Yosemite 10.10.3 update

[kirkt]

FYI:

My computer let me know that the Yosemite 10.10.3 update is now available for download from the App Store.  It includes the much anticipated (?maybe, not?) Photos application, in what I can only assume is its release form for this version.  I have not tried the beta and will take 5 minutes to see what the sturm und drang is all about.  Then I will get on with life.

kirk

[kirkt]

After 5 minutes of exploring the application (more than enough to get the idea), my review is: total waste of time.

Maybe it will expand in scope and usability as updates occur, but at this stage it is useless.

kirk

[kers]

thanks for exploring...   and saving my time!

[digitaldog]

This morning, I got a Mac notification to give it a try. Annoying! I hated iPhoto, I'm not at all interested in this new pup either.

[kirkt]

I sort of thought that there was one slim, glimmer of hope for Aperture users- using Photos as a DAM that syncs with devices or whatever.  I noticed there was a "Share" menu item - with an entry to share to Aperture (see attached screenshot).

I thought to myself, well I suppose you could structure your albums and collections or whatever in Photos, and then "Share" them to Aperture, where that Project structure would be preserved.  Maybe that would work with keywording in Photos too.  Let me note that I do not really use Aperture all that much, and I do not use DAM applications, I just make logical folders on my drives.  I don't keyword or GPS tag or any of that.

I made an Album in Photos of some raw, DNG, tiff and JPEGs.  I then "Shared" this with Aperture.  I opened Aperture and there was a new project with my files in it!  Except when I tried to edit them none of the raw controls were available - turns out "Sharing" makes everything a JPEG.  I hope I did something wrong to get this result - otherwise, WTF?

Wow.

The Preferences dialog gives you no options for anything other than what cloud services you want to enable.

Even though Aperture still works and raw updates are at the OS level so compatibility is probably not an issue, I can empathize with Aperture users - what a let down and a feeling of abandonment.

Fortunately Mac users are lucky to have choices in raw converters, and access to some of the best, Mac-only applications.

Photos appears to be a desktop application for people who take all of their photos with an iPhone or iPad.  Time to move on.

kirk

[kers]

I got this email from Apple:

'we appreciate that you have used Aperture and we wish you a good time with Photos.'
So they imply it is some kind of substitute for Aperture ??!
...
Some moment from now also the iPhoto users will be forced into Photos (- and you cannot download older programs then the latest)
Apple's way of doing is not very nice to users - to say it friendly.

Then Apple likes to reinvent.. we have now Photos 1.0 - probably loaded with problems that were already solved in iPhoto. Let us wait some years and then maybe it works as intended.
(a copy of the Final Cut Pro X soap)
 

[trichardlin]

I'm a diehard Apple fan, but I'm afraid I share your sentiment.  I finally bought the Adobe LR/PS package last year, but never managed to like it. Now I'm in a very unhappy place. Sometimes, I rent new cameras from Lens Rental to distract myself from this misery (EM-5 ii coming today ). 

[CatOne]

Maybe it will expand in scope and usability as updates occur, but at this stage it is useless.

I don't find it useless at all. Then again, I'm not using it as my primary photo editor. It's not equivalent to Aperture or Lightroom.

HOWEVER, it's much better for viewing my photos wherever I am. And for sharing them.

First, for photos I take on my iPhone (and there are many), I have access to them wherever I am. This is super easy, and I have no importing to do at all.

Second, for DSLR pictures, I run those through Lightroom now. When I have my favorite photos, I generate JPEGs of them, and I import those into Photos. Then I immediately have access to those versions on all my Macs, and my iPhone and iPad. I can also share that out to my Apple TV for a slide show, and for others to view. It's a very convenient workflow for me, and it's way better than using the myriad Adobe solutions (what, have they taken like 9 cracks at Carousel now)?

If you want it to be an Aperture replacement, you'll be disappointed. It's a different product, with a different sort of strengths. For anybody who was previously using iPhoto (which is probably 10x the number of people who use Lightroom), it's a better product in every single way.

[luxborealis]

Does Photos in OS X allow you to add titles, captions and/or tags? I'm asking because Photos on iOS does not and it drives me nuts. Otherwise I quite enjoy editing my snaps with it. And, like Kirk, Photos makes sharing amongst devices easy. It's not all things to all people, but then again, LR isn't either, and we know what happens to apps like PS when it tries to be.

[BJL]

"Don't expect too much and you will never be disappointed."

The free software Photos has always seemed intended as an improvement on the free software iPhoto, improving partly by integration with iCloud and between Mac OS and iOS devices, once Apple conceded that Aperture had been defeated by Lightroom.

If Apple directs former Aperture users towards Photos, it can only be for those who used nothing but the most elementary features of Aperture.

Since I get a solild majority of photos right in the camera (where "right" means "good enough for my humble purposes") iPhoto is already often the most convenient tool for minor fixes like cropping, so that Lightroom is the "emergency room" for difficult cases. So Photo might handle a significant portion of my neeeds.

[trichardlin]

... for DSLR pictures, I run those through Lightroom now. When I have my favorite photos, I generate JPEGs of them, and I import those into Photos. ...

That's exactly how I used to use Aperture and iPhoto: Aperture for photo processing, and iPhoto for sharing with family.

[BJL]

Here is a little detail of Apple's Photos software that sounds nice ... and I wonder why I have not seen it offered before:
prints can be ordered online that match whatever shape you have chosen, so with no Procrustean cropping to a few standard shapes and sizes.  You specify the short dimension, and the long dimension is whatever is needed, up to 9:2 shape.  I suppose a roll of paper of the specified width is used, and then cut where needed:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201383

Does anyone know of other print services that offer this?

[Telecaster]

Photos appears to be a desktop application for people who take all of their photos with an iPhone or iPad. Time to move on.

I originally thought MacOS Photos would be a more powerful image processor. But after playing with the editing features of iOS 8 Photos I realized it was more likely what Apple had in mind. Anyway—not even considering desktop & laptop software—there are better iPad & iPhone editor apps available. Photos is useful mainly as a cross-device photo aggregator & distributor.

-Dave-

[luxborealis]

Photos appears to be a desktop application for people who take all of their photos with an iPhone or iPad.  Time to move on.

kirk

I can understand why Aperture users feel abandoned, however I disagree with the sentiment expressed above. There are some serious adjustments in OS X Photos with depth and options far greater than an even an average DSLR user would use. While on the surface Desktop Photos looks simple, ideal for iPhone or iPad users, under the hood it is definitely geared to much more advanced users.

[BJL]

I can understand why Aperture users feel abandoned, however I disagree with the sentiment expressed above. There are some serious adjustments in OS X Photos with depth and options far greater than an even an average DSLR user would use. While on the surface Desktop Photos looks simple, ideal for iPhone or iPad users, under the hood it is definitely geared to much more advanced users.

At a first glance, I am inclined to agree. The question I would like to discuss (ideally in another thread) is what fraction of the ILC photography by members of this forum needs more than the basic manipulations provided by basic free tools like Apple's Photo; stuff like cropping and a few sliders for gobal adjustments of levels and color balance.  I use Lightroom at times, but for a great majority of my photo tweaks, using it all seems like going to the shed and hauling out the power tools to tighten a lose screw.

[Rory]

Second, for DSLR pictures, I run those through Lightroom now. When I have my favorite photos, I generate JPEGs of them, and I import those into Photos. Then I immediately have access to those versions on all my Macs, and my iPhone and iPad. I can also share that out to my Apple TV for a slide show, and for others to view. It's a very convenient workflow for me, and it's way better than using the myriad Adobe solutions (what, have they taken like 9 cracks at Carousel now)?

You don't need Photos to do this though do you?  The icloud does this or you can use drop box...

[CatOne]

You don't need Photos to do this though do you?  The icloud does this or you can use drop box...

How does iCloud do this? I don't know of a way to seamlessly sync all my photos (and their adjustments) from all my devices using iCloud, without using Photos. I certainly don't want to manually manage folders and the like.

As for Dropbox, they have an app and will sync photos. It's not going to sync adjustments, and manually managing photos in a bunch of files/folders on my system is not something I've done since Aperture was released, and not something I have any interest in doing. Photos is much better than manually managing files in a file system, to say nothing of having the ability to adjust them (crop, levels, etc.).

[Rory]

How does iCloud do this? I don't know of a way to seamlessly sync all my photos (and their adjustments) from all my devices using iCloud, without using Photos. I certainly don't want to manually manage folders and the like.

As for Dropbox, they have an app and will sync photos. It's not going to sync adjustments, and manually managing photos in a bunch of files/folders on my system is not something I've done since Aperture was released, and not something I have any interest in doing. Photos is much better than manually managing files in a file system, to say nothing of having the ability to adjust them (crop, levels, etc.).

You did say you were making your adjustments in Lightroom and exporting your favourites.

[BJL]

You did say you were making your adjustments in Lightroom and exporting your favourites.

True -- but some of us are likely to handle many images with just basic adjustments than can be done solely in the Photos/iCloud combo; then it can be a great convenience that adjustments can be made on any device, and they propagate to all others.  For stuff processed elsewhere like Lightroom, it perhaps becomes just a convenient tool for organizing, syncing and sharing; better than a Dropbox folder due to features like albums and smart albums.

[trichardlin]

... But after playing with the editing features of iOS 8 Photos I realized it was more likely what Apple had in mind...

Photos for Mac is nothing like Photos for iOS 8. Most of the typical image adjustment tools are there. For example, Levels (4 quadrants), White Balance, Shadows, Highlights, Black Points, Definition, Healing Brush (Retouch). These adjustments can be turned on and off, and can be copied and pasted (lift and stamp). There are also many keyboard short cuts that make life much easier ( C for crop, A for adjustments, etc). 

Richard