juanm

macrumors 68000
May 1, 2006
1,602
3,041
Fury 161
Other developers that are actively coding image editing plug-ins for Aperture include:
Image Trends Fisheye-Hemi

YES!!! I was about to buy it for Photoshop. Now I can dump Nikon Capture!!!
 
Comment

atari1356

macrumors 68000
Feb 27, 2004
1,582
32
Wow, a pretty impressive update for a ".1" release... can't wait to try out the Dodge/Burn plugin. Looks like it's time for me to bring the old Wacom tablet back out of the closet.

Being able to specify the default adjustment set will be very nice.

Plus, I was disappointed that you couldn't go further with the vignette tool... so, it's great that they expanded it's range of settings.
 
Comment

Abstract

macrumors Penryn
Dec 27, 2002
24,624
489
Location Location Location
Should I quickly jump ship from Lightroom? Dang!

Actually, I'm OK with Nikon Capture NX, PS, and Lightroom. I guess it would be cool to try Aperture 2. I really didn't like Aperture 1.x
 
Comment

TuffLuffJimmy

macrumors G3
Apr 6, 2007
9,010
46
Portland, OR
Should I quickly jump ship from Lightroom? Dang!

Actually, I'm OK with Nikon Capture NX, PS, and Lightroom. I guess it would be cool to try Aperture 2. I really didn't like Aperture 1.x

Now I feel like aperture is a lightroom and photoshop replacement.

It is by no means a full photoshop replacement, and if you do the more powerful and in depth photoshop tools aperture is no replacement. But with a plug-in architecture I can see Aperture as a good replacement for most people.
 
Comment

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,836
623
Redondo Beach, California
Does Aperture still only export to .mac? I couldn't find anything in regard to this.

Aperture can use "export plug-ins". There are many of these available. In fact every major photo web site seems to have an Aperture plug in. Also it is easy to write your own as Apple has a development kit with sample export plg ins that can be modified.

Of couse you can always export to the desktop or a folder and from there put the photos any place you want.
 
Comment

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,836
623
Redondo Beach, California
I don't think I like the way the plug-ins work. Apple should have insisted that they be non-destructive. But now, because they do change pixels what happens if I want to use two plug-in effects on an image? Say I do the noise reduction followed by dodge/burn and then deside to go back and change the setting on the noise reduction. I loose all my dodge/burn adjustments and have to re-do them.

Destructive plug ins are not as usfull as people are thinking. The system that Photoshop has is much better where you stack layers, at any time you can go back and re-work just one layer.

It did not have to be this way. I can think of a plug-in API that would allow for non-destructive adjustmants. Basically the plug in would return a multi-chanel mask and a "call back" that would apply the mask to the raw image. The user's brush strokes woud be preserved in the mask rather then in a versioned image. Non-destructive plug ins were technicaly possable
 
Comment

happydude

macrumors 65816
Sep 2, 2006
1,106
579
a gasping dying planet
what's the feedback of Aperture 2.0 (2.1 now). Is it worth upgrading from 1.5? I haven't even played around with 2.0 so just wondering what people's general impression is.
 
Comment

sblasl

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Apr 25, 2004
844
0
Heber Springs, AR
"Apple has also posted a nice tutorial video outlining the use of their pre-packaged Dodge and Burn plugin. If you have already done the upgrade to 2.1 you can try out the plugin for yourself by selecting an image, and then choosing Images->Edit With->Dodge and Burn.

This plugin will allow you to make selective area adjustments to your images using a specialized dialog box. Once you click save, your image will be saved as a new TIFF file and stacked along with its original Master image."

I don't think I like the way the plug-ins work. Apple should have insisted that they be non-destructive. But now, because they do change pixels what happens if I want to use two plug-in effects on an image? Say I do the noise reduction followed by dodge/burn and then deside to go back and change the setting on the noise reduction. I loose all my dodge/burn adjustments and have to re-do them.

Destructive plug ins are not as usfull as people are thinking. The system that Photoshop has is much better where you stack layers, at any time you can go back and re-work just one layer.

It did not have to be this way. I can think of a plug-in API that would allow for non-destructive adjustmants. Basically the plug in would turn a multi-chanel mask and a "call back" that would apply the mask to the raw image. The user's brush strokes woud be preserved in the mask rather then in a versioned image. Non-destructive plug ins were technicaly possable
 
Comment

ipedro

macrumors 603
Nov 30, 2004
5,556
6,826
Toronto, ON
what's the feedback of Aperture 2.0 (2.1 now). Is it worth upgrading from 1.5? I haven't even played around with 2.0 so just wondering what people's general impression is.

Absolutely worth it, specially if you have a large library. Even more if you work on a laptop.

The preview mode is lightening fast which allows me to very quickly go through a project with 1000+ images in my "first pass" to delete, stack and rate images for the next more in depth pass.
If you're on a small screen (I use Aperture on a 15" MacBook Pro), you'll appreciate the new cleanliness of the interface. Grouping the Projects, Metadata and Adjustments in one tabbed structure saves tons of screen real estate. I rarely (never?) need them all open at once. Hitting "W" cycles through them.

I couldn't go back to Aperture 1 now that I've upgraded. That's a good indicator that it was worth the upgrade.
 
Comment

orangermac

macrumors newbie
Feb 10, 2007
11
0
Destructive?!

I too was thinking of buying Aperture for these abilities, but that was when I thought they were non-destructive, like the clone tools. This would be a killer feature. Unfortunately, baking changes works against the greatest strength of these new bread of photo programs. :(

I'm really looking forward to barrel and pincushion distortion correction. Hope Lightroom and Adobe Camera RAW get this soon.

Both Aperture and Lightroom already allow us to make virtual copies of images. What would be great is if there were a way to define a feathered vector path that will allow one to blend two virtual copies on either side. of the path. That wouldn't be much extra data for the recipe... a bit longer to preview, but the cahced version could still come up quickly...
 
Comment

bobbleheadbob

macrumors 6502a
Feb 6, 2007
653
0
Massachusetts
what's the feedback of Aperture 2.0 (2.1 now). Is it worth upgrading from 1.5? I haven't even played around with 2.0 so just wondering what people's general impression is.

I like it A LOT better than 1.5. It's much easier to use now,the interface is better, and the basic editing tools are improved. Two thumbs up for this upgrade!
:D
 
Comment

ChrisA

macrumors G4
Jan 5, 2006
11,836
623
Redondo Beach, California
I too was thinking of buying Aperture for these abilities, but that was when I thought they were non-destructive, like the clone tools. This would be a killer feature. Unfortunately, baking changes works against the greatest strength of these new bread of photo programs. :(

Yes it does work against Aperure's greatest strength. I'm surprized at Apple's implementation. There was no technical reason that forcedd it to be this way. But on the other had these plug-ins work no worse than "round tripping" to Photoshop. That s destructive too.
 
Comment

Michael73

macrumors 65816
Feb 27, 2007
1,081
41
Near Beer

I'm really torn about the wholle plug-in thing. On one hand this is great but on the other it moves Aperture farther away from what it's really designed to be IMHO which is a photo management tool. Sure it's always had some basic photo post-production functions but the addition of plug-ins moves this closer to photo management / true post-production tool. The problem is that they may be trying to bolt on too many pieces. The other is cost. If each of the plug-ins are sold seperately and you begin to drop $120 here and $79 there, pretty soon wouldn't you be better off just buying the real deal and getting Photoshop. Or, at even a fraction of the cost why not get the new Elements 6 for the price of less than 1 plug-in?!?
 
Comment

Analog Kid

macrumors 603
Mar 4, 2003
6,031
5,295
I don't see any mention of fixing how Aperture plays with Time Machine. I know they worked around the original problem where the two would conflict and damage your library, but they did it rather coarsely. The library is now excluded from backups while Aperture is running, then I get a 160GB sync when I close Aperture down.

Apple really needs to get these to play together more nicely. Vaults are too cumbersome when Time Machine has made backups of all my far less important data so wonderfully painless.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.