After Aperture Import, do I stop using Aperture?
Hello, new Capture One user here. I've watched a few webinars, but a few of the interactions between Aperture and Capture One are not clear to me. I apologize if they are answered elsewhere, but I couldn't find it...
I'm switching from Aperture to Capture One (don't care much for Adobe's subscription model), and having to convert 30k+ Aperture files across 20+ libraries has caused a little consternation. I want to revisit a few thousand of them to reconvert and retouch using CP, but the others I'm ok with letting them be for now. There's plenty that can't import for one reason or another (mostly incompatible files), so I've had to go back into Aperture and re-export in a compatible format and import normally. So far, so good (a pain, but what are you going to do?).
My issue comes from trying to re-organize some of my older Aperture libraries. After importing them into CP, then going back to Aperture, I see that I want to add/remove keywords, maybe re-file them to a different project, change rating, etc.
1) After importing the Aperture library to CP, are any changes made to the organizational structure re-propagated back to the CP catalog? And vice-versa in CP--If I move pictures around in CP, will it be shown in Aperture?
2) Same question, but with edits--say I re-crop in Aperture. Will that change be propagated? And vice-versa--any changes made in CP get propagated back to the versions in Aperture?
3) What's the best practice for these old photos? Aperture is eventually going to stop working, so i feel I should try and get these out of the Aperture library (not using referenced images in it)--should I just over the course of the next few months pull images out of each library and get them organized using CP? Going forward, I'll probably use referenced images.
Thanks,
Dan
I'm switching from Aperture to Capture One (don't care much for Adobe's subscription model), and having to convert 30k+ Aperture files across 20+ libraries has caused a little consternation. I want to revisit a few thousand of them to reconvert and retouch using CP, but the others I'm ok with letting them be for now. There's plenty that can't import for one reason or another (mostly incompatible files), so I've had to go back into Aperture and re-export in a compatible format and import normally. So far, so good (a pain, but what are you going to do?).
My issue comes from trying to re-organize some of my older Aperture libraries. After importing them into CP, then going back to Aperture, I see that I want to add/remove keywords, maybe re-file them to a different project, change rating, etc.
1) After importing the Aperture library to CP, are any changes made to the organizational structure re-propagated back to the CP catalog? And vice-versa in CP--If I move pictures around in CP, will it be shown in Aperture?
2) Same question, but with edits--say I re-crop in Aperture. Will that change be propagated? And vice-versa--any changes made in CP get propagated back to the versions in Aperture?
3) What's the best practice for these old photos? Aperture is eventually going to stop working, so i feel I should try and get these out of the Aperture library (not using referenced images in it)--should I just over the course of the next few months pull images out of each library and get them organized using CP? Going forward, I'll probably use referenced images.
Thanks,
Dan
0
-
Not totally understanding your question. Do you or do you not want to keep on using Aperture? If yes, for what?
But to answer your main question, no. The import from Aperture into CO is just that, an import. It is meant to offer Aperture users an easy way into CO to keep on using CO after that.
If you want to keep on using Aperture, don't use the CO catalog, but a Session. You'd then use Aperture for organizing the files and CO for raw conversion. Edits in CO wouldn't show in Aperture and vice versa. You'd send files from aperture to CO using the usual way in Aperture (something like open with).0 -
Hi Jonas
After you import your images from Aperture libraries into Capture One, there is no further communication between Aperture and Capture One. Capture One changes are saved in Capture Once catalog files, Aperture changes are saved in Aperture library files. There was only one moment in time when those were the same, at the time of your import.
I would strongly recommend against making further changes with Aperture as it will complicate your life immensely, as the there is no direct way to communicate those changes to Capture One, nor to communicate Capture One changes back to Aperture. All they share is an image file, which does not contain information about edits, keywords or project or album.
Unfortunately Capture One DAM for Catalogs over 6000 images seems to be DAM slow for many of us (for my Catalog of 18000 images it is one 1 minute per mouse click) and so some people are looking at alternatives where the Catalog structure is managed by some faster and better DAM, like Aperture, Photosupreme or Lyn, and Capture One is used an an editor only. But for that Capture one is used in session mode only while images are being edited, and then the images handed back to the DAM tool.0 -
Not seeing that speed degradation on my MBP, Eric. If I open Aperture and C1 and click on a thumbnail in the browsers, there is no obvious difference in the time it takes for the full image to be displayed. The time required is in the range "instantaneous" to about 0.5 sec.
Edit: I saw your other post on this after submitting the above. One thing that may explain the difference is that I use albums and groups to classify my images, not keywords, and seldom have more than 50 in a set. However, the comparison with Aperture stands as that is how my library there is structured too.0 -
[quote="NN635770922769309595UL" wrote:
Not seeing that speed degradation on my MBP, Eric. If I open Aperture and C1 and click on a thumbnail in the browsers, there is no obvious difference in the time it takes for the full image to be displayed. The time required is in the range "instantaneous" to about 0.5 sec.
Edit: I saw your other post on this after submitting the above. One thing that may explain the difference is that I use albums and groups to classify my images, not keywords, and seldom have more than 50 in a set. However, the comparison with Aperture stands as that is how my library there is structured too.
Hi, as a point of reference, can you tell me which MBP you have, and how many images in your catalog, are they referenced or managed?
I think you and I may be looking at different aspects of C1.
My C1 catalog too is divided up into many groups, projects and albums, with typically 50-200 images per album. If I use C1 to look at one album or project only, then the speed of sorting and the speed of opening an image is relatively quick, just as your experience. It may be marginally slower than some other tool but I don't care about a few seconds here or there, it is the quality that matters.
However, keywords add great value in managing your overall collection, the trouble with having a 10 year collection of images is that you cannot remember enough to find the images quickly or sometimes at all.
It is when I focus the browser on the "all Images" section, and when I try to set up a filter on the entire catalog that the extreme delays occur. The first I can tolerate as a one time inconvenience but the delays in filter setup considerably dilutes the value of having keywords to enable a search of the entire catalog for all images of a particular type or topic, for example "Bob" or "Flatwater Canoeing" or "Thelon Trip"
I realize it is an imposition and not in your workflow, but I would be very interesting for me to know if you experience the same delays when you try to set up a filter on your entire catalog (from "all images").0 -
[quote="Eric Nepean" wrote:
However, keywords add great value in managing your overall collection, the trouble with having a 10 year collection of images is that you cannot remember enough to find the images quickly or sometimes at all.
It is when I focus the browser on the "all Images" section, and when I try to set up a filter on the entire catalog that the extreme delays occur. The first I can tolerate as a one time inconvenience but the delays in filter setup considerably dilutes the value of having keywords to enable a search of the entire catalog for all images of a particular type or topic, for example "Bob" or "Flatwater Canoeing" or "Thelon Trip"
I realize it is an imposition and not in your workflow, but I would be very interesting for me to know if you experience the same delays when you try to set up a filter on your entire catalog (from "all images").
You are not alone with that. Keyword handling (searching/filtering) is very inefficient in Capture One and unfortunately did not get better with version 9. Instead of searching through all images it works better to make a sub-selection (e.g. an album) first and then search for keywords within that sub-selection.0 -
Eric
What you ask is not an imposition in any way at all - (I would hope that) we all participate here to share and help.
The Mac is a MacBook Pro 9,2 (mid-2012) with 8GB RAM, a 250GB SSD disc for the OS and apps and 750GB SSD for data, 2.9GHz i7 processor.
The managed catalogue contains just over 5,000 images, and searching it using date as a filter consistently finds the target image in under 1 second (from the time that the target date is entered). Most of my 70+ Albums contain around 60 images, some have around 150 and some as few as 10 - this is personal preference but seems to work especially when combined with date.
Hope this helps - let me know if you want me to try something else.
Regards
Bill0 -
[quote="HCS" wrote:
But to answer your main question, no. The import from Aperture into CO is just that, an import. It is meant to offer Aperture users an easy way into CO to keep on using CO after that.
Thanks--that's what I was afraid of. I bought another outboard drive, I've copied my Aperture libraries to it, and am slowly building my CP catalog off of that (moving the images to referenced areas on the drive). After I've imported, I'll probably archive my original Aperture libraries somewhere.
I was trying to figure out if I wanted to use Aperture or not--I like it as a DAM, but eventually, it's going to stop working. So I think I have my mind made up I'm not going to use it anymore. Now I have to rethink my organization (but not too much--it fits pretty well with CP's style from what I've seen). I used to keep separate Aperture libraries (personal, clients, museums, etc), but I think that if I go to a non-managed style, I could probably get away with having one catalog, and then split them into projects from there.
I've noticed that have a lot of images it does seem to slow down when searching via keywords (2013 MBP, 2.8 i7 & 16GB RAM), but I typically have my projects in the 5k range, then folders will be split smaller (100-1000 images, and then use keywords from there--it's tolerable. Is Media Pro any better?
Thanks for all the help and suggestions, for my first post, I couldn't be happier here!
Thanks,
Dan0 -
[quote="Jonas Calhoun" wrote:
[quote="HCS" wrote:
But to answer your main question, no. The import from Aperture into CO is just that, an import. It is meant to offer Aperture users an easy way into CO to keep on using CO after that.
Thanks--that's what I was afraid of. I bought another outboard drive, I've copied my Aperture libraries to it, and am slowly building my CP catalog off of that (moving the images to referenced areas on the drive). After I've imported, I'll probably archive my original Aperture libraries somewhere.
I was trying to figure out if I wanted to use Aperture or not--I like it as a DAM, but eventually, it's going to stop working. So I think I have my mind made up I'm not going to use it anymore. Now I have to rethink my organization (but not too much--it fits pretty well with CP's style from what I've seen). I used to keep separate Aperture libraries (personal, clients, museums, etc), but I think that if I go to a non-managed style, I could probably get away with having one catalog, and then split them into projects from there.
I've noticed that have a lot of images it does seem to slow down when searching via keywords (2013 MBP, 2.8 i7 & 16GB RAM), but I typically have my projects in the 5k range, then folders will be split smaller (100-1000 images, and then use keywords from there--it's tolerable. Is Media Pro any better?
Thanks for all the help and suggestions, for my first post, I couldn't be happier here!
Thanks,
Dan
As long as you keep your catalog size in the 5K-7K range you shouldn't have an issue with speed.
Media Pro may be faster, but it doesn't have the editing capabilities of CaptureOne - the intent is DAM and perhaps minor edits in MediaPro, and then serious editing in CaptureOne. However, as of current writing, MediaPro doesn't communicate with any Capture One version above 8.1
There is a third party tool, PhotoSupreme which does communicate with all v8 versions CaptureOne and is being successfully used by a number of people on this forum. I've downloaded a trial copy.
I see that CaptureOne version 9.0 has just been released, but I would wait at least about 9.2 9and check the users forum) before I upgrade. That's not a dig at CaptureOne - I apply the same policy to Apple and Microsoft SW, and the customers of the company I work for are typically even more conservative than that.0 -
I have a similar cautionary policy Eric.
However .... there is a 30 day trial and I can usually install a new version alongside the old for testing purposes (I'm on Windows, does that make it easier or safer?) so I will be doing that some time before we get to a 9.2 release ..... !
At least it provides some early assessment for the new features without easily managed "risk" (if any) if one installs alongside rather than over the top of an existing installation.
Grant0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
10 comments