Aperture, OS X 10.5.2 and Time Machine

[Mark Smith]

On 27.02.2008, at 13:16, Paul Sargent wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 2:34 AM, Scott Lewis <sglewis at mac.com> wrote:
>> I've noticed that 10.5.2's new "Aperture" support in Time Machine
>
> I'm not sure if this is a 10.5.2 feature or an Aperture 2 feature.

 From memory, it was cited as a 10.5.2 feature and IIRC it predated  
Aperture 2's release as this indirectly confirms:

<http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=306853>

> I think Aperture 2 updated the way it stores photos, but I don't use
> it, so I can't be sure.

There are likely differences in the library, but I don't think that  
this has anything major to do with the way Time Machine backs it up  
and I'm sure the time machine limitation has nothing to do with the  
image files being compressed. They are not. The Aperture library is a  
file bundle in which thumbnails and previews of master files (only  
compressed in as much as they are jpeg files) and versions derived  
from the masters (also w/o additional compression) and if the user  
chooses to do so, the master files themselves (uncompressed), are  
stored in their native format within the bundle.

The original problem was with Time Machine - some aspect of Aperture  
overlooked in Time Machine's logic ?
Having had a short think about it, I don't see anything in Aperture  
that is specifically hostile to versioning by a tool that recognizes  
the file types and their attributes.

It seems to me that Apple have taken a pragmatic approach to using  
Time Machine to back up the Aperture Library in that anything more  
than a daily back-up would be a pain in the ass and would likely  
capture a lot of iterations that one doesn't really need versioned.  
This would fill the target volume quickly and thereby reduce the  
effective time span that was retrievable, which begins to defeat the  
purpose of Time Machine.

0.02,
Mark.