Apple Ending Development on Aperture as Upcoming Photos App for OS X Will Replace iPhoto

[maflynn]

If this follows past patterns:

- The new Photos app will do 99% of what people used Aperture for.

- But not in version one! (There's is SOME hope that the delay of Photos to 2015 makes this not true, but the past pattern is: clean start, then build from there. We saw it with Final Cut on the pro side and iWork on the consumer side when the new version re-gained lost AppleScript tools.)

- But Aperture won't suddenly evaporate. People who need it can keep using it until Photos is ready.

Agreed, just look at iWork, as an example.

As for Aperture suddenly evaporate, it may since Apple isn't going to update it and updates to OSX may render it non functioning. I think those of us who rely on Aperture need to tread very carefully with system updates until we move off of the application.

 

[Small White Car]

Apple is also working with Adobe to create a transitionary workflow to help users shift to Lightroom.

Ok, well I'm happy.

I've been wanting to switch to Lightroom for awhile now (due to Apple's lack of updates) but it's so much damn work.

If this works consider me pleased.

 

[Kebabselector]

Guess I'll never do any professional photographic editing, then. I refuse to give Adobe any money.

Strange decision when they make the industry standard tools.

 

[SHNXX]

I guess the pro photographer market is too niche for apple.

This is 2014 and apple is no longer the small company that makes niche products.
They are a huge company with a market cap that is one of the biggest in the world and a huge cash pile.

 

[scottwaugh]

I hope Final Cut and Logic are not next on the chopping block.

It would probably be wise to have fall back plans (thought out and documented) if you use these applications, just in case that eventuality occurs - the pro apps don't directly support the sale of iThings, which seems to be the reason for standalone software offerings from Apple these days.

In the mean time, Aperture will continue to work for the foreseeable future (hopefully beyond Yosemite).

The Photo's app is a replacement for iPhoto, not Aperture and if what we saw recently is any guide I wouldn't be suprised to see a loss of capabilities from iPhoto (11?). Sad.

How long till Adobe makes Lightroom subscription only now?

 

[britboyj]

I think what I meant is clear though: in a short time Apple will not be a professional's choice anymore.

Oh please.

People said that about Final Cut X and I still see companies buying Apple products for video editing day in, day out. Maybe they're not using FCX (though many still are, after the teething period) but this is simply overblown.

Business sales actually makes up a larger and larger portion of Apple's sales every year.

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

I suspect that Apple is holding back info and will surprise us all early next year. Qe shall see.

 

[Northgrove]

This new Photos app better be DAMN good if they're killing off Aperture.

It's not going to be. It's going to be some iPhoto-like BS that isn't even relevant. Apple demo'ed it and showed how smoothly the library scrolled (!?) as an example of how damn powerful it was. They exemplified the feature set with how beautifully some adjustments mirrored a mobile phone app.

That focus ought to set your expectations.

Even as a Lightroom user, this is upsetting since this market lacks competition. Lightroom pulled ahead of Aperture in terms of features, but Aperture was always the better tool when it came to user experience in my opinion.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

You have a strange definition of "pro" if you don't include wedding videographers in that...

Not strange if you've seen some of the "pro" wedding videos I've had to endure over the years. Cheesy, cliché, and worst of all, boring. And they are almost always the same formula. Sorry, just because one shoots with a $4000 professional video camera and collects $ doesn't make them pro. It's their profession maybe, but of unoriginal amateurish quality.

But back to Aperture. It was launched as a pro event, priced for pros. It was meant to be pro software -- just as FCPX. But Apple dropped the price on both and they became accessible to hobbyists. Aperture can be just as tricky as FCPX but neither are rocket science.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Agreed, just look at iWork, as an example.

As for Aperture suddenly evaporate, it may since Apple isn't going to update it and updates to OSX may render it non functioning. I think those of us who rely on Aperture need to tread very carefully with system updates until we move off of the application.

The transition to Lightroom is actually quite easy.

Although, I agree, Aperture isn't just going to stop functioning on current systems, although users that may want to buy it won't be able to once it's gone. Or should I say shouldn't until they see this Photos app.

Now, as for moving out of Aperture, you can be sure that the Photos app will be crippled like the other poster mentioned, and folks will be moaning and groaning until they just switch or adapt.

 

[ronwasserman]

Happy they're dumping iPhoto. It's slow and feels outdated.

 

[Northgrove]

Oh please.

People said that about Final Cut X and I still see companies buying Apple products for video editing day in, day out. Maybe they're not using FCX (though many still are, after the teething period) but this is simply overblown.

Business sales actually makes up a larger and larger portion of Apple's sales every year.

Maybe you're missing in that comparison that an Aperture X isn't even on the roadmap.

But yes, photo pros will use Lightroom. Because hey, what choice do they have?

 

[fuchsdh]

Not strange if you've seen some of the "pro" wedding videos I've had to endure over the years. Cheesy, cliché, and worst of all, boring. And they are almost always the same formula. Sorry, just because one shoots with a $4000 professional video camera and collects $ doesn't make them pro. It's their profession maybe, but of unoriginal amateurish quality.

I would have thought wedding photography would have gotten better as of late, just because I know a lot of former pro photogs who were forced into the wedding business to pay bills after stock photo houses disrupted the industry. Maybe now cheap DSLRs have swung the pendulum back again.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

This new Photos app better be DAMN good if they're killing off Aperture.

I take it it won't be a reasonable replacement for pros, if they're working with Adobe to come up with a transitional workflow from Aperture to Lightroom.

 

[Bilbo63]

I've been using Aperture as well, but to be honest, wasn't overly thrilled with it. In the meantime I got very comfortable with Camera Raw in Photoshop and that was the gateway drug to Lightroom whose develop module is nearly identical.

Personally I much prefer Lightroom over Aperture anyway and have already began the switch. The Photo pros that I know seem to overwhelmingly prefer Lightroom as well. The writing was on the wall given Apple has let Aperture collect dust in the corner the last few years. At least we finally know now.

It shouldn't be that big of a deal for most users. If Photos doesn't cut it for you, Lightroom is a great option and the learning curve is not that steep.

 

[numlock]

Oh please.

People said that about Final Cut X and I still see companies buying Apple products for video editing day in, day out. Maybe they're not using FCX (though many still are, after the teething period) but this is simply overblown.

Business sales actually makes up a larger and larger portion of Apple's sales every year.

business as in pro users of software or business as in every desk worker having an iphone and an ipad?

since you seem so up to date on final cut how is apples marketshare now compared to before fcx?

 

[WestonHarvey1]

Not strange if you've seen some of the "pro" wedding videos I've had to endure over the years. Cheesy, cliché, and worst of all, boring. And they are almost always the same formula. Sorry, just because one shoots with a $4000 professional video camera and collects $ doesn't make them pro. It's their profession maybe, but of unoriginal amateurish quality.

I've never seen a wedding video that I liked better than a disc with a sequential dump of the raw footage.

 

[pcp_ip]

With 90,601 photos and almost 1TB of data in my Aperture library, I'm sure it's going to cost a pretty penny to store that in the cloud.

 

[winston1236]

Good call, Aperature is mainly used by amateurs anyway these days so its a good idea to just release a stock app.

 

[maflynn]

The transition to Lightroom is actually quite easy.

Although, I agree, Aperture isn't just going to stop functioning on current systems, although users that may want to buy it won't be able to once it's gone. Or should I say shouldn't until they see this Photos app.

Now, as for moving out of Aperture, you can be sure that the Photos app will be crippled like the other poster mentioned, and folks will be moaning and groaning until they just switch or adapt.

I have just about 10 years of photos in Aperture

I can transition the current stuff easy enough, its the legacy photos that's going to really cause me some headaches.

 

[Larry-K]

I've never seen a wedding video that I liked better than a disc with a sequential dump of the raw footage.

I'd rather watch security camera footage from a parking garage.

 

[akm3]

Aperture isn't going to suddenly stop working for these professionals.

That's the problem. It will continue to SLOWLY stop working for these professionals.

New camera? Nope, RAW not supported.
Use the new iCloud photos capabilities? Nope.
New plug in developments? No.

Aperture was already years behind Lightroom, and now it will never be caught up. It a stagnating pool of horribleness.

 

[Hustler1337]

So glad to hear iPhoto is being scrapped - this application is one of the SLOWEST apps I have ever used - always hogging memory, lagging and generally slow in performance. Absolutely hated using iPhoto to manage my photos.

I just hope the new Photos app is much more snappier and faster.

 

[Digital Skunk]

I guess the pro photographer market is too niche for apple.

True, but I think it always has been. Many pros got Macs because of the 3rd party software support.

Heck, even Avid was a Mac exclusive when it debuted.

Business sales actually makes up a larger and larger portion of Apple's sales every year.

Most major post houses can't use FCPX. They couldn't use FCS3 and maybe had a system or two here and there, but for the most part it was Avid and their Unity system from day one.

Smaller houses usually ended up with Adobe since After Effects is still king in that market space.

FCPX was a blip on most post house's radars.

since you seem so up to date on final cut how is apples marketshare now compared to before fcx?

I agree, and I would put money on it being about the same. Some folks will use FCPX and some boutique shops are cutting with FCPX on some DAS boxes in isolated edit suites.

 

[saba01]

I would not mind when the new app can be used without iCloud. We do something around 100.000 to 200000 pics a shoot, our recent Aperture gallery has over 6TB of media. I just don't see that it is possible to upload this to the cloud....And as a pro we do not need pictures on our phones.....LR we use for finishing up the (for) production photo's but LR is useless for sorting that amount out.