Adobe 'Doubling Down' on Lightroom in Wake of Apple's Aperture Announcement

[Tech198]

I will actually say here. good job Adobe...

Apple's loosing focus on the Pro video with Final Cut, stripper a lot out to make it more affordable, (and less crappier), and now their turning their backs on Aperture...

No wonder the "pro's" are flocking to not only PC's but also Adobe Premier and Light-room...

Adobe seizes the moment...

(....and the crowd goes wild) *cheers*

 

[maflynn]

I was wondering when this would happen to be frank. Sad that I now know for sure that Apple has killed one of its VERY successful application creation, that pioneered the RAW management and editing tool.

J

I wouldn't go as far as say Apple pioneered, both Apple and Adobe were working on their respective products at the same time, Apple was quicker out the door. Besides Adobe had Bridge and ACR which many people used for DAM, plus there were other companies out there with DAM products.

I think Apple came out with the best approach and I still do, but there were others already in the market with good products.

----------

Adobe seizes the moment...

(....and the crowd goes wild) *cheers*

Lets see if they actually do seize the moment - advertising their expensive subscription model is not exactly what I call seizing the moment. LR can still be bought stand alone, but its funny they're quite silent on that.

As for the crowd goes wild, I think its anything but because people, like myself who are on Aperture prefer it over LR, so its with a sad heart that we leave a great product because Apple decided to abandon what is one of their best sellers on the MAS.

 

[imajez]

you seem to be pushing your pro LR arguments way too hard... one may start to wonder whether you're making living of shooting pics or selling Adobe licenses

Nope simply correcting the torrent of misinformation re Lightroom, CC and so on.
I used to be a Photoshop Beta tester, but simply don't have time for that at the moment. Nor does that make me uncritical of Adobe, done plenty of constructive criticism there.

 

[Val-kyrie]

How about fixing your software so it doesn't corrupt over a network share Adobe??? Worry about that!

Can you elaborate on this for me?

I am getting ready to purchase photo editing and management software and I am looking at options, so I would find your information very useful, especially since I am looking at storing photos on a network drive.

 

[CausticPuppy]

I wouldn't go as far as say Apple pioneered, both Apple and Adobe were working on their respective products at the same time, Apple was quicker out the door.

The more I'm thinking about this, the more I'm realizing what a big thing Apple is doing. They are not abandoning photography at all.

With Yosemite, they are introducing a new RAW converter into the OS, and exposing it to 3rd parties is ways that simply aren't available to plugin developers now.

With Aperture or LR, you have 2 ways of handling plugins:

1) Preset packs (which are limited to the app's built in capabilities), e.g. VSCO Film

2) External editors, which require converting to large TIFF files. (e.g. Nik)


The reason external editors require TIFF files is that those 3rd parties don't have access to the RAW conversion pipeline in either Adobe or Apple's current process.

Yosemite will allow 3rd parties to inject filters during RAW processing. This means Nik could work nondestructively on RAW files.

This is such a fundamental shift that the old "Aperture" way of thinking no longer applies. But, LightRoom also falls into this "old school" way of thinking. The long-term effect of this is that, on OS X, all photo manipulation, including 3rd party plugins, could be done non-destructively using the new PhotoKit hooks. And they will be the same hooks on iOS as on OS X. So, theoretically, when you view your photos on iOS, they will show the same nondestructive edits as the OS X version, even if you do not have an iOS version of those plugins.

This is kind of a big deal.

https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips...duction-os-x-mentions-iphoto-and#.U7FjghZ8Dbo

 

[maflynn]

With Yosemite, they are introducing a new RAW converter into the OS, and exposing it to 3rd parties is ways that simply aren't available to plugin developers now.

In what ways specifically, because the RAW converter has always been part of OS X? I'm not running Yosemite, so I can't do any of research on what may or may not be different.

With Aperture or LR, you have 2 ways of handling plugins:

1) Preset packs (which are limited to the app's built in capabilities), e.g. VSCO Film

2) External editors, which require converting to large TIFF files. (e.g. Nik)

Yep, and Aperture handles it similarly at the moment.

Yosemite will allow 3rd parties to inject filters during RAW processing. This means Nik could work nondestructively on RAW files.

That will be huge, no question but I think it still doesn't address the concerns issues with waiting on apple.

1. Day one feature list - consumer related, i.e., iPhoto replacement or will it have pro features that we find in Aperture but not iPhoto.
2. Stability of a version 1.0
3. iCloud integration and local storage options.
4. Apple's past history of not really providing a lot of updates to Aperture.

I guess it boils down to peace of mind and waiting isn't a bad option but its not one that I'm willing to do at this point.

Adobe has a long history of image editing and LR has consistently improved. I can see adobe adding non destructive plugins, most like though it will be with their current version of PS. Even if they don't, I've read where that many LR users haven't needed to use plug-ins just because of the rich editing capability of LR, something that Aperture once had but as it aged, plug-ins were the only option to extend the usefulness since Apple failed to improve the application. I'm just scratching the surface of LR, so I can't address that first hand.

 

[thekeyring]

If the past performance of Apple with and without then again with Steve Jobs is any indication, yes, I think he was the only person who could run that company.

Fair point, but history has not repeated itself.

This time, Steve Jobs wasn't kicked out, he stepped down himself. Tim Cook had been acting CEO multiple times before he took over in 2011. If he'd done a bad job, Steve could have picked someone else.

 

[carves]

This is why I still manage my photos with a traditional folder system. Perhaps you'll get lucky and there'll be some way to translate all that database information over...or perhaps not. Folders, while less powerful for searching, are essentially future-proof.

I wish someone would come out with photo management software that also saves the tags in the metadata of the picture, and fixes the database if you move or rename something. Then I'd be first in line.

 

[till213]

$10 bucks isn't a lot, but when you're in college with other bills it is harder to justify...

My son: get good grades in college, get a decent job, become a hard-working member of your Capitalism and you'll get the entry ticket...

 

[Chupa Chupa]

That will be huge, no question but I think it still doesn't address the concerns issues with waiting on apple.

1. Day one feature list - consumer related, i.e., iPhoto replacement or will it have pro features that we find in Aperture but not iPhoto.
2. Stability of a version 1.0
3. iCloud integration and local storage options.
4. Apple's past history of not really providing a lot of updates to Aperture.

I guess it boils down to peace of mind and waiting isn't a bad option but its not one that I'm willing to do at this point.

This is really the crux of Aperture user's dilemmas. I suspect v1.0 will, functionally, be much like FCPX 1.0; i.e., great for prosumers, but not yet pro workflows. It will be an evolving process to get to pro quality, and I imagine 3rd party plugins will play a large part of that.

If I were a pro and somehow still using Aperture I'd be with you and wouldn't wait to migrate. It's just not prudent to rely your business on an EOLed product.

But for everyone else I think it makes sense to cool off and see what Apple offers, as it seems it will be revolutionary, not just way to hook people into iCloud. Aperture is going to be functional for another year; Photos for OS X will be out well before then.

For me, what will really dictate whether I adopt Photos or not will be local storage (a must!) and Aperture like curation. Its worth waiting because IF Photos turns out to be worthwhile and not an over-simplistic photo app then the pain of migration elsewhere is avoided, plus it's free.

 

[krravi]

Considering I just bought Aperture over Lightroom a couple months ago this is a stab in the back!

So Apple, the company that loves to embellish its "Use a Mac for Creative Ideas" is dumping a fine piece of software... because? Oh yeah we are into low cost use and throw iMacs now.

WTF is going on?

 

[imajez]

This is why I still manage my photos with a traditional folder system. Perhaps you'll get lucky and there'll be some way to translate all that database information over...or perhaps not. Folders, while less powerful for searching, are essentially future-proof.

That's exactly why I use that as the first stage of my file management, as should everyone else, as the discontinuation of Aperture has amply demonstrated.
I use a date/description system, simple, very effective and usually works in all software or OSes. Once that is done I add any metadata I need and I'm sorted.

I wish someone would come out with photo management software that also saves the tags in the metadata of the picture, and fixes the database if you move or rename something. Then I'd be first in line.

LR can save the metadata to the file or xmp. In preferences/catalogue settings make sure 'save to xmp' is ticked. This means other programmes can utilise it, if they want to.
Again talking LR here, but it applies generally for such software either on import or before importing. LR can import into folders by date, so I just add a description to the folder after import. Older stuff gets imported as is.
THis next bit is key. - You shouldn't move stuff outside of the database. You put stuff in the correct folders and leave them there. There is no need to move them again outside of your digital assets management app, as that's the old way of doing things. Any renaming or moving should then be done within LR. If you need stuff elsewhere you export it in the format needed to wherever you want it. Exported stuff can also be added to the catalogue if you want, though no need for files destined for say clients.

If however for some reason you do add stuff to folders outside of LR, LR can sync/update folder and add new stuff or remove anything missing. Right click/synchronise If you do have to move folders say to a new HD or something, move the top level folder, LR will place a ? next to folder and you can then right click again and point LR to the new location and that's about it.
One of the things that iTunes does that is really nice is that if you move a file outside of iTunes whilst it is open, iTunes keeps track of this. As I'm currently still adding to my music collection losslessly from CDs rather than more expensive mp3, I get iTunes to rip CD and then file it in a sensible/non-Apple manner. This is so so If I move from iTunes or iTunes gets binned, I'm not left high and dry. I think Aperture does a similar thing with foile tracking and I'm guessing that's because they have file access than non-Apple software does not.

 

[Boomish69]

Apple's business sense just gets better & better, so they drop one of the most simple photo storage apps for the average person so they can bring out another app next YEAR! why tell people this now, so might just stay and wait but a lot will switch to something else, how is loosing Apple customers ever good. Just another case where Apple can't develop their apps professionally anymore.
Really getting sick & tired of Apple never continuing any software development a few years after launching it to much fanfare, how long will the new Photos app last? 3/4 years? As for Logic Pro X what were they thinking with the colour scheme!

 

[linuxcooldude]

Deleted.

 

[Ethosik]

Okay seriously, people need to stop with the creative cloud "paying until you die" nonsense.

Can Photoshop 1 work on Windows 8 easily? No. How do I get Photoshop to work on Windows 8? I need a newer version.

You guys are saying we would still have to be paying Adobe 20 years from now to continue working, that would be the case anyway. Lightroom 5 will probably not work on the OS released 20 years from now. We might not even have OSes like we have them now in 20 years.

Also, you guys said it. Can Lightroom 1 use the latest RAW formats? Will it always be able to use the latest camera formats? No? How do I use them then? Get newer software.

 

[dysamoria]

yeah, I've been debating that as well - the problem just being that Windows 8 is totally and utterly unusable and Apple knows that. If Microsoft actually had a decent OS, things would look differently. But right now, people are moving TOWARDS Mac OS (hence the strong increase in Mac sales while PC sales have been decreasing at alarming rates) and not away from it. IF there were decent PC laptops and IF Windows 8 were halfway usable, I'd switch in a heartbeat. But the way things are now, I'm stuck with Mac OS (which I love).

I hate Windows, but this is ridiculous. Windows 8.1 is NOT unusable. It's got stupid BS changes in the GUI and accessories, but it's certainly usable.

 

[dysamoria]

Actually I think they are focusing in exactly the area they want to, which is not the area you, I and others want them to.

They are after the mass, non computing, market, and they are doing very well at it.
The more cool branding they can get, hell they have Burberry and Beats now, things people can use as lifestyle objects, not computers.

They have found out that is where the big mass money is.

They still have to make, what we would class a proper computers, but it's not their money making focus, they have moved on and are moving more and more away from that.

So many people, old school, want a Apple product like a PC, that could become a nice platform, but it's not going to happen, they only barely wanted to try for that market in the past, failed, and found out they can make money from the bigger non computing market.

I could say dumbed down devices, but I guess that would be harsh.
I guess its like wishing Apple would go back to making DSLR's and they have found more money can be made with compact cameras with a lot of branding and clever advertising.

Truth is, computing devices have historically been a pain in the ass to use, even for many computer geeks. They were never devices for average people, which is why entire markets grew out of those flaws just to make money on "tech support", which is mostly a clan of geeks telling average users that they're stupid and lame. There are WAY more average people than geeks. Apple has changed the expectation a bit. Used to be that people assumed they were stupid (because geeks told them they were, and developers created products that were designed for geeks), but now that devices are becoming actually usable in a world of normal average people, the expectation is now shifting somewhat.

As a former tech industry worker, I'm all for it. Apple isn't "dumbing down" computing. Computing has always been dumb. They're making it smarter. Smart enough for normal people to use computing devices without learning archaic and detailed specialist knowledge. Unfortunately, some of the nitty gritty detailed control gets lost for geeks and power users (but I have yet to feel like anything has been completely taken from me). But geeks are a minority that have enjoyed dominance in this industry for too long (too long because they've done little to actually improve things).

Do I like Apple's visual design of today? Hell no. Do I think they should put more development effort into pro-level content creation tools? Hell yes. But I still agree with their mission to finally drag computing, kicking and screaming, into a modern era where it's not reliant on specialist knowledge and an army of socially ignorant geeks.

----------

When does "doubling down" go away?

I can't wait for it to go away myself. I hate useless corporate jargon. And I hate meme phrases even more (outside satire and jokes).

 

[marstan]

....One of the things that iTunes does that is really nice is that if you move a file outside of iTunes whilst it is open, iTunes keeps track of this. As I'm currently still adding to my music collection losslessly from CDs rather than more expensive mp3, I get iTunes to rip CD and then file it in a sensible/non-Apple manner. This is so so If I move from iTunes or iTunes gets binned, I'm not left high and dry. I think Aperture does a similar thing with foile tracking and I'm guessing that's because they have file access than non-Apple software does not.

What!? You still using iTunes! I moved away from that to JRiver some time ago. Runs circles around iTunes - cross-platform, virtually any audio/video format, incredible tagging facility, great support, and much more.

 

[ellsworth]

Do people not realize you can purchase Lightroom alone without purchasing thei cloud subscription? It's like only $150 bucks. No monthly fees.

People freak out way to easily.

 

[imajez]

What!? You still using iTunes! I moved away from that to JRiver some time ago. Runs circles around iTunes - cross-platform, virtually any audio/video format, incredible tagging facility, great support, and much more.

I've been looking for something to replace iTunes for years, but everything I've tried has been even less useful. Don't recall seeing jRiver. Currently having a look at it and it passes the first test smart playlists. Without that, it wouldn't even be considered.

So first impression is that it's really fugly and has not been ported to OSX very well. For example there are no preferences, but has options i.e. preferences in Player Menu, not the File menu and the UI has windows size button in the wrong place in all the skins bar the default one with the terrible text rendering. Not a good start.
So I Imported some files and it can't even play them back and suggests the format may be supported [even with an mp3!!], that the hardware or Core Audio is not working. Now whenever I click on it it flicks me back to Chrome, so it's buggy too. So this is possibly the worst iTunes alternative I've ever tried as it not only fails to attain basic OS standards but can't even play an mp3 file. Laziest attempt I've ever seen at a Mac programme, so how on Earth you think it runs rings around iTunes beats me. And I doubt it would integrate with any of my DJ software for when I play out either.

 

[captain kaos]

Apple's business sense just gets better & better, so they drop one of the most simple photo storage apps for the average person so they can bring out another app next YEAR! why tell people this now, so might just stay and wait but a lot will switch to something else, how is loosing Apple customers ever good. Just another case where Apple can't develop their apps professionally anymore.
Really getting sick & tired of Apple never continuing any software development a few years after launching it to much fanfare, how long will the new Photos app last? 3/4 years? As for Logic Pro X what were they thinking with the colour scheme!

I believe its the case of the iphone. Apple has got a perfect business modle of updating the phone every year. Its what other companies now do. So now apple is doing the same thing with its software. Kill off a perfectly good app and make it not run on the next os version so everyone has to spend weeks reorganising there 20,000 plus photos in a new programme, then a few years later do it all again.

 

[soulbot]

I guess you've only used Mac for a few years.

Well, your guess would be wrong then. I've been using Macs since 2001. I know *all* about getting locked out of working apps (and much more granular items than "apps") by a new version of an Os. I was a video editor and motion graphics designer for over 10 years. With After Effects and Final Cut Pro (not X), etc. there was an intricate web of compatibilities that had to be maintained. One erroneous update and a critical plugin would break, hobbling a major project. Since projects = money = livelihood, I couldn't afford those risks! I've got a cloned boot drive, parked on 10.5.8. If I need to revive a project, I slam it into my Mac Pro, and go to work. I've got another for 10.6.8—same deal. A precise set of tools on board, known to work for a certain set of projects. I keep things alive like this. So you're preaching to the choir...

I have some software that was optimised for Mountain Lion, but could not work with Mavericks, and I had to buy the new edition. That's just one example. There are tons of examples of software that is broken with each new iteration of OSX. Even with Aperture, Apple is promising to update it to work with Yosemite, because, as is, Aperture probably will not work with Yosemite.

Hence, in response to what seemed to you as a no-brainer, today's LR5, if I cannot get updates later on, may not even work on Yosemite, let alone Macs in a few decades time. And I want to access my photos in a few decades time, particularly the edits I've made over the decades.

I think your reply is an example that society is filled with people who think short term but don't realise that they are essential short term thinking people. If there were no people like you who make up the majority, then the majority of society would not be short term thinkers. I mean, since the majority of society are short term thinkers, who think they're not, there must be lots of people on this forum who are like that.

Um…okay? Some pretty grandiose sociological conclusions you're drawing here, eh? Again, your letting presumptions get out of hand. Reel it in a little bit. You can't sum me up by a few comments I've dropped off in a forum. I've got over a decades worth of photographs (40K plus, and that's just personal, not my photo clients) that I plan to keep access to for plenty decades to come. I've already migrated from Aperture to LR and the chances of me eventually migrating again—at some point in the future—and pretty much 100%. I get it!! It's naive to think it's going to be the exact same paradigm I'm staring at right now. I'm fully aware that the future is uncertain and I'll cross those bridges when I have to. And see, I *know* that I'll have to. None of this stuff is permanent. If you plan on using the same DAM software forever: best of luck to you. But I'm not that guy.

 

[thekev]

Thanks for the tips. I had a bad taste in my mouth from Lightroom 1 on and it's never gone away. Obviously I have to learn it now. Maybe it'll grow on me. Anyhow...thanks for the info.

Lightroom is decent, but Adobe could have done a much better job with the back end color processing (same goes for Apple). They (imo) made a ****** choice of working space profiles. There's really an enormous amount that could be improved in these things, especially if they base their internal working spaces off ICCv4 specifications rather than the older v2. It clamps fewer values. Implementing that all the way back to the point of unrasterized data would probably clear up a lot of typical problems in red channel processing and bloom, which is still annoyingly common after all this time.

I was wondering when this would happen to be frank. Sad that I now know for sure that Apple has killed one of its VERY successful application creation, that pioneered the RAW management and editing tool.

Apple didn't pioneer anything really. They came out with their version. Phase One was the company that really pioneered that, but they're a small company. Their raw processing was probably the highest in quality for a very long time. Now I might argue that some of the Linux projects have surpassed it, but Apple can't even touch those. The annoying thing about some of these smaller projects is that they often lag, and UIs aren't always pleasant. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that Apple was first there. It wasn't even one of their better projects due to the bloated size of those libraries.

I guess you've only used Mac for a few years. I have some software that was optimised for Mountain Lion, but could not work with Mavericks, and I had to buy the new edition. That's just one example. There are tons of examples of software that is broken with each new iteration of OSX. Even with Aperture, Apple is promising to update it to work with Yosemite, because, as is, Aperture probably will not work with Yosemite.

Hence, in response to what seemed to you as a no-brainer, today's LR5, if I cannot get updates later on, may not even work on Yosemite, let alone Macs in a few decades time. And I want to access my photos in a few decades time, particularly the edits I've made over the decades.

I think your reply is an example that society is filled with people who think short term but don't realise that they are essential short term thinking people. If there were no people like you who make up the majority, then the majority of society would not be short term thinkers. I mean, since the majority of society are short term thinkers, who think they're not, there must be lots of people on this forum who are like that.

It's often an issue of deprecated APIs when something no longer works, but the important thing would be what formats are supported decades from now. Some of the earliest digital camera raw formats went away pretty quickly. You can't open some of the old Kodak proback plus files on anything after (I think) 10.3 Panther. The ones that weren't culled immediately lasted pretty well. You can still open a lot of older raw files such as those from light phase backs and Canon .crw files from the early 2000s. If it does become an issue, you can always convert your files. Raw processors have continued to improve, and we're starting to see ones capable of just dumping the full range of the file without baking gamma in a 16-32 bit floating point space. The newer profile types can also recognize a sign bit, so you can preserve negative tristimulus values in any space that doesn't require them to be clamped. For example at 8 bits per channel, you don't have any bits allocated to exponent or sign, as the range 0-255 is 0-2^8-1. As you see more raw processors get to that point, you'll be able to save it in a way that it doesn't really lose much, and yields a lot more control than you would have obtained from earlier raw processors. You don't always know what these things do under the hood. It's even up for debate what constitutes true raw exposure compensation.

 

[imajez]

Apple didn't pioneer anything really. They came out with their version. Phase One was the company that really pioneered that, but they're a small company. Their raw processing was probably the highest in quality for a very long time.

j133yc wasn't talking about raw processing but processing and management. Not that Apple really pioneered that either. Heck Apple very rarely pioneer anything, they usually let others do that, then hoover up their smart ideas and package it nicely and claim to be innovative. Sometimes they do a great job of that, sometimes they do not.

 

[notrack]

The more I'm thinking about this, the more I'm realizing what a big thing Apple is doing. They are not abandoning photography at all.

With Yosemite, they are introducing a new RAW converter into the OS, and exposing it to 3rd parties is ways that simply aren't available to plugin developers now.

With Aperture or LR, you have 2 ways of handling plugins:

1) Preset packs (which are limited to the app's built in capabilities), e.g. VSCO Film

2) External editors, which require converting to large TIFF files. (e.g. Nik)


The reason external editors require TIFF files is that those 3rd parties don't have access to the RAW conversion pipeline in either Adobe or Apple's current process.

Yosemite will allow 3rd parties to inject filters during RAW processing. This means Nik could work nondestructively on RAW files.

This is such a fundamental shift that the old "Aperture" way of thinking no longer applies. But, LightRoom also falls into this "old school" way of thinking. The long-term effect of this is that, on OS X, all photo manipulation, including 3rd party plugins, could be done non-destructively using the new PhotoKit hooks. And they will be the same hooks on iOS as on OS X. So, theoretically, when you view your photos on iOS, they will show the same nondestructive edits as the OS X version, even if you do not have an iOS version of those plugins.

This is kind of a big deal.

https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips...duction-os-x-mentions-iphoto-and#.U7FjghZ8Dbo

If it will be that way, Apple would be quite a bit ahead.

The question for me is, on top of that technology, will they provide a UI that will be useful for me? I mean advanced brushes, keyword management etc..