Options
Aperture Integration? Woo-Hoo!
GRBlizz
Registered Users Posts: 107 Major grins
Apple Releases Aperture 3.5 With iCloud Photo Sharing, Apple Maps Support and Smug Mug Integration
This is outstanding news! Anyone upgraded yet?
This is outstanding news! Anyone upgraded yet?
0
Comments
Anyway, I was very excited about the SmugMug integration. I'm not fully sure about how much synchronization happens. I got on the forum to see if anyone else had said anything about it. So far, it does allow access to all your SmugMug for viewing in Aperture. It acts as though it downloads and saves local versions, which by the way happens slowly initially. There is no organization whatsoever of your galleries. All the galleries you have on SmugMug are just in a big unsorted mess. I'm not sure what kind of editing and synchronizing happens. And if you already had those photos in Aperture before, I think you essentially will have duplicates, one in their original location, and one in the SmugMug galleries. However, it appears you could just turn off the SmugMug access and all that would be gone, so no harm in trying. It doesn't get mixed into your other organization in any case. You can upload to SmugMug through the Share menu, and even create new galleries with some access to gallery settings through Aperture.
I'm still playing with it to see just what it will do. I'm interested also in your thoughts. I'm wondering whether to keep using this or just stick with SmuginForAperture. Still, I'm just stoked that Apple has noticed us. Out of all the possible photo sharing sites, you've got the two biggies: Facebook and Flickr, and then us, and that's it. I really wouldn't be surprised if SmugMug helped push to make this possible.
I just uploaded a new 106 photo gallery using the new integration from 3.5, and I immediately see one problem: a title was automatically appended to each picture, equivalent to "file name.jpg". I don't want each picture to have an automatic title! In the new SmugMug, if you click on Organize>Organize Site and then select your gallery in question, you can then hit "Select All" and then the edit wrench, then Edit Caption & Keywords, and you can remove all captions and keywords on all pictures with just a few keystrokes. However, you cannot do that with Titles. So, I will have to go into each picture individually to delete its title, unless someone knows how to either bulk delete titles or set up the Aperture / SmugMug integration to not provide a title to each picture to begin with.
Hmm. I can't take the risk of upgrading yet (in the middle of a time-sensitive project), but I need to see what you're talking about with this filename issue. I also use SmugInPro, and I have it set to upload the content of the "Headline" field to Title, and Caption to Caption. I have noticed that my files all get uploaded with the version name as the filename, but that doesn't show anywhere. If the Headline field is empty in Aperture, nothing is populated in SmugMug's Title field
Are you saying that the direct upload puts content in the Title field? That would be bad, since SM doesn't allow bulk editing of Titles.
Unfortunately, that's exactly what I'm saying. The direct upload puts "file name.jpg" into the Title field for each picture.
Well, I've now upgraded both my OS and Aperture, and I'm very excited about the SmugMug integration.
I see the problem that Matt talked about - the Version Name in Aperture populates the Title field in SmugMug. So if your version name is the Aperture default of the filename, that will become the title. If you change the version name in Aperture to something else, that will become the title.
In summary, SmugMug picks up the Version Name info as Title, and the Caption info as Caption. Works for me.
I also like that I can upload to either of my SmugMug accounts seamlessly - actually, more easily than with SmugInPro. I like that the interface works with the full depth of folders that new SM allows. That was an annoying limitation in SmugInPro for Aperture.
The feature I am most excited about is the synchronization. Any changes made to an image in Aperture can be synchronized with SmugMug. It's not automatic as it is with albums shared to Facebook. You have to select the album, right click, and choose "synchronize" But when you do this, any changes to the Title, Caption, or the image itself, get reflected.
This feature, by the way, offers a solution for bulk changes to the Title field. Since Title = Version Name, just edit your version names in Aperture, synchronize, and you're set!
I don't love that folders on SM are downloaded to Aperture, because everything that is on SmugMug CAME from my Aperture library, so it's duplication. But I just deleted the old folders and disabled that feature.
Overall, I think it will be most useful. Definitely a woo-hoo.
Plus the aforementioned quirk with the sported file name.
Galleries in one long list: I agree it would be better if they were organized by the same hierarchy as in SmugMug. The primary problem I see with the current (lack of) structure is that duplicate gallery names can be confusing, when one wants to add photos to an already-published gallery. Since I started having that problem when I began using the Aperture API for Facebook, I have adopted a workflow of using more specific gallery names. It's a workaround, and actually probably better communication.
File Name export: Why is it a quirk? I think it's probably an improvement. At least we know which field in Aperture populates the "Title" field, which was not the case before.
Also, now we have a way to do a bulk edit of Titles - do it in Aperture and synchronize. Until SmugMug adds the ability to bulk edit Titles as they do Captions, this is the best option we have.
Not arguing, just suggesting options that might make it work better for you, until they improve it.
The Aperture API doesn't reflect all those options. Makes it awkward to sync effectively.
There is inconsistent terminology based on inconsistent file behaviour.
Album=Gallery, no?
Can someone answer the following questions
1) Are the files transferred to smugmug full resolution or are they compressed?
2) Once all the photos are on smugmug if I were to lose my aperture (accidentally) could I still retrieve all the photos off of smugmug?
3) If I make changes at the smugmug site (like a crop etc.) will those changes show up in my aperture
4) If I make changes at the aperture program will those changes show up in my smugmug site
5) Besides titles and captions is there any reason (with regards to backing up my aperture files to smgumug) to use smuginforaperture v. this new aperture method.
Thanks in advance. I could not find much about this anywhere on the web.
www.glenndavidphotography.com
They are JPEGs, so will be based on your JPEG Export Preset in Aperture.
They will exist on SmugMug whatever happens to Aperture, and vice versa. The SM version will be a JPEG.
No It is not a persistent synchronization. Make changes in Aperture and you need to re-upload and replace the existing photo.
And vice versa. Edit in SM and you need to download to Aperture and import that file.
See above.
This new method is an API and not a plug-n script and as such has the potential to be much more powerful. It is a "share" in Aperture vs an "Export".
Right now I find it disorganized but the potential for things like auto-sync are now built-in.
Frankly, this is abig vote of confidence in SM from Apple. Not every supplier gets the keys to the car like this.
It's brand new and we're all on a learning curve.
I've found that it's a little simpler with changes made to Aperture versions that have been uploaded to SmugMug. All you have to do is find the gallery in the SmugMug folder in Aperture (under SHARED). Then click on the little wireless symbol and it will synchronize the version on SmugMug with the version in Aperture.
Cheers!
I have found that the Aperture/Smugmug integration is causing havoc is the order photos are kept within galleries. For example, I have one Smugmug gallery in which photos are placed simply in the order they are uploaded, and I want them that way for a reason. After I synced with Aperture, that program reordered the set chronologically by date taken, and this was mirrored on Smugmug. I did not tell Aperture to do this, it was apparently a default setting.
I instructed Aperture to order the images Manually, and for a short time I was pleased, as it remembered the original order and reverted the gallery.
But then I added a new image and, yes, everything flipped back to chron by date taken. Sure enough, Aperture has reset itself to that setting without my input. Worse, when I flipped the switch back to Manual, it didn't quite remember everything and I'll have to spend 20-30 minutes re-ordering the photos, then I'll just turn synchronization off until this is worked out.
Hmm, I just uploaded a gallery that I had sorted manually in Aperture, and it retained the manual sorting. Then I resorted it to "date taken" and synced. It remained in the Manual sort order in SmugMug.
I believe that sort order in SmugMug is controlled by the gallery setting (under Appearance). I had this gallery's sort order set to "position". Perhaps you can try that and see if you are happier with the results.
Thanks I'll try that tonight.
It's not working. I'm not sure what "Sort by Position" is supposed to do, but it is switching items to Date Taken when I enable it. I first used Smugmug Sort by Date Uploaded (which is what I want), then enabled Sort By Position, thinking it might just mean "keep them in whatever position they are in" but that didn't work. Like I said, it sorted them by Date Taken for whatever reason.
SmugMug has a sort by Date Uploaded option, but Aperture keeps overriding it I think because Aperture has no sort by date uploaded option it converts it to date taken, so every time I have a Smugmug gallery organized by date uploaded, whenever it syncs with Aperture, that program converts it to date taken.
What is Sort by Position supposed to do? SmugMug already has sort by (10 Date Taken, (2) Date Modified and (3) Date Uploaded. Why would By Position = Date Taken?
But, I now have tentative hope. I just sorted by date uploaded, and then switched Smugmug to "Sort Manually", which is not under Settings/Appearance, but accessed directly from the top menu when in Organize Mode for a specific gallery. I did Sort by Date Uploaded, then switched it to "Manually" and the order held. Now I have to wait until I go home and try setting the Aperture version of the Gallery also to Manual, Sync, and hope everything continues to hold.