Done with Photos, move back to Aperture

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by KettyKrueger, Aug 30, 2015.

  1. KettyKrueger macrumors 6502

    KettyKrueger

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    Hi

    I have a new photos library, it was not migrated from Aperture. I used Aperture to export some projects, then imported them into Photos.

    Anyway, I'm done with Photos now, I'm tired on the inflexibility and dumb layout. I may be done with DAMs altogether but one step at a time.

    I want to move my library back to Aperture, is this possible? When I try to import the Photos library into Aperture, the Photos library is greyed out.

    I think in the long run I want to use a folder structure and not rely on a DAM at all - but I want to get my photos out of Photos/Aperture with keywords embedded which I know is not possible with Photos but it is with Aperture.

    Please help...

    Thanks
     
  2. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #2
    I'm assuming you copied your Photos images into a Photos managed library, rather than opting for leaving the images in place and using a referenced Photos library. Unfortunately it's not easy to switch in Photos. You may have to do some bulk exporting.

    Or you could go into the Library itself and simply copy out the masters for use in Aperture, although they wouldn't have keywords.

    And BTW, using a folder structure and a DAM isn't mutually exclusive. You can do that with Aperture, Lr, Photos, etc etc. It's a lot easier to embed the keywords with applications like Lightroom, but it's possible with Aperture although I think it's a manual process still.
     
  3. KettyKrueger thread starter macrumors 6502

    KettyKrueger

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Thanks for the reply.

    Yes, it's a managed library.

    Unfortunately, I think you're right. Exporting out will loose my keywords. I'm fed up with DAMs now...I was never happy with iPhoto, moved to Aperture. Aperture was good but it always annoyed me that my photos were trapped (Yes, I know I could move the masters out but that wasn't good enough), and now the same situation with Photos.

    I just want my photos where I want them. I need to find a keyword manager, one that writes to the original file. Photo Mechanic seems to be perfect for my needs but alas it's $150!

    I've got Hazel at the ready to do the bulk renaming and moving of photos to a simple hierarchy.

    I think I need to swallow this and put it down to experience. I'll have to keyword all my 10k photos again :(



     
  4. simonsi macrumors 601

    simonsi

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Auckland
    #4
    I bit the bullet and migrated my Aperture managed library out into folders then had Capture One Pro take nearly 3 days importing them and re-processing the RAW files as C1 was so much better at conversion...this was on 70k images. The benefit outweighed the time/hassle for me...
     
  5. E3BK macrumors 68020

    E3BK

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #5
    Ugh. This all sounds painful. I'm so sorry you have to go through this. I'm still trying to figure out the best thing for me to do. I made a backup of my Aperture library before I finally caved and started using Photos a month ago. I hate it. It's slow & sluggish and I hate the way it organizes. But I use iCloud Photo Sharing a lot so I'm going to have to figure out some hybrid way of using it. iCloud Photos on Aperture is still sort of usable but it will be outdated soon since Apple isn't updating it anymore.
     
  6. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #6
    No, copying out of the masters folder will result in no keywords.

    Exporting should produce files with keywords. Whether it's more tedious than keywording all over, only you'll know. You can export maximum-sized JPEGs or TIFF with the keywords, or an unmodified original with a sidecar.

    You could thus export all your JPEGs as "unmodified" JPEGs with XMP sidecars containing the keywords. Lr, and many other DAMs, won't recognize an XMP sidecar for JPEGs so they won't import the keywords. But some software does; XnViewMP for example (it's a great application for keywording, and free). But that's a not a long-term solution; you can use exiftool (http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/metafiles.html#xmp) if you can use Terminal and just copy in all the XMP sidecar into into the JPEG.[exiftool -tagsfromfile [SOURCE.xmp] -all:all [DESTINATION.jpg]).

    Or use Graphic Converter; it has the same ability, and is easier to use if you prefer a non-command line application. It can perform all kinds of operations on images besides keywording, like geolocating, etc.

    And don't damn all DAMs (sorry; couldn't help myself). Many reference files, so they are where you put them, even if its in some obscure obtuse place in your filesystem. Many of your problems stem from using a managed, copy-into, system. I prefer Lr principally because of its use of hierarchical keywords, which are more powerful than just keyword lists. And it gives more control over their export than Aperture did.
     
  7. KettyKrueger thread starter macrumors 6502

    KettyKrueger

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    Thanks for the reply.

    I don't really want to export as to JPEG as it will introduce some, albeit not much, quality loss. Suppose I could export to TIFF...

    I have actually already exported the originals out of Photos, backed the library up just in case, and deleted it.

    I now have a bunch of folders and I'm using Graphic Converter to add keywords directly to the files. Great app, I'm also using lossless rotation. As I've mentioned before, I've got Hazel doing the moving around of files.

    No, not all DAMs are annoying. I used Aperture for years and loved its flexibility. But the problem with referenced libraries is that the most up-to-date version of the file is trapped inside the app (or in a sidecar file). I'm not going to bother with editing any pictures unless I plan to print them (seldom done). Usually my edits involve hitting the 'auto' button, or manually using the sliders if the auto button messes things up. My edits rarely add value!

     
  8. robgendreau macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #8
    Not exactly; a referenced image is just a reference, not a file, in a database, and a preview in the DAM. The file is the file is the file. It's up to date if you write metadata to it, and in the case of Adobe stuff that can include the image adjustments. The file is not trapped anywhere; it's just sitting there in your filesystem.

    You seem to be referring to the adjustments (like say a crop and color change) rather than the file. That's not necessarily a feature of a DAM, but a PIE—parametric image editor, software that can store edits to the image itself as a set of instructions. The idea is to never alter the original, like it's negative film. But some applications (again, Adobe's, or say Mylio) can trade those instructions and use them on that original file to get the same results.
     
  9. kelub macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    #9
    I really struggled with what to do myself; I finally resigned myself to moving to LightRoom, but I export my final images for each product out as high quality JPGs into Photos so they synchronize with all my devices etc. I won't use Photos for PP or RAW conversion. That way, LR is my "workbench" app and Photos is my "finals" DAM.
     

Share This Page