No, the developer can release free update to x.0 release if they want.
But frankly, I don't mind paying for Aperture 4.0. $79.99 is a bargain for upgrade if you think about it (although those that have recently purchased may feel differently).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Updates Aperture and iPhoto With Lengthy Changelogs
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, the developer can release free update to x.0 release if they want.
But frankly, I don't mind paying for Aperture 4.0. $79.99 is a bargain for upgrade if you think about it (although those that have recently purchased may feel differently).
Some things are working, e.g. iPhoto and Xcode updates. Aperture and Safari updates are not though.
Mine is OK (but I don't have it in the dock normally). Maybe you need to reboot to clear a cache or something.
4.0 is just a number. The features that apple puts into the releases, no matter the version number, is what is important.
True but features Apple has added to 3.0.1 to 3.4.2 have not been substantial enough to catchup to Lightroom. Major features added since include:
- 3.2: Photo Stream
- 3.3: AVCHD video support
- 3.3: Camera-generated preview on RAW support
- 3.3: Auto Enhance
- 3.3: White Balance enhancements
- 3.3.2: Retina Macs
- 3.4: Shared Photo Stream
I have to disagree. Social networking has been a blessing for many businesses. Getting a following of people who love your work is a great thing and to be able to upload straight from Aperture is a great thing.
I disagree. Give me a chance to explain.
As a photographer and business owner, and sometimes analog and digital assistant, there has been little proof of social networking sites providing much (if any) business benefit. It is also important to realize that any work posted on ones site (especially sites such as "Facebook") requires legal permission from clients. Most often, the only [legal] work allowed is that done personally by the photographer (which may not reflect the crux of their business, i.e. headshot photographers).
Beyond this, a personal/business site outside of Facebook provides a much better conduit for branching out online. Making certain you're advertised well and in the top brackets of search engines helps a great deal (in essence, the "old school" of internet marketing). Statistically (fairly consistent research), empirical studies [comparing businesses in the same market/locale over a one year span] between non-Facebook advertised businesses (traditional), business who ventured into Facebook (both traditional and non-traditional), and business purely on Facebook (non-traditional), little difference (if any) was demonstrated.
Facebook consists vastly of private individuals communicating with friends and family. With millions of individuals using the social service each day, advertising is consistently pushed aside/ignored by many (Safari extensions, etc allow for the removal of [some] Facebook ads, in the same vein as YouTube cleaners).
Having worked for Apple Corp., Apple invested a lot into Facebook (re: iPhoto, OS X integration). Zuckerberg was/is a smart businessman; he realized the odds that Facebook would not do well once publicly traded [which it didn't]. However, slowly getting Apple [and others] on board was a business safety net. Apple could not let Facebook plummet as they have too much invested in the company. Mark walks away a wealthier man, and Apple foots much of the bill monetarily and through more OS X/iOS integration.
Does any of this really help photographers/businesses? Not really. It simply helps Apple and Zuckerberg.
Spot on. I have been using Nik plugins with Aperture for years. They get better with every new version, but if the features were integrated it would be MUCH better I expect.
LR also just WAYYYY passed Aperture with their last release in the exposure adjustment category. The amount of highlight and shadow recovery is absurdly awesome compared to Apertures.... Sharpening and Noise reduction is still bounds better as well.
I could never get used to the UI so have stayed with Aperture... Maybe I'll give LR4 another whack...
Still there is no support for fuji x-pro1 or x-e1. X-pro is rather popular and is more than a year on the market, why this takes so long?
Well, LR is more up Adobe's strength as a software shop. I don't think it's unreasonable that Apple's software offerings will not be on the cutting edge. Just the way it is.
Wouldn't it be lovely if the Mac Pro that's going to be released next year, is released at a Pro themed event.
Then we can have new Aperture, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro and Motion, all in one keynote. Also, some OS 10.9 features that keep the Pros happy.
I know Apple wants to focus on the consumer market, but it seems like ALL their work has gone into it lately.
Then we can have new Aperture, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro and Motion, all in one keynote. Also, some OS 10.9 features that keep the Pros happy.
I know Apple wants to focus on the consumer market, but it seems like ALL their work has gone into it lately.
I use Nik Color Efex exclusively for black and white conversions, as well as film "effects" and some other neat "fun" stuff. For serious stuff I just use it for black and white, very powerful with LOTS of options.
@MattSepeta Thank for the reply, will look into it when I purchase. The reviews on the app store are not looking great as far as crashing but hopefully this is just an issue with a small percentage of users.
I experienced more crashing with the previous versions of the NIK products with A3... This most recent release, 4 I believe, is surprisingly stable and has a much improved UI and general usability.
Download the trial from the NIK website and give it a go before you buy!
I disagree. Give me a chance to explain.
As a photographer and business owner, and sometimes analog and digital assistant, there has been little proof of social networking sites providing much (if any) business benefit. It is also important to realize that any work posted on ones site (especially sites such as "Facebook") requires legal permission from clients. Most often, the only [legal] work allowed is that done personally by the photographer (which may not reflect the crux of their business, i.e. headshot photographers).
Beyond this, a personal/business site outside of Facebook provides a much better conduit for branching out online. Making certain you're advertised well and in the top brackets of search engines helps a great deal (in essence, the "old school" of internet marketing). Statistically (fairly consistent research), empirical studies [comparing businesses in the same market/locale over a one year span] between non-Facebook advertised businesses (traditional), business who ventured into Facebook (both traditional and non-traditional), and business purely on Facebook (non-traditional), little difference (if any) was demonstrated.
Facebook consists vastly of private individuals communicating with friends and family. With millions of individuals using the social service each day, advertising is consistently pushed aside/ignored by many (Safari extensions, etc allow for the removal of [some] Facebook ads, in the same vein as YouTube cleaners).
Does any of this really help photographers/businesses? Not really. It simply helps Apple and Zuckerberg.
I agree with this. My photography business is 50/50 or 40/60 split between commercial and portrait photography. I experimented with a Facebook page to boost the portrait side of things and amassed quite a following of a few hundred people in no time at all, 'liking' my work.
The trouble was all the messages and enquiries from it were from young women asking if I'd do shoots for free (I guess because they are beautiful princesses I should be falling over myself to work with for nothing - no thanks, I'd rather do test shoots via the best local model agencies) or people that it turned out were expecting some sort of Craigslist pricing (doubtless due to the millions of 'Capture the Timeless Moment' psuedo-pro fauxtographers on Facebook).
After my likes crept up to over 600 I had done perhaps one small extra portrait shoot due to it.
My high local Google ranking, by contrast, sees me adding shoots to the calendar all the time. And offline word-of-mouth remains the number one source of business.
Facebook's just not worth the bother - it's a distraction.