Workflow: Camera - Aperture - iPhoto

Question

Hi there, some questions regarding the workflow that I use. Like everything, it has its ups and its downs. What I´m trying to do - of course - is to eliminate the downs. Please feel free to comment.
1 - Shooting in RAW
I use a Nikon D200 for photography. I have this set to shoot in RAW. This gives me maximum quality and flexibility afterwards. Yes, the files are large, but with the prices of memory cards, this is no problem (for me). I have my camera set up in the AdobeRGB (1998) color space, although shooting in RAW does not assign a color profile to the files, as far as I know.
2 - Processing in Aperture
I import the files in Aperture. This Apple program gives me the possibility to totally work in RAW (I ahrdly ever use Photoshop any more). In the import step, an AdobeRGB (1998) color profile is assigned to the pictures. I have my monitor calibrated (Colorvision), so the camera and monitor profile work together to show me the exact image.
3 - Export from Aperture to network disk cabinet (NAS)
When I´m finished adjusting the pictures in Aperture, I use the export function to make JPG copies and store the JPG´s on a network attached storage (disk cabinet). I later use to JPG´s in iPhoto.
Question - What image resolution should I use to create the JPG´s. I have read all sorts of confusing stuff about pixels and DPI and how these things are not the same. What I want, is to have iPhoto display the pictures in a good quality, without taking too long to load them. Which resolution do you guys think I should use?
The original photo´s - still in RAW - are kept in Aperture. When I want to make prints, I do this from Aperture, using the RAW pictures. I later save the Aperture projects as containers to my NAS.
4 - Showing off in iPhoto
I import the JPG´s from my NAS. I do not copy the files to the library, but have iPhoto point to the NAS-based files.
Question - Do you people have all your pictures stored in the library? The library seems to get really really big...... but maybe there are some advantages that I do not see right now. A possible advantage would be, that by copying the picturews in the library, there is a possibility to link a color profile to them. Does anyone have a nice comparison of pro´s and cons of both possibilities?
I use iPhoto to show my stuff through Front Row. Of course, my NAS has to be running... Hmmmm maybe that would be another advantage of storing the pictures directly in the library...
I bought iLife 08 a few days ago and als got a .MAc account, so now I also have the possibility to create web galleries. Great stuff !!
Question - Am I correct that there is no possibility to decide on the resolution of the pictures on the gallery? So, which resolution are they?
Question - I assume that, when I create a gallery, the pictures are copied from my computer (iPhoto library) to a .Mac server so that everyone can see them without my computer having to be running?
These are my questions. So, what do you guys think? Again, please feel free to comment on anything I have written here. Thanks.
Kind regards,
Willem
(Netherlands)

Answer 1

Terence, thanks for your quick reaction. Let me try to clarify the situation.
In my workflow, I try to separate between processing and digital publishing.
*For processing*, I use Aperture. For this, I import pictures into a project in Aperture, and I do all sorts of actions on them until I'm satisfied with the results. In this proces, I work in RAW. I also show the pictures that I'm working on to the relevant people (clients, friends) in Aperture slideshows. While I work in Aperture, the pictures are stored inside the Aperture library which is on my local harddrive. I use a vault to make backups while I'm in the processing stage.
When I'm thru with processing. what I want to do is get (selected) pictures into iPhoto. I want these to be in a good quality, taking into account that most of the time, I will be showing them digitally thru Front Row, a iPhoto slideshow or in a web gallery. Of course, these pictures need not be in RAW quality. I think, a decent JPG quality will do just fine. Remember, if I want to make prints, I use Aperture since this has far better controls.
I use a NAS to store all my relevant stuff. I have several shares set up on the NAS, like "media", "backup" and home shares for different users (mostly private users but also my business user, I'm self-employed).
So, for example, when I listen to music thru iTunes, it actually points to music on the NAS. Therefor, my NAS has to be running. This is a downside of the NAS solution. Pro's of using a NAS are, for me:
- it is a RAID disk cabinet, so with extra security built-in;
- the local harddrive in my iMac would be too little to hold all my stuff (since I'm a music purist, I do not compress my music so the files are rather large....)
So, for *digital publishing* the pictures, I thought it would be wise to have the pictures on my NAS. In this way, they are on a safe RAID cabinet and also, it keeps the iPhoto library from getting too large.
When I have exported the JPG's out of Aperture and maybe have made prints, I save the Aperture project as a container on my NAS and then I delete the Apeerture project. After that, I use iPhoto to show the stuff.
So, I cannot point iPhoto to the Aperture, because that would mean that I would have to keep all pictures inside the Aperture.
Am I doing something stupid here?
Willem
Netherlands