MacInTouch Amazon link...

Apple photo software/alternatives

Channels
Apple, Troubleshooting, Products, Questions
I'll try setting up a user with limited access to photos on my Synology and see what kind of trouble I can cause.
Not much, trouble that is. The way I set up the user, all the account can do is view photos and remove them from the shared folder to which access is granted.

My efforts to get a "public sharing link" in both the administrator account and the limited account I set up tonight worked, but the link didn't. It's supposed to pass through the Synology QuickConnect service, and looks from the link's text as it is conformed to do so, but it strikes out.

My experience with Synology documentation is there's often "one little thing" missing that clears up issues. Often a click or setting that's not in the immediate area of the "management tree" I'm in. Sometimes I find them in blogs, others in the many helpful videos on YouTube. Haven't found this one.
 


Photos doesn't force your library to be on the local volume.
...There are only two issues I know of when using multiple libraries with Photos. One is that...
The other is that only one library (the "system library") can be used for iCloud services like the Photo Library, shared albums and Photo Stream. You can select which library this is, but only one can be selected at a time. ...
Unfortunately, the iOS version of Photos has no option to use any other Photos library than the single "system library", so when I split my photo collection into multiple libraries, I lose access to them on my iDevices. Bummer.
 


Given that almost five years have passed since the announcement, it is amazing that Aperture is still popular. It is now in the category of many OS X-based applications that may live on while running in virtual machines -- unless the graphics are a problem. Not ever being or supporting an Aperture user, I can't speak to that.
I tried running Aperture in a macOS 10.12 Fusion VM a while back. The app runs but the graphics do not work. The browser preview works fine, but the main viewer is grey with no image displayed. If one clicked and dragged the image, it did show a full-size preview, but this disappeared when the mouse button was released. Never tried it in any other VM.

I moved over to Lightroom in 2016 and never looked back. The main reason for choosing Lightroom over Capture One Pro was built-in support for geotagging but also the fact my production machine is macOS/Windows dual-boot, and they share the same library. The Lightroom library and images sit on an NTFS volume, which macOS has no issues with, thanks to Paragon NTFS for Mac, and syncing between the two for Lightroom Mobile works perfectly. All plug-ins I use are cross platform, as well.
 


... but also the fact my production machine is macOS/Windows dual-boot, and they share the same library. The Lightroom library and images sit on an NTFS volume, which macOS has no issues with, thanks to Paragon NTFS for Mac, and syncing between the two for Lightroom Mobile works perfectly. All plug-ins I use are cross platform, as well.
Not to derail this thread, but, in a couple sentences would you elaborate on the need for full access from both platforms? Just curious what tools (presumably) are on one side vs. the other to create this need.
 


Apple obviously wants everyone to Use Shared Albums in Photos, one of its high-priority and profitable services businesses.
I'm also very interested in finding a family sharing solution that maintains privacy and security controls (users, groups, and permissions) and doesn't turn over all the content to third parties (e.g. Facebook et al) for their AI/data/profit mining, but, hopefully, also could serve as a backup system. I haven't gotten very far in this project, but here are a few potential platforms/systems:
I'd be very interested in hearing other ideas.
You might check out SmugMug. It's designed for professionals but may have adequately low costs....
 


What blows my mind is that there's still not a single multi-user, shared photo library solution for keeping photos on a home server and having all your family members have access to use them, edit them, sync their photos, and so on.
I was similarly surprised, and spent a long time looking for anything in this space, open source or commercial. My wife had a decade of family photos in iPhoto on her laptop that I rarely got to see, so I really wanted a single family photo library.

It doesn't exactly meet the requirements, but Mylio is the closest fit. It syncs both photos and edits across all devices. Syncing can be done peer-to-peer or through a small number of supported cloud services, some of which allow the photos to be uploaded encrypted. A home file server or NAS can't be used to sync multiple machines, but you can use it as "protection device" that receives a complete copy of the library from one of the client machines.

Mylio support has indicated in the past that they may offer a headless server component or the ability to sync via NAS in the future. Certainly more requests for this feature could help. In the meantime, I find that if your home "server" is a logged-in Mac running Mylio, everything gets synced peer-to-peer.

I can't compare Mylio to Aperture or Lightroom, but my family has no complaints for light use of editing features compared to iPhoto or Apple Photos. Photos are stored in a folder layout you choose, with metadata in XMP sidecars, so a migration path out, if necessary, is clearer than with Apple Photos.

Mylio is subscription software, which is not my preference, but the sync works, and they appear to be the only player designing for multi-device usage.
 


Synology also offers "Moments," a Google Photos-like application for mobile devices. I haven't installed it to test, since reviews on Google Play for Android are rather discouraging.
Installed Moments on my "state of the current art" Android phone. Moments connected through the Synology QuickConnect service. I opened Moments (a Synology application) on the NAS itself and copied in a folder of recent pics I'd downscaled from full res to 20%. Reasonably promptly the photos appeared in the Moments app on my phone.

I then tried to share the photos to Ric, first, from the Moments app on the Synology itself. That resulted in a "sharing" link that worked. Of course it did, it was local to my LAN. Tried the same thing from the app on the phone. Same link. Wait! The phone is on same LAN, but via WiFi. Disabled WiFi, asked for link while connected cellular only: same local link, no joy opening it over cellular connection.

Temporary overview of how Moments might work for multiple users: Synology admin would need to set up a user ID intended for photo sharing via Moments. That's because you probably don't want your "serious" log-in info (user/password) wandering around the universe on phones. Given the amount of data being exfiltrated from phones (including by GBoard and other keyboards), I should have done that and now will have to change the NAS log-in I used to enable Moments.

Moments is separate from Synology's more complete "Photo Station." They co-exist, but if you're serious about storing and accessing photos on a Synology, you'll probably use Photo Station. That would mean downloading photos that arrive in Moments, then adding them to Photo Station storage.

This is not as simple as Google Photos. I've only briefly glanced at Apple's iCloud photos - most of my experience with that service is trying to help two women whose iPhone local storage filled up and whose iCloud storage filled up, and they couldn't take photos. One woman tried too often to enter iCloud with the wrong passwords and got the Apple account guillotine. The other was willing to pay to add more iCloud storage but didn't know how to do that and was going to have to do it from her computer at home. Thus, I wasn't able to help her, either, though the woman who could add storage to her iCloud account was at least happy to know her iPhone wasn't broken.
 


Mylio is subscription software, which is not my preference, but the sync works, and they appear to be the only player designing for multi-device usage.
Intriguing. I think they're getting somewhere! If nothing else they may spur on another player to do one better. I like the cloud-free experience yet the ability to "push out" any image I want to the family. Pricing structure is a bit much, but the free version fits perfectly - I have a reason to upgrade to iOS 12 now! Thanks!
 


You might check out SmugMug. It's designed for professionals but may have adequately low costs....
It may be designed for professionals, which I definitely am not, but I have used SmugMug to share photos with family and friends for a number of years. I have relied on the SmugMug settings to make my albums non-searchable on Google (and that seems to work).
 


SmugMug has advantages, including low cost and active support from staff and fellow users. Storage and data transfer are unlimited for photos and video, if I recall correctly.

It also has disadvantages. For years, there has been talk of better interfacing with Apple systems, but implementation has been slow in coming. I have had an account for about a year but have not yet uploaded much. I am waiting for simpler large-scale transfer from Photos on macOS.

A more permanent potential disadvantage is reformatting of user media. On upload, all photos and video are reformatted to whatever SmugMug uses for storage. Your uploaded originals are then permanently deleted. Various sizes and formats available for download are created by SmugMug. This means SmugMug cannot be an archive for originals, which have never been degraded by reformatting. It also means SmugMug can be a "future-proof archive," so you never need to worry that you cannot read your media.

SmugMug restricts use to 'family friendly" content. The intention is to prevent use of SmugMug for pornography distribution. I am not sure how this is enforced. I suspect uploaded material may be subject to inspection, but I do not know. Those seeking absolute privacy should investigate further.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I'm finally getting a chance to set up my new RX10 M4 (not RX100) today. However, trying to set up the Bluetooth connection to link location data from my iPhone wasn't easy. How hard is Bluetooth pairing? It takes about an hour the Sony way.
I just set up a Fujifilm X-T3. On power-up, it wanted a smartphone Bluetooth connection, so I downloaded the iOS app and enabled Bluetooth on the iPhone. Aside from a trendy dark user interface, installation and operation went smoothly, syncing the camera's clock to the iPhone time.

The Fuji iOS app was able to successfully update firmware1.to the new Version 3.0 wirelessly (switching from Bluetooth to WiFi automatically).

The, to my delight, it appears that the camera is now geotagging photos, thanks to the iPhone connection (which requires that the app be running on the iPhone).

I haven't tried sending files wirelessly, preferring to simply remove the SD card and insert it into the 2015 MacBook Pro's SD card slot....

I also haven't hooked up USB, but the X-T3 has a USB-C connector, which can be used to charge its battery.

(The camera itself is quite remarkable and offers a model for what Apple should be doing, design-wise, with all the X-T3's natural and effective human control points vs. the idiocy and frustration of hide-and-seek obfuscation.)


1.Note: the firmware update process completed on the iPhone before it completed on the camera, and it was critical to wait until the camera had finished its own update process before proceeding.
 


... A more permanent potential disadvantage is reformatting of user media. On upload, all photos and video are reformatted to whatever SmugMug uses for storage. Your uploaded originals are then permanently deleted. Various sizes and formats available for download are created by SmugMug. This means SmugMug cannot be an archive for originals, which have never been degraded by reformatting. It also means SmugMug can be a "future-proof archive," so you never need to worry that you cannot read your media. ...
I use SmugMug, although lightly. I do remember reading in their documentation a few years ago that you can archive to SmugMug, so I just searched a bit and found this statement:
Your untouched, full-resolution originals are always available to be retrieved by you (at no extra charge). In fact, you can get them back individually, or we'll zip up the whole gallery for you with a single click.
On another page:
Once you upload your ful-res file, SmugMug maintains it carefully in all its glory... and also creates a series of custom display sizes for easy viewing and sharing.
Perhaps there’s more to the story, but this may augment the statement made earlier about SmugMug compressing uploaded photos. As I read these statements, SmugMug preserves the original you upload but also generates other, more compressed versions, as well, choosing the version to deliver based on the context.
 


A few folks were asking about making books, now that Photos has nowhere to send the "book file". I found a solution I've been using for quite a number of years. Note that this no longer works with iPhoto in Sierra (and probably beyond), as placed photos seem to be cropped at the bottom; but, in Photos, this works. As I use Lightroom for all management and editing, I just export full-quality JPEGs and drop them into a Photos album.
  1. Craft your book in Photos as you would do normally.
  2. Create a custom page size with your printer driver if you are deviating from 8.5x11.
  3. Set the proper page size in Page Setup.
  4. Print the book as a PDF; open in Preview if you wish to double-check the book.
  5. Look okay? Now export each page of the book as a JPEG (close to max quality, 600dpi). Keep those pages numbered properly as you'll need to know this later. (There is an AppleScript that does this in one shot with all JPEG pages named sequentially.)
  6. Log into your Shutterfly account (or substitute your preferred bookmaker).
  7. Create a book of the appropriate size, upload the JPEG pages you exported previously, and place them 1 per page so the book is populated properly.
  8. You'll have to do the spine of the book manually (at least at Shutterfly I did).
  9. Now verify all is okay and order your book.
I've been doing this for a number of years, although Shutterfly's changes to their online bookmaking software have made it fairly easy to skip the "first do the Photos book" procedure. The first one I did this way was a copy of one I ordered from Apple some years ago. These "our vacation" paper books are identical in every important way.

Also note that Lightroom has the bookmaking ability and the ability to print these books as PDF (so they may be uploaded to whatever bookmaking site you prefer). As well, Photos has some extensions for specific photobook makers.
 


I agree with both points. My pet hate with Capture One is the black import window ...
Don't get me wrong; I've committed to Capture One and only look back to Aperture for old libraries (which I haven't imported to Capture One but may be forced to, once the OS kills Aperture for good).

But one of the unnecessary nagging issues with Capture One is the import process. The non-standard way of selecting a destination folder is clunky. I don't trust any program's one-stop import process, as any failure along the way can be tragic, so I always first copy from memory card to destination folder, usually named hierarchically by date, then import into Capture One, leaving images in place. I can offer more details as desired.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
But one of the unnecessary nagging issues with Capture One is the import process. The non-standard way of selecting a destination folder is clunky.
More information about Capture One import is available in the online user guide, and, as previously mentioned, anyone can try the software out free for 30 days, while Sony and Fujifilm cameras are supported with free "Express" versions, as well as discounted "Pro" versions.
 


You might check out SmugMug. It's designed for professionals but may have adequately low costs....
I've just started kicking the tires on Flickr after being away from that platform for a few years. Interestingly, SmugMug bought Flickr from Yahoo/Oath almost exactly a year ago.

Flickr has a concept of "Groups", which might be useful for some family-sharing use cases. Each user maintains their own account, but they can share photos to a particular Group, and Groups can be private. (Note that the free level of 1,000 photos per user might be too limiting for many people, as upgrading each member of a family to the Pro level might not be practical at $49.99/year.)

I'm interested in using Flickr Groups to allow multiple people to post photos for a non-profit organization. There seem to be surprisingly few photo-sharing tools that support multiple users at a reasonable price. Ideally, I'd like to be able to allow multiple individuals to post as the non-profit organization while using their own logins, as opposed to sharing a single account and password. (This would be similar to how Facebook allows multiple people to post/comment "as" an organization rather than as their own accounts, or how Twitter does the same using Tweetdeck.) Any suggestions for other platforms to try would be welcome!
 


I use SmugMug, although lightly. I do remember reading in their documentation a few years ago that you can archive to SmugMug, so I just searched a bit and found this statement:
Your untouched, full-resolution originals are always available to be retrieved by you (at no extra charge). In fact, you can get them back individually, or we'll zip up the whole gallery for you with a single click.
As I read these statements, SmugMug preserves the original you upload but also generates other, more compressed versions, as well, choosing the version to deliver based on the context.
I stand corrected, and thank JSchaffe for setting me straight. I also have only used SmugMug a little, and was citing from memory.

What I remembered was relevant to videos, where SmugMug says:
We don't keep a copy of the original video you upload. We make high-quality display copies, which are probably altered from what you send us.
In reviewing SmugMug to correct my misstatement, I have been even more impressed. I recommend others investigate. This may be the archiving and sharing site many have been seeking.

One more comment: SmugMug seems very responsive to user input, including help with coding. If you see something you think could be done better, discuss it with them. If you have the expertise to make it work you may be rewarded. My brother referred me but declined the referral reward, because he already had better compensation from coding something for Smugmug. Perhaps MacInTouch users, with their wealth of expertise, could help SmugMug become the ideal site we all seek.
 


... In reviewing SmugMug to correct my misstatement, I have been even more impressed. I recommend others investigate. This may be the archiving and sharing site many have been seeking....
Everyone considering/using SmugMug should be aware of this:

Unless things have changed since that post, it also appears to mean that SmugMug are operating illegally in the European Union.
 


I know this is slightly off topic, but I have been looking at Synology to use as a local and remote private photo server for my machines and when I'm on the road, and I'm not thrilled with their software. Is it possible to use their Diskstation software without having to run Java or Flash?
 



SmugMug has advantages, including low cost and active support from staff and fellow users. Storage and data transfer are unlimited for photos and video, if I recall correctly. It also has disadvantages. For years, there has been talk of better interfacing with Apple systems, but implementation has been slow in coming. I have had an account for about a year but have not yet uploaded much. I am waiting for simpler large-scale transfer from Photos on macOS....
I use SmugMug to share my photos on the web. I use Apple Photos software and iCloud Photos to sync my local devices. While one cannot directly upload photos from Apple photo libraries to SmugMug, I use the following procedure:

1) Create albums within Apple photos for my photos (also add titles, keywords, etc.).​
2) Export each album to a folder the desktop at the original size and maximum JPEG quality.​
3) Use the Upload function at smugmug.com to upload the exported albums to SmugMug albums.​
4) Delete the local exported albums.​

So, the process is not as automatic as one might like, but it is not really a show-stopper. A nice thing about SmugMug is that it allows great flexibility in how one organizes the SmugMug presentation. I have chosen one that looks much like an organized library, but you can be as imaginative or dull as you like.
 


I've been using SmugMug continuously for about 15 years and am quite satisfied with their services. I formerly created Aperture albums and now use it for Photos albums I want to share without the limitations of Photos' built-in sharing option (e.g. add text to individual photos, change background color, make it easy for viewers to order prints, etc.).

As for uploading, there seems to be some confusion about SmugMug's capabilities in this regard. I simply choose SmugMug's "Upload" option, navigate to the particular Photos album I want to use on my iMac (~ Pictures > Photos Library > My Albums > album... or Folder and then album, if you're anal like me) and simply upload the photos I select. Eazy teazy (your milage may vary).
 


I use SmugMug to share my photos on the web. I use Apple Photos software and iCloud Photos to sync my local devices. While one cannot directly upload photos from Apple photo libraries to SmugMug, I use the following procedure:
There is also a SmugMug app that runs as a menu bar item. I have a SmugMug keyword in Photos and use a Smart Album to collect them. You do still have to export the photos and then select them from there in the app. It is probably not more convenient than uploading within a web browser session, but it is my current standard operating procedure.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I don't know anything about Mixbook, but I just saw a book today that was printed by the company from professional photographs of family members, and it was excellent.

 


Everyone considering/using SmugMug should be aware of this:

Unless things have changed since that post, it also appears to mean that SmugMug are operating illegally in the European Union.
Simple - don't log in or register with a Facebook (or any other 'social' ) profile. In fact, never register to anything using a Facebook profile.

I think the link posted earlier must be old, as I couldn't find any mention of taking address book contents when I looked earlier today. (That's a Facebook thing.) Nor could I find anything about image matching or facial recognition tagging. (Is that another Facebook thing being conflated?)

I've been a Smuggie (jazzmugs.net) for several years now, and I've never had problems uploading from my Macs. My uploads are drag and drop; it always tells me if I've already uploaded something. Their public demos are always on Macs

Finally, there is a substantial section in their privacy policy about EU data sharing.
 


I have now wasted about half an hour on attempting to upgrade my Capture One Pro 10 to the current version. It was not easy even getting to the area where I could select an upgrade option. But selecting the basic upgrade results in a pinwheel of death. It's been going for at least 10 minutes now. This should be a very simple process, but it is not.

Is it possible that they won't allow an upgrade from v10 to v12? I could find no info on the site about that.

I sent screenshots to Support. Right now, I'm really not impressed with their handling of customers. I bought v10 about two weeks before v11 came out. Of course, if I'd known it was imminent, I'd have delayed purchasing. They didn't even bother to reply when I contacted them to ask if they offered a reduced upgrade price to people who bought within a couple of weeks of the introduction of a new version.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Just a few random notes about Capture One, as I've been working with it:
  • "Synchronize" within the Library tab may be surprisingly useful. Choose (or add) a hard drive folder under Folders (e.g. a folder full of photos you just copied via the Finder), then right-click for "Synchronize..." which gives you options for catalog import and for showing missing images.
  • Also under the Library tab, in User Collections, it's easy to create a Smart Album that collects all images from a particular camera, e.g. Search Criteria: Camera Model Contains D90. (I do this for each camera.)
  • I find it useful to have two other Smart Albums based on ratings ("stars", which are easy to add to a photo by simply clicking a number on your keyboard from 0 to 5):
    • "Starred": Rating Is Greater Than [0 stars]
    • "Stars+": Rating is Greater Than [1 star]
  • It's also easy to create a (non-smart) album under User Collections then drag and drop any images into it. You can then select images in the album and switch to the Process Recipes tab to export them to a folder on your Mac.
  • I have a large set of photos in one folder on my drive, but that gets a little slow - it probably makes more sense to keep files organized in subfolders, e.g. by year and month or project. Capture One can actually rename files during import, using various metadata fields, and can organize them into at least one level of subfolders (though I don't completely understand all these workflow options yet).
Meanwhile, Dropbox seems like a pretty easy way to share photos. Create a Dropbox folder for a photo album, create a link for it (with or without password), then send the link to people you want to see the album. Dropbox displays the photos (you can zoom in/out) and lets you print (locally), comment, and see metadata (click "About" when viewing a photo).
 


I have now wasted about half an hour on attempting to upgrade my Capture One Pro 10 to the current version. It was not easy even getting to the area where I could select an upgrade option. But selecting the basic upgrade results in a pinwheel of death. It's been going for at least 10 minutes now. This should be a very simple process, but it is not.
I just purchased the Fuji Pro version. I had all sorts of trouble with a Safari browser. Switched to Firefox, and it worked. This might help you, as well.
 



I just purchased the Fuji Pro version. I had all sorts of trouble with a Safari browser. Switched to Firefox, and it worked. This might help you, as well.
If you own Capture One, you should see an upgrade option on startup. Use that link, and it should be able to recognize your account. I've been upgrading since something like V7 and have had no problems, other than having to pay for major steps up.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
FYI:
NBC News said:
Facial recognition's 'dirty little secret': Millions of online photos scraped without consent

... “This is the dirty little secret of AI training sets. Researchers often just grab whatever images are available in the wild,” said NYU School of Law professor Jason Schultz.

The latest company to enter this territory was IBM, which in January released a collection of nearly a million photos that were taken from the photo hosting site Flickr and coded to describe the subjects’ appearance. IBM promoted the collection to researchers as a progressive step toward reducing bias in facial recognition.

But some of the photographers whose images were included in IBM’s dataset were surprised and disconcerted when NBC News told them that their photographs had been annotated with details including facial geometry and skin tone and may be used to develop facial recognition algorithms. (NBC News obtained IBM’s dataset from a source after the company declined to share it, saying it could be used only by academic or corporate research groups.)

... Despite IBM’s assurances that Flickr users can opt out of the database, NBC News discovered that it’s almost impossible to get photos removed.
NBC News said:
Millions of people uploaded photos to the Ever app. Then the company used them to develop facial recognition tools.

... Everything about Ever’s branding is warm and fuzzy, about sharing your “best moments” while freeing up space on your phone.

What isn’t obvious on Ever’s website or app — except for a brief reference that was added to the privacy policy after NBC News reached out to the company in April — is that the photos people share are used to train the company’s facial recognition system, and that Ever then offers to sell that technology to private companies, law enforcement and the military.

In other words, what began in 2013 as another cloud storage app has pivoted toward a far more lucrative business known as Ever AI — without telling the app’s millions of users.
 
Last edited:


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I haven't tried it yet, but ON1 Photo RAW looks pretty good, with a ton of features, a 30-day free trial, and a current sale price of $79.99, with a 5-computer license and a 30-day money-back guarantee.

(I'm wondering if its interface and DAM/organizing tools might be more palatable to Aperture fans who don't like Capture One... or its price.)
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Don't get me wrong; I've committed to Capture One and only look back to Aperture for old libraries (which I haven't imported to Capture One but may be forced to, once the OS kills Aperture for good). But one of the unnecessary nagging issues with Capture One is the import process. The non-standard way of selecting a destination folder is clunky.
Here's a lot of helpful information about Capture One import and organization (including Lightroom and Aperture mentions/comparisons):

 


Here's a lot of helpful information about Capture One import and organization (including Lightroom and Aperture mentions/comparisons):
I have a fully managed Aperture library over 2TB in size. I don't intend to move it to Capture One. I'll just start from scratch. I've moved Aperture and the library to an older Mac Pro running El Capitan. It will stay safely there.

I have scoured all Capture One's tutorials and have come to the conclusion that although Capture One Pro supports managed catalogues, it's really treated as an afterthought. It is rarely, if ever mentioned and there are no tutorials specifically designed around a managed workflow. I have contacted them about it, so we'll see.

I have worked with Aperture's managed workflow for over 10 years, and it has been absolutely flawless. I have no interest in leaving that type of environment. It's one less thing to worry about.
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
I have a fully managed Aperture library over 2TB in size. I don't intend to move it to Capture One. I'll just start from scratch. I've moved Aperture and the library to an older Mac Pro running El Capitan. It will stay safely there. I have scoured all Capture One's tutorials and have come to the conclusion that although Capture One Pro supports managed catalogues, it's really treated as an afterthought. It is rarely, if ever mentioned and there are no tutorials specifically designed around a managed workflow. I have contacted them about it, so we'll see. I have worked with Aperture's managed workflow for over 10 years, and it has been absolutely flawless. I have no interest in leaving that type of environment. It's one less thing to worry about.
I had no idea what "managed catalogs" were, but a bit of web searching suggests that it means storing your images inside the catalog database itself, rather than keeping those images in the form of normal files. One issue with that approach is that any corruption of the catalog could destroy your entire image archive (though backups are obviously critical with any approach). Another issue is that you may not have enough space to store a catalog full of images on your internal drive, but using "referenced" image files, instead, lets you store a huge archive of images on an external drive while keeping the catalog on a fast internal drive for better performance. An advantage of the "managed" library, of course, is that it avoids having the catalog get out of sync with the files on disk when you move files around separately from the app e.g. by using the Finder. (Capture One offers a "Synchronize" option to help clean up this sort of problem.)

Capture One does offer a managed file option, though it's not really highlighted in documentation and tutorials.

For what it's worth, here's more about migrating from Aperture:
Capture One User Guide said:
Importing catalogs from Media Pro, Lightroom or Aperture
In addition to the typical workflow of importing image files from various sources, you can use a Capture One Catalog to import previously made catalogs of images from third-party applications. A Capture One Catalog can import Lightroom Catalogs and Aperture Libraries, albeit with some restrictions. Images are not moved or duplicated but referenced in their original location, including any images stored physically inside the Aperture Library.
I see a similar request for this sort of feature from ON1, so you might want to cast your vote there, if Capture One doesn't meet your needs.
ON1 Photo RAW Project said:
Apple Aperture Managed Libraries Conversion Feature for On1 RAW
I would like to recommend that On 1 create a conversion feature in On1 RAW, similar to what Lightroom has, that would convert Aperture Managed Libraries to formats that could be used with On 1 RAW and other programs (.PSD/.TIFF/.JPEG), and retaining the Aperture catalog structure resident in existing user libraries.
 


For what it's worth, here's more about migrating from Aperture:
Thanks, Ric. in my quest to find a replacement for Aperture I have, from time to time, bought copies of On1, Lightroom, Luminar and Pixelmator. I have found them all wanting, usually because of their DAM, if they even have one. As for issues regarding a managed catalogue, my main managed Aperture library was created well over 10 years ago and has worked flawlessly for all that time. It's over 2TB in size and has been moved to ever larger hard drives over the years simply by copying it via the Finder. It currently sits on a 10TB internal hard drive. It is backed up automatically via Time Machine, as well as to two Aperture Vaults, one of which is stored off site.

As for accessing the originals, an Aperture library, just like a managed Capture One Pro catalogue, is a macOS package, which you can option-click to open and navigate. The beauty of a managed library/catalogue is that you can just launch the app and import your images. No need to have a predetermined folder scheme. The app handles everything for you. Capture One will do this, but [I feel it's] "clunkier" and less sophisticated than Aperture.

Finally, my other major complaint with the other photo editors is that they are usually cross-platform, and usually drop all access to the Apple ecosystem. No iCloud, no slideshows with music, or exporting to video. No automatic syncing to other devices, and another biggie, no access to images from within other Apple apps. Even over 4 years after its demise, you can still access all your Aperture images from within the current version of Pages or Keynote!
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
My main managed Aperture library... is over 2TB in size and has been moved to ever larger hard drives over the years simply by copying it via the Finder. It currently sits on a 10TB internal hard drive. It is backed up automatically via Time Machine...
Thanks for mentioning that, as it brings up another issue with managed catalogs that grow very large: backup. Constantly backing up changes to a 10TB catalog is quite the challenge, backup-wise, vs. backing up changes to a handful of files in the 10MB range! How big is your backup drive?! (Time Machine local snapshots of such a catalog package would seem to be impossible on an internal SSD, though local snapshots of individual image files and modest SQL databases shouldn't be a problem.)
As for accessing the originals, an Aperture library, just like a managed Capture One Pro catalogue, is a macOS package, which you can option-click to open and navigate.
Thanks, I hadn't realized that, but I now see that a Capture One catalog is a "package" that combines image files stored "within" a managed catalog (package) alongside the catalog's SQLite database. (Is this "package" structure identical on Windows/NTFS, I wonder - does Windows/NTFS even have macOS "packages" or an identical equivalent?)
 


I had no idea what "managed catalogs" were, but a bit of web searching suggests that it means storing your images inside the catalog database itself, rather than keeping those images in the form of normal files. One issue with that approach is that any corruption of the catalog could destroy your entire image archive (though backups are obviously critical with any approach). Another issue is that you may not have enough space to store a catalog full of images on your internal drive, but using "referenced" image files, instead, lets you store a huge archive of images on an external drive while keeping the catalog on a fast internal drive for better performance. An advantage of the "managed" library, of course, is that it avoids having the catalog get out of sync with the files on disk when you move files around separately from the app e.g. by using the Finder. (Capture One offers a "Synchronize" option to help clean up this sort of problem.) Capture One does offer a managed file option, though it's not really highlighted in documentation and tutorials.

For what it's worth, here's more about migrating from Aperture:

I see a similar request for this sort of feature from ON1, so you might want to cast your vote there, if Capture One doesn't meet your needs.
Apple Aperture Managed Libraries Conversion Feature for On1 RAW
The "managed" library option was designed for non-technical users less comfortable with working around the computer's file system who want a one-stop option. Those are also likely users with limited-size libraries that'd work well on a single machine. Any heavy shooter or pro would want referenced libraries. That's where Aperture excelled, with a robust reconnection interface for when systems migrate to new computers, files get backed up, etc. Worked flawlessly. This is also where Capture One can [lose sync, if you] make file/folder moves outside of the program. Short version: don't do it!
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
This is also where Capture One can [lose sync, if you] make file/folder moves outside of the program. Short version: don't do it!
As previously mentioned, Capture One Pro has a feature specifically for this problem:
Capture One User Guide said:
Updating a folder
... When changes have been made to a referenced folder outside of the Catalog, for example, when adding images using another application, the Catalog can be updated using the Synchronize Folder option.
 


Thanks for mentioning that, as it brings up another issue with managed catalogs that grow very large: backup. Constantly backing up changes to a 10TB catalog is quite the challenge, backup-wise, vs. backing up changes to a handful of files in the 10MB range! How big is your backup drive?!
Because the Aperture catalog is a package (to the file system and Time Machine, just a special folder with lots of contents), a differential backup is only tracking changes to files and folders within the package. So it's not quite as bad as it sounds - editing one photo doesn't require a full new backup of the entire catalog. That said, editing may cause lots of files to be modified and backed up (preview files of different sizes, etc), so it may not be 'efficient' - depending on how you define efficient.
 
  • appreciate
Reactions: KJM


Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts