Anyone used "Aperture Exporter"

[nicholasg]

I am trying to transfer a large Aperture library ( c. 600MB, >30,000 images) to Photos on a new iMac.

The transfer seems to work, but Photos now crashes every time I use it. Apple is looking into the issue. I assume there is something corrupted in the library.

I was thinking (as a backup plan) of using "Aperture Exporter" to build a copy of Aperture library in folders, that I could drag & drop into Photos.

Anyone here used "Aperture Exporter"?

 

[fcortese]

I used it about 8 years ago when I abandoned Aperture for Lr after they failed to do any further upgrades. The folder structure came through just perfectly. I have no clue if there have been upgrades or changes to AE since then and if there were any significant changes to its overall performance. The only glitch I encountered was that I was too liberal with my star rating range and I also ended up bringing over any adjustment I made on a photo. So if I did 3 or 4 versions of a photo with different adjustments, ALL of them came over and I had to go back after the fact and start removing them since they were "burned" as individual JPEG photos.

 

[Ray2]

Or use Aperture to move from a managed to a referenced library.

 

[simonsi]

Or use Aperture to move from a managed to a referenced library.

Do this OP, no sense using a 3rd party app to carry out functionality already in Aperture, you can google for detailed instructions if you need it, or use Aperture help. I did this prior to importing my library of 70k into Capture 1 Pro.

 

[MCAsan]

Run the database test and repair utilities in Aperture....then have Aperture move from managed to referenced library.

 

[nicholasg]

Do this OP, no sense using a 3rd party app to carry out functionality already in Aperture, you can google for detailed instructions if you need it, or use Aperture help. I did this prior to importing my library of 70k into Capture 1 Pro.

I would agree, but Aperture Exporter does more than you can do with standard Aperture functionality. For example it converts Faces to keywords and creates JPEGs or TIFFs for edited images. Some of the functionality could replicated manually in Aperture, but for $19.99, not sure why anyone would want to.
[doublepost=1513351717][/doublepost]

Run the database test and repair utilities in Aperture....then have Aperture move from managed to referenced library.

Did your first 2 suggestions. Wonder why you think moving to a references library would help.

Thanks,
Nicholas

 

[robgendreau]

I used it quite a while ago. I agree it was worth not having to mess with rolling my own in Aperture, esp for the export of the previews as a way to get out edited images.

It still helps to do some trial runs, and then go back and maybe add keywords and do some other work in Aperture since the whole virtual structure of Aperture's containers isn't always what one might want in Lr (I used the opportunity to switch to relying more on hierarchical keywords than album/project/folder or collection/collection set.

And I dunno about MCAsan's workflow but I converted all my Aperture stuff to reference because I continued using Aperture for some edits, and Lr was referencing the same originals. So I could export again from Aperture to the same folder and then use Lr to synch that "new" image so I had it in Lr as well.

 

[MCAsan]

I would agree, but Aperture Exporter does more than you can do with standard Aperture functionality. For example it converts Faces to keywords and creates JPEGs or TIFFs for edited images. Some of the functionality could replicated manually in Aperture, but for $19.99, not sure why anyone would want to.
[doublepost=1513351717][/doublepost]

Did your first 2 suggestions. Wonder why you think moving to a references library would help.

Thanks,
Nicholas

Because a managed Aperture or Photos library can not span multiple volumes. A referenced library can.

 

[ChrisA]

It you was to automatically export your edits then "exporter" is it. Yes you could do it manually, elect the image then export it but if you have 12,000 edited images then manual export is unreasonable. But for only a couple hundred, just do it manual.

I'm talking about edited raw images. It is trivial to export the originals even if you have 100,000 of them. It is keeping the edits that is harder and that is what Exporter does.

 

[MCAsan]

Unless you are pro with a portfolio that actively produces income, why do you need to keep the edited versions from years ago? If you need to make a new edited version, won't newer software tools give you the possibility to do more with the original raw files?

 

[ChrisA]

Unless you are pro with a portfolio that actively produces income, why do you need to keep the edited versions from years ago? If you need to make a new edited version, won't newer software tools give you the possibility to do more with the original raw files?

Why keep the edited file? Because only the edited file matters. It is the one that shows what yu want. You might argue to delete the original because it is NOT what you want, it was just the raw material

The OTHER reason to keep the edited version is that in at least a few cases the edits represent an hour or more of my time, in a few cases hours of work wet into making masks in Photoshop, and other tedious work.

NO future software will not allow me to make better edits. The edits are good or poor based on my artistic judgment. Possibly this judgment will improve. Actually it has, a little.

Most edits are simple and were one in Aperture and are just white balance, some shadow or highlight adjustment and a possible slight rotation and crop then an inappreciable vignettes (I got that last idea from an Ansel Adada book on print making.) All this makes only a few minutes but is applied a few thousand ties and not I don't want to have to redo it even if it would only take 10,000 minutes. That is 4 weeks of 8 hour per day effort

Some times I do re-edit a photo but almost always it is because i'm repurposing the image to use a different way

In any case storage is cheap. About $35 per TB today