Aperture 4 for iPad and Mac?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by MCAsan, Jan 21, 2014.

  1. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #1
  2. TjeuV macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Location:
    Belgium
    #2
  3. Bear macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Sol III - Terra
    #3
    And would Aperture 3.6 be good enough if it had new features and there was an iPad version of Aperture? Some people seem to be hung up by version numbers.

    Anyway, yes there are features that it is time for Aperture to have. In some ways I'd wish Appke would do regular updates with each update adding 1 or 2 features instead of waiting for all the new features to be ready.
     
  4. swordio777 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    #4
    Very well said! Far too many people are clamouring for "version 4" with absolutely no indication about what may be included in such a release!?

    If version numbers are all that matters, does that mean Capture One Pro 7 is better than Lightroom 5? And what about DXO Optics Pro 9 - surely that's best of all?? :rolleyes:

    I completely agree that Aperture could do with a handful of new features to keep a wide range of users happy, but there are still areas where it wipes the floor with the competition and a lot of perfectly satisfied Aperture users out there.

    Instead of getting worked up about it, each user just needs to judge each app on its merits & limitations then chose the software that's best for them. But because 2 people prefer different apps it doesn't mean one is "better" or that one user is "wrong". Always remember: competition is a good thing.

    Best regards.
     
  5. Designer Dale, Jan 21, 2014
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2014

    Designer Dale macrumors 68040

    Designer Dale

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    Folding space
    #5
    "$99 on an annual basis"

    Sounds like an iPad implementation of that Adobe Cloud thing. You wouldn't actually have LR on your iPad and could only use it with a good internet connection.

    Neither LR nor Aperture are viable iPad apps for serious RAW format photographers because the memory processing and storage is too limited. Some of us work on single images that would choke a top of the line iPad or Surface Pro.

    Dale

    EDIT: What I would like to see is a Field Tools kit for the iPad. It would consist of a battery and small ssd in a snap in case for the iPad. It would have several built in media card slots and maybe a USB port. An Aperture First Edit app would go with it. You would be able to load a card in the field, view and edit out the junk and store the keepers in original unedited form on the ssd and maybe a second media card as a backup. Dock it with your computer when you get back and the tedious first edit is out of the way.
     
  6. BJMRamage macrumors 68020

    BJMRamage

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    #6
    I'd love an iPad-Aperture Companion App. (it doesn't have to be Aperture 4...could be 3.X)

    I'd like to (even if just on WiFi--sitting on my couch away from the iMac) be able to go through my photos, rate them, Star, put in more Keywords, delete obvious blurry ones, maybe, MAYBE throw a few adjustments on them. It wouldn’t matter too much since they Masters/Originals are on the main drive/box. If working off RAW, they would show the JPG preview. It would at least get things rolling AWAY from the computer.

    AND if they came out with a larger iPad...I might want that even more. And with the release of an Aperture-iPad app I’d be more inclined to get a new iPad. Currently I am using an iPad2 and that fits my needs.
     
  7. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #7
    iPhoto for iOS does all of this already.
     
  8. BJMRamage macrumors 68020

    BJMRamage

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    #8
    It'll let me view any photo in the library without sending it over it the iPad via iTunes?

    Curious as I've only used it in the iPhone not iPad. I'll have to look into it.
     
  9. MCAsan thread starter macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #9
    Personally I find the idea of trying to do an Aperture or LR on an iPad a sad joke. Where the heck is the screen real estate tp run tools...etc. I know, we run slave tablets to handle the tool display while the first pad (calibrated or course) displays the image...or was that...


    The real point of the thread is....how may more nails is Apple going let Adobe and others put in Aperture's coffin before it officially gives it a grave or breaths some life back into it? Ball is in Apple's court and the game clock is ticking.
     
  10. Designer Dale macrumors 68040

    Designer Dale

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Location:
    Folding space
    #10
    The real competition killer here is Google. NIK made a good set of plug ins for both Aperture and LR that could stand on their own as editing tools. Haven't heard much from them since the big G bought them out.

    There are bit players, but Aperture and Lightroom are the only real practical options for serious photographers. Adobe pays more attention to LR than Apple does to Aperture because they are a software company. If Adobe were to loose PhotoShop, they would go poof overnight.

    Mobile is a huge challenge for this market because the interfaces are so inherently complicated. The first one to develop a viable user interface that puts all the power of these apps at our fingertips is the winner.

    Dale
     
  11. Commy1 macrumors 6502a

    Commy1

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2013
    #11
    I can see it.
    Consider the Logic Pro Remote app for Garage band, Logic and.. some other OSX can't recall. It turns the iPad into a wireless touch soundboard.
    I think it'd be really awesome if the iPad could be used in a similar way. Perhaps something similar to Shuttersnitch as well as a Remote connectivity feature for the Aperture editing workflow.

    I'd buy that.
     
  12. MCAsan thread starter macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #12
    Huge difference in using the iPad for Logic Pro controller vs. trying to edit photos where you can not have too much screen real estate for the photo and the editing tools. You would need an iPad with a 15" or better screen....might as well use rMBP. Personally I find my 15" rMBP screen too small. So I only use it for importing in the field. At home editing is done on a calibrated ATD.
     
  13. irishv macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    #13
    Except it doesn't. No star ratings in iphoto for ios. Any metadata edits will only sync back if you save a new version to your camera roll. No non-destructive edits.
     
  14. CausticPuppy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #14
    No, it doesn't allow you to do any of that on your main Aperture library on your Mac.

    There's an all called photoscope that allows remote browsing and rating of an Aperture library on the same LAN.
     
  15. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #15
    I guess I'm old school but I can't see how useful editing images on the iPad are

    Also Aperture and Lightroom are DAM, editing is but one aspect but managing the images is the major function of the two. I don't want to have my library to be on the cloud but in my possession
     
  16. Jacksonc macrumors 6502

    Jacksonc

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2013
    Location:
    Jony's house
  17. soulbot macrumors member

    soulbot

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2008
    #17
    This is one of the biggest misunderstandings about how Adobe's Creative Cloud works. You do not need a constant internet connection for things to function. You absolutely would have a LR mobile app on the iPad. When it comes time to sync up to your other machines, you're only syncing metadata: KB, maybe MB, not GB.

    Lightroom 5's Smart Previews is aimed at alleviating the massive storage needs of Raw photographs. I think the general goal is indeed portability.

    "For example, 500 raw images from a high-end DSLR camera may occupy 14 GB of disk space. The Smart Preview files for the same images amounted to 400 MB of disk space."

    Have a look at this video, from Photoshop World 2013. Fast forward to about the 41:00 mark and you can see all this in action. I get it, using an iPad as part of the workflow, will never work for a lot of people out there. However, the issues you're highlighting have been considered and are being addressed.
     
  18. tgara macrumors 6502a

    tgara

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2012
    Location:
    Somewhere in the Delta Quadrant
    #18
    You can flag photos. No, you can't edit metadata, but I've found that this isn't something you want to do on an iPad anyway. And you can in fact remove edits to the photos by reversion.
     
  19. jacg macrumors 6502a

    jacg

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #19
    I'd like a quick and dirty import to iPad. Compare, rate, crop, straighten, delete, all via Airplay to Atv if available. Really fast initial sweep.

    Then either sync over photo stream to Aperture, or sync metadata only, linking automatically to RAW files imported to Mac, updating the versions accordingly.

    Any chance?
     
  20. MCAsan thread starter macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #20
    I use my rMBP in the field and at home to import, edit, and finalize my photos. I can't think of any advantages of iPad in terms of apps (LR, Nik, OnOne, Topaz..etc) screen real estate, processing power and memory, storage, or interfaces when I may be shooting 50-100GB or raw files. The things I can see using an iPad for in the field is a monitor if you are doing live view and showing jpeg versions of your finalized raw orignals.
     
  21. jacg macrumors 6502a

    jacg

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2003
    Location:
    UK
    #21
    I can see your point. I guess I'm one of the many non-pro Aperture users who uses the system to lightly process a smaller number of photos quickly. If I don't have a laptop with me, I can't do that. I tried in iPhoto but I just had to do it again later.

    You've got to consider the potential for non-professional users because Apple shut us out of iPhoto by crippling it and, fortunately, made Aperture affordable.
     
  22. MCAsan thread starter macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #22
    Which raises the very serious question....is Aperture for pros or average hobbyists?. If pros, is iPad support seriously important? Most pros I know have a MBP in the field. Of course if Apple continues to let the gap between LR and Aperture grow, this may be a mute point anyway. That will be sad.
     
  23. swordio777 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2013
    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    #23
    Why does it have to be only one or the other?? Apple are obviously trying to keep both happy, with flexible management features for professionals and light editing for amateurs.

    Do not forget – amateurs are where the money is, but this is not a bad thing. If we want apple to continue developing aperture then they need to turn a profit on their development costs. To do this, it needs to appeal to the widest possible audience.

    "Professional" does not mean "very good". Far too many people who are not professionals harp on about "professional software" like it’s some sort of badge justifying their ability (This is not aimed at you - I have no idea whether you’re a working photographer or not). The same can be seen with hardware from enthusiasts who demand "pro" gear!?

    In my opinion, both lightroom and aperture are aimed mainly towards enthusiasts. That is to say they contain a lot of features trying to please the masses, with a handful of features aimed at the working photographer. Aperture has a few more features which are aimed towards professional photographers (mainly to do with library management) and lightroom has many more features which are aimed towards amatuers / enthusiasts (mainly mediocre editing tools). The gap between the two that you mention is mainly to do with average-quality editing tools & seated squarely in the "enthusiast" camp.

    Best regards.
     
  24. MCAsan thread starter macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #24
    = iPhoto

    .
    What money for Aperture? We can't seriously think Aperture sales make a dent in Apple overall revenues. If Apple was serious about defending Aperture market share, they would LR competition seriously. Today, that is not the case. Of course with Apple that could end easily with another..."One more thing."
     
  25. irishv macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    #25
    Thanks, this looks almost perfect for my use case. Would be nice to get remote access over VPN and support for the camera connection kit, but it looks like a good start.

    How (honest question)? In my experience with iPhoto for iOS, if you want to save any changes you've done (flag, favorite, caption, contrast, etc), you need to save the image to the camera roll to get it off your ipad and into Aperture. Once you save to the camera roll you lose the ability to revert back to the original in Aperture. Changes made in the default Photos app (crop, etc) can be reversed (IIRC).
     

Share This Page