Aperture 3 Reportedly Causing Hangs and Memory Leak Issues for Some Users

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Apr 12, 2001
7,199
8,371
0
19
www.macrumors.com



Softpedia and Computerworld have noted a significant number of complaints from users of Apple's new Aperture 3 professional-level photo editing and management application released last week. The complaints, which have been flooding Apple's discussion forums (1, 2), include crashes and hangs, as well as "out of disk space" warnings that appear to most commonly be associated with importing database files from Aperture 2. Computerworld notes:Apple's support forums are filling up with users with similar problems: When they leave Aperture 3 to import their photo libraries, their page file balloons until they run out of disk space. The system then becomes unstable. Some users start seeing their swap disk file size balloon almost immediately after launching the app.

The issue isn't universal. A few users have chimed in to say that they've had no issues with Aperture 3. That means there might be some external issues at play here.According to Softpedia, some speculation has centered around corruption of Aperture 2 libraries that causes issues as they are put through the upgrade process to make them compatible with Aperture 3. Regardless of whether the source of the problem is corrupted databases or issues with Aperture 3 itself, Apple has apparently yet to acknowledge the issues or offer specific suggestions or fixes.

Article Link: Aperture 3 Reportedly Causing Hangs and Memory Leak Issues for Some Users
 

verniesgarden

macrumors 65816
May 29, 2007
1,070
556
0
Portland, Or
more reason to stick with lightroom. i never liked the "photo library" scheme that apple does, I want to be able to easily get to my photos in finder.
 

nalk7

macrumors regular
Jul 11, 2008
168
0
0
looks like Ill be skipping this update for a while... at least until they find a solution ;)
 

gfiz

macrumors 6502
Dec 18, 2009
349
1
0
Virginia
how the hell did this get past alpha, let alone beta. You guys at apple using i7 MBP's maybe instead of that crap you're still peddling to the rest of us? maybe it works fine on Arrandale...:rolleyes:
 

ayeying

macrumors 601
Dec 5, 2007
4,548
11
0
Yay Area, CA
Eh, I tried using a new library created by Aperture 3 and still get massive swap memory size. It's not good when my swap is over 4-5GB and I still have 500MB of actual free ram (not inactive) with only 10 pictures in the library :(
 

gramorris

macrumors newbie
Feb 9, 2007
8
0
0
more reason to stick with lightroom. i never liked the "photo library" scheme that apple does, I want to be able to easily get to my photos in finder.
Ignoring the fact that Aperture lets you organise your photo library how ever you please and doesn't make you use Apple's scheme?

Incidentally my upgrade was fine although I did hit this issue when brushing in a vignette.
 

Kaptajn Haddock

macrumors regular
May 10, 2007
221
5
0
Denmark
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; da-dk) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)

I have had none of the issues reported. 18.000 pic library upgraded from Aperture 2.1.4
 

CQd44

macrumors 6502a
Jul 27, 2009
630
0
0
Edinburg, Texas
Wow Apple. It seems to me like they're just not getting good press lately. Hope I'm wrong and that this issue gets fixed in a timely manner :)
 

oxfan

macrumors member
Dec 5, 2008
35
0
0
All good for me on my 2007 Mac Mini (4Gb RAM), when I'm actively using Aperture it does use a lot of memory which I assume is Aperture caching images that I've recently accessed. If I leave Aperture running but then use another application it starts to free up the memory.
 

xgman

macrumors 601
Aug 6, 2007
4,767
589
0
It did this for me even on a 16gb mem 08 Mac pro 8 core, but that was only when importing iphoto large libraries and heavy face recognition use, then it settled down, but it was clear to me that there is some sort of memory leak of sorts that needs to be fixed.
 

manu chao

macrumors 603
Jul 30, 2003
6,288
2,261
0
Visit site
more reason to stick with lightroom. i never liked the "photo library" scheme that apple does, I want to be able to easily get to my photos in finder.
And this has been possible with Aperture since vs. 1.5.
LR also maintains a "photo library", it is called the 'catalogue'.
 

fribhey

macrumors member
Mar 11, 2005
83
20
0
i never liked the "photo library" scheme that apple does, I want to be able to easily get to my photos in finder.
so then don't use the "photo library" scheme when importing your photos. I have all of my photos stored in their own folders organized how i want them, none of them are stored in the aperture library "scheme".... but then again, i know how to actually use the application.

i also haven't had any problems at all with two different upgrades of Aperture 3
 

wizard

macrumors 68040
May 29, 2003
3,848
569
0
Visit site
They already have an update out. Or so I hear.

This does seem a little pathetic.

On the otherhand it is very possible that some of those Aperture 2 databases are really screwed up. I'm with others though about the long term feasability of Apples approach. That is sad because I other wise like Aperture.



Dave
 

spice weasel

macrumors 65816
Jul 25, 2003
1,255
9
0
Visit site
I've been using the Aperture 3 demo on my MBP while my i7 iMac is in the shop for a screen replacement, but it has been really buggy. Making adjustments in Levels crashes it frequently, as in every couple of photos. I'm hoping Apple releases a major patch soon. It's practically unusable for me in its current form. Oh, and this is a clean Aperture install on this machine, with no previous versions on it.
 

dwd3885

macrumors 68020
Dec 10, 2004
2,106
90
0
This has happened to me. Aperture takes forever to load an image or I just get insane hangups and leaks. It's a shame too because I really like Aperture 3's features and editing capabilities compared to Lightroom. But this has got to be fixed. I shouldn't need to buy more RAM, I already have 4gb and am have nothing open but Aperture. I didn't have any library before, just imported folders into a new Aperture 3 library.
 

trrosen

macrumors regular
Apr 29, 2003
169
0
0
Visit site
no problems here

I had a few hangs early but that was mostly me trying to check out some of the new feature while aperture was still churning away updating and doing face detection on 5000+ files.

In all i'd say its a great and much needed upgrade. ( I was this close to going to lightroom ) Faces alone makes this the best of the two for the prosumer. For Pros its still a toss up, but being able to do faces on a per project basis -- lets say I shoot 1000 shots at a wedding (I have) then you go into aperture and say show me all the shots with the father of the bride and BAM. That could sell a lot of people right there. The same with places for nature and landscape shooters.

I haven't had time to use the new adjustment brushes but I think they could save me 80% of my trips to photoshop. (why the hell can't PS open JPG 2000 files=lossless)

Note I'm running fine on a 1.6 Ghz mini with 2 G ram If your having problems I doubt its a hardware issue
 

revs

macrumors regular
Jun 2, 2008
197
19
0
Worcestershire
Visit site
no problems here on my "old" 2.33/3GB MBP (10.6/64bit Aperture) - I do wish I could get more than 3GB of RAM in this machine though!

Much quicker, better UI, and have moved from Lightroom 3.. so it must be good!
 

Xenu007

macrumors member
Mar 19, 2008
68
0
0
And Aperture still has lousy RAW support

Compared to Lightroom, Aperture's RAW support is pathetic.
 

scionfriar

macrumors member
Apr 26, 2005
35
0
0
12,000 pic library upgrade took about 2 hours. It created a swap file of about 2GB and was quite sluggish until I reboot the machine. No problems since then. 2.26 Core 2 Unibody MBP, 2GB of RAM.