PDA

View Full Version : Aperture on new Macbooks?




Roy Hobbs
Oct 15, 2008, 08:41 AM
I assume Aperture 2 will run pretty well on either of the new MacBooks.

But before I buy the MacBook I want to hear what you guys think.

Thanks



ipodtoucher
Oct 15, 2008, 11:30 AM
I assume Aperture 2 will run pretty well on either of the new MacBooks.

But before I buy the MacBook I want to hear what you guys think.

Thanks

It will theoretically run better on the MBPro, but should see a 50% jump in speed with either from the last chipset :) Can't wait to get my MBP!!

OreoCookie
Oct 15, 2008, 11:35 AM
I assume Aperture 2 will run pretty well on either of the new MacBooks.

But before I buy the MacBook I want to hear what you guys think.
Put a sizeable amount of RAW files (in a sample project?) onto a USB stick or so and ask the staff of an Apple Store whether you can try it on a MacBook, because if it is fast enough, you're going to buy one ů ;)

Much better than any theoretical advice on what is and isn't acceptable ů especially with machines that have yet to make their way into the wild.

ChrisA
Oct 15, 2008, 12:51 PM
I assume Aperture 2 will run pretty well on either of the new MacBooks.

But before I buy the MacBook I want to hear what you guys think.

Thanks

the new MBP is clearly fast enough. IT is fast enough on my imac and the MBP specs are better. But "fast" isn't everything. You have to ask also


Can you put up with the new glossy screen?
Can you even edit photos in a small 15" screen even if it were a perfect anti-glare screen.
Is the disk large enough to hold your library?


You will have to figure out the above but youes it is "fast enough". You may need to use the "P" short cut to work with previews, this makes it really fast on even low end equipment.

You might need an external monitor and a large external disk. Well actually no matter what you will need a few external disks for backups.

Roy Hobbs
Oct 15, 2008, 01:19 PM
Thanks for the replies, as I original stated Macbook, not MacBook Pro.

I only plan on using the machine on the go.....I have an iMac and MacPro at ghome for the hard core editing and such.

So would a MacBooc 2.4 with 4 gig of ran run Aperture at a decent speed. Its runs pretty well on the iMac C2D 2.16 with 3 gig of RAM so I assume it would run as well if not bette ron the MacBook

OreoCookie
Oct 15, 2008, 01:24 PM
I only plan on using the machine on the go.....I have an iMac and MacPro at ghome for the hard core editing and such.
In that case, I'd say get it. For `serious stuff', you still have your two desktops.

ChrisA
Oct 15, 2008, 01:35 PM
Thanks for the replies, as I original stated Macbook, not MacBook Pro.

I only plan on using the machine on the go.....I have an iMac and MacPro at ghome for the hard core editing and such.

In that case, yes it will do very well. The Aperture license allows you to install it on one desktop and one notebook and you can move project between the two computers easly over the network.

Br˘tkvest
Oct 19, 2008, 04:44 AM
In that case, yes it will do very well. The Aperture license allows you to install it on one desktop and one notebook and you can move project between the two computers easly over the network.

Really interesting info on the license ChrisA, thanks!

I'm about to add the first mac to our household, and at the same time I also plan to order Aperture in order to edit and keep my hobby photographing results in good order.

I have no big problem regarding the time it takes loading the pictures from camera/SD-card to the computer (this means I don't have to stare at the progressbar while tapping fingers on the desk is stress, and not that an hour is still ok) but I would like to know if Aperture (which is new to me aswell) runs smoothly on either of the two new macbooks?

Maybe an iMac will turn up in the home office later on aswell, if the macbook turns out to be as good as I hope :) (therefore the info ChrisA gave on the license was very nice to have in mind)

Slightly OT: Is Aperture a god investment for a hobby photographer to make? How far will iPhoto take me?

wheelhot
Oct 19, 2008, 06:07 AM
Oo, that's a interesting license. And I'm surprise many users posted about the MBP when the op is referring to the MB.

Br˘tkvest
Oct 21, 2008, 01:50 PM
Really interesting info on the license ChrisA, thanks!

I'm about to add the first mac to our household, and at the same time I also plan to order Aperture in order to edit and keep my hobby photographing results in good order.

I have no big problem regarding the time it takes loading the pictures from camera/SD-card to the computer (this means I don't have to stare at the progressbar while tapping fingers on the desk is stress, and not that an hour is still ok) but I would like to know if Aperture (which is new to me aswell) runs smoothly on either of the two new macbooks?

Maybe an iMac will turn up in the home office later on aswell, if the macbook turns out to be as good as I hope :) (therefore the info ChrisA gave on the license was very nice to have in mind)

Slightly OT: Is Aperture a god investment for a hobby photographer to make? How far will iPhoto take me?



Ok, my last attempt in this thread on this issue:

Has anyone run Aperture 2 on either of the new Macbooks (not MBP)?

Roy Hobbs
Oct 21, 2008, 04:21 PM
Ok, my last attempt in this thread on this issue:

Has anyone run Aperture 2 on either of the new Macbooks (not MBP)?

I have and it runs just fine with a 10,000 plus library 1/2 of which are RAW

FrankieTDouglas
Oct 21, 2008, 04:44 PM
It's plenty fast enough but before you buy a Macbook, make sure none of your external devices are firewire and confirm that you will never, ever need firewire.

sjobs@mac.com
Oct 21, 2008, 05:07 PM
Seeing that Aperture is GPU heavy will using an Aluminum Macbook 2.0 see a significant slow gown to the 2.4. Is that 0.8GHz (0.4GHz per core) really going to be missed?

Artful Dodger
Oct 22, 2008, 05:47 AM
Seeing that Aperture is GPU heavy will using an Aluminum Macbook 2.0 see a significant slow gown to the 2.4. Is that 0.8GHz (0.4GHz per core) really going to be missed?
The only reason I would go for the 2.4 is for the extra HDD space (even though you can upgrade this without voiding the warranty now) and the backlit KB. Aside from that I haven't seen much difference but down the road who knows. My girlfriend bought the 2.0, saved $250 and can add more ram and a bigger HDD from any one whenever she needs to and still can handle Aperture just fine so far (I just got Aperture and tried it on her new MB).

Br˘tkvest
Oct 22, 2008, 03:37 PM
Roy Hobbs, Artful Dodger, FrankieTDouglas, ChrisA, sjobs@mac.com

Thanks guys for sharing thoughts and experiences. Now I feel more more confident in choosing my first mac, which will be a MacBook, probably the 2.0 GHz model (thoughts are just beginning to stop spinning in my head). Being "a PC", as I have not yet taken the step, I have no equipment that needs FireWire.

Regarding my "Slightly OT" issue regarding if Aperture is a good choice for me:

If anyone thinks I should have any second thoughts buying Aperture 2 for me as an hobby photographer, throw in a couple of lines, otherwise I will know after installing :p (I feel quite sure after what I have heard so far)

Artful Dodger
Oct 22, 2008, 04:22 PM
Roy Hobbs, Artful Dodger, FrankieTDouglas, ChrisA, sjobs@mac.com

Thanks guys for sharing thoughts and experiences.
Regarding my "Slightly OT" issue regarding if Aperture is a good choice for me:

If anyone thinks I should have any second thoughts buying Aperture 2 for me as an hobby photographer, throw in a couple of lines, otherwise I will know after installing :p (I feel quite sure after what I have heard so far)

I would have to say it's worth it just in the areas of adjusting your primary colors in your photos. I believe than I should be able to get as close to what I'm seeing first with the camera and then a pinch in Aperture or what you fancy using to edit. I have some good photos that are just flat and I feel that iPhoto can't balance the areas I need to make them very good. I don't know if some view $159 as needed if you're just starting out but with the basics covered and a whole lot more room to grow, you are the only one that knows how far you plan to take it ;)
Good luck and enjoy :)

Br˘tkvest
Oct 23, 2008, 03:28 PM
I would have to say it's worth it just in the areas of adjusting your primary colors in your photos. I believe than I should be able to get as close to what I'm seeing first with the camera and then a pinch in Aperture or what you fancy using to edit. I have some good photos that are just flat and I feel that iPhoto can't balance the areas I need to make them very good. I don't know if some view $159 as needed if you're just starting out but with the basics covered and a whole lot more room to grow, you are the only one that knows how far you plan to take it ;)
Good luck and enjoy :)

I'll definitely have a go at the trial version in order to get a closer look before buying (the MacBook, however, I plan to keep anyhow :D )

My thought is to get a solution that stands over time. Moving pictures between applications, and maybe losing tags in the process, is not very appealing, have lost tags at one time when I was forced to reinstall my PC (me being careless during Linux installation overwriting MBR, which is not unfixable if it was not for MS/HP being dumb in licensing, hence me turning towards Apple and Mac).

Thanks again :)

ChrisA
Oct 23, 2008, 04:20 PM
Slightly OT: Is Aperture a god investment for a hobby photographer to make? How far will iPhoto take me?

I would suggest starting with iPhoto and then going to Aperture only if you can identify a reason to move. iPhoto's learning curve is a lot shorter than Apertures' and it does all that many people need to do.

You will likely want an image editor too. I'd start with Adobe Photoshop Elements. As above only move to the full up Adobe Photoshop CS4 when you see that Elements is not cutting it. But Elements will do most everything you will need.

Aperture allows for more complex library organization, better backups and more adjustment controls. Many people prefer iPhoto because it is simple. Apple makes it easy to upgrade to Aperture. Just one click on "Import iPhoto Library".

Br˘tkvest
Oct 24, 2008, 03:35 PM
I would suggest starting with iPhoto and then going to Aperture only if you can identify a reason to move. iPhoto's learning curve is a lot shorter than Apertures' and it does all that many people need to do.

You will likely want an image editor too. I'd start with Adobe Photoshop Elements. As above only move to the full up Adobe Photoshop CS4 when you see that Elements is not cutting it. But Elements will do most everything you will need.

Aperture allows for more complex library organization, better backups and more adjustment controls. Many people prefer iPhoto because it is simple. Apple makes it easy to upgrade to Aperture. Just one click on "Import iPhoto Library".

Thanks, of course this is the most sensible way to go. Again some great info for a soon to be mac newbie.

To begin with, the first and most important question is answered; if the MacBook 2.0 GHz would manage to run Aperture 2, if I would decide to move on from iPhoto.

Regarding photo editing programs, the experience that I have is from the one that came with my Canon EOS 450D, GIMP, Paint.NET and Picasa. Before that I used the Nikon application that came with my first digital camera which was a Coolpix 7000-something.

Further questions will find their ways in other threads, since I have know clicked the button and ordered my first Mac :)

Thanks again to to you guys sharing your thoughts and ideas