ANOTHER question:
From what I've read, Aperture creates a jpg for your stored pictures called a "preview" (at least, I think that's what its called). I found where you can control that preview in terms of size/quality.
The catch is -- the jpg preview is the file that is copied should you, for example, drag and drop your photo from Ap onto the desktop.
This gives you a trade-off to make:
Either keep a low-quality, small sized preview setting for performance and storage reasons, and use "export" when you want a high quality jpg.
OR use a high quality full sized preview, so you can quickly/easily use Ap photos in other iLife apps at full res.
I'm actually OK with the second choice EXCEPT -- I contemplate having 3-4 versions of the same photo. Does that mean I'll end up with 3-4 full sized jpgs for that photo?
Does LR work differently? Does it keep some kind of jpg for preview, or does it somehow render on the fly in library and develop, as you are looking through pictures? (which, if true, would seem to be a trade off to tax the CPU a bit more, but preserve storage)
From what I've read, Aperture creates a jpg for your stored pictures called a "preview" (at least, I think that's what its called). I found where you can control that preview in terms of size/quality.
The catch is -- the jpg preview is the file that is copied should you, for example, drag and drop your photo from Ap onto the desktop.
This gives you a trade-off to make:
Either keep a low-quality, small sized preview setting for performance and storage reasons, and use "export" when you want a high quality jpg.
OR use a high quality full sized preview, so you can quickly/easily use Ap photos in other iLife apps at full res.
I'm actually OK with the second choice EXCEPT -- I contemplate having 3-4 versions of the same photo. Does that mean I'll end up with 3-4 full sized jpgs for that photo?
Does LR work differently? Does it keep some kind of jpg for preview, or does it somehow render on the fly in library and develop, as you are looking through pictures? (which, if true, would seem to be a trade off to tax the CPU a bit more, but preserve storage)