I notice that Aperture Inspector seems to be including statistics for a camera who's photos have been exported to a separate library. I would like to have the option to be able to run A.I. against the library that I currently have open, and not to include statistics from other libraries that Aperture might know about. The rationale is that I have my photographs loaded into Aperture, but I also have my Father's and wife's, that they have taken with their cameras. If this can not be done, how about separating out projects as their photos are under two unique folders?
Hi
Aperture Inspectore analyzes the aperture database file. If an image exists in your aperture database (the library you have selected in Aperture Inspector) it will be included in the analysis. If the image is erased from the Library it will not be included.
The analysis does not look at files that have been exported in another way than it looks at any other file. As long as the file is in the database, it will be included in the analysis.
thanks
Stig
d kenner,
To be sure we understand what you’re saying…
You said Aperture Inspector is including stats on photos that have been exported — but are they also still in the Library you’re inspecting?
If you have exported and then deleted them from the Library, then from what Stig is saying, they should’t show up. If they are there, then of course they will be included in the inspection.
Aperture Inspector looks at your entire library, and can’t look at just a single folder or project. I don’t know if that’s even technically possible (Stig?) but regardless it doesn’t do it now.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Stig, I understand what you are saying, but I am looking at A.I. right now and it is showing 889 photos taken by a Fuji MX-700. This was my Father’s camera from 1999-2001 and I imported the photos into a project in Aperture, and then exported it as a library, deleting the project from the main Aperture library. Yet, I am seeing the camera and associated photos in the stats. Unless there is an “empty trash” for Aperture projects that I do not know about!
Rgds, Dixon
d kenner,
There is an empty trash actually… if you haven’t emptied it, then that could be the problem! [screenshot]
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Well, 4,400 photos in the Aperture trash. Emptied, exited and restarted AI, and the numbers remain the same. I’ll have to find out how to search on the camera metadata to see if the photos are actually in the core library. They shouldn’t be as they were imported into a specific project, the project exported to its own library, and then deleted.
Thank you for the pointer to the aperture trash. Did not know it was there.
Dixon.
d kenner,
No problem. Check this article to really understand the Aperture trash: Emptying the Trash in Aperture 3—What Really Happens?.
You can search the entire Aperture library by metadata by selecting the Photos view, then opening the search pane, and adding the data you want. If you’re searching by a particular camera, then go to EXIF and Camera Make or Model, like this: [screenshot].
If the camera that’s showing up in Aperture Inspector is truly no longer in the Aperture library, then this is good information to know.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Excellent article on emptying the trash. However, before emptying the trash I created a smart album where, as you note above, I searched on “MX-700” as the Camera Model. In the core Aperture library, there were no hits. I switched to my Father’s library, and there were lots of photos in the duplicate smart album. I emptied the trash and again looked in the Smart Albums. No changes. None in the core library, lots in my Father’s external (on an external USB HD) library. Went into the mail Aperture library, opened up A.I. and we still have the 889 MX-700 photos showing.
Not that this bothers me at all. It is curious that the programme is not responding in an expected way. Just for fun, I exited A.I. & Aperture, disconnected the external HD with the library with the Fuji photos in it, opened up Aperture and then A.I., and the 889 photo are still listed.
Curious.
Rgds,
d kenner,
We’ll need Stig to chime in again here. The way AI works is it reads a database file inside of Aperture, and it rescans that every time it launches. So it sounds like either a) AI isn’t clearing out old data, or b) Aperture isn’t clearing old data out of it’s database.
If it’s (b), then perhaps a database repair or rebuild will fix it.
To find out if it’s (a) though, delete the cache that AI has created so it has to scan your Aperture library again. It might do this just by dragging the Library into AI again (as if you were loading a new Library, but instead just load the same one), or you can delete it manually — delete folders named “com.infostill.apertureinspector.xxx” in the user Preferences folder, at ~/Library/Preferences/
I’ll ask Stig to chime in though; he wrote the app and might be able to shed some more light on this :)
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Hi there
Every time Aperture Inspector in lauched it starts reading all NEW images from the aperture library. It deos not scan the whole library every time, as this would slow it down quite significantly for those of you with big libarires.
If you want AI to re-scan your library because yo u have erased a lot of pictures you need to select the library again, that is go to Preferences -> select library and select the library again. This will cause AI to scan it from the start, and not just from the last import.
When this is done Aperture Inspector will show only the images that you have in your library right now.
If this logic is flawed - please give me suggestions as to how you would liek it to work. For me it seems like the best solution, as it will give you stats for all pictures , and not just the ones you have decided to keep after a while.
-Stig
Deleted the files buried in the bottom of that structure. The MX-700 photos are gone when I reloaded AI. I did not think before I did this as I now need to go and find what all of the lenses and cameras cost again.
Thanks,
Stig,
From my point of view a differential approach as described for new images seems to make sense. However, when re-selecting a library certain data should not be waived, e.g. the information on prices of the equipment as outlined by d keeners and also in my post.
Moreover, sometimes AI does not seem to recognize the manufacturer or type of equipment. Reloading the same library fixed that in my cases.
It would be very helpful if the name of the library that has been analyzed were displayed e.g. under “Preferences”.
- d-light
Hi
The fact that the price info gets lost is something I will fix in the next update. I simply did not think about this, as I use one library myself.
The feedback I get is is very valuable, because it seems almost everyone has their own way of organizing their pictures with aperture.
If you look under the preferences is does state where the library is, albeit in a rather technical way. I’ll see if I can clarify this a bit.
-stig
Hi Stig,
Thanks a lot for your prompt feedback. Your improvements are very much appreciated.
I am sorry that I did not see the “Location of Library:” entry. I have simply overlooked it.
-d-light
“If this logic is flawed - please give me suggestions as to how you would liek it to work. For me it seems like the best solution, as it will give you stats for all pictures , and not just the ones you have decided to keep after a while.”
The complication that arises is when you are processing for more than your own photos. The current structure of AI does not take into account the possibility of different libraries that could exist. Without complicating things, if AI could have a “collection” of libraries that it looked at, the Aperture owner could either aim AI at a particular library, and get the required data. Or, it could look at a collection, or aggregation of several other libraries. Given the user accepting the performance hit of a rescan, this should be possible. Storing camera and lens cost data in a separate file would get around the problem of data being over written. You are giving the end user greater control, which is fine, so long as they understand. Possibly a default is the existing situation, a toggle would allow finer controls if desired.
An idea.