FWIW, the nearest “PC+only Photoshop” equivalent to Aperture is obviously Lightroom and you’d have exactly the same “issue” with that. You do not resize “within” Lightroom - you export a new resized file.

The only difference is that there’s a built-in script in LR that lets you choose to re-import the resized image whereas with Aperture, you either manually re-import, write your own script, or even simpler, use an easily assembled Automator folder action, or buy a ready-written script as Tom says above. That is +1 to LR if we’re keeping score by the way and I hope Aperture X or whatever has that functionality. But I digress.

Once that script or folder action is written (two minutes tops), it’s invisible and files are automatically reimported into Aperture as long as you export the resized file to the appropriate folder (i.e the one to which you’ve attached the folder action). Me writing this makes it sound far more complicated than it actually is!

Photoshop/Bridge do not have catalogs or libraries so there is no need to “re-import” the resized image that Photoshop has produced and saved. You still have to be able to find it should you want it though.

File > Export > Version.

Then in the export preset select one of the sizes there. If the size you want is not there then look at the bottom of the Export Preset List where the last option it says Edit and then make a preset to how you would like it.

I’ve had the same question myself as Ron first posted but don’t see the answer I’d need in Chris’ reply above.

What I would like to do is resize WITHIN Aperture; I’ve done the exporting too but then consider it a cumbersome work-around to reimport and relocate the image in the Aperture Project/Album.

Can resizing be done totally within Aperture ?

Thank you.

Bob,

There’s no built-in way to make smaller versions in Aperture. But you can write an Applescript to do it. Or you can buy the script already done and available right here in the ApertureExpert Store.

The script just automates the process of exporting the images (at the size you specify) to the desktop, then reimporting those back into the same project and deleting the exported images from the desktop.

Tom

Tom

You have responded to previous postings of mine here; thank you for all the help.

I’ve read the link you offered and like what I found there. Might there, however, be an option where one could resize an image for a given purpose without having to “surrender” the RAW Master, as appears to be the case in the script ?

Thank you

Bob

The original RAW files aren’t deleted by the script. They are “rejected”. See number 4 in the description of what the script does:

“The original Master files are rated as Rejected and are hidden from view. However they are still in your Library! This is done so you can manually confirm the conversion, and compare quality if you like, before deleting the files.”

A rejection is just a type of rating. When images are imported they have no rating (or are rated 0) and you can give it a rating of 1 - 5. Or you can type the 9 to reject it. Typing any other rating from 0 - 5 will remove the rejection. You can change the browser filter to show the rejected images so you can undo the rejection.

Better yet, I’m sure you could edit the script to leave out the command that rejects them in the first place. If you’ve rated the images, the rejection step will remove your rating so it might be something you’d want to avoid.

Keep in mind I haven’t actually used the script myself. I’m only going on what the description says and what I recall others writing about in the forum in the past. Maybe someone who’s used the script will chime in soon and provide more insight.

Walter

Thank you for the input.

I am comfortable using such export presets. However, with them one still needs to reimport the resized image back into Aperture from the Desktop or whatever location one supplied to the export options. Therefore, when I wrote “resize WITHIN” Aperture I meant that to be asking how one resizes and can then see the smaller size file reappear automatically within the Aperture project/album, etc., interface to be able to skip the re-import segment.
Possible ? If not, I’ll just carry on the old way.
Thank you

Bob

Ron/Bob,
‘Resize’ means either enlarge or reduce. To reduce the size, i.e. you need a 4x6 print, then the answer is obvious within the Print function. To enlarge an image beyond the pixel dimensions that your camera has produced, you need special software to do it properly. PS, PS Elements, and a few plugins do it satisfactorily. I use OnOne’s Perfect Resize, which you can run WITHIN Aperture. It does create a TIF copy and allows you to enlarge (or reduce) your image and maintain detail. This type of enlargement capability is not possible within the stock AP3 application.

Bob … you didn’t stir anything up … it sometimes becomes difficult to explain that workflow apps like Aperture and Lightroom and Capture One are different in capabilities compared to traditional options of the past. If users are to implement these types of workflow solutions and reap the highest reward from the effort, they have to think outside of the box of what was the norm prior to their existence. Unfortunately, new users of these apps spend far too much time trying to make these apps “fit” what they are familiar with rather than embracing a new workflow that can offer greater potential.

These apps are designed to eliminate and/or streamline mundane and repetitive tasks as well as eliminate the need to create, archive and track unnecessary duplicate files. Where once we were forced to crete and store multiple files for our workflow, now … with the aid of these new tolls and a brief setup of presets, scripts and shortcuts, we can reproduce a specific output file in short order. Thus removing the tedium of these annoying repetitive tasks.

For myself, the only derivative files I create that are kept in my Aperture library, are those full resolution TIFF and PSD versions that have had further processing beyond the capability of Aperture … by percentages, even those instances are very few. Even though I create many tens of thousands of jpeg files for online proofing, sending out to pro labs for client printing, I do not keep any of those images on hand for future use. There is just no need to clutter up the process when you can create them again at will in very short order.

I actually wanted the same thing for a while … here’s why.

When you’re printing both large and small (of the same image) but still want the image to pop, conventional workflows require that you resize before sharpening. If Aperture were able to perform a resize and output-sharpen in one step, then I completely agree that a single image in my library would work and thus avoid clutter. When I want to send off a 5x5 and a 20x20 for print to a lab, I have to either take my workflow outside of Aperture or I use things like the Perfect Resize plugin and maybe Nik Sharpener with it. Then I keep the different versions in the single stack.

If Aperture provided a decent resize->sharpen->(optional watermark for web) as part of the Export, then my life would be easier. Instead I’ve tried everything from BorderFX and Perfect Resize to Photoshop.

Generaly speaking, I have settled on the following:
- For down-sizing, I tend to use “Edit with” and BorderFX. I have save presets.
- For upscaling, I tend to use “Perfect Resize” - also with presets.

Although both programs have sharpening, I will often run a Nik Sharpener sharpen on them if I’m sending to a lab for printing. Of course the above workflow keeps everything nicely in Aperture - and it sounds like this is what you’re after.

Well, this has turned a basic question into much more debate than I anticipated.

I myself, have actually never needed to do such resizing but I have been trying to induce/convert-to-Mac/Aperture a photography student I met in a class on motion photography which was conducted by a diehard PC+”only Photoshop will do” adherent instructor who was highly dismissive of Mac+Aperture photographers in her class. After singing the praises of Aperture and having to parry the instructor’s objections, I told my fellow student I’d try to find the answer to the question on Aperture Expert.com.

I myself am an Aperture fan [although am also looking forward to the next iteration of it, ‘someday’ ] but also use NIK or Elements for necessary functions unavailable in Aperture. I have used various of the suggestions of my fellow posters, above, and find them helpful.

I was just trying to add one more member to the Aperture user community by posting this question. Didn’t mean to stir up anything.

Bob