Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Other Raw Converters => Apple Aperture Q&A => Topic started by: digitaldog on February 05, 2015, 01:25:15 pm
-
First look at what Apple is proposing as a 'replacement' for Aperture that I've seen:
http://www.macworld.com/article/2880099/first-look-photos-for-os-x.html
Doesn't seem like much of a replacement based on this information.
-
First look at what Apple is proposing as a 'replacement' for Aperture that I've seen:
http://www.macworld.com/article/2880099/first-look-photos-for-os-x.html
Doesn't seem like much of a replacement based on this information.
It's not, really. I think it's better at sharing stuff across the Apple ecosystem (iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Mac). Its editing capabilities are not on par with Lightroom (or even Aperture) if you're making extensive use of brushes and local corrections.
I think if you got by with the "enhance" button in Aperture for most of your photos, it'll be fine. If you really made the most of what Aperture 3 offered over Aperture 2, I think you'll be left wanting here.
-
Doesn't seem like much of a replacement based on this information.
Many great solutions had meager beginnings. I doubt even the engineers working on Photos for OS X actually know what thew app will be capable of once it is officially released for use. Or what it will be a year or two from now.
-
Many great solutions had meager beginnings.
True. But it kind of reminds me of the software 'progress' I see with X-rite where the newer stuff is better in some places but at the expense of a boat load of features in previous products we need. If they make progress, fine. Aperture still runs fine. But if they don't, we get to be pissed. ;D
-
What I find intriguing is the biggest point of discussion from the WWDC announcement was that Photos for OS X would have extensible third party capability for plugins with non-destructive application. So far, none of the "first look" articles have really mentioned this.
-
I see that Apple has now posted information regarding Photos App via their Web with a release time of Spring:
https://www.apple.com/osx/photos-preview/
Now from my observation it looks more to be cumsumer program more then a pro program.
Stu
-
What is not really shown on the Apple page for Photos is the handling of raw files. The sliders shown for the sample image of the woman on Muir Beach are pretty standard stuff. But, as in Aperture, there are more tools for raw files. It will be interesting to see how it works for raw data - if it is as good as Aperture in terms of image quality and raw conversion, but is missing some local editing tools, etc. on the first version, so be it. We will see - i think aperture users that feel abandoned are quick to put down the application without ever using it or seeing glimpses of it.
kirk
-
What is not really shown on the Apple page for Photos is the handling of raw files. The sliders shown for the sample image of the woman on Muir Beach are pretty standard stuff. But, as in Aperture, there are more tools for raw files. It will be interesting to see how it works for raw data - if it is as good as Aperture in terms of image quality and raw conversion, but is missing some local editing tools, etc. on the first version, so be it. We will see - i think aperture users that feel abandoned are quick to put down the application without ever using it or seeing glimpses of it.
kirk
I might expect that the raw conversion would be BETTER in Photos than in Aperture.
In the WWDC sessions last summer, they showed some enhancements to the RAW converter in OS X Yosemite that had better noise reduction and colors in some specific files. In using Aperture on Yosemite, I didn't see any of the enhancements. One might figure they didn't explicitly support it in a product on the way out. I'd expect it would be available to Photos, however.
-
I gave up after using it for years and bought the Cloud in Dec. it will take a few iterations if ever to get to where Aperture was. I just hate they dropped it at all and as such list my loyalty. I still have my macs and they are newish, so will stay with them for a few more years. When I upgrade next I will look at PCs again. Been a mac guy since 06 and prior to that an Apple II so I will adjust and see what happens s a computer and what is a phone on my desk.
-
First look at what Apple is proposing as a 'replacement' for Aperture that I've seen:
http://www.macworld.com/article/2880099/first-look-photos-for-os-x.html
Doesn't seem like much of a replacement based on this information.
I don't think anyone can call it a replacement. I have been using Aperture since it was released. Pretty frustrating to see Apple drop professional photographers wholesale.
I'm sure Photos will improve over time but I'm not seeing anything that looks like the understructure for a fully fleshed out pro-capable app.
All that said - I have been using Capture One v8 since early last fall, first for tethering and lately looking to make a full switch. If anything it does show what Aperture might have been - layers, copying and pasting of masks, client review of images in real time via an iPad, etc. It also has much better processing of raw files, something a new Aperture would probably have been capable of had Apple not stopped development.
Review of Photos by David Pogue (https://www.yahoo.com/tech/photos-for-the-mac-is-clean-fast-connected-and-110170322774.html) which goes into differences between it and Aperture (scroll down.)
I had planned to try and stick it out with Aperture since it will work for a while more but already needing C1 for tethering on jobs (Aperture has become too flaky - a combo of the software itself, the OS, and camera FW updates - none of which are keeping pace with each other) and seeing how much better C1 is at conversions (far less noise, smoother gradations, more dynamic range) there are no reasons left to stick around.
-
I might expect that the raw conversion would be BETTER in Photos than in Aperture...
RAW conversion is a system level function and it should be the same between Photos and Aperture.
Richard
-
... Pretty frustrating to see Apple drop professional photographers wholesale...
They did it because the whole 'professional photographer' industry is dying off.
-
Ran across this video of the new Apple Photo App.
For what it maybe worth he states it is a replacement for iPhone but not Aperture.
Hands on: Photos for Mac OS X - YouTube
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=opqLavQ-XuM
Stu
-
Ran across this video of the new Apple Photo App.
For what it maybe worth he states it is a replacement for iPhone but not Aperture.
Hands on: Photos for Mac OS X - YouTube
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=opqLavQ-XuM
Stu
Yes, he did mention the Photos app was likely a suitable replacement for iPhoto ... but he also failed to point out that he was demonstrating a first issue Developer Beta ... or that Photos is the foundation for a much broader extension based platform that could impact image processing as we know it to infinite possibilities.
-
... or that Photos is the foundation for a much broader extension based platform that could impact image processing as we know it to infinite possibilities.
Wouldn't that be nice! But Apple's history here isn't so hot. The pro photo market isn't on anyone's radar much these days.
-
They did it because the whole 'professional photographer' industry is dying off.
Yeah, well, hmmm.... Can't argue with that on a certain level & I posted something similar on another forum.
I use FCPX as well. Some are saying this doesn't bode well for Apple's other Pro Apps. Hard to know. The glass half-empty is this is a red flag to pro's basing their workflow on any Apple software, the glass half-full is Apple saw the writing on the wall with pro vs. consumer stills and made a decision to double down on pro video.
-
You may want to listen to Derrick Story's latest podcast http://thedigitalstory.com/2015/02/tds-podcast-466.html released today (02/10/2015).
He states that that he talked to Apple and was informed the Photo App is a replacement for iPhoto and not Aperture.
During his podcast he goes into pretty good detail of his conversation with Apple. It is well worth the time to listen this podcast.
Stu
-
This is what I can find directly from Apple:
When Photos for OS X is available this spring, Aperture will no longer be available for purchase from the Mac App Store.
So the situation is Aperture is abandoned, not replaced.
It still runs which is great. For the time being.
-
This is what I can find directly from Apple:So the situation is Aperture is abandoned, not replaced.
It still runs which is great. For the time being.
That's old news Andrew ... Apple said that would be the case months ago. Aperture has indeed reached an end of life from a standpoint of further development ... that, however, is not an indication that Apple will not offer a pathway to solutions for advanced photo enthusiasts would find acceptable.
-
Aperture has indeed reached an end of life from a standpoint of further development ... that, however, is not an indication that Apple will not offer a pathway to solutions for advanced photo enthusiasts would find acceptable.
Or they will offer such a pathway. Photos isn't it.
-
RAW conversion is a system level function and it should be the same between Photos and Aperture.
Richard
RAW conversion is indeed a system level function. However, some of the new stuff (i.e. the improved noise reduction) is not exposed in Aperture 3.6. It has the old noise conversion. Photos.app will probably use the new stuff.
-
Or they will offer such a pathway. Photos isn't it.
Photos is exactly the pathway (or foundation) via extensibility. The primary intriguing aspect of Photos isn't it's capability as a single application, it is in how it can relate to other image software options.
If developers can have access to your RAW images via extensions ... allowing the user to employ Photos as the hub of a non-destructive workflow, it could open up nearly infinite possibilities.
Think of it as utilizing a traditional plugin that can get the job done in parametric manner without the creation of an interim tiff/psd file. A more seamless "Edit in" function if you will that isn't limited to a few options, but to all third party developers that desire to venture forth.
-
That only works if your hub -Photos- is able to recognize the non-destructive edits applied by a third party plug-in. Seems pretty far-fetched to me. At best there might be common standard for an embedded preview, but how would a process which depended on a sequence of third party plug-ins work? I'm not saying it is impossible, but it would be a very hard nut to crack, and I cannot see any commercial motivation for Apple to crack it. Or indeed much sign that their dev teams even have that level of ability, these days.
-
That only works if your hub -Photos- is able to recognize the non-destructive edits applied by a third party plug-in. Seems pretty far-fetched to me. At best there might be common standard for an embedded preview, but how would a process which depended on a sequence of third party plug-ins work? I'm not saying it is impossible, but it would be a very hard nut to crack, and I cannot see any commercial motivation for Apple to crack it. Or indeed much sign that their dev teams even have that level of ability, these days.
Thats the marvel of it all ... a new paradigm. I don't profess to know how it works ... nor do I really care how it works. I am only sharing what has been discussed since the announcement of the OS X version of the Photos app at 2014 WWDC ...
The motivation and ability is already there because that is how it works now in iOS ... you can capture or import a photo and perform adjustments in Photos, as well as roundtrip from there to any other app that offers extension functionality ... all the while, your original image remains intact. Not to mention, Apple is garnering significant earnings from developers who sell their offerings on the App Store ... that is plenty of motivation for all concerned.
This is all early days. A concept still in development. Although it is still a very exciting and intriguing concept. I for one hope they are successful in the implementation.
-
Forgive if I'm mistaken, because I don't use iOS 8, but surely there the edits are on JPGs, and the "plug-in" delivers back a new version ? To work in a RAW pipeline, you'd need to provide various registration points for plug-ins, for example MegaDemosaicerPro could register itself as a RAW renderer, MaxVividityPlus as a colour editor and CuttingEdgeX as an output sharpener. And you'd need to assemble your own pipeline for each photo.
Maybe I'm not Thinking Different enough, but I can't see another way to do it. And, according to Derrick Storey, who is on record (well, podcast) as saying he got it from Apple directly, Photos, at least for now will NOT actually implement a extendibility scheme. The marketing intent is to replace iPhoto.
Not that I'm happy about this. I spent an hour or so in Lr5 today, and I don't feel well now :-( Took me 10 mins to find the straighten tool. What a dog's breakfast of a UI (and I'm not totally new to Lr, I used v1 prior to Ap2). I cannot imagine why it is so popular. Fabulous marketing, I guess, helped by Apple arrogance.
-
I need a black armband. I have run a business based around Aperture since version 1. Apple have now killed off the best dam/editing package to replace it with toy town £ucking junk.
I can't believe a company with Apples resources can't come up with a solution for us pro users that they went out of their way to pitch Aperture at.
Apple make pro computers but don't support their own hardware with the software.
-
I'm not going to castigate Photos until it has been released and is clear what capabilities it provides and how good its workflow is. FCP-X was roundly slammed in its initial releases but we now use it for 100% of our editing.
Personally I don't use Aperture's DAM features. I use it as a RAW processor for Canon/Panasonic images and a retoucher for Hasselblad images (which I've done RAW processing on in Phocus already).
So if Photos gets local adjustments, healing brush, local skin smoothing, curves and the ability to run Portraiture or similar skin-smoothing plug in, and its UI doesn't suck, hopefully it will do the job for me. Probably not on launch day, but maybe after a few maintenance releases. That's the Apple way- at least FCP-X proved that they listen to the pro market and do implement important missing features, and provide all those version updates free.
I personally loathe LR's user interface. I suppose I'll check it out again if I really have to. I'd like to use C1, but it is a pain it won't work with Hasselblad RAW files, and its clone/healing tools weren't as powerful or as easy to use as Apeture's last time I looked.
Most likely I'm just going to freeze our current production set-up: two MacPros, three MacBookPros, Mac Mini as a data server. Yosemite seems to be riddled with bugs, so I'm still on Mavericks. Maybe I'll just keep the whole shebang running with no further updates until something catastrophically breaks, or I need updates to handle new cameras. At which point I'll look again at the Mac vs. PC vs. Linux and LR/C1/whatever choice.
At least Apple have learned from the FCP-X debacle and given us plenty of warning that Aperture is EOL, rather than just removing FCP7 overnight!
Cheers, Hywel
-
C1 is like Lightroom in that its development tools are better than Aperture's but its DAM tools are far worse. :(
-
I just reread this and it is pretty simple, I will be not going to the new program and will not use aperture and now my next PC does not have to be a Mac. I am ok with this even though I do not like it much. I am picking up LR and I find I am using CC Photoshop more then I was. So, the out put is the same but it takes more steps. I guess, we all get to vote with our dollars and since Apple is now just a iPhone company we all might be better off on different platforms next upgrade. I think that the iPhone sales could be impacted as well as there is no need for an iPhone then as the computers will not be as intertwined.
I am on a couple other forums as well and the upshot is that many seem to think as I just said and the cost of a strong PC based desktop is cheaper then the apple version across the board.
-
I just reread this and it is pretty simple, I will be not going to the new program and will not use aperture and now my next PC does not have to be a Mac.
Don't cut your nose off to spite your face! There are plenty of other things about a Mac that are better than a PC. If you like Lightroom well enough, it runs fine on Mac. :)
-
... the cost of a strong PC based desktop is cheaper then the apple version across the board.
I, too was extremely disappointed and upset with the realization that Aperture will see it's end much sooner than we all had hoped.
While it is true that purely considering the price of entry only, Windows based hardware can be found for less money than the average Apple counterpart. Though, I would think the number of Apple users who came to, and stuck with Apple hardware solely to use Aperture, would be a very small subset of the total user base ... otherwise, I think Apple would have had much more incentive to maintain support and development.
As Bob points out, many Apple users have looked beyond Aperture when considering choosing the platform. Considering the useful life expectancy and the much higher resale value of Apple hardware as compared to the rest of the industry, there are many other points to consider before making the jump.
For we photographers ... if low bid was our primary concern ... would we have so much invested in all those spiffy and expensive Nikon and Canon products?
-
While it is true that purely considering the price of entry only, Windows based hardware can be found for less money than the average Apple counterpart.
I'm not even sure how true that is. I haven't done it for a while, but the last time I went to Dell's website and configured a couple of their machines to match the specs on a couple of Apple's, there wasn't that much difference. Maybe Apple was 10% high. I'll pay that for what I get.
-
I'm not even sure how true that is. I haven't done it for a while, but the last time I went to Dell's website and configured a couple of their machines to match the specs on a couple of Apple's, there wasn't that much difference. Maybe Apple was 10% high. I'll pay that for what I get.
Well there are also other additional tradeoffs ... building a custom work station will also not have a stylish case designed by Jony Ive either ... ;)
If you are a shrewd shopper ... you can often gather the components to build a Windows based machine that can offer equal to slightly better performance for much less cost ... if you build it yourself of course. As soon as you mention a custom build by a vendor like Dell, then most often, the price difference is marginal.
I have never built a system from scratch, but it is what my brother-in-law does for a living. He always enlightens me on how much money he could save me ... I just smile and go back to work ... I don't do Windows. Both figuratively and literally ... ;D
-
If you are a shrewd shopper ... you can often gather the components to build a Windows based machine that can offer equal to slightly better performance for much less cost ... if you build it yourself of course.
Perhaps; but how much is your time worth?
Jeremy
-
Perhaps; but how much is your time worth?
Jeremy
Couldn't agree more ... just sharing what the folks in that camp have said in the past.
-
I'm not even sure how true that is.
Even if true, I don't care. The OS (which has been free for awhile) is a big factor for me. I use both, but one 5% of the time because I prefer the other. If that cost me a bit more money, so be it.
-
Perhaps; but how much is your time worth?
Jeremy
That question has already been answered by the people who think building a PC is cheaper: they think their own time and effort have no value.
-
Interesting developments from the new El Capitan page at apple.com:
New editing extensions let you go further with your photos.
OS X El Capitan supports third-party tools that will be available from the Mac App Store and accessible right in the Photos app. Use multiple editing extensions from your favorite developers on a single photo, or use a mix of extensions and the editing tools built into Photos. From adding subtle filters to using beautiful texture effects, you can take your photo editing to a whole new level.
Fingers crossed for local adjustments/brushes...
PP
-
Interesting developments from the new El Capitan page at apple.com:
Fingers crossed for local adjustments/brushes...
PP
meh...
don't care. I'll never go back to depending on Apple for ANY type of software for stuff I care about long term. Killing off Aperture and expecting pro users and "advanced hobbyists" to embrace a piece of software meant for pre-teens and bored housewives has shown me that the company is not dependable enough in the long term.