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 Ending Development on Aperture as Upcoming Photos App for OS X Will Replace iPhoto
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
there isn't one... that's half the problem.
by announcing the assassination of Aperture without giving us a proper look at it's successor we can only assume and speculate.
and shoot our angry mouths off at they way we are as ever being treated.
So they murdered iPhoto and Aperture and we don't know with what?
Damn, this Photos app better not be basic
Mr Pro??
I don't care what DAM is for that matter
I only want to deal with Professional Software that fits MY Workflow!
And I only know about 90% of ASMP Members since I Joined in 1985.
I go by the Folks I know and what they use!! 99% of shooters I know run on Adobe Products
Back in the olden days, there was a Program Called Quark for Publishing, it was the Ultimate for Layout and Publishing... Until In Design came out with a Flawless Interface to Photoshop!!
Now, NOBODY used Quark
NOBODY I know of used Aperture...
Last edited:
That's all?
I'm working on over 2M Images I have done since I started, and THAT is the main reason that most Pro Shooters use INDUSTRY STANDARDS!!
Aperture has NEVER been Industry Standard at ANYTHING!!
Photoshop is!!
FWIW, I Shoot in NEF RAW, Save those files, Process them into TIFF or JPG and Save those, NEVER in a format that might become obsolete in the future or with a Software that might end up being obsolete!! Photoshop has been around for over 20 years, THAT makes it Industry Standard.
----------
EXACTLY on both counts!!
NOT a single Pro I know uses Aperture!!
I have to learn Lightroom now that Nikon will no longer support Nikon Capture NX2!!
I was told by a fellow shooter that once I go Lightroom, I will NEVER Go back!!
I only used NX2 to batch convert NEF Files to JPG on large Batches, 20K Images and such.
Adobe have become arrogant this will make them worse I will not sign up to a subscription model which is where LR is headed.
Bought Capture One which Pros use from Phase One and its a great tool much easier than LR embrace the "little guy" if you want competition.
Bought Capture One which Pros use from Phase One and its a great tool much easier than LR embrace the "little guy" if you want competition.
Wow. Enough chest pounding. We get it, you're a pro. Great.
2M images? You don't take the trash out much. Guess I could do that too, but that many pics is unmanageable. Period.
Sorry, but what a load of tosh! We all know, what Photoshop is, but it seems you don't. Good luck organizing and structuring your 2M pic library with the 'industry standard' Photoshop
And good luck with the non destructive saves in TIFFs or JPG if you decide later down the road to change a few edits.
Sorry, but you have no clue what your are talking about.
The "They" I was talking about weren't selling anything...
You need onsite and offsite backup to guard against fire
EDIT: (which I guess isn't multiple forms of backup if that offsite backup is still hard drives which I guess is ok...)
If you want to know about professional workflow, then knowing about DAM is essential. This conversation if you boil it down is not at all about PS, it is about DAM. The reason why many of us do not want to move to LR is because how the files are organized.
In 1985 I was hot swapping floppies on the top end Tandy 1000. Digital photography didn't exist then, I was shooting film.
----------
Pros certainly do use Aperture.
----------
Yes, but backblaze is just $5.00/month for unlimited back-ups; let me repeat that - unlimited backups. If you are taking the back-up HDD to the safety deposit box or grandmothers house, how often are you doing that? Even once a day is not often enough if you are a professional.
Last edited:
I'm not on the Aperture dev team, so all I have is my hunches, obviously, but I'm pretty sure it's all sorted out by NSBitmapImageRep. As long as they keep that Cocoa class alive, then Aperture should benefit I'd suspect.
From my perspective though, it only gives me a little more time to consider my options, it's not a long term solution. Maybe it'll give me enough runway to see what the first updates to Photos looks like. The sooner I can stop putting images into Aperture though, the fewer images I'll have at risk.
You have the wrong idea about what a raw file is. A JPEG (compressed lossy data) is just a converted manipulated RAW (uncompressed sensor data) file, just that instead of you doing the manipulation, the camera does it for you using preset defaults.
Whether or not someone does heavy manipulation after that can be done to either RAW or JPEG images.
The other guy did 500k images over 8 years, I wonder how someone reaches that number of photos, let alone 2M...
I'd have to spray and pray to get that many pics or do time lapse. I wonder what the average life was of those cameras to get to 2m photos, did they die at the average 300k shots? Do you just get the camera fixed or buy a new one?
Also how many hard drives, inc. backups, that must be about 10-25 TB.
----------
I've never disagreed with that...
Granted there will be some loss in tool suites, but the user will have to adjust to the new software. The same tools are there, just in different places and they work in different ways. I wouldn't say it's trivial, god no. It's anything but trivial. It's just making the best of an awkward situation.
It's amazing the level of ignorance of these forums. Aperture and Photoshop NEVER did compete with one another. In fact Apertures has a preference field where you can specify your "default image editor" and I would guess that a great many people have Photoshop in that field.
I aperture you can double click an image and then it comes of inside your "default editor" which might Photoshop.
On the other hand Photoshop is completely lacks any ability to organize photos into a library, that is Aperture's job.
As for "standard" file formats. Apertures keeps the photos in the SAME files they came off the camera. For me that would be Nikon's raw "NEF" files. Aperture does not have a file format for storing images if uses TIFF, JPG, NEF and I thing even Adobe PSD files.
Anyway it hardly matters any more. People will be switching to maybe Capture One Pro 7. Or if you can stand the subscription pricing Light Room.
Who was that guy who claims to be in the business for decades and did not know what "DAM" was? That's fair, no one used that term in the film days. "DAM" is a digital assets Magager. Adobe has one that call "bridge" Apple has one called "Aperture" and there are MANY of them. It the film era I used to use"print file" pages in three ring binder boxes. I've been using Aperture AND as I said Aperture seamlessly integrates with Photoshop.
It's going to replace iPhoto, Aperture is just collateral damage. Apple is *not* a company that makes professional equipment or software or is moving out of the few vestiges that it still holds in that particular area.
Some saner thoughts on all of this:
https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos#.U6-j3o2wJgV
and
https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/28/comment-follow-demise-aperture#.U6-kHI2wJgU
But my own investigation took me back to the WWDC Keynote, where they demonstrated the simple interface of Photos and offered a peak behind the curtain at the deeper software underneath.
The simple interface has a"Light" slider and a "Color" slider. Want to adjust an image? The software will brighten or darken or saturate or desaturate your image when you adjust that slider. But they showed, without going into too much detail, that these smart adjustments were actually several adjustments made in concert with each other. So making the image brighter with the "Light" slider might actually adjust the exposure up but the highlights down, while boosting shadows and contrast. All handled automagiclally with that one slider and based on the content of the image, to keep it looking good. But you have access to all of those sliders if you want that.
So I looked at the interface of the OSX Photos in the UI still that was released yesterday, and here's what I found:
Under the "Light" slider, you have: Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Brightness, Contrast, and Blacks.
Under the "Color" slider, you have: Saturation, Contrast, and Cast. Note: this "contrast" is shown having a different value than in the Light heading, leading me to guess that it is color contrast, or what Lightroom calls "Vibrance."
Under the "Black and White" heading, Hue Strength, Neutral Boost, Photo Tone, and Grain.
Definition and Vignette have sliders.
White Balance can be selected ("Neutral Gray" is shown) and Warmth has a slider.
There is also a five point levels tool with a monochrome histogram. This is in addition to the 6-color histogram at the top of the UI.
These are all shown to be the tools in one of four toolsets on the far right of the UI. The other icons are Crop, Band-Aid, and a three-circle Venn Diagram icon ("effects" in iOS iPhoto).
So that's plenty to work with. More than Aperture, in fact.
Reminding myself of the Aperture UI by visiting the product page (I no longer have it installed, having switched to LR years back), the adjustment tools there are:
White Balance ("Natural Gray" selected) with a warmth slider. Identical in Photos.
Exposure, Recovery, Black Point, and Brightness. All but Recovery is in Photos, but Photos has Highlights and Shadows.
Contrast, Definition, Saturation, and Vibrancy: All but Vibrancy is in Photos, but I'm guessing the "Color Contrast" is exactly Vibrancy.
Tint has no obvious analogue in Photos from the still that was released.
So there we go. No guarantee, obviously, but I'm willing to bet that importing an image library from Aperture will see edits transitioned seamlessly, or at least as seamlessly as the move from Aperture 2 to Aperture 3. And haven't people been clamoring for a new, more-feature-rich version of APerture for years now? It seems to be called Photos.
https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos#.U6-j3o2wJgV
and
https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/28/comment-follow-demise-aperture#.U6-kHI2wJgU
But my own investigation took me back to the WWDC Keynote, where they demonstrated the simple interface of Photos and offered a peak behind the curtain at the deeper software underneath.
The simple interface has a"Light" slider and a "Color" slider. Want to adjust an image? The software will brighten or darken or saturate or desaturate your image when you adjust that slider. But they showed, without going into too much detail, that these smart adjustments were actually several adjustments made in concert with each other. So making the image brighter with the "Light" slider might actually adjust the exposure up but the highlights down, while boosting shadows and contrast. All handled automagiclally with that one slider and based on the content of the image, to keep it looking good. But you have access to all of those sliders if you want that.
So I looked at the interface of the OSX Photos in the UI still that was released yesterday, and here's what I found:
Under the "Light" slider, you have: Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Brightness, Contrast, and Blacks.
Under the "Color" slider, you have: Saturation, Contrast, and Cast. Note: this "contrast" is shown having a different value than in the Light heading, leading me to guess that it is color contrast, or what Lightroom calls "Vibrance."
Under the "Black and White" heading, Hue Strength, Neutral Boost, Photo Tone, and Grain.
Definition and Vignette have sliders.
White Balance can be selected ("Neutral Gray" is shown) and Warmth has a slider.
There is also a five point levels tool with a monochrome histogram. This is in addition to the 6-color histogram at the top of the UI.
These are all shown to be the tools in one of four toolsets on the far right of the UI. The other icons are Crop, Band-Aid, and a three-circle Venn Diagram icon ("effects" in iOS iPhoto).
So that's plenty to work with. More than Aperture, in fact.
Reminding myself of the Aperture UI by visiting the product page (I no longer have it installed, having switched to LR years back), the adjustment tools there are:
White Balance ("Natural Gray" selected) with a warmth slider. Identical in Photos.
Exposure, Recovery, Black Point, and Brightness. All but Recovery is in Photos, but Photos has Highlights and Shadows.
Contrast, Definition, Saturation, and Vibrancy: All but Vibrancy is in Photos, but I'm guessing the "Color Contrast" is exactly Vibrancy.
Tint has no obvious analogue in Photos from the still that was released.
So there we go. No guarantee, obviously, but I'm willing to bet that importing an image library from Aperture will see edits transitioned seamlessly, or at least as seamlessly as the move from Aperture 2 to Aperture 3. And haven't people been clamoring for a new, more-feature-rich version of APerture for years now? It seems to be called Photos.
@Wiyum - Exactly....
At first I was deeply disappointed by the news...but thinking about it rationally, doing some investigation in what was really said, what was announced at WWDC, what new frameworks have started to appear in Yosemite (lens correction, noise reduction anyone)
I'm actually getting rather excited about this prospect with even tighter integration and sharing across end user devices, better sharing of the libraries, more core functionality than there is now...
Yes little is known about DAM, key wording capability etc and I hope that the flexible management that we are used to will reappear and improve in Photos.
Until such time I won't be migrating anything, we know there will be a Yosemite update for Aperture so it continues to work, and once Photos is released the decision to migrate or not could be made then...
No need to move to Lightroom and its clunky interface just yet...
PS. I'm loving the comments by the self proclaimed Pro Oh dear oh dear, lets hope the photography is better than the comprehension on what this is about...
At first I was deeply disappointed by the news...but thinking about it rationally, doing some investigation in what was really said, what was announced at WWDC, what new frameworks have started to appear in Yosemite (lens correction, noise reduction anyone)
I'm actually getting rather excited about this prospect with even tighter integration and sharing across end user devices, better sharing of the libraries, more core functionality than there is now...
Yes little is known about DAM, key wording capability etc and I hope that the flexible management that we are used to will reappear and improve in Photos.
Until such time I won't be migrating anything, we know there will be a Yosemite update for Aperture so it continues to work, and once Photos is released the decision to migrate or not could be made then...
No need to move to Lightroom and its clunky interface just yet...
PS. I'm loving the comments by the self proclaimed Pro
Oh dear oh dear, lets hope the photography is better than the comprehension on what this is about...
Well we know the photos app will feature extensibility so in theory existing plugin makers will be able to update their plugins to be compatible with the new Photos application.
But will Apple offer a "pro" type plugin that gives us the features of Aperture? Seems unlikely.
But will Apple offer a "pro" type plugin that gives us the features of Aperture? Seems unlikely.
PS. I'm loving the comments by the self proclaimed Pro
I don't even take it seriously when someone starts a sentence with "I'm a pro". As a matter of fact I don't even know what this term means or should mean in 2014.
If you can show me good work it means you have the knowledge and understanding. That is enough for me and I couldn't give a bigger **** how or where you keep your photos.