Aperture Database

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by coastertux, Feb 24, 2008.

  1. coastertux macrumors regular

    Jul 17, 2006
    Is it possible to have Aperture store photos in folders instead of all in one big database file?
  2. tersono macrumors 68000


    Jan 18, 2005
    Simple answer: yes.

    I download photos from my DSLR into dated, named folders in a hierarchy that works for me. When I import photos into Aperture, I simply select the 'store files in current location' option in the import dialog.

    FWIW you can do the same with iPhoto
  3. coastertux thread starter macrumors regular

    Jul 17, 2006
    Ah...ok. So I must download my images not using Aperture. Is there a way to get my photos currently in the Aperture database out and into folders?
  4. Maui macrumors 6502a


    May 18, 2007
    In Aperture help, read up on Managed vs. Referenced images. You can store Referenced images anywhere you like. There are pro's and con's to both (e.g., Referenced masters are not backed up to the Vault), and a huge number of threads on this subject.

    You can export your images back into folders, project by project. Just use the export command. I would not mess with the Aperture Library directly. As always, be sure to back up your Library before you start messing with a lot of files.
  5. John T macrumors 68020

    John T

    Mar 18, 2006
    Yes, you can download your images straight from your camera into Aperture. Set up in preferences.

    You can also move folders from a master Aperture file to either a new master location on your computer or into new Projects/folder(s) using the File>export command.
  6. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Apr 14, 2001
    Sendai, Japan
    Aperture does not store all pictures in one big file, it's a package! A package is essentially a special type of directory that tells the Finder not to show its subdirectories. Aperture creates proper subdirectories in its package.
  7. law guy macrumors 6502a

    law guy

    Jan 17, 2003
    Western Massachusetts
    Or you can do the file structure that the poster mentioned through Aperture if you want to - when you import, the choices as I recall are the Aperture Library, store in current location, or "choose" - select choose and then pick the hard drive / folder you want - including the ability to create new folders at that stage. Then if you want to go directly to that folder from another program - let's say you decide to use Lightroom in the future - you can just navigate to that folder outside of using the Aperture program and import those photos into the other program.)

    I think that this "choose" feature is good way to unpack an iPhoto library into normal folders as well. By importing the iPhoto library into Aperture and, again avoiding the Aperture Library, and choosing the disk and folder where you want the files to go, Aperture does a nice job of creating well organized folders by event. This can serve as a bridge for those that have Lightroom as well and want to move several iPhoto files over to LR. LR in my experience will take the iPhoto library and put it in one big import file and mix things up a bit. By using Aperture as a bridge, the LR user can then import the nice and organized Aperture created folder structure (albeit one at a time, so bring a snack with you to your desk) into LR.
  8. johanf macrumors newbie

    Feb 25, 2008
    Aperture pictures in my selected folder

    I have chosen to have my photos in my own separate file structure because I wanted to keep my own control of the data there. I was not sure how long time I should use Aperture either.

    By time the amount of data grows, perhaps out of control. I liked the idea to be able to view things in the Finder and move it quickly and also separate originals and edited images.

    So I organized my own folder structure like for instance: "HD - My photos - Travel - Africa - Kenya - 2007".

    However, now I see one big drawback with this. In Aperture I have to organize it again in a similar structure. Well, that was OK the first time.

    Then I import my new pictures from the camera to a folder named like "Not yet sorted year 2008".

    Now the problems start! When I try to sort those pictures into appropriate folders in Finder, I have to do the same in Aperture. It becomes very time frustrating after a while. Especially if I create new subfolders and move many pictures and have to mirror that work in Aperture.

    I wish Aperture could synchronize with the folder structure!

    Some photos need post work beyond the capability of Aperture. Where should these "modified copies" go? I would like to separate all these large files from my valuable "originals".

    Then I have the hi resolution scans from my medium format slides. Each one is 300 MB. Where shall I store them? Inside the Aperture managed library?

    I have a feeling this is going out of control soon! Shall I leave control of everything to Apple?

    Dear fellows, do you have any recommendations? /Johan
  9. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Apr 14, 2001
    Sendai, Japan
    That's because you insist on doing things manually, that's the source of your problems: you're still treating Aperture as if it were iView Media Pro or so -- it's not.

    Let Aperture manage your photos and be done with it.
  10. johanf macrumors newbie

    Feb 25, 2008
    Yes, it is just to bite and swallow!

    Say goodbye to find the photo in Finder any longer! Even if you know its name Spotlight won't find it.

    I tried an import test. Plenty of GB was eaten up but I didn't know where.

    After a while I found the big box "Aperture Library.aplibrary" in a place where I didn't want to store our common pictures.

    Right click and its content was revealed. Many, many new files with strange names were generated. Are all these really necessary to have? I just want to keep my photos and be able to edit them in a professional way!

    What to do if I need to fiddle with the pixels? Then I must export the photo from Aperture first and then open the copy in another suitable program. I can no longer just open it. And when I have processed that copy I need to import it in Aperture to have it available. It was faster and much more straight forward before in my opinion.

    The world is becoming more and more complicated-

    But I guess it is the future ... /Johan
  11. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Apr 14, 2001
    Sendai, Japan
    That's not true, you can automate that 100 % with Aperture:
    (1) Select the image you want to edit.
    (2) Press Shift + Command + O (or: right click and select Open With > [Image Editor]). Aperture now generates a file (either a tiff or psd file, depending on your settings in the Aperture prefs) and opens it in -- say -- PS3 or Pixelmator. When you're saving the image, Aperture automatically updates the entry. All keywords and settings you've applied to the original image are applied to the copy created by Aperture as well.

    I hope that helps you speed up your workflow.
  12. johanf macrumors newbie

    Feb 25, 2008
    Thank you very much for that help. It will save a lot of time for me.

    Perhaps you have an idea about this too:
    I have started to scan my medium format slides in high resolution, TIFF, 3x16 bits.

    I then need to assign the profile of the scanner to each photo and then convert to the colorspace I prefer to store the photo in.

    Could this also be done easily, perhaps within Aperture?

    Thanks for help. /Johan
  13. 147798 Suspended

    Dec 29, 2007
    If you want to manually sort photos in finder, and apply development profiles during import, I understand Lightroom does both of these things better than Aperture, though Aperture has other strengths over adobe lightroom. You can download a trial from adobe.

Share This Page