Apple Releases Aperture 2.0

[Furrybeagle]

No, you don't NEED one [discrete graphics], but Aperture never ran great on a MacBook. They lowered the minimum specs and eventually made it run on a MacBook, but it was never really designed to do so.

But hey, the loupe was slow even for some users with a Quad Core, so....

Just to clear this up (if it hasn’t been already):

You need a Core Image compatible graphics card, which is one that supports “Open GL Shader (GLSL) commands” [Wikipedia:Core Image] (ie, Shader Model 2.0, or in the Windows world, DirectX 9). This includes pretty much all recent graphics chips: the Radeon 9000 cards, Radeon X*** cards, GeForce FX/6/7/8 cards, Quadro 4000 cards, recent Intel GMA chips, etc.

Despite that the Intel GMA 950 and GMA X3100 are integrated graphics chips and vastly underpowered (compared to discrete graphics), they still support the necessary shader instructions. Thus, there's no reason for them to not be on the list of supported graphics cards.

I kind of don’t feel like they “lowered the minimum specs” for it to run on the MacBook. The rest of the MacBook hardware is more than enough to run Aperture (if my G4 can run it, an Intel Core processor can easily run it), and it has always had a compatible graphics card. I have to wonder if Aperture even pushes the graphics card that much beyond the fact that it needs Core Image capabilities (but I’ve never used Aperture on a MacBook, so I wouldn’t really know).

[lloydh]

I wish I could get a Mac Pro but I've got a rev. A MBP @ 2.16 and aperture 1.5.x is sloooow

Snap (well, about the machine at least).

Are you running 2GB RAM? If not that makes a huge difference. Everyone knows that Aperture isn't exactly a 'snappy' app but I've found that my MBP runs it pretty well. I did go for the 7200RPM drive but that's not going to speed up exports too much...

If you haven't tried 2.0 yet you're in for a pleasant surprise.

[eyecool]

Is Aperture $200 better than iPhoto? My wife is the photo nut of the house. I just got us CS3 Web Premium, plus a MP for me, plus a 1TB Time Capsule, plus Mac Office 2008, oh, plus the ram and HD upgrades for the MP.... I feel burned out, considering the MP ordered in Jan still hasn't shipped.

She loves how iPhoto catalogs pics and integrates with .mac. If she's going to use PS CS3, is Aperture really worth the $200? Neither of us have any experience with it.

[supercooled]

Is Aperture $200 better than iPhoto? My wife is the photo nut of the house. I just got us CS3 Web Premium, plus a MP for me, plus a 1TB Time Capsule, plus Mac Office 2008, oh, plus the ram and HD upgrades for the MP.... I feel burned out, considering the MP ordered in Jan still hasn't shipped.

She loves how iPhoto catalogs pics and integrates with .mac. If she's going to use PS CS3, is Aperture really worth the $200? Neither of us have any experience with it.

Sorry for sounding haughty about this but that's why they have trial versions. It's more than iPhoto but less than Photoshop.

[drackett]

Earlier this a.m. ordered upgrade to version 2.0. Tried the upgrade via the website route and stopped as there was no download option. Downloaded the trial version and after starting the trial, an option appears allowing you to buy the software. You select that option and it takes you to Apple site.

After clicking on upgrade you are presented with upgrade checkbox with software Key only. When you select that you buy the upgrade key (no download necessary) and receive a purchase Order Confirmation. You should receive, with the confirmation email (according to Apple's own site) an upgrade key to enter into the trial. There was no key. After contacting support they said I should wait up to 24 hours for key to be generated and emailed to me. The Order Status page at Apple tells me that the order has been 'shipped' via electronic delivery.

Anybody else experience this?

You did better than me. Mine looks like a regular physical order. that I won't get for 7 days. I can't find anyone who can help, and they all just tell me that the only way to get aperture 2 right now is to order the physical box (I find this hard to believe, and think their is just a bug on the website)

[adamzx3]

Umm...I ran Aperture 1.5 on my Macbook, which doesn't have a graphics card.
Just checked, and Aperture 2 doesn't require one either.

I do believe having Aperture supports GPU acceleration so if you have a higher power GPU you can gain some more speed. Aperture 1.5 with 10mp raw's ran great on my 2ghz MBP 2GB ram....can't wait to try out 2.0

[~David]

Is nobody else having the same problem as me?

Ever since I installed Aperture, I now have two "Aperture Projects" folders in my Wallpaper settings and all my custom folders are gone (and I can't add any new ones or remove the Aperture Projects. See the attachment)

Any help? :confused:

[eyecool]

Sorry for sounding haughty about this but that's why they have trial versions. It's more than iPhoto but less than Photoshop.

PERFECT! Thats the ticket right there!

[kdb31]

Is Aperture $200 better than iPhoto? My wife is the photo nut of the house. I just got us CS3 Web Premium, plus a MP for me, plus a 1TB Time Capsule, plus Mac Office 2008, oh, plus the ram and HD upgrades for the MP.... I feel burned out, considering the MP ordered in Jan still hasn't shipped.

She loves how iPhoto catalogs pics and integrates with .mac. If she's going to use PS CS3, is Aperture really worth the $200? Neither of us have any experience with it.

First, I havent used aperture 2.0 or the new iphoto nor have I really tried using CS3 as a primary photo editor (just a few raws here and there)... That said, I think the premise of Aperture (and lightroom) are completely different from Photoshop because they're designed specifically to cover the entire digital photo workflow. In photoshop when you open up some raw files you get a sort of dialogue to make some quick adjustments and then bring the photos into the main program, but its not really an integrated process imo. Aperture on the other hand attempts to cover all of your photographic needs, from the import, sortation, cataloging, mass editing, comparisons, output (printing, web galleries, books, etc). Aperture will allow you to do all of typical photo adjustments (white balance, exposure, contrast, colour, etc) efficiently which makes it great for professionals. Photoshop on the other hand is the tool you need to do the fine detailed editing like complex dodging and burning, anything with layers, or any sort of artificial manipulation (removing/adding/changing things). If you take a peek at the aperture tutorials theyll do a really nice job explaining the program and how it works (at least the old ones did). Hope this helps :)

[ariel]

You did better than me. Mine looks like a regular physical order. that I won't get for 7 days. I can't find anyone who can help, and they all just tell me that the only way to get aperture 2 right now is to order the physical box (I find this hard to believe, and think their is just a bug on the website)

I found the serial purchase by clicking on the "mac software" link on the left navigation of the store and then by clickin on the "new releases" tab on the page that came up... the upgrade and full purchase key only links are there.

and YES - the serial numbers are massively delayed - try reading the aperture forum on discussions.apple.com for more info

[kdb31]

I do believe having Aperture supports GPU acceleration so if you have a higher power GPU you can gain some more speed. Aperture 1.5 with 10mp raw's ran great on my 2ghz MBP 2GB ram....can't wait to try out 2.0

Yeah its heavily gpu dependant. On the mac mini vs the macbook pro I remember seeing a huge speed improvement when they were only a few hundred mhz apart (processor), same for the previous gen mac pro with the 7300 vs the x1900 on the 30" cinema display at the apple store. The gpu is what'll give you snappy performance when doing your adjustments in the program, the cpu will give you the fast render/export times.

[eyecool]

Yeah, I know they are different beasts, but the adobe suite I ordered comes with Bridge and a few other programs I've never heard of that are supposed to manage assets. I asked her if she had heard of Aperture and she knew about 2's release before I did. Thinks it would be easier for her to put her mind around than PS. I think trial version is the way to go for now.

[ChrisA]

Is Aperture $200 better than iPhoto?

Aperture will do the same raw image processing as iPhoto but I think Aperture has far better facilities for adding meta-data and for comparing and sorting images. One of the biggest jobs is always right after you've downloaded 200 images and now you need to organize it. Aperture is better at that. Is it $200 better? Don't know.

PS CS3 is for making detailed edits to images, one image at a time.

[ChrisA]

Yeah, I know they are different beasts, but the adobe suite I ordered comes with Bridge and a few other programs I've never heard of that are supposed to manage assets.

"Bridge" is the basic building block of the Adobe suite. It is more general than Aperture because it is intended to also hold Acrobat .pdf files, Illustrator files and to sync color spaces between Adobe apps.. Aperture is about "photography" while Bridge is about "Graphic Arts" Photoshop is used by a lot more people than just photographers.

[adamzx3]

Aperture will do the same raw image processing as iPhoto but I think Aperture has far better facilities for adding meta-data and for comparing and sorting images. One of the biggest jobs is always right after you've downloaded 200 images and now you need to organize it. Aperture is better at that. Is it $200 better? Don't know.

PS CS3 is for making detailed edits to images, one image at a time.

I agree 100% Aperture is geared towards speeding up workflow and organizing things, I could never stay organized in iPhoto, I have over a hundred folders and subfolders that are categorized by Types, dates , shoots, etc... Variations is a godsend for multiple versions. Editing gets more detailed as well as (i think at least) color managment and printing.


making more complex edit with curves, masks and channels is made by sending the file to cs2 and making the change, then aperture keeps that file cataloged as a version automatically.

Being able to store my old pictures on DVD is great, can mark a DVD in my folder as 1-23-06 and when I see the preview in aperture it says, hey go get that cd named 1-23-06 and I will load up your file....saving hard drive space on rarely used files. Backing up to disk is so simple too.

I would say if she's upgrading to heavier artillery like the 40D then likely it will be worthwhile to organize and edit those photo's in a better editor. The best way is to take your collection and try out Aperture 2.0 watch the tutorials and you should be able to make a great decision on if it's worth the money.

[EagerDragon]

Wow, you're wife is lucky.

I have the Rebel right now and I just tried Aperture. For some reason, my Canon raw files show up with a pretty nasty yellow tinge. You might want to have your wife try it out first.

If this is an issue that happens all the time you need to adjust the default RAW processing. Under the Aperture Tutorials select the "Using RAW Fine Tuning" video and I think you will be very happy.

[beatzfreak]

If this is an issue that happens all the time you need to adjust the default RAW processing. Under the Aperture Tutorials select the "Using RAW Fine Tuning" video and I think you will be very happy.

Thank you so much!!!

I'll check it out.

[shadowfax]

this is what I found:
To answer my own question--It appears that in the trial version, you will not be able to import your 1.x libraries en masse into Aperture 2. You will have to pull individual projects out of your old library and import them into the trial library. You need the full version to actually update your library to version 2.0. Kind of stupid, IMHO, as I have a full backup of my 1.x library. But whatever, my full version will be in the mail soon...

You can navigate to your aperture library and then right click (ctrl-click) on it, and select "show package contents." There is a bunch of crazy stuff in there, but you should see the project folders there. You can import some or all of these into the trial library to mess around.

Man, it is truly, truly retarded of them not to offer to send you your activation key electronically as well as sending you the box. How aggravating. I guess I can wait a few days, though.

[EagerDragon]

I checked most of the tutorial videos and this can do most everything I would want.
About the only exception would be replacing backgrounds and large objects from the pictures but for that there is PhotoShop Elements.

Will download trial this weekend when I have time to play with it.

Very excited with what it can do.

Question for those familiar with Aperture and any of the PhotoShops ..... If I decide to edit the photo using photoshop, what happens to the original image when I end the photoshop editing (remove background, multiple layers for masking etc) and in what format are the results imported back into Aperture?

[ariel]

Question for those familiar with Aperture and any of the PhotoShops ..... If I decide to edit the photo using photoshop, what happens to the original image when I end the photoshop editing (remove background, multiple layers for masking etc) and in what format are the results imported back into Aperture?

usually, when you use aperture, you use "edit with photoshop" - and aperture makes a copy of the original, exports that as .psd to PS where you edit... when closing and saving in PS, aperture picks up the changes. So you have a complete round trip and all images are still managed by Aperture. Perfect solution :)

[itou]

I checked most of the tutorial videos and this can do most everything I would want.
About the only exception would be replacing backgrounds and large objects from the pictures but for that there is PhotoShop Elements.

Will download trial this weekend when I have time to play with it.

Very excited with what it can do.

Question for those familiar with Aperture and any of the PhotoShops ..... If I decide to edit the photo using photoshop, what happens to the original image when I end the photoshop editing (remove background, multiple layers for masking etc) and in what format are the results imported back into Aperture?

not sure i understand your question correctly, but if i do, photoshop treats documents the say manner in which all other documents are treated. if you edit the original image and click SAVE, then your original document is replaced. if you choose SAVE AS, then you'll be asked to create a new file with a new file name thus preserving the old file. you'll of course have the option to save (within photoshop) to a variety of different formats which aperture can recognize and import.

[ifonline]

Question for those familiar with Aperture and any of the PhotoShops ..... If I decide to edit the photo using photoshop, what happens to the original image when I end the photoshop editing (remove background, multiple layers for masking etc) and in what format are the results imported back into Aperture?

not sure i understand your question correctly, but if i do, photoshop treats documents the say manner in which all other documents are treated. if you edit the original image and click SAVE, then your original document is replaced. if you choose SAVE AS, then you'll be asked to create a new file with a new file name thus preserving the old file. you'll of course have the option to save (within photoshop) to a variety of different formats which aperture can recognize and import.

Actually, Ariel had it correct. Within Aperture, you can set what file type (PSD, TIFF, etc.) is sent to Photoshop for editing. So, in Aperture, you select an image to send to Photoshop, and when you send that image, Aperture first creates a version (copy) of the image and then sends that copy to Photoshop. Once you save the image in Photoshop after editing it, the copy (that still resides in Aperture) is updated to reflect the changes. You do not edit the original (master) file. The master file remains safe within Aperture so if anything disastrous happens, you can always reclaim the original photograph.

[UMHurricanes34]

Glad they released this, I'm interested in giving it a shot.

Hopefully my iMac can handle it alright...

[JAT]

Still no Foveon support. God forbid they support another company that has small market share, but is better.

Lightroom is still my choice.

[ifonline]

I have a year's worth of experience with Lightroom and love it. I tried Aperture at 1.5 or so a little while back, but just didn't get into it. As time passed, I got into Final Cut Studio 2. Then Logic Studio. Now with Aperture 2 out, I have downloaded it and am trying it out.

I still love Lightroom, but I am beginning to feel like I love it because of some sort of loyalty to Adobe. Aperture 2 may be very much the same old hat for seasoned Aperture 1 users, but for me, enough has changed from what I can recall that it just seems to fit me now. It might be because I am used to Apple's pro application layouts, etc., but I am really excited to be trying Aperture 2. I have had several moments where I said out loud "Ah ha! That really makes sense!"

Oh, and I am running Aperture 2 on my MacBook Black C2D (not the new ones) with 2GB of memory with no issues, per se. Sure, it could be faster, and when I decide if I want to buy Aperture 2, I will install it on my Mac Pro for the speed and efficiency that machine offers. But even with some pauses in operation on the MacBook, I find it pleasantly, and surprisingly, fast.

[ChrisA]

Question for those familiar with Aperture and any of the PhotoShops ..... If I decide to edit the photo using photoshop, what happens to the original image when I end the photoshop editing (remove background, multiple layers for masking etc) and in what format are the results imported back into Aperture?

If you go the automated route and launch PS from within Aperture. Aperture makes a temp file with your image in it in PSD, TIFF or some other format. Inside PS you do "save" and PS overwrite the temp file and quites the Aperture grabs control of the file and saves it as a "version" of the image. Did I ge that right. You can customize the details to some extent too. The thing is that you don't see the image file unless you go looking.

iPhoto works about the same way. There is a preference called "external image editor". You tell it what program to use and iPhoto makes it mostly transparent. Aperture is about the same.

[Jonx]

new update on software update

iLife Support v8.2 2.7 MB


This update supports system software components shared by all iLife ’08 applications to improve their stability and performance. This update also supports important bug fixes for Aperture 2.0.

[robbieduncan]

Well, I'll be buying the upgrade version at discount (employee purchase program where I work). I'm hoping to around £65...

It's up on our EPP store this morning. £107 for the full version (nice) but the upgrade is full price. Fortunately that's £65 which is what I was looking for anyway...

[EagerDragon]

Actually, Ariel had it correct. Within Aperture, you can set what file type (PSD, TIFF, etc.) is sent to Photoshop for editing. So, in Aperture, you select an image to send to Photoshop, and when you send that image, Aperture first creates a version (copy) of the image and then sends that copy to Photoshop. Once you save the image in Photoshop after editing it, the copy (that still resides in Aperture) is updated to reflect the changes. You do not edit the original (master) file. The master file remains safe within Aperture so if anything disastrous happens, you can always reclaim the original photograph.

Thanks all that responded. I was afraid that the original image would be replaced by the photoshop edited version. But apparently I end up with two images, the original in RAW form plus a set of instructions for any Aperture edits/changes, and the PhotoShop version (no undo capability on this one).

Too bad Aperture does not have the ability to undo/peel back changes made in photoshop. But heck what else could I ask, LOL.

Thanks a bunch guys.

[randomlinh]

I wanted to add that "checker" they have is just to see if you can run Aperture, doesn't really say anything about if you can upgrade or not (to those trying to figure out if the educational version is upgradeable... would be nice if this time around it was...)

[EwanP]

My brother just bought Aperture 2 in the UK, using the educational discount (through the university network) - for a sweet 55 pounds!!!! And they assured him it is the full version, upgradeable etc.

[Project]

My brother just bought Aperture 2 in the UK, using the educational discount (through the university network) - for a sweet 55 pounds!!!! And they assured him it is the full version, upgradeable etc.

Blimey. I'm heading over to uni right now.

[ariel]

My brother just bought Aperture 2 in the UK, using the educational discount (through the university network) - for a sweet 55 pounds!!!! And they assured him it is the full version, upgradeable etc.

I sure wouldn't count on 'upgradeable' - the 1.0 licenses aren't

[bobbleheadbob]

Amazon has the new Aperture available for $190. Ships starting on Friday. I went ahead and ordered it. No sales tax and the $10 off made my decision a little easier. Thanks for the replies. :apple::)

[Mike Teezie]

I downloaded the demo to check out the new bookmaking features. I need something like that badly in my album design workflow. Hopefully Aperture can help me out!

Also, I finally have a machine beefy enough to handle Aperture properly - my last Dual G5 Powermac struggled with it.

Off to play with it now.....

[lloydh]

My brother just bought Aperture 2 in the UK, using the educational discount (through the university network) - for a sweet 55 pounds!!!! And they assured him it is the full version, upgradeable etc.

If that's true then I'm getting it through uni too! The serial's on the box so hopefully Apple just send you a standard box and it is the same.

I have a friend who I think can get it through their affiliate employee discount if not.

[ariel]

If that's true then I'm getting it through uni too! The serial's on the box so hopefully Apple just send you a standard box and it is the same.

I have a friend who I think can get it through their affiliate employee discount if not.

Just FYI

I bought the academic version of Aperture when it came out (1.0 version) - yesterday i bought the non-academic upgrade serial number - i found out for sure that the upgrade won't work.

i'm off to call Apple...

anyone want an upgrade serial number cheap? :)

[ralfyx]

is there a way to create a Web Gallery without an .Mac account ?

[robbieduncan]

is there a way to create a Web Gallery without an .Mac account ?

The old Web galleries are still there: you can export them to a folder and upload via your favourite FTP client but you won't get all the cool .Mac gallery features like downloadable zip files, downloadable master images or password protection...

[GavinT]

I currently use Lightroom (1.3) (I wasn't that impressed by Aperture 1.0 when it came out).
However, Aperture 2 looks rather funky, and as it's Apple, seems a lot better integrated with iLife/iWork compared with Lightroom.

At the moment, I going through sorting out my library of images. Some are old JPGS (some of which will be rescanned from the original negatives), some are RAWS.
All my recent photos (RAWS) have already been 'sorted' out, so that's tagged with metadata, cropped and post processed as necessary.
My main photo library is on an external drive, which I tell my Lightroom setup to reference, rather than make copies of. Changes I make are written to 'sidecar' files, thus maintaining the original RAW files (or JPGS/TIFFS in the case of older stuff).

So, if I was to want to go to Aperture instead, how on earth could I do that!!??
I COULD export everything, as a DNG say or a TIFF, or something that's lossless. Then I'd import that into Aperature and work from there. However, I'd effectively be stamping over the original photos with my edits. Something I've discovered I don't want to do (I wrecked a bunch of my earlier JPGS I took when I first got my digital camera).
I COULD just use the existing files I have, and loose all my changes. However, that's a least two years worth of editing, which I wouldn't have time to sort out again (I've got enough of a backlog as it is!).

So, can Aperture import stuff from these sidecar files??

[EwanP]

I sure wouldn't count on 'upgradeable' - the 1.0 licenses aren't

Apparently there is no educational version for 2.0 - just an educational price (this said by apple sales dude over the phone). Will wait to see what my bro says when he receives the box though ;)

[sterlingindigo]

There was a pretty good side by side comparison in a dual article. One guy was an Aperture user the other a Lightroom user and they tried the other camp's application and gave very honest reviews. Each app had it's own strengths and weaknesses and seem to come out about equal:

http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/2007/03/05/aperture-vs-lightoom.html

:)

Thanks! Good article.

[neutrino23]

I currently use Lightroom (1.3)...

(snip)

So, can Aperture import stuff from these sidecar files??

I'm not an Aperture user but I did sit through an Aperture class at MWSF. Aperture can work with external libraries (such as files on DVDs) of RAW files while keeping jpgs on the main hard drive.

I think you'll need to contact an Apple support person to find out about importing the edits you have already performed. I'm not hopeful. Try contacting an Apple store if you live near one and see if they are having any kind of Aperture training in the near future. The trainer should be able to answer that kind of question. Our local store sometimes does this for various products.

[NotChemist]

I'm not an Aperture user but I did sit through an Aperture class at MWSF. Aperture can work with external libraries (such as files on DVDs) of RAW files while keeping jpgs on the main hard drive.

I think you'll need to contact an Apple support person to find out about importing the edits you have already performed. I'm not hopeful. Try contacting an Apple store if you live near one and see if they are having any kind of Aperture training in the near future. The trainer should be able to answer that kind of question. Our local store sometimes does this for various products.
Lightroom edits will not transfer. The instructions for edits are stored in a format that ACR and LR understand, but Aperture will not be able to use them because they are proprietary to Adobe. Metadata is another issue; in theory, Aperture should have no problem ingesting the IPTC information contained in XMP metadata in sidecars or DNG headers. Unfortunately, despite the fact that Aperture can export IPTC in XMP, it can't import this information from sidecars. Importing IPTC contained within DNG headers currently "sort of" works, though some fields aren't transferred. This didn't happen at all in Aperture 1.5, so I guess one could call it an "improvement," though I wouldn't do that if Apple were listening, because the current behavior still needs work to be satisfactory.

[randomlinh]

Lightroom edits will not transfer. The instructions for edits are stored in a format that ACR and LR understand, but Aperture will not be able to use them because they are proprietary to Adobe. Metadata is another issue; in theory, Aperture should have no problem ingesting the IPTC information contained in XMP metadata in sidecars or DNG headers. Unfortunately, despite the fact that Aperture can export IPTC in XMP, it can't import this information from sidecars. Importing IPTC contained within DNG headers currently "sort of" works, though some fields aren't transferred. This didn't happen at all in Aperture 1.5, so I guess one could call it an "improvement," though I wouldn't do that if Apple were listening, because the current behavior still needs work to be satisfactory.

Wow, if it can't import sidecars w/ IPTC info... I'm very disappointed. I have a small bit in Lightroom after trying it out for a couple of months. I'm torn on whether I should switch completely now. The improvements in speed/UI are promising, and I love OS X. But blast my iMac... and a Mac Pro is too expensive, and I don't want to rely on a hackintosh.. sigh.

but back to the point, anyone else have issues w/ IPTC sidecar importing (specifically from LR) and Aperture 2?

[ifonline]

Wow, if it can't import sidecars w/ IPTC info... I'm very disappointed. I have a small bit in Lightroom after trying it out for a couple of months. I'm torn on whether I should switch completely now. The improvements in speed/UI are promising, and I love OS X. But blast my iMac... and a Mac Pro is too expensive, and I don't want to rely on a hackintosh.. sigh.

but back to the point, anyone else have issues w/ IPTC sidecar importing (specifically from LR) and Aperture 2?

I can feel your pain with regards to IPTC from Lightroom to Aperture, but if I end up purchasing Aperture, I intend to start over with importing my images. Granted, my collection of RAW images is not huge (several thousand files), but I don't mind starting fresh to avoid pitfalls with trying to convert from Lightroom to Aperture.

[Phil A.]

Has anyone in the UK managed to purchase the Serial Number only option? I can't find it anywhere on the UK store and if you select it from the page that Aperture opens when you click buy, it just takes you to the US store (even after you select UK in the country drop down) :(
I've been waiting over 24 hours to try and buy a serial number in the UK and I can't believe Apple have made it a) so difficult to find and b) a complete mess when buying from the product!

[randomlinh]

I can feel your pain with regards to IPTC from Lightroom to Aperture, but if I end up purchasing Aperture, I intend to start over with importing my images. Granted, my collection of RAW images is not huge (several thousand files), but I don't mind starting fresh to avoid pitfalls with trying to convert from Lightroom to Aperture.

I spend a lot of time tagging images... I don't really care about the edits, since I can go back and just do them when needed. But I index everything so it's searchable later. I don't want to have to redo that. Of course, I only have maybe 500 or so pictures relative to my aperture library, but it's more of a principle matter, especially for those that might have more.

[maestrokev]

Lightroom edits will not transfer. The instructions for edits are stored in a format that ACR and LR understand, but Aperture will not be able to use them because they are proprietary to Adobe. Metadata is another issue; in theory, Aperture should have no problem ingesting the IPTC information contained in XMP metadata in sidecars or DNG headers. Unfortunately, despite the fact that Aperture can export IPTC in XMP, it can't import this information from sidecars. Importing IPTC contained within DNG headers currently "sort of" works, though some fields aren't transferred. This didn't happen at all in Aperture 1.5, so I guess one could call it an "improvement," though I wouldn't do that if Apple were listening, because the current behavior still needs work to be satisfactory.

I'm not surprised the editing instructions created in LR don't transfer over to give you a close replica in Aperture. LR had that problem for a long time until a RawShooter migration tool came over and even then it was a hit or miss. In the end I had to redo all 10,000+ RAW images I had and I wouldn't want to do that again even with the speed of LR. This is going to be a problem for any serious photographer who has more than a few thousand RAW images as who wants to redo all their editing again. Both LR and Aperture are new apps with no track history - fortunately if you commit to LR then you can always transfer edits to Adobe PS/Camera Raw.

Not being able to import IPTC and XMP metadata which has become a standard with photographers is a huge problem. Despite Apple's claims of pro photographers loving Aperture I can't see this happening if any pro needs to share files with others. Only wedding photographers who live in an isolated world would be content, news and stock photographers need compatibility with IPTC.

[mafu]

I've managed to get an upgrade activation key into the UK basket with the following link.
http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/ukstore?noji=yes&partNumber=D4460

But it says it will take 8 days to ship!!

[morespce54]

haha I've stopped reading page2 since they moved it lower on the page and put an iphone blog to its old place instead...

OMG!!! They still have a Page 2???? ;)

Same problem here, it says invalid serial number :(

That's because you *must* purchase version 1.5 ;)

That's what Aperture was designed to do from the start.

I think he wanted to know "how good" it really was for that purpose...

[netdog]

For those in the EU looking to get Aperture and a license via download, note that you can do so by following the instructions here (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=6593651#6593651).

[FleurDuMal]

Does anyone know if Aperture 2.0 can work with Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ18 RAW files? It's not listed on the official support list, though similar Panasonic models are. I'm thinking of getting this camera so I'd be pretty gutted if Aperture won't work with its files :confused::(

[Madame Defarge]

Thanks! Good article.

Thanks! That's a great resource!

While I haven't used Lightroom, I find that Photoshop can be frustrating. For me Aperture is v. easy to use, though it could be improves, for sure.

[fulcrum]

I'm digging the RAW 2.0 converter in Aperture 2. But one downer is that I have to manually switch each image from RAW 1.1 to 2.0. When you have thousands of images, that's a nightmare. Anyone know if there's a setting where it will automatically switch all images to 2.0?

[aliquis-]

As earlier clean interface and works even better with iLife and iWork. Better price aswell.

But, it still takes longer time to get the same result as in lightroom and I think it's just as slow as the old version. So it fails on me.

The new patch tool seemed rather cool in the tutorials, but I doubt it works as good on most real images. Maybe it would work a little better if Apple didn't hated GPUs so much, I doubt it would be as fast as lightroom thought.

Also Lightroom won't tie you up to OS X and Macintosh.

Maybe the price point was changed because Apple knew they had a less good application?

Edit: And then I only try on 4 mpx jpegs, I guess it would be reaaaaally slow with higher resolution raw images.

[aliquis-]

is there a way to create a Web Gallery without an .Mac account ?Yeah, that sucks major donkey ass in all Apples applications aswell, why require a special .mac account? Atleast people be able to put up their own .mac server. .mac is way to expensive for what you get, and to little space aswell. They could have offered the 10GB version for free for all people who have bought a mac ;/

[aliquis-]

now. The improvements in speed/UI are promising, and I love OS X.Have you downloaded the trial and tested? Imho it's not at all as fast as lightroom.

[aliquis-]

It figures this happens when I just got Apeture 1.5 for Christmas... :mad:Are that to early for the 9.99 upgrade or whatever it was?

[aliquis-]

No, you don't NEED one, but Aperture never ran great on a MacBook. They lowered the minimum specs and eventually made it run on a MacBook, but it was never really designed to do so.

But hey, the loupe was slow even for some users with a Quad Core, so....The loupe are slow because it makes the program swallow all your graphics memory.

[aliquis-]

Is Aperture $200 better than iPhoto? My wife is the photo nut of the house. I just got us CS3 Web Premium, plus a MP for me, plus a 1TB Time Capsule, plus Mac Office 2008, oh, plus the ram and HD upgrades for the MP.... I feel burned out, considering the MP ordered in Jan still hasn't shipped.

She loves how iPhoto catalogs pics and integrates with .mac. If she's going to use PS CS3, is Aperture really worth the $200? Neither of us have any experience with it.I've played around with iPhoto, Aperture and Lightroom and when you try to do similair stuff to an image with all three the iPhoto version didn't looked as good. iPhoto seems nicest for just browsing and sorting your images thought.

So if most she does is sorting images, iPhoto are sufficient.

If very simple image editing is enough, iPhoto are probably sufficient.

If you want to be very creative and do advanced stuff you need Photoshop (but Photoshop Elements are only 1/10 of the price and can do much aswell... so consider that if you will buy the software.)

If you want a fast way to tune and sort your images Aperture and Lightroom are your options, you can get a much better image quality than the original much faster than in Photoshop (but the same stuff can probably be done in Photoshop with more work.)
Personally I like the layout of Aperture but the result, speed and compatibility of Lightroom. So I will probably go with Lightroom over Aperture.

Edit: Since you already had CS3 I guess iPhoto + CS3 works nice aswell aslong as you don't mind eventually having dubletts of the images (original + photoshop modified one.)

[John Purple]

IMO you forgot to mention one of the most important differences between Aperture/Lightroom and the rest of the apps, as iPhoto, PSE, PS3, CS3 etc.: Aperture and Lightroom will NEVER change your original photos when you are editing them. AP and LR just keep the originals plus save the editing commands. AP/LR will render the pictures at any time you want to look at it, print/export it (that is why you need a better GPU etc).
Even if you export your picture from Aperture/Lightroom for more sophisticated editing to PSE or PS it will be returned automatically to AP/LR by PSE/PS just by saving the edited (psd, tiff, jpg ...) version in PSE/PS, but within AP/LR there is still the original (raw or jpg) photo to which the edited version will be attached. Therefore you can allways got back to square one. If you try the same with e.g. iPhoto, your original file will be overwritten by the edited picture and you have to be happy with your edited version. No way back.

BTW PSE and PS have one major difference, that might even be of interest for those of us would don't need the very advanced editing power of PS: With PS you can edit (nearly) everything in 16 bit mode, whereas PSE offers 16 bit mode only for that kind of editing you can do anyway in Aperture or Lightroom. For more advanced features you have to switch to 8 bit mode in PSE.

[Phil A.]

I've managed to get an upgrade activation key into the UK basket with the following link.
http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects/ukstore?noji=yes&partNumber=D4460

But it says it will take 8 days to ship!!

Brilliant! Thanks for your help, I've now managed to get the key and am currently upgrading my library :)

[tfredvik]

If you try the same with e.g. iPhoto, your original file will be overwritten by the edited picture and you have to be happy with your edited version. No way back.


That is not quite true. In your iPhoto Library there are two directories called Originals and Modified. If you modify a photo the modified version will be stored in Modified, while the unchanged original photo remains in Originals. In iPhoto it is the modified photo that is shown, and you may revert to the original photo by selecting "Revert to Original" from the Photos menu.

[ifonline]

The loupe are slow because it makes the program swallow all your graphics memory.

It doesn't sound like you have any idea what you are talking about. I am running Aperture 2 on a MacBook and it runs just fine, loupe and all. Speed is subjective, which makes it difficult to qualify "fast" or "slow", but it runs just fine for me.

[TheSpaz]

I've just ordered my Aperture 2 Activation key... I'm now awaiting for the emai... Sweet! I can't wait to play with this thing.

[chickenninja]

sweet

[GroundLoop]

Does anyone know if the retail box version of the software is in stores yet?

Hickman

[randomlinh]

Have you downloaded the trial and tested? Imho it's not at all as fast as lightroom.

That's a bit disappointing to hear. I installed it last night, but never got a chance to exporting old stuff to import into Aperture to play with.

Given what folks seemed to be saying, seemed like it'd be a nice improvement. the UI certainly looks better, but I've always liked Aperture over Lightroom for that.

Out of curiosity, what computer are you running off of?

[Mike Teezie]

Well, I'm sold.

Bookmaking rocks. It will help me immensely in my album production for clients. The only thing that is lacking, is books only export to PDF. If they exported to JPG, it would be perfect for me and my album company's procedures.

Just a little gripe. I can easily open all and save to JPG in Photoshop.

[aliquis-]

IMO you forgot to mention one of the most important differences between Aperture/Lightroom and the rest of the apps, as iPhoto, PSE, PS3, CS3 etc.: Aperture and Lightroom will NEVER change your original photos when you are editing them. AP and LR just keep the originals plus save the editing commands. AP/LR will render the pictures at any time you want to look at it, print/export it (that is why you need a better GPU etc).
Even if you export your picture from Aperture/Lightroom for more sophisticated editing to PSE or PS it will be returned automatically to AP/LR by PSE/PS just by saving the edited (psd, tiff, jpg ...) version in PSE/PS, but within AP/LR there is still the original (raw or jpg) photo to which the edited version will be attached. Therefore you can allways got back to square one. If you try the same with e.g. iPhoto, your original file will be overwritten by the edited picture and you have to be happy with your edited version. No way back.

BTW PSE and PS have one major difference, that might even be of interest for those of us would don't need the very advanced editing power of PS: With PS you can edit (nearly) everything in 16 bit mode, whereas PSE offers 16 bit mode only for that kind of editing you can do anyway in Aperture or Lightroom. For more advanced features you have to switch to 8 bit mode in PSE.Uhm, does iPhoto overwrite the original? That suck. I guess one can store dublicates onself thought.

Regarding Photoshop and Elements I don't know what are the differences, I'm a pirate anyway so it doesn't bother me. But I would probably go with elements if I had to pay, atleast to see if it was sufficient or not.

[aliquis-]

It doesn't sound like you have any idea what you are talking about. I am running Aperture 2 on a MacBook and it runs just fine, loupe and all. Speed is subjective, which makes it difficult to qualify "fast" or "slow", but it runs just fine for me.But then mac fanatics says that iBook G3s run everything sooo great and that Vista requires a bla bla whatever new rig to work. So well, I don't know how much it's worth. Over here in Aperture 1.5 he loupe was very slow, and it lags in 2.0 aswell. If that doesn't bother you that's ok, same with using sliders and not getting instant results on the image, to me it's just annoying to try to get it right when the controls and image lags. I have better things to do when wait =P

I also ran opengl driver monitor when I experienced it and sure enough all my graphics memory was used up.

[aliquis-]

That's a bit disappointing to hear. I installed it last night, but never got a chance to exporting old stuff to import into Aperture to play with.

Given what folks seemed to be saying, seemed like it'd be a nice improvement. the UI certainly looks better, but I've always liked Aperture over Lightroom for that.

Out of curiosity, what computer are you running off of?I don't have a decent camera so I just used my 4mpx jpegs, I guess raw may differ, not that it will be faster I assume but slower in both applications, and maybe Aperture works better compared to Lightroom then, I have no idea.

Yeah, the UI are soo clean and it's nice to have everything at ones place, I hate the library and develop tabs in Lightroom.

I ran it on 2.2GHz MBP / 2GB ram / 128MB vram.

But don't trust me, just try it, I would have prefered if I liked Aperture better since it would sound cooler to say it was only available on a mac, but well, I don't it seems =P. Both apps are good thought so I would probably do well with either.

But I still think the 256MB vram version may run it much better, and I will always hate Apple for their specs.

And the guy who got a quad Mac Pro but only the 7300 GT should probably just upgrade his graphics card, I mean, if you can afford a quad mac pro why use such a lowend card? Atleast it is fixable in the mac pro, if only they used BIOS aswell (or all PCs used EFI) so one didn't had to get a special mac version of the graphics card aswell.

[geerlingguy]

Does anyone know if the retail box version of the software is in stores yet?

Hickman

Yes - I was just at an Apple Store in St. Louis this afternoon, and they had only one retail box left on the shelf, and it was installed on all their Macs.

[boer]

IMO you forgot to mention one of the most important differences between Aperture/Lightroom and the rest of the apps, as iPhoto, PSE, PS3, CS3 etc.: Aperture and Lightroom will NEVER change your original photos when you are editing them. ... If you try the same with e.g. iPhoto, your original file will be overwritten by the edited picture and you have to be happy with your edited version. No way back.

This is simply not true for iPhoto! The originals are always kept separate from the edited versions, automatically.

Don't write things like this, please! Someone might be confused and take you for real.

[boer]

Uhm, does iPhoto overwrite the original? That suck. I guess one can store dublicates onself thought.

No, iPhoto keeps the originals intact.

[Cloudane]

Downloaded the trial. It's very, very cool. Ever since getting my iMac I've been using iPhoto, which is ok with some basic RAW handling but it was always a bit technically lacking compared to what I was used to on the PC (Breezebrowser etc). However the way it worked - flicking through events etc - made me stick with it. Now that Aperture has the same features and is essentially iPhoto for serious photographers it fills the gap nicely, with some truly awesome tweaking options.

My only gripe is that after importing an event from iPhoto I can't easily tell which the original RAW file is and which the tweaked version is (it imports both, as a stack of 2) without relying on judgment. I'm sure there's a way though.

I love the fullscreen mode.

My wallet can expect a sting next month!

If only the feckin' useless TN display in the 20" iMac was actually suitable eh! I'm going to regret that one bigtime for the next 4 years. (When you can convert a photo from "gorgeous sunset" to "mid-day daylight" just by moving the window towards the bottom of the screen, you know it's a bit crap)

[TheSpaz]

No, iPhoto keeps the originals intact.

But, it (iPhoto) makes a COPY of the image... resulting in filling up your hard drive faster. Aperture applies the changes on top of the photo requiring only a small file that Aperture reads and displays the edits. So Aperture doesn't duplicate your photos and it also never touches the master version. Also, you can make as many variations of the same photo as you want without requiring more disk space.

[tofupancake]

I'm digging the RAW 2.0 converter in Aperture 2. But one downer is that I have to manually switch each image from RAW 1.1 to 2.0. When you have thousands of images, that's a nightmare. Anyone know if there's a setting where it will automatically switch all images to 2.0?

Yes, there is.

Select a Project or Projects. Right click. Select 'Migrate Project...'. A dialog will allow you to narrow the effect, if you wish, otherwise will migrate all Raw 1 to Raw 2.

[ifonline]

But then mac fanatics says that iBook G3s run everything sooo great and that Vista requires a bla bla whatever new rig to work. So well, I don't know how much it's worth. Over here in Aperture 1.5 he loupe was very slow, and it lags in 2.0 aswell. If that doesn't bother you that's ok, same with using sliders and not getting instant results on the image, to me it's just annoying to try to get it right when the controls and image lags. I have better things to do when wait =P

I also ran opengl driver monitor when I experienced it and sure enough all my graphics memory was used up.

Again, you find the loupe slow. I don't. What I don't appreciate, however, is suggesting that I am tolerating a poor functioning piece of software, because that simply is not the case. You are spreading misinformation for whatever reason, and it is unnecessary.

I am running Aperture 2 on my MacBook (Black) and it runs fine. It will undoubtedly run even better on my Mac Pro, but it isn't worthless, by any stretch of the imagination, when running on my MacBook.

[jacg]

Downloaded the trial and I'm not hugely impressed. I've recorded some feedback for Apple which I will share here. Obviously I'm not a pro user so maybe I'm not in the actual market for the app. Just wanted a step up from iPhoto for JPEGs. Anyway, here's my first impressions (as addressed to Apple, sorry it sounds so negative):

Why does your latest piece of software have window appearance that looks more like Tiger? What's with the nasty rounded corners? The small windows look even sillier. I thought Leopard was supposed to bring a consistent look...

Why does the magnification of the loupe change randomly? Might it also be useful if it appeared where the cursor is? Neither of the two options is really all that intuitive.

Import: I can't select a whole iPhoto library, only one event at a time.

iPhoto browser: You can't select multiple events if you need to scroll the window - any selection is lost when you attempt to scroll.

I've imported all the events from an iPhoto library. How do I get the events to appear in the new project in chronological order. They seem to be in alphabetical order at the moment.

Please could you make it so that my computer is still useable while Aperture is working on 'previews' in the background. Everything runs so slowly on a MBP 2GB C2D, even just using the finder or typing in Mail becomes problematic.

Ultimately I'm finding Aperture a disappointment. I like the advanced editing features - a step up from iPhoto. But where's the speed? With the FCP interface being so much faster than iMovie HD I thought you might achieve something similar here. Switching between projects and between the other inspector tabs is just sluggish - more so than any application that I currently use. I wanted to use Aperture to manage JPEGs mainly (I imported about 5000) but honestly iPhoto is so much faster. Perhaps you could put the loupe in iPhoto! (Also when using iPhoto, switching to other applications doesn't slow to a crawl, even on a fresh boot. When Aperture is simply open all other applications seem to go into slow motion).

The main reason I wanted to look into Aperture was to get round the annoying limitation of having only one iPhoto library 'live' at any one time. Aperture sort of gets round this by allowing you to have folders full of projects. Shame you haven't implemented something like the 'events' in iPhoto - now that I've learned how to navigate them in the media browser I'm beginning to like them. You'd think projects could be shown in the same way as events?

[Cloudane]

The look is the only thing that bugs me. Finally with Leopard they standardised the visual styles... and now they come up with yet another :p

[ifonline]

The look is the only thing that bugs me. Finally with Leopard they standardised the visual styles... and now they come up with yet another :p

They (Apple) didn't just come up with yet another look. Aperture is part of the pro series of applications from Apple, and all of them use the same visual stylings. For example, my copy of Final Cut Studio 2 and Logic Studio both look like Aperture in terms of styling.

Heck, even Garage Band doesn't follow the standardized look of Mac OS X per Apple's own rules, but these differences in styles are not new with Aperture 2.

[Tosser]

They (Apple) didn't just come up with yet another look. Aperture is part of the pro series of applications from Apple, and all of them use the same visual stylings. For example, my copy of Final Cut Studio 2 and Logic Studio both look like Aperture in terms of styling.

Heck, even Garage Band doesn't follow the standardized look of Mac OS X per Apple's own rules, but these differences in styles are not new with Aperture 2.

Yes, that was what I thought too. Take a look at Soundtrack Pro. Quite the difference.

[Cloudane]

Ah right, I've never used any of the other Pro apps yet. Cool.

[ifonline]

Ah right, I've never used any of the other Pro apps yet. Cool.

Fair enough. I hope I didn't come across sounding too rash as I didn't mean to. That being said, it took me a little while to get used to the pro applications look, but now that I have been using several of these apps for a little bit now, I am more comfortable with the gray coloring and the micro-sized font.

[shadowfax]

I have an interesting story that I thought I would post here as a matter of interest to higher ed students/faculty interested in getting Aperture. First off, you might be able to get your educational copy from your University for much cheaper (mine offers version 1.5 for $99).

However, I am about to finish my MS this year, and I was kind of interested in getting the retail version. Anyway, because I am kind of retarded, I initially bought the academic version from Apple for $179. After thinking about it, I thought that was kind of retarded. I could get the fully upgradeable retail version for just another $20. Then Aperture 3.0 might be only $99 for the upgrade rather than having to pay full price.

So, I received my Academic version today, and called them up to return it. I was on the phone with the Apple rep, and she asked me why I was returning it, and so I told her that I had decided a little late in the game that I wanted the Retail version so I could upgrade for cheaper when 3.0 comes out. She said that was understandable, and then she told me that you can actually get the Higer Education discount on the Full Retail version of Aperture. There doesn't appear to be a way to do this on the internet, but you could presumably do it in the Apple Store, and you can call and place your order and ask for it.

That really sounds like a glitch in the system. Anyway, I personally was going to cancel my order and order through Amazon for $189 with free shipping and no tax, but the Apple Store price with tax was about the same, so I went ahead and had her put me in for the retail version from Apple. And I am glad that I did--they already shipped it (I ordered it at like 4:00 PM this afternoon, so that's awesome). The sales rep told me the estimated arrival was at the end of next week, but the FedEx delivery estimate is now Tuesday the 19th.

So, if you want Aperture 2 (Full Retail) for $20 off, you can call them up and ask for the Higher Ed. discount on the retail version. And you will probably get it much sooner than from Amazon, who appear to be out of stock.

[ifonline]

I have an interesting story that I thought I would post here as a matter of interest to higher ed students/faculty interested in getting Aperture. First off, you might be able to get your educational copy from your University for much cheaper (mine offers version 1.5 for $99).

However, I am about to finish my MS this year, and I was kind of interested in getting the retail version. Anyway, because I am kind of retarded, I initially bought the academic version from Apple for $179. After thinking about it, I thought that was kind of retarded. I could get the fully upgradeable retail version for just another $20. Then Aperture 3.0 might be only $99 for the upgrade rather than having to pay full price.

So, I received my Academic version today, and called them up to return it. I was on the phone with the Apple rep, and she asked me why I was returning it, and so I told her that I had decided a little late in the game that I wanted the Retail version so I could upgrade for cheaper when 3.0 comes out. She said that was understandable, and then she told me that you can actually get the Higer Education discount on the Full Retail version of Aperture. There doesn't appear to be a way to do this on the internet, but you could presumably do it in the Apple Store, and you can call and place your order and ask for it.

That really sounds like a glitch in the system. Anyway, I personally was going to cancel my order and order through Amazon for $189 with free shipping and no tax, but the Apple Store price with tax was about the same, so I went ahead and had her put me in for the retail version from Apple. And I am glad that I did--they already shipped it (I ordered it at like 4:00 PM this afternoon, so that's awesome). The sales rep told me the estimated arrival was at the end of next week, but the FedEx delivery estimate is now Tuesday the 19th.

So, if you want Aperture 2 (Full Retail) for $20 off, you can call them up and ask for the Higher Ed. discount on the retail version. And you will probably get it much sooner than from Amazon, who appear to be out of stock.

I get a discount because of my job, and my friend gets a discount because he is a teacher. This has always been the case, and we both end up with the full version (not the academic version) of the software that we buy.

Apple offers some huge discounts for certain jobs and job types, but you have to ask for the discounts when you buy. The sales people at the store have several pages of discount codes that they can look at to find the discounts applicable to your job. Just ask for it when you are buying.

[Buran]

someone has reported seeing $69 edu pricing on the apple discussions thread - but that hasn't been confirmed yet - every attempt i've made on edu store online has said product not available.

That was probably me, though I'm not sure if it was in this thread or elsewhere. It was edu institutional, not individual -- maybe that is why you can't find it.

[princigalli]

Slow, buggy. Not much else to say about this upgrage. Hard for a professional to keep a real workflow. I tried the software with a 1200 photos project, but it was a disaster. In order to be able to deliver to the client I had to start over on Adobe Lightroom.

So many small problems, and one huge problem: The previews are blurred. Also everything runs way too slow on my Macbook Pro.

Don't they have quality control at Aperture? What do they use, the same people from their Interlaced IMovie?

Why can't Apple produce software that "just work" like Adobe on Windows?

[petvas]

Slow, buggy. Not much else to say about this upgrage. Hard for a professional to keep a real workflow. I tried the software with a 1200 photos project, but it was a disaster. In order to be able to deliver to the client I had to start over on Adobe Lightroom.

So many small problems, and one huge problem: The previews are blurred. Also everything runs way too slow on my Macbook Pro.

Don't they have quality control at Aperture? What do they use, the same people from their Interlaced IMovie?

Why can't Apple produce software that "just work" like Adobe on Windows?

What kind of pictures did you import?
I have projects with 2000 pictures and my system is blazing fast.

[princigalli]

What kind of pictures did you import?
I have projects with 2000 pictures and my system is blazing fast.


Thanks for the reply, glad to know there is hope for a solution. Those are 12MP Jpegs from the Canon 5D. The computer is a Macbook Pro Core Duo with 2Gb Ram and 256Mb graphics.

Obviously I have less photos loaded than you do and you don't seem to experience speed problems. In previewing the photos, do you lose sharpness?

[shadowfax]

Thanks for the reply, glad to know there is hope for a solution. Those are 12MP Jpegs from the Canon 5D. The computer is a Macbook Pro Core Duo with 2Gb Ram and 256Mb graphics.

Obviously I have less photos loaded than you do and you don't seem to experience speed problems. In previewing the photos, do you lose sharpness?

I have a similar machine to yours--a C2D 2.33GHz, 3GB RAM, 256MB Graphics, blah... see my sig for the rest ;). I work with 8MP RAW images which are significantly larger than 12MP JPGs. I have never had issues with speed or stability, but I did have to make a new Library to fix the problem where the "built-in smart albums" (i.e. "Rejected," "* or better," "*****", etc. under the "Library" tree) didn't show up right (they were displaying as "010 - EntireLibrary," etc. I tried all kinds of stuff to fix this, including messing with the sqlite3 aperture database, to no avail. I had to move my projects to a new Library to get them working properly, and then I had to manually recreate all my smart albums, because Apple doesn't let you move Smart Albums from Library to Library, which is royally stupid for $200 software.

Anyway, other than that nuisance, which I have now dealt with, things are going great. It's fast, loads pretty quick--I will say that previews show up blurry when it is in "full" mode. It doesn't render the large-resolution preview while it's trying to load the full image with edits. I think they blur it on purpose in this mode, so you know that the image is not ready yet. I would suggest you try the new "Quick Preview" mode (shortcut is P). In that mode it loads the previews up. A lot of times the colors of the preview can be off, but the images have fine resolution. On my system, browsing in Quick Preview has no delay, and browsing in regular mode is fine. Not blazing, but also not unpleasant.