Scripting with Aperture to select images

I am trying to create an Applescript and need a little help. It needs to read filenames from a text file and then select those images in Aperture and change their rating to 3 stars. I have the first part worked out, I think, but am having trouble getting the images selected from the list and their rating changed. Any ideas would be much appreciated.

It's my script in the first place...
The line you need to replace is:
"duplicate tImgID to this_project"
with:
"set main rating of tImgID to 3"
If the first part of the script is working, this should now set the rating to 3 instead of adding the Version to an Album.
One of the best places to get some beginner's scripts for Aperture is http://homepage.mac.com/jlarson7/index.html
Ian

Similar Messages

APERTURE: Small preview images do not show the changes.

excuse my lousy english...
Problem with Aperture:
Small preview images do not show the changes.
I use Aperture 3 since August 2010. By November and 10 projects later it ran normally.
Since the project 11 are in the preview images shown (on the bottom bar in the shared representation) and in the pictures in the books no adjustments. I change for example a picture in b / w it remains in the small preview images bunt even though the great View Erbild s / w is. Even in the books then the famous picture colorful and even grobpixelig.
This is of course in the processing of multiple images per project huntert pretty annoying to have no overview of processed images ...:-(
I had a third installed for books and not as close a relationship.
Does anyone have similar experience or know someone how can I fix this?
Thanks for reading!
Lokoe

Lokoe,
To make sure we understand:
I change for example a picture in b / w it remains in the small preview images bunt even though the *great View Erbild s / w is*.
I am not sure what "s/w" is, but I think you mean:
"I change picture to black and white and the small preview images remain *in color* even though the *big picture in the Viewer* is in B/W."
Even in the books then the famous picture colorful and even grobpixelig.
"In the books the selected picture is colorful and even ???"
"Grobpixelig" -> "grosspixelig" -> "Looks like big pixels???" Not quite sure of the translation. It's been 15 years since I spoke Deutsch!
nathan

Aperture 3 selected folders sync

Syncing my I phone with aperture 3 selected folders gives me an error -50 as the size of he library is too big and the option "selected folders' id greyed out...

Error -50 is being caused by the photo cache, which you say you've deleted, correct? If you can select the whole library, but selected albums are still greyed out, that usually means that aperture has not built all the previews for the photos in question. Perhaps someone from the aperture forum might be better able to direct you, as I have not used aperture 3.0, yet.
http://discussions.apple.com/category.jspa?categoryID=184

If I select multiple images to apply a change to all Aperture it does so only with the first selected. Why?

If I select multiple images to apply a change to all openings it does so only with the first selected. Why?

You probably have Primary Selection only on.
Aperture identifies the images you’ve selected by displaying them with a white border. When you select a group of images, the actively selected image, called the primary selection, appears with a thick white border and the rest of the selected images appear with thin white borders.
Primary Only button: Click this button to make changes to the primary image selection only.

Can't select projects for iPhone to sync with Aperture

I'm migrating from iPhoto to Aperture 3.3.1
I'm on a 2009 Mac Mini using Lion.
I can easily import iPhone photos into Aperture, no problem.
I've managed to get iTunes to allow selecting sync between my iphone 4S (latest OS5) and Aperture. All well and good. But...
What I don't seem to be able to do is select anything of substance to sync. For one thing, the only items available for sync are "Events"--for example "last 20 events" and macros like that. Since Aperture doesn't deal with "events" but rather "projects", I don't know how this translates.
I have a lot of projects in Aperture, but unlike when I was syncing with iPhoto--where I could select from a long list of specific items I'd created in iPhoto, I don't see any option in iTunes to sync custom named Projects, Albums, or any such thing from Aperture. Only these simple macros for recent events. And even when I select something like "the 20 most recent events" and try to sync, nothing is synced. Nothing gets transferred when I do a sync. No photos get transferred to the iPhone.
How do I get all of my projects to appear in iTunes as options to sync with my iPhone?

I see, we have been cross posting
What exactly are your settings in the "Previews" tab of the Aperture preferences? Have you enabled the sharing and the automatic creation of previews?
If you are not sure, if previews have been generated for all your projects, force the creation by selecting all images and selecting "Photos > Update Previews".
Since iPhoto and Aperture now share the same library, I don't understand why selecting Aperture as the sync source would be any different than selecting iPhoto in this regard.
Do I understand you correctly - You have only one library right now, that you alternately open in Aperture and iPhoto?
Then only one of the two Applications will show the contents: Aperture or iPhoto. The results I have show you above in my previous post do apply, when I have two libraries, one used with iPhoto and one used with Aperture. The same library openened in turns with iPhoto or Aperture will only show all contents for one of the two apps; I assume this is to keep the photo cache inside the library small - otherwise you would have to waste space for two photos caches.
When I try to sync my Aperture library with iTunes, I see all projects like shown above with the switch set to Aperture, but set to iPhoto I also see only the two events you have shown. So use the application to sync your photos that will show all albums or events/projects.
Regards
Léonie

How to best store images with Aperture's Library?

I do not understand, after all this time, how the Aperture library works. I've done a little research online but I cannot see anything which satisfies me. The problem is that I have a 500GB HDD and its getting full, with Aperture taking up roughly 300GB of it!
I find that I have a library with 317.91GB in it and the folder has 47k images, but my library has over 100k, so are the rest inside the library? Am I doubling up the amount of imagery with them organised in my Photos folder and a big Aperture library?
I'm not sure if I need the two or wether I can amalgamate the two, so if anybody know please let on thanks.

Thanks SierraDragon for your thorough reply, but I can't be using Managed-Masters because 95% of my Pictures are outside of the library and referenced, I have since found out. I wasn't under the impression the default was to store inside the library, I have always saved to the Pictures folder.
I know about the 70% HDD issue (although I thought it was 50%), but what can I do, I can't split my Aperture Library, I wan't everything in one place. Storage on an external drive is a no no because I use a MacBook, also I have only FW400 and USB2, so I know internal storage is best and of course SSD would solve a lot of my problems.
Mr. Endo is advocating the use of Managed-Masters while you keep telling me to rely on a Referenced-Masters library, but I think Managed is better because everything is in one place. Also, I'm had an internal HDD failure before and although I'd made a recent backup with Vaults (I have backed up with vaults since v.2 by the way) and Time Machine, the process of piecing back together the library was arduous to say the least - it was all manual!! If it were all contained inside the library file It would have been simple, right?
As my library is already 317.91GB I am left a little unsure as to why, because I know I have most of my images stored in the Pictures folder (122.64GB) but not sure why its so big just from Reference images and metadata (which is basically text!). I base this on the "File Searches" (Managed/Referenced) which Mr Endo advised me to do and with only 7321 images as Managed the rest (126,422) are not inside, so why so big, my library being mostly JPEG and consisting of 133,743 images??
How can the Referenced-Masters Library remain a reasonable size if placed on an external source like you say? surely it will be the same size anywhere?! You mean my local HDD will be kept under control, well sure, but tethering an external HDD is no fun with a MacBook as I use it on my lap. I think that storing imagery inside the Library is better, I'm not one of those who touches the folder structures in the Pictures folder and work exclusively inside Aperture, it seems like those who use referenced masters are worried about that.
I base my decision on centralisation as, having read the following, I get the impression that Managed will allow Vaults to back everything up, even though I have a Time Machine its easier this way. The only part of the document which I think is opinionated, rather than factual, is the last bit which mentions:
"As a point of comparison; most hobbyists use Managed, most pros use Referenced."
ref: http://aperture.maccreate.com/2010/01/12/tip-0-referenced-vs-managed-files/
..I must be a hobbyist because I don't shoot weddings and edit on the road.
Another site had most people using Managed because its easier to handle imagery and back up, while those who used a reference library did so because of the restrictions of space on a portable and bad habits from the past. Yet I believe that I can manage my library on one HDD and don't fancy the idea of tethering external storage from a MacBook.
The only things I am concerned with now are the the "Offline" and "Missing" discrepancies in my library; which come to 1277 images, I don't know how this happened but I should be able to get them back with my Time Machine backup shouldn't I?
So, if I move to a Managed Library with the built in tool (set to move, not copy) I've been told I might get duplicates, hmm, this is to be avoided, but what on earth is taking 317.91GB of space when 95% of my library is outside of it and in a folder which totals to 122.64GB?? Further, is it an all or nothing affair when engaging in this change or can I do selected imagery at a time?
Thanks.

Using Photoshop Elements as external editor with Aperture 3: What are issues with requiring 8-bit image?

While I would do most of my photo edits with Aperture there may be times I would like to do special effects that a PSE might offer with layers. I am considering purchasing PSE 10 and was concerned with having to lose information by saving as an 8-bit image. Can anyone enlighten me of the circumstances when this would be of concern?
Thanks.

Can anyone enlighten me of the circumstances when this would be of concern?
If you had to do high quality printing larger than 8x10.
Before buying PSE trial Pixelmator and try GIMP. Note that GIMP (now v2.6) will have 16-bit per channel with v3.0.
-Allen

Creating a pdf with user selectable images?

Hello, I'm quite new to indesign and need some help. I really hate to be that guy saying "quick someone fix my problem for me" but I'm signifigantly behind schedual and this is holding me up.
Basically, I need some way to alow a used to select from and print up to 8 of around 60 images. An ideal situation would be somehow being able to select images from dropdown lists, but as I said I'm behind schedual and no longer care if it's pretty or intuitive as long as it works.
If anyone can offer some advice on acomlishing this I would be forever greatful. Oh, I'm using cs6

I would make a web site for this. I might use a PDF for showing off the options/images and point them to the web site.
That said, you can use images on buttons, or layers, and show/hide the images using javascript. What is displayed is what will print. I would put the request for aid into the Acrobat forum as someone may have already scripted this. I probably wouldn't use ID for more than the static elements to make the PDF pretty. Then use Acrobat to add images and script it.
Mike

Image Artifacts with Aperture, not ACR or Capture One?

I generally use Capture One, but for the first time I’m using Aperture to process a series of photos from a just-completed trip to northern Arizona/southern Utah. I’ve been very impressed with Aperture’s workflow, and would very much like to make Aperture my primary tool for managing my photos.
However, tonight I discovered some very unsettling artifacts in the prints that I made in Photoshop using files that Aperture converted from RAW. Upon closer inspection, the artifacts also appear in Aperture, when I zoom in. But interestingly, neither Capture One nor Adobe Camera Raw shows these artifacts to nearly the same degree. Scroll down for examples of the artifact as seen in Aperture, Adobe Camera Raw, Capture One, and Photoshop.
For completeness, here are the specifics of my configuration:
Canon 1Ds RAW images
PowerMac G5 dual 2.5 GHz
OSX 10.4.7
Aperture 1.1.2
Photoshop CS
Capture One Pro 3.7.4
Here is the photo in which I first discovered the artifacts, which are visible in the full-sized image and on the print, but not in this small jpeg:
The artifacts I’m referring to are regularly-spaced train track-looking things in certain sections of the sandstone. The issue can be seen on 100% crops taken from the left side, about 1/3 of the way down from the top. Here is the area as it appears in Aperture using View > Zoom to actual size:
And here are the Aperture adjustments that I made:
Okay, I used Open With External Editor, to load the image into Photoshop – at its original size. Here is the same area, viewed at 100%, and the artifacts are plainly visible:
Notice that the artifacts appear in much the same way they did in Aperture. Just as a test, I used Aperture to “Export” the image as a 16-bit TIFF format, and then opened in Photoshop. Same artifacts as before:
For comparison I opened the same RAW file in Capture One. The artifacts are barely discernable! :
And here are the Capture One settings I used:
And here is the Capture One conversion as it appears in Photoshop, viewed at 100%. Again, the artifacts are essentially absent:
The image dimensions are almost exactly (but not quite) the same as the image that Aperture converted.
And, although it’s not part of my usual workflow, I converted the image using Adobe Camera Raw. The results show that, like Capture One, ACR doesn’t exhibit these artifacts (although it does show a bit more chromatic aberration):
Just to be clear, these artifacts ARE visible in my 16 x 24” print.
It’s a bit discouraging that, on my first serious attempt at using Aperture, I discovered these artifacts. It may be that this is a rare event with Aperture – or maybe not.
Has anyone else seen this sort of thing? Are there other discussions of the issue? And last but not least, can anyone suggest a way that I might avoid this in the future?
Thanks!
-- Jim
G5 Dual 2.5 GHz Mac OS X (10.4.6)

Here is another example of this effect, but with a different type of subject matter: a ball. The original is a raw file from a Canon 350D/Digital Rebel.
In Aperture's Zoom mode there is a pattern on the ball that looks like Maze Craze:
The pattern is maintained to a lesser degree as the image is sized down:
Exported as Original Size png:
Exported as Half Size png:
Now, as pointed out in the earlier post, the real problem is that other apps do not have this problem. The following is from ACR:
Aside from the pattern, Aperture does look better, but the pattern is nasty and almost makes the image unusable.
Will
Dual Core 2.3GHz PowerMac G5, 2GB RAM, GeForce 6600 Mac OS X (10.4.6) Canon Digital Rebel XT, Edirol UA-5
Dual Core 2.3GHz PowerMac G5, 2GB RAM, GeForce 6600 Mac OS X (10.4.6) Canon Digital Rebel XT, Edirol UA-5
Dual Core 2.3GHz PowerMac G5, 2GB RAM, GeForce 6600 Mac OS X (10.4.6) Canon Digital Rebel XT, Edirol UA-5

Anyone having trouble sharing large images via email with Aperture 3 and OSX 10.7.2?

I am having trouble sharing images via email with Aperture 3. No matter what size I have in the preferences, the image is thumbnail size. The requested size flashes on the email a couple of times but the small size remains and is sent. I am using OSX 10.7.2. Any suggestions how I may send larger sizes?
oldgranddad

I have taught many how to use GUI-based computers. The number of controls they are aware of on the screen always progresses, usually linearly with the amount of time they spend actively learning the GUI. Beginners are totally flummoxed that windows can hide other windows. A step beyond that, they are amazed that they can resize windows using the mouse cursor. Those two are trivial to most users today, but they illustrate 1. that there is nothing "intuitive" about the GUI, and 2. that the amount one perceives is dependant on the amount one knows. IME, this has nothing to do with age, and everything to do with experience using a GUI.
Here is a good hint: if you are using a Mac and can't figure out how to do something, look for something to click. If you find something that seems promising, try "{Option}+clicking".
The interface is richer than any one person can master. Frank's statement "most times we all fail to see everything " is, imho, _always_ true. We never see everything, even in the grossly limited resolution of our computer screens.

Problems with impromptu slideshow in lightroom 5, functions such as flagging, rating not applying to all selected images?

I'm using windows lightroom 5 and have just started to learn the programme. I am using adobe photoshop lightroom 5 classroom in a book which is an official training workbook from Adobe so you'd think the instructions would work for the lessons but they don't. Is anyone else having problems getting ratings, flagging, colour labels to apply to selected images. Also the esc button doesn't take me back to the main working screen. Any ideas?
Thanks

Can you zip up a few of your GoPro images, upload them to dropbox.com and post a share link, here, so others can experiment with them, or do you mean this issue is global to all camera models?

Create new album with new versions of selected images

Is there an easy way to create a new album containing new versions of the currently selected images?
Some explanation where I need that feature:
First I go through the images and adjust them for the some purpose. Then I need the same images in another place also and I now that there I need them to be a bit brighter or cropped differently or something. So it would be nice to be able to just select the images and say "I want a new album containing new versions of these images".
Is that possible somehow? Have I just missed something while reading (riffling through) the manual...

There is not such an option but it could come in handy. You can use Aperture's feedback to suggest it.
For now the only way would be duplicate versions and move them to another album.

Regarding Lightroom Slideshow module: When I click on the preview button I get the following error: An internal error has occurred: ?:0: attempt at index a nil value. This occurs with any group of images I select in my catalog.

Regarding Lightroom Slideshow module: When I click on the preview button I get the following error: An internal error has occurred: ?:0: attempt at index a nil value. This occurs with any group of images I select in my catalog.

Jeannine,
If you follow the advice of the previous poster Julie Kmoch and then gradualy add presets back in one at a time you might be able to find the one that is causing the issue. I may be guessing, but I believe the issue has something to do with either an incompatible Preset setting (eg a older preset in newer version of LR) or a corrupt Preset.
Say you bought LR2 and imported a bunch of Presets from the internet, cuz 'Hey these effects are cool and I don't have to recreate the wheel', and then you upgraded to LR3 (not a clean install) and now one of the Presets that calls a certain slider setting or value that is different in LR3 doesn't work anymore. This might be why it throws the error, but again I am just speculating.
Location of LR Preset folder in Windows Vista/ Windows 7
C:/Users/<YourUserName>/AppData/Roaming/Adobe/Lightroom/Develop Presets
If you do not see the folder AppData, you may need to change the settings in Windows Explorer to 'Show Hidden Files and Folders'. To do that in Windows Vista/ Windows 7, open a Windows Explorer window, Click on Organize, then Foler and Search Options. Then click on the View tab and select the option button next to Show hidden files, folders and drives.
Hope this helps a bit,
Glenn

Best way to select image with fine hairs?

I have been using the quick selection tool to select images that I want to remove from their backgrounds or edit separately. It always works well except in the hair area. Even when the hair is smooth it looks a little unnatural, and when the hair is flying around I don't know what to do except to laboriously outline things in extreme close-up. Any other suggestions?

There are several methods available. Here is one tutorial which helped me get a grip on masking hair.
http://www.graphic-design.com/Photoshop/remove_backgrounds/index.html

Too late to start up with Aperture?

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

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

Scripting with Aperture to select images

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for