This is a great thread, not the least of showing me I'm not alone in trying to get a handle on this stuff.
Does any one have an opinion on how well Aperture handles these image management issues compared to LR?
Thanks,
Mitchell
Mitchell,
Aperture allows something a bit different, but useful I think. I do not import the originals into Aperture. Instead, I create a folder/file structure similar to what Jack and other are describing. I keep that on an external FW portable drive while on the road. I then import things as "referenced" files into Aperture. That basically brings in a higher resolution image, if you choose, and all of the edits stay in the Aperture Library (like LR, I think), but the original RAW files are still in the folders I set up for them. This permits me to access those files easily with C1, Bridge/ACR, or other RAW developer options, should I so choose. I can store those converted/edited files in sub-folders, and selectively import files or referenced files into Aperture from those folders also.
When I get back to my office, I can copy the external drive files to my main system, and then re-establish the links to Aperture. I can also export the Aperture project folder to another Aperture Library if I want, so that I can access it with another machine, if I choose. That way, any of the edits (versions, IPTC info, etc.) will be saved and can be used. Also, since I kept the originals in their own folder structure, and kept subfolders from other app work (C1 or ACR), I can still access those files too.
In the end, my bias is thinking that Aperture may allow a bit more flexibility than LR for this stuff, but since I really do not use LR, I cannot say for sure. The one key that I think is important, at least for how I work, is to keep the original files in their own folder/file structure. That does not lock me into any app (Aperture or LR). With some of the new features in Aperture, I think one can even save IPTC edits directly to the RAW files now, making all of that effort more portable. Aperture seems to have a "cleaner" export option for masters and versions, if one needs that also.
Bottom line, both LR and Aperture are great programs, but they are a bit different for DAM, and overall file access flexibility, I think. The key for me is the ability to keep the originals in their own folder/file structure and work on referenced files in Aperture. As long as you are connected to those source folders, you can do everything and not balloon your file storage on your laptop, for example, as you will only be saving the small instruction sets in the library, plus smaller image files for viewing. If you are not connected to the original source files in Aperture, you can still do edits to IPTC data, create book layouts and other stuff, and then have all of that sync when you reconnect. That is a sweet option for being able to do some cataloging stuff without having to have all the files with you all the time.
Not sure if that helps answer you question or not.
LJ