I've searched and read several posts that have to do with multiple computer library sharing, but haven't found one that directly applies to my situation:
I would like to share a managed library btw two computers, an iMac at home with plenty of internal storage, and a MBP with only 250 GB of storage that usually resides at my office. Currently, there are no files on my MBP but there are times while at work (or when travelling) when I would like to edit and view files from an aperture library that mirrors that on my iMac.
Normally, I suppose I would keep a “full” library on each computer and merely connect them from time to time and merge the libraries back and forth, but due to the limited storage on my MBP, I don't think I want to keep a full library on the MBP locally.
Instead, I though I might use an external HD for my MBP to work off of. Because this external drive would usually be connected to the MBP at my office, I would still want to maintain a library locally on my iMac (rather than keeping a single library on the external drive and accessing it from either computer, as some posters have discussed). I would then merge libraries back and forth between the external drive and my iMac by importing into and exporting out of the iMac.
Does this solution make sense or am I missing something?
Thanks!
Tison,
It makes sense but unless you really need simultaneous access to the full library on two computers, I wouldn’t do that. You’re just asking for a headache in duplicate files (as you copy photos you don’t need to), or worse, missing files (as you delete files you thought you already moved).
Personally I’d recommend the external drive route, and just plug that drive into whatever computer needs to access the photos.
If you do truly need simultaneous access (meaning someone at home wants to get on the computer while you’re at work), then yes your method will work, but you’ll have to be diligent.
An alternative that might be easier is to just maintain a “selects” library, where you export JPEGs of your favorite and treated photos from the main Aperture library, and store those exports in another Aperture Library (or even an iPhoto library to keep things visually separate), and just leave that smaller library on the iMac for others to access. If all the other access is for is to email/share pictures, then this will make things cleaner. That makes it a one-way move, instead of trying to keep two libraries in sync.
You could even use Dropbox to make copying the photos invisible. Just export photos to a shared Dropbox folder on your laptop, and they will show up on the iMac, then import those photos into the iMac’s Aperture or iPhoto library.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Thank you Joseph,
I thought that Aperture was pretty good at not duplicating files when merging (or importing/exporting) libraries, no? What steps would I have to take to be diligent?
If it is too difficult, I think the external drive route may be best for me. I don’t need simultaneous access, but I will be editing on both machines.
-Tison
Tison,
Yes Aperture does a good job of merging dupes, but if the image was edited in both copies prior to merge, then you’ll end up with duplicates for sure. Oh and that merging only works if you export a Project, then import that same project. If you just import the same photos to two libraries, Aperture won’t know they are the same when merging.
As I said it absolutely can be done — it just requires a level of diligence that may be more of a headache than it’s worth.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
Joseph,
Can I export/import the entire library, rather than exporting/importing individual projects? Would this save time in case I edit photos across multiple projects, or will aperture take a long time in merging entire libraries? I suppose the answer would depend on whether the length of time it takes to merge is proportional to the number of photos that have “changed” or have been added, or whether it is proportional to the size of the library or project that aperture has to evaluate for differences. If so, do you know?
Thanks!
-Tison
double post, sorry
Tison,
You wouldn’t actually have to export the entire Library, because when you export anything you’re exporting it as a Library. So an entire Library exported as a Library would just be a copy — make sense?
However merging two complete Libraries would take quite a bit of time, regardless of the number of changes, because both Libraries would have to be scanned and compared for changes.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?