting).
Now, we'll use run-on paragraphs. OK? ¶ On topic: I need more space to install a newer iOS on my iPhone. ¶ Someone at Apple Store Genius Bar advised deleting the album of pictures originally copied from my computer when I had vast memory space since it is already on the computer. Got 1GB About to say Available was still too low for the new iOS install. ¶ Another Apple Store Genius Bar advised making a good backup using TimeMachine on my computer and deleting all the pictures from my iPhone by the painful method of selecting each collection. ¶ So I thought I'd check how successful the backup was. Cmd I (doesn't look like El, yea!) on the Picture Library was 38 GB on my back up disc and 40 GB on my computer disc. ¶ Desktop folder is 87.1 MB (87,091,206 bytes) in both. How do I get the other 2 GB on the backup?

Time Machine Picture Library size is 2GB smaller in backup than computer disc using Cmd I (Eye, not EL—don't we all love sans serif fonts as default) for both info.
Ah, this is readable at faster reading speeds.
Now ( oops the return key killed the font setting).
Now, we'll use run-on paragraphs. OK? ¶ On topic: I need more space to install a newer iOS on my iPhone. ¶ Someone at Apple Store Genius Bar advised deleting the album of pictures originally copied from my computer when I had vast memory space since it is already on the computer. Got 1GB About to say Available was still too low for the new iOS install. ¶ Another Apple Store Genius Bar advised making a good backup using TimeMachine on my computer and deleting all the pictures from my iPhone by the painful method of selecting each collection. ¶ So I thought I'd check how successful the backup was. Cmd I (doesn't look like El, yea!) on the Picture Library was 38 GB on my back up disc and 40 GB on my computer disc. ¶ Desktop folder is 87.1 MB (87,091,206 bytes) in both. How do I get the other 2 GB on the backup?

Font Size Difference between Exe and Labview IDE

I'm stumped on the following issue and surprizinglycan't find any references that are similar on this forum.
I've developed an application which, when built to an Exe, has different font sizes than when executed on the same computer in the Labview Integrated Development Environment. In each instance the screen resolution is the same. I've used the "Application Font". I'm having trouble figuring why the font would render differently in each case. Of possible signifigance is that I'm running the Exe by simply browsing to the folder where the build procedure drops it instead of building an installation.
I've attached one of the most glaring examples that shows the rendering in each case.
I'm hoping that someone can point me in the right direction to resolve this issue.
Attachments:
Font Differences1.zip ‏1704 KB

Hi Doctor,
two notes:
for the font size differences: I would try to change the font settings
to a more 'specific' font like Arial 14pt. The application font is set
somewhere in an ini-file and the setting may change with the
environment (IDE vs. exe-rt).
for your attachment: please convert pictures to jpg or png. This will
reduce size by orders of magnitude :-) And please crop them, unless you
have a very (VERY) beautiful desktop background picture!
Best regards,
GerdW
CLAD, using 2009SP1 + LV2011SP1 + LV2014SP1 on WinXP+Win7+cRIO
Kudos are welcome

Library size difference

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for