Workflow for keeping referenced masters organized

Hello, I'm coming to Aperture 3 having used LR for several years (after initially using Aperture 1). I love the feel and features of Aperture 3, but there's one thing I'm having a hard time with and that's working with referenced masters. I have a simple year>month folder structure on my HD for all digital images, and I'd like to keep it this way in case I ever decide to abandon Aperture again. My workflow for importing pictures into LR was to dump the card contents into an "Unsorted" folder, then to delete the ones I don't want, and drag the rest into the correct folders. I liked being able to do this in LR and have the contents of my hard drive reflect the folder structure within LR.
I'm aware that Aperture is designed mainly to have the pictures in a library, but that really freaks me out for the long term, so I imported all my folders into A3 in the same structure they are on the HD. I have to be careful about rearranging pictures into different folders because sometimes I forget that they stay where they are on the HD!
So I'm wondering, does anyone have a workflow suggestion for those of us who want to be able to organize images within A3, and have the Finder folder structure reflect that of A3? Manually relocating masters and then dragging the images to their new location in A3 is really tedious!
Message was edited by: disconnekt

Everyone on this thread is doing way too much manual work...
There is a function in aperture for existing images under File->Relocate Masters that will automatically create a folder structure of your choosing for you. You can do this at anytime, and it is nearly impossible to screw it up, because you can always re-do it.
In fact it is so powerful, It makes sense for people with unorganized Hard drives to just import everything in place, set up their projects and organize their masters in aperture, then use File->Relocate masters to cleanup the filesystem side of things.
As far as importing new images, here is what you do:
1. Create your project.
2. Click Import.
3. On the right side, change "store files in" from "in the aperture library" to a "root" folder of your choosing. Example: Mine is set to "Media HD/Raw Masters".
4. Change the "subfolder" dropdown to either use one of the built in presets, or create one of your own. Example: Mine is set to "YYYY/Project Name". This is so I can easily view my master files by Year and then project name, so at the end of a year, I can easily archive these raw files and take them off my editing machine, but leave my library and projects all in tact.
Why, oh why would you want to use the finder to do your selects when its so much fast in aperture? Why manually create folder structures when the computer can do it for you?
The new aperture 3 import is even faster than photo mechanic, since it gives you almost immediate thumbnails to begin reviewing from the embedded JPGs in the raw files, while it copies the full masters in the background.
If this answers your question, please mark it as solved - If you have more questions, email me at "matthew at (my username lowercase no spaces) dot com". I will send you a "stock" email I send people with screenshots if needed.
Message was edited by: Matthew Bergsma

Similar Messages

LR workflow for keeping track of copyright submissions?

Instead of reinventing the wheel, I thought I'd ask here first.
I have around 8,000 images in a smart collection of photos taken between Jan 1, 2010 and March 31, 2010. I've added my copyright info into the metadata and am in the process of exporting a 700px image of each image to a 1st_qtr2010_copyright folder on my hard drive before submitting them.
I am considering adding these phrases to the Keywords into the original raw images: "copyrighted" and "submitted April 16, 2010". In the future, I should be able to search for all "copyrighted" images or a refinded search for any "submitted..." group. And when the certificate is returned for the images, I'd add one more keyword like "© completed July 20, 2010" and/or the copyright document number.
I guess the target is to figure out how to keep track of the images already submitted, the ones officially copyrighted, and any images still needing the copyright submissions.(images that do not contain "copyrighted")
If anyone here has a tried and tested method or workflow using Lightroom, I'd love to hear them before I go any further.
Thanks in advance,
M. Jackson

Sean and Jao,
I found the tick box now.
I create a Keyword Set called something like "Private Keywords" and inclued the keyword "copyrighted" (with the boxes unchecked). I select one or more images, then click the copyrighted keyword in the list? I think I got it. I then add additional Private Keywords to my set and use them as needed. Right?
Going back to my original question, I am looking for help with a workflow suggestion to help keep track of submissions to the copyright office. I see the option in LR to assign either Unknown, Copyrighted, or Public Domain in the Metadata. So, I import them into LR as unknown until I prepare the jpgs for uploading, at which point, I change all of the original RAW images to Copyrighted. At the point of uploading and payment, the images are copyrighted for most purposes, but there is still the final step of getting the certificate from the copyright office a few months later. I'd like to find all the ones submitted in that group and assign a new Private Keyword that associates the registration number and maybe date with the photos in that group.
Unless I am missing more features in LR, assigning appropriate keywords would be necessary to keep track of the whole process. Keeping some of them private makes a lot of sense. If I were to run a copyright batch every few weeks, it would be easy to visualize eight or nine "in progress" copyright submission groups waiting for the final certificates.
Any additional advice would be appreciated.
M. Jackson

Best Practice for Keeping Imported Music Organized? - Help Please

I download tunes and am looking at the best way to keep iTunes up to date with new downloads (as opposed o CD rips). Am i best to have all files in one overall folder and then just use iTunes to import the files from whatever folder they reside in (after the download) to the copy in iTunes and delete the original? To date Ive been keeping them scattered across drives and just using iTunes as the pointer to the original but now losing track as to what has been imported and what hasnt. Perhaps the above is a better way and if so....best to delete iTunes, reinstall with an empty database, import all and then delete from original flile locations? Help and thanks in advance!!
Porsche216

I import similar to the way you described. Import then delete original. I keep a folder just for importing. iTunes has a function consolidating the library. It will copy from the multiple locations to the iTunes library location. You would then have to delete the originals to free up space.

Regarding Backup of Referenced Masters: What Software do you use?

Hi, I have a portion of my library stored on an external drive via referenced masters. I back up these image files to another external drive. Currently I do this manually - I just copy the folders using the Finder. But I'm interesting in a program that can automatically backup these files incrementally and keep the backup up to date. What does everybody here use? Lacie Silverkeeping? Thanks.

GraemeSmith wrote:
The referenced masters are stored on an external drive, not the internal drive (which is backed up with Time Machine). Is it even possible to use Time Machine on an external drive?
Sure. Time Machine can backup whichever hard drives are plugged in to the machine on which Time Machine is running. This is to be distinguished from drives attached to the network, via Airport Extreme, for example. Time Machine won't get those.
Also the backup drive I want to use for the referenced masters is different that the Time Machine drive.
Gotcha. That obviously rules out Time Machine.

Referenced Masters on network

It appears that Aperture 3 broke support for storing Referenced Masters on an NFS share. My library is stored on the regular HFS+ drive used to boot the Mac, and in Aperture 2 I had no problems storing Referenced Masters on NFS. This allowed them to be automatically backed up when the file server did it's nightly backup.
As anyone else seen this issue, and if so, any chance you have a solution? Without this being fixed Aperture 3 is completely useless to me.

Re iPhoto on a NAS:
Still trying to solve this.
iPhoto needs to have the Library sitting on disk formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled). Users with the Library sitting on disks otherwise formatted regularly report issues including, but not limited to, importing, saving edits and sharing the photos. Simply a NAS is not a suitable home for an iPhoto Library.
Workaround: Make a dmg formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled) and put the Library on that and store it on the NAS.
I think I have to mirror the iTunes solution above,
This involves having iPhoto reference the files on the NAS with the Library on your internal HD or some other volume. I strongly suggest that you don't do that. Unlike Aperture, iPhoto has no tools to reconnect with lost masters (Originals in iPhoto) so should anything go wrong you'll find yourself re-connecting each individual photo in the Library with its Original +one by one+.
but figure out which folders to move
You would need to recreate your Library as a Referenced Library.
Regards
TD

HDV/ sony ZIU workflow for editing & mastering

I'm new to this forum so first off thanks for having me.
I'm trying to develope a successful workflow that will carry this studio throught the upcoming year of producion.
We wil be shooting HDV w/ the Z1U and editing in FCP 5.0...
We need to edit webisodes weekely as well as log and master the HDV footage for stock footage, broadcast use and other future applications.
Here is my initial game plan:
I was planning to work in SD by capturing the footage with the downconvert option (HDV-DV) strait off the camera. I'm doing this to keep my logging speed and disc space low. Also, I'm assuming that for exporting QTs for the web the quality will still look great.
Then later for my HDV masters I will open a new project in FCP, compile all my clips and re-capture the footage in HDV.
At this point I would be running all my FCP setups for native HD, 1080i60, etc. Then, Print to Video from my FCP project back to the Sony Z1U camera.
Does this make sense to other out there, considering we can't afford and HDcam deck or AJA Kona at this juncture?
Has anyone had issues re-capturing footage in HDV and/or printing back to tape?
Thanks and Aloha,
BGP Editor
G5 Mac OS X (10.3.9) AJA Io, FCP 5.0, Sony Z1U

Welcome!
I can't comment on you workflow,
however since you are looking towards the future, I would strongly recommend that you upgrade your OS X to 10.4.8, and purchase the FInal Cut Studio 5.1 crossgrade for $50.00 (before offer expires sometime in Dec I believe).
http://www.apple.com/universal/crossgrade/
FInal Cut Pro 5 was last updated to 5.0.4, there will be no more updates.
G5 1.8 DP (PCI-X) Mac OS X (10.4.8) ATI X800 XT, 4GB RAM, 20" & 23" ACDs, M-Audio Revolution 5.1, Fostex D15 DAT

Recently I noticed that when I change the name of a photo (correcting a mistake) it always goes back to the previous name, keeping the mistake I'm trying to correct. A spelling mistake, for example. As I keep my photos organized by name and not by date, t

Recently I noticed that when I change the name of a photo (correcting a mistake) it always goes back to the previous name, keeping the mistake I'm trying to correct. A spelling mistake, for example. As I keep my photos organized by name and not by date, this is very annoying.
And today it won't even read my camera's sd card, and I try with 2 different ones. If I restart the computer, leaving the memory card in, then it reads it; but if I pull it out and push it back in it doesn't see it. Whath am I doing wrong, if anything?
Diane

Where/how are you trying to change the name? If it is in Finder (after you've downloaded the pics to your desktop), highlight the pic icon and press Return. the name field will change and you can type in your new name. Hit Return again. That should make it "stick". If you're trying to do it elsewhere, please post the steps that you've tried.
As for your card: do you eject it properly? Either drag icon to trash or hit the eject symbol in the sidebar?

Workflow for editing and organizing video with PSE7 and PRE7

I'm quite new to using PSE to organize my videos, and would appreciate suggestions on tutorials or guides creating a nice workflow to keep the growing number of clips manageable.
What I've done is to import my videos into a separate catalog, and I kind of hoped that I could make version sets like with still photos. I can't seem to find that option. Is it possible?
Alternatively, I'd like to just replace the original clip with an edited version, but again I haven't found an easy way to do it.
Any suggestions on how to start are welcome, also if they take a different approach from what I mention above.

I've created an overview of the Organizer and its functions for Muvipix.com. You can find it here:
http://muvipix.com/products.php?subcat_id=7
Otherwise, there's unfortunately little information on it.
http://www.muvipix.com, a site set up by a number of experienced Premeiere Elements users with some support from Adobe, offers one of the most friendly, helpful forums on the web and includes a large number of complimentary products including tutorials, tips, DVD templates, stock footage, motion backgrounds and sound effects. And, for a small annual fee which we use to keep the site up and running, you can have unlimited downloads from our ever-growing library of high-end tutorials, tips and products.

Interesting Approach to Referenced Masters

With the usual caveat that your mileage may vary, would like to share the results of an experiment in using referenced masters.
My son in law is a very talented photographer who, for family reasons, prefers to edit on a laptop (17" MacBookPro) rather than a desk top set up.
He has upgraded to a 500 GB HD, but is running out of room. Time to relocate some masters to be sure that the has lots of space on his HD for system ops, caching, etc.
He has his old HD, now mounted in a cheap USB 2.0 case. I pointed out to him that as masters are write once/read many, and not even used that often in normal Aperture operations, putting the masters on the HD would probably incur very little loss of speed, and, with enough RAM, even that would be a one time only pause when loading.
So he moved a project or two and all was well. The difference in loading time was barely noticeable.
Then he got clever, and noted that he had a Time Capsule. What would happen if he hung the USB HD off of the Time Capsule so that:
-- It did not clutter up his lap or desk and,
-- The masters would still be accusable anywhere in the house.
The short answer was that there was no noticeable drop in performance. I was surprised.
For the record, the files in question are Nikon D90 NEF. Part of this effort is to clear up space on the existing HD to make ready for the arrival of a D800. Obviously, the D800 NEF will be larger, but I doubt that there will be much performance change as we are still talking about a very linear read of an unfragmented file.
Some small evidence that the time to load a RAW master into memory may be limited as much by bus speed and rendering speed as it is by HD performance. Clearly, HD read/write is very important for updating the versions/previews/etc., but probably the least important consideration for where you place your masters.
Offered for your consideration. Would be hearing the experiences of others.
DiploStrat

Kirby,
He doesn't do much/any brushing; most of his heavy editing is with the NIK suite.
As I understand Aperture, brushing will hammer the GPU and the Version file, but it ignores the Master, once it is loaded. This all makes sense. I also run Aperture 3 on a 2006 MBP with 2 GB of RAM and a 240 GB SSD. I can brush, edit, etc. but when working at full res with so little RAM there are definite pauses, some as long as 30 seconds, in the work flow. The short answer here is that even a fast SSD can't catch up to a real shortage of RAM and an older generation of GPU, only two cores, etc.
If you have enough RAM to get the entire Master into RAM and keep it there without it paging out, then the fact that the Master was initially on a slow drive should have no impact on your working speed.
Léonie,
This was all done under Snow Leopard. Most interesting links. Leaving aside all of the screaming and shouting, it seems silly that Lion should actively shut off this feature. Indeed, given all of Apple's push for iClouds, etc., you would think that this is exactly the kind of "bonus" feature that they would be touting. Referenced Masters require a bit of extra work on the part of the user, keeping track of whether the drive is direct connected, or networked shouldn't be that much extra. If anything, and given that Aperture can challenge even the healthiest Macs in a way that Lightroom doesn't seem to, the fact that you can sometimes gain speed by putting your Masters on slower hardware is actually a plus.
There is a small possibility that this is related to the idea that Aperture is a single user, not a collaborative system. But then, if I were releasing Aperture 4 tomorrow, I would come up with a multi-user version. There is a small, but vocal group of Aperture users who really want/need a multi-user, or at least a multi-computer workflow. Couple that with iCloud and the potential for newsies, sports shooters, and others, are amazing.
DiploStrat

Considering workflow for Aperture-based library?

Hi all, I'm an amateur photog, mostly sporting events, nature, and family stuff. I am using OSX 10.8.1, FCPX 10.0.5, and Aperture 3.3.2.
Until recently, I have had totally separate storage between stills and video: Photos in an Aperture library, and FCPX events for video. This works, but means that for any given event, I have masters in two places.
I recently learned that Aperture can now house ALL my source media, even my 60p video. I don't know exactly how recent this support is, but it was news to me. I like this potential to keep all originals/masters in one project location. It eases backups, helps my sense of security, and is nice for casual browsing of past events.
So I'm experimenting with consolidation of my video masters into Aperture projects, and creating FCPX events that point to them.
How I think the workflow looks:
Import from camera to Aperture. I store all masters/originals as referenced files using a simple "Year/Month/Project" organization on the drive.It's worth noting that as part of this step I use ClipWrap to losslessly convert AVCHD files to MOVs, although I don't think this is relevent to the overall workflow.
In FCPX, select Import Files...
Use the media browser to open the aperture event and select the video clips.
Uncheck "Copy files to FCP events folder"
The event is created.
Looking in finder, the event's Originals are links, as you would expect. However, interestingly, these links point not to the actual files, but to the Aperture library's "preview" files. These files are tiny MOVs that must only contain some sort of proxy or reference to the actual originals. I'm not familiar with this format or spec. I can play the files, they look like the originals, but they're tiny, under a megabyte in size.
At this point, everything seems to work fine. Editing in FCPX works normally, exporting in Compressor works, and I can even move the referenced masters around in Aperture (to a diferent folder structure for example) and FCPX has no problems with it, because it's pointing to Aperture's proxy files rather than directly to the originals.
So, my questions:
1. Is this sane? In other words, am I missing a problem that I haven't discovered? Does anyone else do this?
2. Because the "Originals" are links to these odd preview files, FCPXs date stamps are way off. I've always carefully kept my masters' datestamps accurate and used the organize by date view for events. I would give that view up if I had to, but it's nice. Any workaround?
3. What the heck are these proxy/preview MOV files? Aside from a hex editor, how can I tell where they point?
Thanks in advance.

Regarding question #2 above, I've experimented a little more, and found a potential problem: Because the time stamp of the files is incorrect, FCPX is unable to reconnect an existing project (that used an event where the files were stamped correctly) to a newly created project sourced from Aperture's native preview sharing, because the timestamps don't match.
This wouldn't be a problem if i were starting fresh, but even then I would be afraid that Aperture might touch those preview files at some point in the future thus breaking the timestamp that FCPX depends on to identify the clips.
As a workaround, if I import the files directly from the drive, rather than through the native preview sharing functionality, it shows the clips with the proper timestamps. This is ok by me.

Import photos from SD Card into a library with referenced masters

I have the following problem:
I would like to migrate from Aperture (that I used for the past couple of years) to Photos for OS X. (Well, let's say I feel kind of forced to by Apple's decision to abandon Aperture and since I do not like to switch to Lightroom (which I fear will soon be available via Adobe's Cloud system!)). I successfully migrated my Aperture library to Photos. My library is a 'referenced library', i.e. a library where the original photos ('masters') are NOT inside the library but stored in a separate location. In my case the original photos are stored on a NAS. Photos recognizes all my photos and by right-clicking on a photo I can select the 'Show in Finder' option and Photos correctly shows then the location of the corresponding photo on the NAS. So far so good.
The problem arises when I want to import new photos from the camera (or its SD card). I plugin the SD card into the Mac and fire up Photos. Then I click on 'Import'. I do not succeed in importing the photos from the SD card in a way that the original files (masters) are copied to the NAS (the place where I keep my masters). In fact when I import then everything (also the master files) are copied into the library (which is located on the Mac's internal SSD.) This happens despite I have deselected "Copy objects into photo library" in the Photos app Preferences.
(Another problem is that, with Aperture, I could import photos from the SD card in a way that the originals were copied to the NAS, renamed appropriately (e.g. <date>-<time>.JPG and put automatically in an Aperture-created folder structure (year/month/day). I fear that the only way to keep on working with 'referenced' masters will be by NOT using Photos' Import function directly for the import from the SD card, but first to copy 'manually' (using the Finder) the photos from the SD card to the NAS (after having created year, month, day folders manually) and then to use Photos Import function. Is this really the sad truth?
Another problem is: When I delete a photo from the library, it will NOT be deleted from the masters! :-(
Has anybody experienced the same problems?
Cheers
Rainer

The SanDisk website has a PDF owner's guide that says the following;
Macintosh Disk Icons: When you connect the MicroMate Reader/Writer on a Macintosh operating system, a removable disk icon labeled
“untitled” representing the MicroMate Reader/Writer will show on the desktop when a card is inserted.
It also has directions to drag the removable disk icon labeled “untitled” to the trash to remove the disk. There is also a support link to a ebox page on a secure site that won't let me go farther (I think I need a newer browser), so I can't find drivers.
My problem is that the icon doesn't show up and I can't find it in any applications I try. I know the Disney camera is a toy, its for my 5 year old, but I am having the identical problem with both the Disney camera and SanDisk.

Aperture 3 Backing Up Referenced Masters

I am trying to develop my workflow better.
I shoot images into the field and download them to my laptop. I then transfer them back to my iMac when I get home. I use Aperture 3 for my pictures.
In Aperture, I have all of my files referenced to a external drive. I want to back these photos up overnight using a Drobo or Synology NAS drive.
Does anyone have any experience on which would be better?
I could also implement a workflow in which the files will be referenced on the Drobo or NAS and then backed up overnight. I will be backing up the referenced just in case something were to happen to it.
Anyone have opinions on this?

Aperture 3 added a "Trash".
The deleted versions go into the trash, and you have to empty the trash to truly delete them. At this point it will ask if you want to delete the referenced masters as well.
As a pro, I'd rather not have a trash... But oh well, gotta appease the newbies.
Message was edited by: Matthew Bergsma

Workflow for moving photos/videos from iPhoto to LR

I used to use iPhoto, but have switched to LR. I'd like to move all the images/videos I have in iPhoto to LightRoom.
What is the workflow for making this move?
thanks
Greg

You can't run an iPhoto Library from a NAS. iPhoto needs to have the Library sitting on disk formatted Mac OS Extended (Journaled). Users with the Library sitting on disks otherwise formatted regularly report issues including, but not limited to, importing, saving edits and sharing the photos.
You can't convert a Managed Library to a Referenced Library (see below for definitions of managed and referenced) with iPhoto - and you probably shouldn't anyway, especially when the masters are on one volume and the library on another. See
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3062728?tstart=0
for more on why.
With Aperture, you can easily have the Masters on one volume and the Library on another, and you can convert the Library from Managed to Referenced easily.
However, if you di any editing your planned set up will not work. Both iPhoto and Aperture will never edit your original file. All processing in these apps is virtual. So, if you fix red-eye for instance, the image in iPhoto/Aperture will have the red-eye fixed. But the image on the NAS will be your original file, with the red-eye. So any device that accesses the images directly from the NAS will have he original image, not the processed one.
Is that what you want?
Regards
TD
Definitions:
A Managed Library, is the default setting, and iPhoto copies files into the iPhoto Library when Importing. The files are then stored in the Library package
A Referenced Library is when iPhoto is NOT copying the files into the iPhoto Library when importing because you made a change at iPhoto -> Preferences -> Advanced. (You unchecked the option to copy files into the Library on import) The files are then stored where ever you put them and not in the Library package. In this scenario you are responsible for the File Management.

Can't import referenced masters into Library

I've used referenced masters for years, since Aperture 1. Now I'm trying to import, and I get the error "Insufficient disk space". Here are the details
OSX 10.7.5
Aperture 3.4.1 (Just updated)
Current RAW Folder                              110 GB
Current Aperture Library                         9.9GB
Free space on startup disk                    13.3 GB   (not a lot, I know)
Space required (according to aperture)     3 GB
Folder I'm trying to import                         19.4 GB
Camera Nikon D7000, files NEF format. No previous problem with this camera.
If 100GB can be represented by 9.9 GB in the Aperture library, why does it want 16.3 GB to import 19.4 GB?
I have "Store files in their current location" selected in the Import pane.

Gil I think there are a couple of basics you need to come to grips with.
Assuming your Aperture library is on your start up disk and that you only have 13GB free, DO NOT PLACE ANYTHING ELSE ON THIS DRIVE, until you clear out some space adding more files to this drive is only asking for trouble.
So Aperture.
100GB is represented by 9.9GB, yes, Aperture has created previews of the referenced files and has a database to describe them = 9.9GB, 100GB of master files/images still reside on the other drive though.
The folder of files you are trying to import, 19.4 GB, you say you are now using a managed file workflow, that being the case Aperture now copies the files into the library, so there is no way that 19.4GB will fit into 13.3GB, plus there will then be an additional 1-2GB, based on 110GB=9GB, of space required by Aperture.
I hope this makes sense.
Moving forward, get youself two external drives, have you library, managed or not, along with any referenced files on one drive, the other drive use for your back up.
Tony

Aperture Workflow - need help creating workflow for photo management

Hi -
I currently shoot with a Canon SD890 (point & shoot) and a Nikon D300 (SLR). My photography is either personal photography or street photography. I may use some of my photography for a web project but that should not be considered right now. I shoot jpegs with the SD890 and RAW with the D300. I need to create a workflow that will allow me to manage all of my photos as well as the RAW vs JPEG aspect. Here are a few initial questions:
1) Should I separate the RAW and JPEGs in Aperture (two libraries)? One library for finished photos and one for negatives?
2) What folder structure should I use? Since I am not a professional photographer, I won't be shooting projects. I think something date or event driven would be best (preferably both).
I am interested to hear how others do this...especially if you use both point & shoot and SLR cameras.
Thanks for your help!

jnap818 wrote:
1) Should I separate the RAW and JPEGs in Aperture (two libraries)? One library for finished photos and one for negatives? I am interested to hear how others do this...especially if you use both point & shoot and SLR cameras.
No, use a single Library. Aperture will have no problems with the various formats or with various different cameras.
2) What folder structure should I use? Since I am not a professional photographer, I won't be shooting projects. I think something date or event driven would be best (preferably both).
Actually those date or event driven batches of images are very logically "Projects" in Aperture. Simply name each group of images as you import into AP as a new Project.
IMO it is not good to import camera-to-Aperture (or direct to any app other than the Finder). Best is to use a card reader and use the Finder to copy images from the camera card to a folder on the computer hard drive.
Below is my Referenced-Masters workflow:
• Remove the CF card from the camera and insert it into a CF card reader. Faster readers and cards are preferable.
• Finder-copy images from CF to a labeled folder on the intended permanent Masters location hard drive. I label that folder with the Project name suffixed with _masters, that way I can always find the Masters if Aperture forgets where they are.
• Eject CF.
• Burn backup copies of the original images to DVDs or to hard drives (optional backup step).
• Eject backup DVDs/hard drives (optional backup step).
• From within Aperture, import images from the hard drive folder into Aperture selecting "Store files in their current location."
• Review pix for completeness (e.g. a 500-pic shoot has 500 valid images showing).
• Reformat CF in camera, and archive DVDs of originals off site.
Note that the "eject" steps above are important in order to avoid mistakenly working on removable media.
I strongly recommend that every Aperture user spend $35 and work through the tutorial CD Apple Pro Training Series: Aperture 2 (Apple Pro Training Series) by Ben Long, Richard Harrington, and Orlando Luna (Paperback - May 8, 2008), Amazon.com. Note that the value is in working the tutorial, not in using the book as a manual.
Good luck!
-Allen Wicks

Workflow for keeping referenced masters organized

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for