Is Aperture for Me?

[dringkor]

I've done searches and have found some answers to some questions, but I thought I'd ask here whether you guys think Aperture 3 would be worth it for me, given my workflow:

My main camera is a Canon DSLR with which I shoot Canon RAW, and I have various other devices (P&S cameras, iPhones, other people's camera's, etc.). My workflow right now is that I copy photos from all these to my 2008 Macbook Pro (2.2GHz, 2GB RAM) and store them in folders organized by year and event name. I process the RAW files using Canon DPP, and the JPG files using GIMP. I periodically transfer these folders to a separate "archive" server and share them back out via NFS read-only.

I don't use iPhoto, because it doesn't have as powerful editing capabilities as DPP or GIMP, and the total size of my library is now at 61GB, which is more than I have available on my MBP. Hence the "archive" server.

What I'd like to do, and what I'm asking, is whether Aperture 3 offers:

- Access to my entire photo library, whether on the local disk or on read-only NFS drives. If I make an edit to a file in the read-only "archive," is it stored as an extra copy on my local hard drive, such that the originals are not modified? And if I move some folders from my local drive to the "archive" server, can Aperture find them there?

- A single interface for editing photos, whether they are RAW or JPG.

- A way to modify the metadata within a RAW or JPG file and store custom fields there (maybe IPTC data).

In general, my current workflow works for me, but with Aperture being discounted on the Mac App store, is it worth it to buy?

 

[Keleko]

The first two are definitely possible in Aperture. I store all my RAW files on an external drive. The edits and viewable library are stored as JPG on my MBP's internal drive. You can import/export stuff to a new library on any disk you have. Aperture never modifies the original RAW files (or jpg if it happens to be that). You can edit in an external program, too, though I don't know if it works with GIMP. It does work with Photoshop, though.

I don't know the answer to the last question. I've only started using Aperture in the past month or so, so I'm really not that experienced with it yet. I had to spend a fair bit of time figuring out if it was really going to be useful for me before I decided to buy it. I'm glad I did now.

 

[AxisOfBeagles]

Yes, yes, and yes.


The latter is best done by creating templates of the EXIF / IPTC data you want, and have that template selected on all imports. In other words, you do it automatically in batch as you import your photos.

 

[ChrisA]

..
In general, my current workflow works for me, but with Aperture being discounted on the Mac App store, is it worth it to buy?

******************


- Access to my entire photo library, whether on the local disk or on read-only NFS drives. If I make an edit to a file in the read-only "archive," is it stored as an extra copy on my local hard drive, such that the originals are not modified? And if I move some folders from my local drive to the "archive" server, can Aperture find them there?

Aperture uses a LIBRARY. Tere is only one physical copy of you image in the library. There are some tricks, A library can keep the actual image file in an external location so all you have is thumbnails and meta data on the notebook. It's flexible and you can move sub parts of the library called "projects" between Aperture libraries. Keep a subset on the noke book

- A single interface for editing photos, whether they are RAW or JPG.

Yes that is the entire point of Aperture. Details like the file format or where it is physically on your disk are hidden and you don';t need to think about it. You can find out but no real need to.

- A way to modify the metadata within a RAW or JPG file and store custom fields there (maybe IPTC data).

Can do within limits of the file type. Mtea data is also kept in a database that has many more feilds then will even fit in a file. Very good suport for meta data in Photoshop PSD, and some other formats

In general, my current workflow works for me, but with Aperture being discounted on the Mac App store, is it worth it to buy?

Yes. Get it but only if you want to use an Aperture style work flow. That would be.

Import to Aperture on notebook, you can work while import progresses, start rating and selecting photos and "stacking same shots of same subject, plce bast "select" on each stack. asign tags for subject, location, client or what ever. ou must do this if yu even want to find a photo weekslater.

Then after you tagging and sorting maybe delte the junk then start small adjustmants to the best rated images, just the basics double click to apply Photoshop to the few that need it, finally crop and maybe sharpen.

Then take the notebook home and add you photos to a larger laibrary you keep on a larger disk, It is pretty easy in Aperture to move parts of the library so you keep just the working subset on the notebook

But in Aperture you do NOT place imge in finder type folders. You can make smart Aperture folders that select photos with a given tag into the folder. Then as you re-tage images the moved into the corect foldrs. They can be in several folders at once, but only one physical copy on the disk. It's just like iTunes really.

But it you still want the old workflow then keep using the old software, not Aperture