Aperture 3.1?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ipedro, Sep 28, 2010.

  1. ipedro macrumors 68040

    ipedro

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    #1
    I'm wondering what the production cycle is like for Aperture. Isn't Aperture 3.1 due for release any time soon? Does Apple ever release Aperture betas for testing and if so, any indication as to when we can expect a new point update to hit?

    Aperture 3 has some serious issues with memory hogging. A top of the line MacBookPro with 4GB has trouble running it with a library of 40,000 photos (in different projects, folder separated). I've tried all the tips in the book and I'm currently running Aperture with Faces off. The application just isn't responsive. :(
     
  2. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #2
    Here's no memory leak in Aperture since the first update. 4 gigs of ram isn't that's much though for doing raw editing.
     
  3. ipedro thread starter macrumors 68040

    ipedro

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2004
    Location:
    Toronto, ON
    #3
    8gb

    I updated my MacBookPro with 8GB RAM and 1TB HDD and Aperture 3.1.1 is running blazing fast.

    Apple should really up their minimum specs. There's no way 2GB can run this application.
     
  4. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #4
    My laptop is limited to 3GB and it sucks performance wise.
     
  5. Winni macrumors 68030

    Winni

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Location:
    Germany.
    #5
    Then use Bibble Pro or Adobe Lightroom instead of Aperture -- they're both faster than Aperture and require less system resources.
     
  6. chrono1081 macrumors 604

    chrono1081

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Location:
    Isla Nublar
    #6
    Aperture is much more efficient then Lightroom. I use both frequently (almost daily) and Aperture is by far faster. The only reason I also still use Lightroom is because I have a ton of Lightroom libraries (since I used Lightroom since beta) and have requests for reprints and such.
     
  7. CrackedButter macrumors 68040

    CrackedButter

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    Location:
    51st State of America
    #7
    I use Lightroom now and again and I can't get my head around how it organises my photographs. I've also never noticed a performance increase. I think a placebo effect is in place. It's modular nature is also a limitation.

    Bibble Pro however, I've not tried, but will take a look.
     
  8. TonyK macrumors 6502a

    TonyK

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    #8
    Being a former Bibble Pro user, I cannot recommend them any longer. As a company they made and broke promises on functionality and service.

    For over a year, people were locked in to older cameras because Bibble would not update their application while waiting to release the next big thing (v5). People were told to modify their workflows, shoot JPG instead of RAW, etc.

     

Share This Page