edit in aperture without import as a copy

[david o]

hi,
My workflow consist in download the images from the camera, create a folder named by what's in, then divide in Negraw folder and PrintFolder. Uselly I organise from bridge and process in PS.
I like do it that way as I know what's goin on.
I did try lightroom, and as iphoto, the "import" process create another folder with duplicate images. That does take another hard drive space.
So I was on my way to not use it anymore.
I tried aperture to see if it worked another way.
It seems that it does the same.
Am I wrong or is there any way to edit the pics, directly from the folder they already are... without creating another tons of folder.
thank's




www.davidolivier.net

[eSBee]

you have to forgive me if I misunderstand ...

but isn't that the exactly 'beauty' of Aperture... ?  > when you work on a picture it doesn't make a copy of the complete picture and it does not save the complete modified picture...
but Aperture only saves references/data of the new settings that are made.
this data is loaded and applied very quickly when you view the changed 'version'.

That is a lot less data on your harddisk.

[jani]

I did try lightroom, and as iphoto, the "import" process create another folder with duplicate images. That does take another hard drive space.

No, that's only if you choose that importing option. You can choose between referencing the files in their place (save space), copying them to the Lightroom library (what you evidently experienced), moving them to the Lightroom library (save space, lose your current organization), and copying them as digital negatives (DNG, use more space).

As eSBee also notes, Aperture can now also reference file in their existing location.

[david o]

ok, sounds better, I'll try to find how to do.
thank's for your help.