Moving from Aperture...referenced or managed?!

NN635636369204462861UL

• 17. April 2015 21:04

I'm a long time Aperture user. I have a 320GB Managed Aperture Library. So far I really like Capture One.
However, I need clarification on catalog management.

I am currently referencing my managed Aperture Library in Capture One. I have 12TB of hard drive space and have made a copy of my Aperture Library. I think I will use Aperture on occasion using the original managed library. I would like to use the copied library in Capture One moving forward. So..... should I rename the copied Aperture Library "Capture_One" (for example), and reference this library? Or should I bring all the photos into Capture One as a managed catalog? I'm really stumped. 🤓

Questions:
1) Is there an advantage or disadvantage to continue referencing an Aperture Library?

2) Is there a speed advantage if a Capture One catalog is managed or referenced? - (assuming it is on the same drive.) I have 12TB of free storage space on a Drobo 5D, thunderbolt, so I'm not concerned about running out of storage.

3) If I create a new referenced catalog in Capture One, how would I maintain my current Aperture structure (Projects/events/etc...). I understand how to maintain structure with a managed catalog, but not with referenced.

Thank you,
Alex

0

• 

  Paul Steunebrink

  • 18. April 2015 07:16

  A2) I would prefer the referenced option over managed in your case. I suggest you put the catalog folder, which includes the catalog database and previews, on your local drive and reference to images in your NAS (Drobo). The advantage is that you always have your images with you, even when not connected to your NAS. Second, I expect better performance, either speed or stability, when you run the catalog from the local drive.
  
  A3) The internal organisation of your catalog is fully independent of the physical organisation of files. In other words, managed or referenced is what happens 'outside' the catalog and does not affect the projects and albums, the 'inside'. That is key for the catalog design.
  
  You might like some inside information for a clarity on how the Capture One catalog works. Written and illustrated, you can find it here: http://imagealchemist.net/tag/catalog/

  0
• 

  EnderWiggins

  • 18. April 2015 13:23

  I've been down this road (425 Gig Aperture managed library, 10 years of photography successfully converted into a C1 catalog) so I feel qualified to answer here.
  
  

  [quote="NN635636369204462861UL" wrote:
  1) Is there an advantage or disadvantage to continue referencing an Aperture Library?

  
  Besides what I wrote under 2) I would say the general question of how much you trust Aperture to work as flawless as today under future OS X releases is a big disadvantage to keeping it managed.
  
  Currently you are able to move your images out of the library into a referenced folder structure using the "Relocate masters" command in Aperture. This worked extremely reliable for me. You can choose the folders you want to see in the finder within Aperture and you have to do nothing manually. I chose a structure like Year>Month>Day (of shooting) for all my master files. This was a matter of a few minutes. You don't want to do something like this manually from the package file some years down the road, when Aperture maybe stops working.
  
  

  [quote="NN635636369204462861UL" wrote:
  2) Is there a speed advantage if a Capture One catalog is managed or referenced?

  
  In other forums I've read about complains of slow startup time and performance and a high probability that this is caused by referencing the image files directly from an Aperture managed database.
  
  

  [quote="NN635636369204462861UL" wrote:
  3) If I create a new referenced catalog in Capture One, how would I maintain my current Aperture structure (Projects/events/etc...). I understand how to maintain structure with a managed catalog, but not with referenced

  
  Your Aperture database is completely unaffected by your choice of managed/referenced. Everything within Aperture stays the same, you just moved the masters out of the package file into the finder view, that's all. This way you can have a folder tree with your masters and have both C1 and Aperture reference their database/catalog to this tree and work with the images. Once you import the Aperture database into C1 using the importer, you have basically the same structure (Folders/Projects) within C1 and go from there. Of course, there are some key differences in terms of DAM between both tools, but you'll find out about them when you start working in C1.
  
  Additionally, I have decided to put all my NEW images (post-migration shootings) into a separate folder tree on the same HD (one is called "Aperture Masters" the other "Capture One Masters") so that I have a clear cut between both worlds. The Aperture folder is write-protected in the finder, because no new images will be added to it.

  0

Post ist für Kommentare geschlossen.