PDA

View Full Version : Apple Launches iPhoto for iPad with Photo Editing and Organization Features




MacRumors
Mar 7, 2012, 01:05 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/07/apple-launches-iphoto-for-ipad-with-photo-editing-and-organization-features/)


With the introduction of a Retina display on the new iPad, Apple has updated all of its stock applications to support the higher resolution, also adding updates to several of its applications including GarageBand and iMovie. But the company has also filled out the remainder of its iPad versions of its iLife suite with the launch of iPhoto for iPad (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/03/07Apple-Completes-iLife-for-iOS-With-Introduction-of-iPhoto-Major-Updates-to-iMovie-GarageBand.html), a new application offering photo editing capabilities right on the device.

http://images.macrumors.com/article-new/2012/03/iphoto_ipad.jpg


iPhoto for iPad offers a broad array of photo editing and comparison features, including auto-enhancements such as straightening photos and fixing contrast. Brush palettes offer a number of editing tools including red-eye removal, lighten, sharpen, soften, and darken. iPhoto can handle images up to 19 megapixels.iPhoto, Apple's popular photography app, has been completely reimagined for iOS to take full advantage of the Retina display and intuitive Multi-Touch gestures on iPad and iPhone. Simple gestures can be used to select and compare photos side by side and flag your best shots. iPhoto gives you full control over color, exposure and contrast, and you simply touch the parts of the image you want to change. You can enhance pictures by adding beautiful Apple-designed effects with just a tap, or apply adjustments exactly where you want them with fingertip brushes. In addition to posting photos to Facebook, Flickr and Twitter, you can beam photos between your iPhone and iPad; stream photos and slideshows to your Apple TV with AirPlay; and use iCloud to publish photo journals to the web and share your stories with friends and family in a whole new way.iPhoto for iPad launches today and is priced at $4.99.

Article Link: Apple Launches iPhoto for iPad with Photo Editing and Organization Features (http://www.macrumors.com/2012/03/07/apple-launches-iphoto-for-ipad-with-photo-editing-and-organization-features/)



Frazzle
Mar 7, 2012, 01:14 PM
Just witnessed the return of Gallery functionality in iCloud. Great to see it back.

Also, interesting 'Beam' option in the sharing options. What's that then?

Wang Foolio
Mar 7, 2012, 01:21 PM
Beam seems to be a function for sharing files with a nearby iDevice. Phones have similar apps for sharing contacts etc.

FearlessFreep
Mar 7, 2012, 01:22 PM
Not up on the store just yet

gazonk
Mar 7, 2012, 01:40 PM
What kind of stupid limitation is that?

fel10
Mar 7, 2012, 01:41 PM
Was really impressed by all the features. Getting it as soon as it is released.

mbhebsgaard
Mar 7, 2012, 01:41 PM
Did they forget - "one more thing"


Where is the New Mac Pro :)

kjs862
Mar 7, 2012, 01:41 PM
Is iPhoto available for iPhone too?

HabSonic
Mar 7, 2012, 01:42 PM
Can you send iOS iPhoto photos to OSX iPhoto easily and keep the structure you've create on iOS?

----------

Is iPhoto available for iPhone too?

Yes. Universal application.

Small White Car
Mar 7, 2012, 01:43 PM
Love it.

It makes me want Aperture for iPad even MORE than I did before, but still, this is awesome news.

tkermit
Mar 7, 2012, 01:44 PM
Original iPad not supported of course. :/

redscull
Mar 7, 2012, 01:46 PM
Does iPhoto run on iPad 1? I understand that a lot of those editing operations would be much slower. But can iPad 1 users buy and use this new app?

Note: I do not have an iPad 1, that's why I am asking. My mom does, and the built-in photos app isn't very good for organizing photos. I'm hoping iPhoto is and works on her device.

Edit: i see a reply right before my now saying it's not supported on iPad 1 :(

CmdrLaForge
Mar 7, 2012, 01:47 PM
19mp.What kind of stupid limitation is that?

My Sony has 24 MP, so this kind of sucks and makes no sense for me then....

milo
Mar 7, 2012, 01:49 PM
Looks very cool, SO glad I didn't get Photoshop for iPad (even though this release hadn't leaked), particularly since that one is limited to 1600 by 1600. Adobe has to be feeling that fire under their butt right now...

And funny that the Apple webpages for the app are up saying it's in iTunes but the link gives an error.

tkermit
Mar 7, 2012, 01:50 PM
i see a reply right before my now saying it's not supported on iPad 1 :(

Probably a good thing to be honest. I'm sure it wouldn't run well on it.

Skika
Mar 7, 2012, 01:50 PM
iPhoto should just launch with every iPad. Or be free for every iPad.

sartis
Mar 7, 2012, 01:50 PM
What kind of stupid limitation is that?

Really? photoshop touch has a 1600 x 1600 pixels limitation

The photo they were editing was from a d300s and the resolution was 4288x2848 and was 12.2MP...pretty awesome if you ask me.

Floris
Mar 7, 2012, 01:52 PM
Is iPhoto available for iPhone too?

Yes

iPhoto is a universal app that runs on iPad 2 or later and iPhone 4 or later.

Source: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/03/07Apple-Completes-iLife-for-iOS-With-Introduction-of-iPhoto-Major-Updates-to-iMovie-GarageBand.html

Navdakilla
Mar 7, 2012, 01:55 PM
Very nice

Dorje Sylas
Mar 7, 2012, 01:58 PM
Looks very cool, SO glad I didn't get Photoshop for iPad (even though this release hadn't leaked), particularly since that one is limited to 1600 by 1600. Adobe has to be feeling that fire under their butt right now...

Not really as Photoshop for iPad does things beyond image touch up that iPhoto won't do. Where they they will be feeling the heat is when some of the other 3rd party image editing Apps skip well past that limit. Although expect to see some of these features being "new" iPad only.

Also we may actually see an update for Photoshop that increase that limit... again exclusive to the newer iPad and it's improved graphics capacity.

BJMRamage
Mar 7, 2012, 01:58 PM
Would be really cool to use your iPhoto or Aperture Library and have available to make edits and Tag/Rate the photos and they'd go back to the main library.

Then if you wanted, you could save them locally on the iPad/iPhone.

and then be able to view them online would be terrific too.

CrackedButter
Mar 7, 2012, 01:58 PM
Yes



Source: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/03/07Apple-Completes-iLife-for-iOS-With-Introduction-of-iPhoto-Major-Updates-to-iMovie-GarageBand.html

Thanks for this, just waiting for it to appear on the store!

Lesser Evets
Mar 7, 2012, 02:01 PM
Does it let us make cards/books/etc??

I think iPhoto is an OK program. iPhotos card/book printing is SUPERLATIVE; that is the true strength of the program, beating to death all Hallmark stores and print services worldwide forever and ever.

HarryPot
Mar 7, 2012, 02:02 PM
Anything about RAW support?

mrtune
Mar 7, 2012, 02:02 PM
Seems like this app is basically a suped-up version of the stock Photos app.

I wonder if Apple will allow us to remove the stock Photos app if we purchase iPhoto?

gpsouza
Mar 7, 2012, 02:06 PM
Seriously, what the ****?
It's an Apple app! And it's only available on USA Store... Should be released worldwide.

milo
Mar 7, 2012, 02:11 PM
Not really as Photoshop for iPad does things beyond image touch up that iPhoto won't do.

You don't think Adobe is feeling the pushback on 1600x1600 (regardless of what iPhoto supports)? I find that hard to believe, more advanced editing options are fairly pointless when limited to such low resolution images.

HabSonic
Mar 7, 2012, 02:14 PM
Just saw that image on Apple iPhoto for iPad page:

http://cl.ly/3s1J1d143t2t3V293v3m/content

10.7.4 isn't out yet. I guess iPhoto for Mac will become fully compatible with iPhoto for iOS in the next update that will require 10.7.4.

http://www.apple.com/ca/ipad/from-the-app-store/apps-by-apple/iphoto.html

luckysob
Mar 7, 2012, 02:23 PM
Just witnessed the return of Gallery functionality in iCloud. Great to see it back.

Also, interesting 'Beam' option in the sharing options. What's that then?

Gallery: Is that what is meant by "Or publish them as beautiful web pages that you can share with family and friends using iCloud."?

http://www.apple.com/ipad/from-the-app-store/apps-by-apple/iphoto.html

I have been waiting for this to return. :D

rydewnd2
Mar 7, 2012, 02:23 PM
My Sony has 24 MP, so this kind of sucks and makes no sense for me then....

Are you printing your images onto billboards? If not why are you wasting the disk space to shoot 24 MP?

mattraehl
Mar 7, 2012, 02:38 PM
There's already plenty of great photo editors for iOS. I was hoping for something that integrated/synced with iPhoto on the Mac. Bummer.

CmdrLaForge
Mar 7, 2012, 02:39 PM
Are you printing your images onto billboards? If not why are you wasting the disk space to shoot 24 MP?

Well - what can I say. That is just the camera resolution. I have the Sony A65. On my Mac I use Aperture and I will continue to do so. It would have been interesting for travelling to use just the iPad for review and first corrections on the road. At home everything goes back into Aperture anyway. When I do only people, family pictures I reduce the resolution to 12MP but when I travel I like taking landscapes and actually don't want them in 12MP. 16MP would be alright as well but my cam just doesn't support it.

Snowy_River
Mar 7, 2012, 02:47 PM
Looks very cool, SO glad I didn't get Photoshop for iPad (even though this release hadn't leaked), particularly since that one is limited to 1600 by 1600. Adobe has to be feeling that fire under their butt right now...

And funny that the Apple webpages for the app are up saying it's in iTunes but the link gives an error.

As others have noted, PS Touch is a completely different animal than iPhoto. That being said, I really hope that Adobe is feeling some pressure from the resolution that iPhoto and other apps support in contrast with the pathetic resolution that PS Touch supports. As it stands, the computer that I had twelve years ago, running PhotoShop could handle bigger documents than PS Touch, and it had the same screen resolution as the iPad (1 & 2). If an update comes that supports higher resolution but only for the iPad 3, I'll definitely be writing a letter of complaint...

milo
Mar 7, 2012, 03:00 PM
That being said, I really hope that Adobe is feeling some pressure from the resolution that iPhoto and other apps support in contrast with the pathetic resolution that PS Touch supports.

Exactly my point. Whether iPhoto is intended for the same thing as PS touch is or not doesn't make the PS limitation any less of a drag. And the limitation makes PS pretty useless for me at this point while iPhoto is capable of working on my photos at the resolution I have.

nutmac
Mar 7, 2012, 03:00 PM
Sadly, it seems to be missing one feature that would be most valuable to me: ability to rate and tag photos then synchronize against Aperture and iPhoto for Mac.

milo
Mar 7, 2012, 03:14 PM
Sadly, it seems to be missing one feature that would be most valuable to me: ability to rate and tag photos then synchronize against Aperture and iPhoto for Mac.

Seriously, it still doesn't have that? I was shocked that the initial iPad photo app didn't have it...then again when iOS 5 came out and still no star rating...and now this really doesn't have it either?

celebi23
Mar 7, 2012, 03:16 PM
Really does suck that iPhoto doesn't support the 4th Gen iPod Touch. I mean, it supports the iPhone 4 so, an A5 isn't a requirement. Maybe there's a way to change one of the .plist files, in the app, to allow it to run on my iPod :P Anyone willing to try? :D

Floris
Mar 7, 2012, 03:17 PM
Does it let us make cards/books/etc??

I think iPhoto is an OK program. iPhotos card/book printing is SUPERLATIVE; that is the true strength of the program, beating to death all Hallmark stores and print services worldwide forever and ever.

Apple has a free Cards app for your pictures.

http://www.apple.com/iphone/from-the-app-store/apps-by-apple/cards.html

milo
Mar 7, 2012, 03:18 PM
iPhoto now in the App store, just bought it (unfortunately won't be able to try it for a couple hours).

gsmumbo
Mar 7, 2012, 03:20 PM
iPhoto now in the App store, just bought it (unfortunately won't be able to try it for a couple hours).

Still not seeing it on my devices(US)

AppliedMicro
Mar 7, 2012, 03:29 PM
Also, interesting 'Beam' option in the sharing options. What's that then?
"you can beam photos between your iPhone and iPad"

Seems to be some sort of file sharing for photos between your devices.

I'd guess it'll also find its way to the Mac in two years or so (as so many features do a year or two later, after first appearing in iOS)

shurcooL
Mar 7, 2012, 03:31 PM
Original iPad not supported of course. :/
Darn, that's a bummer. But not too unsurprising giving how the app seems to be very real-time-effect-heavy.

Digital Skunk
Mar 7, 2012, 03:41 PM
Seems like this app is basically a suped-up version of the stock Photos app.

I wonder if Apple will allow us to remove the stock Photos app if we purchase iPhoto?

Hopefully they will. The standard photo app would seem redundant.

Does it let us make cards/books/etc??

I think iPhoto is an OK program. iPhotos card/book printing is SUPERLATIVE; that is the true strength of the program, beating to death all Hallmark stores and print services worldwide forever and ever.

Agreed! Nothing sucks more than being able to do all of your post in one app, then have to export and transfer your images to another app just to get them out to the world.

Making a change at that point becomes a 5 step process.

Are you printing your images onto billboards? If not why are you wasting the disk space to shoot 24 MP?

The amount of disk space needed for a 24MP image is negligible with 4TB disks on the market. Besides, no good shooter cripples themselves by shooting at a lower resolution just to save a few fractions of a cent on storage space.

Sadly, it seems to be missing one feature that would be most valuable to me: ability to rate and tag photos then synchronize against Aperture and iPhoto for Mac.

That is almost a deal breaker.

steviem
Mar 7, 2012, 03:56 PM
Well - what can I say. That is just the camera resolution. I have the Sony A65. On my Mac I use Aperture and I will continue to do so. It would have been interesting for travelling to use just the iPad for review and first corrections on the road. At home everything goes back into Aperture anyway. When I do only people, family pictures I reduce the resolution to 12MP but when I travel I like taking landscapes and actually don't want them in 12MP. 16MP would be alright as well but my cam just doesn't support it.

Yeah, you have a semi pro camera. I have a feeling it won't be too much of a wait for Aperture for iPad though.

farleysmaster
Mar 7, 2012, 04:06 PM
So does this sync with the events in iPhoto on your Mac? What happens when you edit a photo on the phone?

butterfly0fdoom
Mar 7, 2012, 04:11 PM
But... does this support RAW?

HarryPot
Mar 7, 2012, 04:21 PM
But... does this support RAW?

After much reading, I sincerely doubt it.

I'm not sure if Apple thinks the difference between editing a RAW image and a JPEG image is negligible. But it sure seems like they do.

Fandongo
Mar 7, 2012, 04:53 PM
What kind of stupid limitation is that?

People who down-voted this are retards.

5dmkii = 21mp.
5dmkiii = 22mp.

Where the hell is the ipad for these people?

You know... the people MOST interested in having on-sight photo manipulation abilities.

Retina display huh?
That would sure make a great DSLR monitor/controller.

Oh right, it's just an overgrown toy that inherently illogically lacks functional use.

At least it has plenty of storage space to accommodate content lovers.
You know, the only reason in having it look pretty is for real content right?

$100 bucks more to get 32gigabytes?
....the size that was in the original ipod touch 5 years ago!!


The New iPad, 2 steps forward... 1,500 steps in a circle.

pancakedrawer
Mar 7, 2012, 04:54 PM
The iPhoto icon is awful. It looks like a screenshot of the OSX icon sitting on a dock.

twoodcc
Mar 7, 2012, 06:04 PM
haven't gotten it yet, but will tonight

buckers
Mar 7, 2012, 06:13 PM
Why would I edit photos on a phone and then have to sync and import them into the Mac iPhoto, unless I was on holiday and away from the computer for a while? Is there direct syncing, be it over WiFi, an internet connection or the USB cable?

If I had an iPad, how would I get my DSLR photos on there? Surely I'd have to import them into iPhoto for Mac, and then sync the iPad with iTunes. How could I fit my entire library on it?

Am I missing something here? What happened to iCloud?

Don't get me wrong, though. The app looks really slick and I'm really glad they've done it (not to mention the awesome £2.99 price point), but these are the small things that would stop me putting it to real use.

Enori
Mar 7, 2012, 06:30 PM
Good God, syncing looks like a mess. I sync album from iPhoto, make changes in iPhoto on iPad, then I need to export this photo to camera roll on iPad, then it syncs with Photo Stream, then I go to pc, copy photo from photo stream to album and finally delete original photo from album. Phew.
Or, I take photo with my iPhone, edit it on iPhoto, export to camera roll, syncs with Stream, nice, but I'm left with 1 original photo on my camera roll, one edited in my camera roll, and two, same edited photos in iPhoto on iPhone.

buckers
Mar 7, 2012, 06:39 PM
Good God, syncing looks like a mess.

Which is a real shame, because I've just been playing around with it on my iPhone 4, and it's a brilliant app.

steviem
Mar 7, 2012, 06:40 PM
Why would I edit photos on a phone and then have to sync and import them into the Mac iPhoto, unless I was on holiday and away from the computer for a while? Is there direct syncing, be it over WiFi, an internet connection or the USB cable?

If I had an iPad, how would I get my DSLR photos on there? Surely I'd have to import them into iPhoto for Mac, and then sync the iPad with iTunes. How could I fit my entire library on it?

Am I missing something here? What happened to iCloud?

Don't get me wrong, though. The app looks really slick and I'm really glad they've done it (not to mention the awesome £2.99 price point), but these are the small things that would stop me putting it to real use.

Answers for you!

I just got the iPad Camera Connection Kit - I know, what a strange concept.... It has 2 connectors, one for an SD Card and another for a USB cable. Using the SD card connector, I imported RAW photos and a couple of 1080i MP4 files.

In iPhoto, it tells me that the images are from RAW files, but it only shows the jpg versions, which are annoyingly stripped of metadata.

iPhoto doesn't seem to sync with the desktop version. Also, at the moment, iCloud is limited to sharing.

Hopefully there will be a $20 Aperture app, which will let me properly edit and manage RAW files and put my entire photo library into iCloud.

So far, for $5 it's a great concept, the Journal portion is really nice, but I'd like to see 'faces' in there too.

steviem
Mar 7, 2012, 06:41 PM
Good God, syncing looks like a mess. I sync album from iPhoto, make changes in iPhoto on iPad, then I need to export this photo to camera roll on iPad, then it syncs with Photo Stream, then I go to pc, copy photo from photo stream to album and finally delete original photo from album. Phew.
Or, I take photo with my iPhone, edit it on iPhoto, export to camera roll, syncs with Stream, nice, but I'm left with 1 original photo on my camera roll, one edited in my camera roll, and two, same edited photos in iPhoto on iPhone.

Just edit the one in Photostream?

*sorry for double post. Mods, please merge them together if you don't mind :)

Enori
Mar 7, 2012, 06:47 PM
Nope. If I edit the one in the photo stream I still need to export it to camera roll, then photo stream. Edits doesn't sync with photos app.

buckers
Mar 7, 2012, 06:55 PM
Answers for you!

Thanks for that!! +1

***

There still needs to be some storage solution. My library is 40-50GB of family photos. iPhoto for iCloud would be ideal!

Cory Bauer
Mar 7, 2012, 08:32 PM
Answers for you!

I just got the iPad Camera Connection Kit - I know, what a strange concept.... It has 2 connectors, one for an SD Card and another for a USB cable. Using the SD card connector, I imported RAW photos and a couple of 1080i MP4 files.

In iPhoto, it tells me that the images are from RAW files, but it only shows the jpg versions, which are annoyingly stripped of metadata.

iPhoto doesn't seem to sync with the desktop version. Also, at the moment, iCloud is limited to sharing.

Hopefully there will be a $20 Aperture app, which will let me properly edit and manage RAW files and put my entire photo library into iCloud.

So far, for $5 it's a great concept, the Journal portion is really nice, but I'd like to see 'faces' in there too.
Thanks for that. This is a very cool App, but pointless for me if it can't:

1. Work with RAW files
2. Maintain and sync non-destructive edits between the iOS and desktop App

steviem
Mar 7, 2012, 09:45 PM
The edits are non destructive.

Also, using an image in Photostream which came from my camera uploaded to my iPad, I edited it on my iPhone and it updated across to my iPad without any of the shenanigans listed by the poster above.

I have to say, so far, this is great to work with on the go and if I take some time to consider the details, it may change the way I work with my photos. *not a pro by any stretch of the imagination, but always looking to find ways of freeing myself from my desk when not at work...

HarryPot
Mar 7, 2012, 10:43 PM
The edits are non destructive.


Non-destructive is really just a way of saying "iPhoto makes a duplicate of the file". Eventually you end with thousands of duplicates.

The real beauty of Aperture, besides handling RAW, is that it has real non-destructive editing. Were no duplicates are made.

liquidsuns
Mar 7, 2012, 10:47 PM
Well unless the iPad version is different from the iPhone version, this does NOT have any (other then Photo Journal) organization features. Which sucks cause that is the last missing ingredient (as well as iClouding that organization) to actually make iOS PC-free....and it's a BIG missing ingredient.

This just another (albeit pretty sweet) photo editing app.

steviem
Mar 7, 2012, 10:57 PM
Non-destructive is really just a way of saying "iPhoto makes a duplicate of the file". Eventually you end with thousands of duplicates.

The real beauty of Aperture, besides handling RAW, is that it has real non-destructive editing. Were no duplicates are made.

Doesn't seem to be how it's presenting edited images... Seems to present it in a way similar to Aperture.

gazonk
Mar 8, 2012, 12:13 AM
People who down-voted this are retards.


I usually avoid such wording, but yeah, they are. Or at least they haven't been paying attention to camera announcements for at least one year.


5dmkii = 21mp.
5dmkiii = 22mp.

Where the hell is the ipad for these people?



Some may want to argue that with those cameras, you're not going to use iPhoto anyway (There is basically no RAW support: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5182?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US) - BUT even for power users, iPhoto could have been interesting for quick image fixes when you're traveling light (you can always shoot RAW+JPEG).

But it's not like some ignorants here presumably assume, that cameras with more than 19mp are pro cameras! Nokia just announced a camera phone with 40mp... Most people will produce only 5mp images from that camera, but then there are cameras like the Samsung NX200 with 20mp, clearly targeted at consumers and the Sony NEX-7 with 24mp, also a high end camera, but not exactly a "pro" camera.


Retina display huh?
That would sure make a great DSLR monitor/controller.


Well, that will certainly still be possible (with the right software) even if you're not using iPhoto!


Oh right, it's just an overgrown toy that inherently illogically lacks functional use.


I guess that despite all the "post PC" marketing BS, the iPad is still very far from being a PC replacement if your computing needs are a little more than web browsing and mailing. E.g. if you're serious about photography above the camera phone snapshot level.

Nimrad
Mar 8, 2012, 03:13 AM
People who down-voted this are retards.

5dmkii = 21mp.
5dmkiii = 22mp.


To respond you in the same retarded way:
People who don't understand that there are limitations on a photo editing app on a mobile device are retarted.

kitenski
Mar 8, 2012, 03:24 AM
Can anyone tell me if this changes the way photos are synced/displayed on the iPad around sub folders?

Ie if I have a subfolder

Summer, with subfolders under that of 2010 2011 2012, the iPad flattens them all into one folder called Summer.

Does this keep the subfolder structure?

Thanks,

Greg

gazonk
Mar 8, 2012, 03:34 AM
People who don't understand that there are limitations on a photo editing app on a mobile device are retarted.

Everybody understands that, and nobody expects it to support medium format cameras in the 40-80mp range, but the point is that the 19mp limit is just a little too low. There are even point and shoot cameras at 18mp now, so let's hope Apple is able to stretch this limit within a few months - before 20-24mp cameras are the new norm. People who want high quality in a small package already buy cameras like the Sony NEX-7 (24mp) or the Samsung NX200 (20mp), and exactly these customers - who prefer to travel light, but who won't compromise on quality - are of course also right in the target group as iPad buyers.

(And don't forget that Nokia is able to process 40mp of image data in a phone)

Fandongo
Mar 8, 2012, 03:47 AM
To respond you in the same retarded way:
People who don't understand that there are limitations on a photo editing app on a mobile device are retarted.

The iPad 3 is not a mobile device.

It's is a quad-core computer that forgot to be tethered to the wall.

Any limitations are purely retarded.

Nimrad
Mar 8, 2012, 03:50 AM
Everybody understands that, and nobody expects it to support medium format cameras in the 40-80mp range, but the point is that the 19mp limit is just a little too low. There are even point and shoot cameras at 18mp now, so let's hope Apple is able to stretch this limit within a few months - before 20-24mp cameras are the new norm. People who want high quality in a small package already buy cameras like the Sony NEX-7 (24mp) or the Samsung NX200 (20mp), and exactly these customers - who prefer to travel light, but who won't compromise on quality - are of course also right in the target group as iPad buyers.

(And don't forget that Nokia is able to process 40mp of image data in a phone)

I do understand, and as a photographer I also understand how frustrating it must be for those using especially Sony cameras which tend to use 20+ MP. As I pointed out I replied in a retarded way. But as naÔve as I am I tend to trust Apple to make the right decision. What I base that conclusion on is that all my other Apple Apps tend to work more fluently then when I purchased other products without those "stupid" limitations. Apple dares to make these kind of hard decisions. Many don't like it, but I think that kind of decisions is what makes Apple be Apple and not everybody else.

Macman45
Mar 8, 2012, 03:52 AM
This one I will try when I get my newbie. It looks impressive...Coupled with the camera I may well use it in the studio. Of course, it will be more like £5 here in the UK, but I'll give it a try.

Fandongo
Mar 8, 2012, 04:46 AM
I usually avoid such wording, but yeah, they are. Or at least they haven't been paying attention to camera announcements for at least one year.



Some may want to argue that with those cameras, you're not going to use iPhoto anyway (There is basically no RAW support: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5182?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US) - BUT even for power users, iPhoto could have been interesting for quick image fixes when you're traveling light (you can always shoot RAW+JPEG).

But it's not like some ignorants here presumably assume, that cameras with more than 19mp are pro cameras! Nokia just announced a camera phone with 40mp... Most people will produce only 5mp images from that camera, but then there are cameras like the Samsung NX200 with 20mp, clearly targeted at consumers and the Sony NEX-7 with 24mp, also a high end camera, but not exactly a "pro" camera.



Well, that will certainly still be possible (with the right software) even if you're not using iPhoto!



I guess that despite all the "post PC" marketing BS, the iPad is still very far from being a PC replacement if your computing needs are a little more than web browsing and mailing. E.g. if you're serious about photography above the camera phone snapshot level.

Ok, iphoto can blow all it wants, what's important (for photographers) is photoshop touch, and it's (in)ability to support raw.

Thunderbolt was a big opportunity that totally whizzed passed everyone's head this generation of electronics.

Monitoring is a simple request... over USB 2.0 you can monitor/control DSLRs **when attaching DSLR to ipod touch to a COMPUTER** but it's what, 8fps? Phones can control it on their own now, but only the dual core ones.

The entire filmmaking industry has been monopolized for over a hundred years until Canon threw Kodak in an alley and urinated in their mouth, but price gauging is still VERY prevalent in accessories (5" monitors are still $500-$20,000+).

DSLRs and ipads are DANGEROUSLY powerful technological revolutions, born to work together...why the hell aren't they?

Chris Dodd, the MPAA, Hollywood. All in immediate danger of dissolution.
That's why.
That's also why the revolutionary jump in video encoding in Ivy bridge will somehow cease to be... or fail to be integrated into FCP.

We take pride in our anti-competition task force (DOJ). It makes it seem like we're not getting f$%%ed in the "a", no lube, no saliva...sand.

That's why Canon sat on the 5Dii for 3.5 years, unlimited data is gone, physical media is gone--which is good, but--the iPad3 stores less than the ipod touch 1.0, and I'm pretty sure Billie Mayes was still alive the last time the Mac Pro was updated...SAND

They're using sand.

**This just in. DOJ warns Apple the suits are coming.

Price fixing ebooks, tsk tsk.

Cory Bauer
Mar 8, 2012, 09:02 AM
The edits are non destructive.

Also, using an image in Photostream which came from my camera uploaded to my iPad, I edited it on my iPhone and it updated across to my iPad without any of the shenanigans listed by the poster above.
But do the edits remain non-destructive between iOS iPhoto and OS X iPhoto? That to me is the key. Being able to edit your photos on the iOS version is pointless if the output to the OS X iPhoto is the original image plus a flattened adjusted image.


The real beauty of Aperture, besides handling RAW, is that it has real non-destructive editing. Were no duplicates are made.
This is exactly right, and more of what I was expecting. As it's the only thing that makes sense from a functionality standpoint. The photos cannot reside permanently on the iOS device due to space limitations, so it would be crazy if the edits there are permanent. Those photos eventually need to move to your Mac, where you'd want the non-destructive editing to remain in-tact.

gazonk
Mar 8, 2012, 10:44 AM
I do understand, and as a photographer I also understand how frustrating it must be for those using especially Sony cameras which tend to use 20+ MP. As I pointed out I replied in a retarded way. But as naÔve as I am I tend to trust Apple to make the right decision. What I base that conclusion on is that all my other Apple Apps tend to work more fluently then when I purchased other products without those "stupid" limitations. Apple dares to make these kind of hard decisions. Many don't like it, but I think that kind of decisions is what makes Apple be Apple and not everybody else.

What you say makes a lot of sense, but it also means that the iPad unfortunately still can't be considered much more than a toy even for hobby photographers, which are much better served with the smallest Air (with 4GB!) than with the newest iPad. Now if they only could make a retina version of the Air :-)

quaternio
Mar 8, 2012, 01:19 PM
I don't mean to hate, but complaining about the 19MP limit for an iPad is ridiculous. If you are going to complain from a professional standpoint, complain that RAW isn't supported. But for me, the iPad still has a LONG way to go to be any sort of a replacement for a computer in my profession of photography, and it has nothing to do with the 19MP limit (and yet, I'm typing from my iPad 2 right now).

Also, I wouldn't expect to see an iOS Aperure for at least 2 years.

gazonk
Mar 8, 2012, 01:47 PM
I don't mean to hate, but complaining about the 19MP limit for an iPad is ridiculous. If you are going to complain from a professional standpoint, complain that RAW isn't supported.

You still don't get it? There are now (and there will soon be many more!) NON-professional cameras that exceed 19mp. Even the NEX-7, while pretty high-end for a mirrorless, is not a pro camera and will certainly be used by a lot of jpeg-only pure amateur shooters. But I'm optimistic that this is a limitation that the Apple developers will remove as they get time to optimize their code for future versions of the app.

canman4PM
Mar 8, 2012, 01:55 PM
My Sony has 24 MP, so this kind of sucks and makes no sense for me then....

Ya, but I see you have a Quad-Core MBP and a fairly high-end camera. What the hell are you doing your editing on an iPad for? If you're just doing short and dirty edits, or playing with "non-important" photos for uploading to whatever (fb, twitter, etc), who cares if the iPad de-scales them to 19MP? As another reader said: are you gonna try to Airprint a billboard from an iPad? Or fully Photoshop a pic on an iPad just to add it to your fb page? No, your gonna open a real computer to do real computing - your gonna use that MBP you paid 2.5-3 Grand for, not your thousand dollar iPad.

----------

Seriously, what the ****?
It's an Apple app! And it's only available on USA Store... Should be released worldwide.

It's also available on the Canadian Store.

Nimrad
Mar 8, 2012, 02:17 PM
What you say makes a lot of sense, but it also means that the iPad unfortunately still can't be considered much more than a toy even for hobby photographers, which are much better served with the smallest Air (with 4GB!) than with the newest iPad. Now if they only could make a retina version of the Air :-)

Still not a toy, but also still not a fully successor of the personal computer no. How come there's nothing in between for you? I can still do some photo editing on my iPad, but I can't replace my mac with it. That's unthinkable for me and will probably always be until all my needs that requires my mac to be online 24/7 can be done in the cloud.

About the retina MB Air: second that!:D

Carl Sagan
Mar 8, 2012, 02:21 PM
I don't mean to hate, but complaining about the 19MP limit for an iPad is ridiculous. If you are going to complain from a professional standpoint, complain that RAW isn't supported. But for me, the iPad still has a LONG way to go to be any sort of a replacement for a computer in my profession of photography, and it has nothing to do with the 19MP limit (and yet, I'm typing from my iPad 2 right now).

Also, I wouldn't expect to see an iOS Aperure for at least 2 years.

I agree these people are clearly idiots. If you are that serious about photo editing you'd be a fool to be using your iPad!

Razeus
Mar 8, 2012, 04:21 PM
I don't understand what the point of this app is. If I'm editing on my iPhone/iPad, I'm doing with pics I've taken with those devices. I use Snapseed, Hipstamtic and Instagram for those purpose.

My DSLR photography is handled by LR/PS combo. When I edit those, it goes to iPhoto simply as a means to display and sync to my iDevices.

fiveainone
Mar 8, 2012, 04:39 PM
Are you printing your images onto billboards? If not why are you wasting the disk space to shoot 24 MP?

WTF? :rolleyes: Does he NEED a reason to shoot at 24mp? Why is iPad wasting memory space to go up to Retina display? Only in the world of Apple would something like this be said - justifying the limitations of Apple by making every other choice invalid. Just because Apple doesn't allow it, doesn't mean everything else has to follow their standard. The church of Apple, I swear to God. Or should I say Jobs.

canman4PM
Mar 8, 2012, 06:36 PM
I don't mean to hate, but complaining about the 19MP limit for an iPad is ridiculous. If you are going to complain from a professional standpoint, complain that RAW isn't supported. But for me, the iPad still has a LONG way to go to be any sort of a replacement for a computer in my profession of photography, and it has nothing to do with the 19MP limit (and yet, I'm typing from my iPad 2 right now).

Also, I wouldn't expect to see an iOS Aperure for at least 2 years.

Exactly. Keep in mind this isn't meant for professionals. The hardware ain't there yet. Also keep in mind it's the first version of the software. I'm sure future versions will advance. Apple's kinda know for that too.

Finkille
Mar 8, 2012, 06:58 PM
To all who state this limitation is obvious. My current setup while traveling is 5DMK II (21MP), cf reader for iPad and Snapseed for editing. I backup photos and view on iPad 2, Snapseed for editing and then either create real postcards with a 3rd App (Sweden only forthright one I use) or as more common use Wordpress for blogging with images. This allows me to leave laptops at home while on vacation which is great.

iPhoto looks great but a lot of other DSLR users will not be able to use it. And no, I am not a professional.

Fandongo
Mar 8, 2012, 11:02 PM
Ya, but I see you have a Quad-Core MBP and a fairly high-end camera. What the hell are you doing your editing on an iPad for? If you're just doing short and dirty edits, or playing with "non-important" photos for uploading to whatever (fb, twitter, etc), who cares if the iPad de-scales them to 19MP? As another reader said: are you gonna try to Airprint a billboard from an iPad? Or fully Photoshop a pic on an iPad just to add it to your fb page? No, your gonna open a real computer to do real computing - your gonna use that MBP you paid 2.5-3 Grand for, not your thousand dollar iPad.


True, and as many have said, the only thing that's really important for "pros" is Raw support...with the Adobe software--Photoshop Touch.

People will demystify its insides soon, and we all can't wait for Blendtec to turn it into hot goo.

Quad core is a step in the right direction, but for hungry apps, the biggest limitation is certainly Ram. 1GB is nowhere near enough for professional applications in photo/video land.

This is what Curves was made for--Physically bending contrast/color etc. to your will. Sure as hell beats click and drag.

The iPad3 as a controller for Photoshop on an MBP/iMac rather than an all out replacement, I'd settle for that.

srikz
Mar 9, 2012, 04:40 AM
Hereís a tutorial on how to install iPhoto app on iPad 1 ! Yes it is possible and it works perfectly fine. http://bit.ly/yFODTJ

CmdrLaForge
Mar 9, 2012, 07:50 AM
[QUOTE=canman4PM;14461429]Ya, but I see you have a Quad-Core MBP and a fairly high-end camera. What the hell are you doing your editing on an iPad for? If you're just doing short and dirty edits, or playing with "non-important" photos for uploading to whatever (fb, twitter, etc), who cares if the iPad de-scales them to 19MP? As another reader said: are you gonna try to Airprint a billboard from an iPad? Or fully Photoshop a pic on an iPad just to add it to your fb page? No, your gonna open a real computer to do real computing - your gonna use that MBP you paid 2.5-3 Grand for, not your thousand dollar iPad.[COLOR="#808080"]

As I explained it would be nice to do some work while on the road and not to bring the laptop.

HarryPot
Mar 9, 2012, 08:35 AM
To all who state this limitation is obvious. My current setup while traveling is 5DMK II (21MP), cf reader for iPad and Snapseed for editing. I backup photos and view on iPad 2, Snapseed for editing and then either create real postcards with a 3rd App (Sweden only forthright one I use) or as more common use Wordpress for blogging with images. This allows me to leave laptops at home while on vacation which is great.

iPhoto looks great but a lot of other DSLR users will not be able to use it. And no, I am not a professional.

Snapseed just accepts 16MP images.

As for RAW, how does Snapseed handles it? Does it creates a JPEG version of the photo?

Finkille
Mar 9, 2012, 08:45 AM
Snapseed just accepts 16MP images.

As for RAW, how does Snapseed handles it? Does it creates a JPEG version of the photo?

Snapseed accepts larger than 16MP, but downsamples when saving. You can in other words open photos shot by e.g. 5D MK II and work with them but scales down (unless you haven't cropped away pixels enough already). No additional JPEG is created, that said the RAW conversion is rather basic and not in the same league as e.g. Aperture or Lightroom.

LimeiBook86
Mar 13, 2012, 08:26 AM
Hereís a tutorial on how to install iPhoto app on iPad 1 ! Yes it is possible and it works perfectly fine. http://bit.ly/yFODTJ

That worked pretty well for me! I like a lot of the of the features (especially Photo Journals, almost replaces MobileMe galleries). I hope they bring over a lot of these changes to iPhoto on the Mac. If so I'll dust off my Magic Trackpad and give it a go! :D

canman4PM
Mar 15, 2012, 07:48 PM
The iPad3 as a controller for Photoshop on an MBP/iMac rather than an all out replacement, I'd settle for that.

Or how 'bout using the iPad as the display (with it's 478,000,000,000,000 pixels) for editing with the Book/Mac...?

Fandongo
Mar 16, 2012, 03:40 AM
Or how 'bout using the iPad as the display (with it's 478,000,000,000,000 pixels) for editing with the Book/Mac...?

I'd rather use a 30" retina iMac.

ToddJ
Mar 19, 2012, 03:08 PM
if I were to add a caption to a Photo Stream photo, would it transfer to the same photo on the Photo Stream on my computer's iPhoto? I'm trying to find a better way to organize the photos on my Photo Stream using my iPhone.

Benson11
Mar 20, 2012, 02:59 PM
That is really a fascinating offer and seems it's gonna be awesome.. just waited for such features. Thanks for informing us!

canman4PM
Mar 28, 2012, 05:15 PM
I'd rather use a 30" retina iMac.

mmmm....

...30" iMac with retina display...