Apple Releases Aperture

[mainemike]

Exactly.

Can photoshop do this on its own? Well everything save actually managing a library of photos, but these two products do complement each other. Where they overlap it appears that Apple has focused a lot of effort to ensuring it is better; that still leaves Photoshop its core competencies as its role in your workflow.

Well said.

I work as a professional photographer and Aperture looks very promising indeed. I looked at each product page for Aperture today (along with all of the associated QT movies) and I'm convinced that I'm going to have to purchase it. It appears to be the post-production solution I've been wanting for several years now. Should work beautifully in conjunction with Photoshop; not a replacement nor is it designed to be.

 

[studiographiko]

I agree. I can't see why people are comparing this to Adobe Photoshop. After reading about it and watching the demos, it looks to me like something aimed at Phase One's Capture One PRO software. Sure it does appear to be a lot better than Bridge and Camera RAW, but we'll see once it's actually shipping. I would hope that a $500 dedicated app would be better.

But I still don't see how a pro photographer wouldn't still need Adobe Photoshop. Hell, I'm not even a pro (just a hobbyist) and there are transforms and affects I use that still would require Photoshop.

Unless you do illustration work, digital paint work, image compositing or lots of heavy retouching, it may not factor that heavily. But if you're strictly a shooter, then you probably already have Photoshop in place. The shooters WILL be comparing the two.

I think most pro shooters aren't interested in the effects. I want to get as clean an image out of the camera with as little grief as possible. Sharpening, noise reduction, color balance, exposure and spot retouching dust are about it. I feel even more heavy manipulation, like removing facial blemishes, wrinkles in clothing and the like are a bit "outside" of the photographer's realm. I'm done being the photographer, now I'm the retoucher. Here goes the "retouchers" hat, just like the "film lab" hat and the "photo printer" hat that I've been required to wear now that it's all digital. That's one thing I like about Aperture, its feature set is geared toward the photographer. I don't have to ignore the "Type on a path" tool. But that's why I think this is a replacement for Photoshop--as far as a photographer is concerned. Woe be the shooter who just sunk his cash on CS2. But when it comes to the rest of the uses for Photoshop, the painting and type effects, Aperture is a non-issue. It doesn't go there.

 

[Lacero]

The look in Aperture is money!

Reminds me of Shake with the dark neutral UI and non-modal HUD. I think the HUD is like all the rage for Apple's pro apps now.

Lovely. Aperature looks mostly like a photo management tool, and a really good one at that. Fills a void where Photoshop and Bridge left off. Never thought I'd need this product, but looks like a winner to me.

 

[CalfCanuck]

Bang on, Apple!

I agree, it does look great - let's hope there are no surprises in the final product. It's all about the taking images and then managing/manipulating them in a digital darkroom. It looks like the emphasis on RAW, a vastly improved workflow, non-destructive editing, and easy integrated backups for massive amounts (as we are now shooting GB's of data each day) of data are GREAT.

As I posted on the initial updates thread, this is the biggest part of this update, and should do for digital photography what Final Cut Pro did for digital video.

As for the $500 price, it's a bargain. For me, anything under $500 is an impulse purchase if it makes my work flow better. I've got a $5000 Cumulus server sitting on my shelf, that never really integrated too well into my particular situation.

 

[ktlx]

I think most pro shooters aren't interested in the effects. I want to get as clean an image out of the camera with as little grief as possible. Sharpening, noise reduction, color balance, exposure and spot retouching dust are about it.

If that's all a "pro shooter" cares about, then why would they be replacing Adobe Phothshop to begin with? Prior to CS2, a "pro shooter" would have been stuck with (at best) the File Browser and Camera RAW 2.x or worse. Those stunk for any kind of volume work, so it's hard for me to believe any pro focused only on a basic raw workflow (i.e. raw to TIFF or something similar) isn't already using something else.

 

[CalfCanuck]

I think most pro shooters aren't interested in the effects. I want to get as clean an image out of the camera with as little grief as possible. Sharpening, noise reduction, color balance, exposure and spot retouching dust are about it.

I couldn't agree more. Can't ever remember ever using 99 % of the Filters in PS, and I've been a power user since PS 2.0 (before layers and multiple undos, when applying anything was destructive - HA, those were the days!).

The other reality is that RAW allows us to get that cleaner image (with white balance, exposure compensation, etc) much easier, so there's less tweaking inside PS to try to "readjust" an image.

 

[mac-er]

Where is iGary on this thread?

 

[CalfCanuck]

If that's all a "pro shooter" cares about, then why would they be replacing Adobe Phothshop to begin with? Prior to CS2, a "pro shooter" would have been stuck with (at best) the File Browser and Camera RAW 2.x or worse. Those stunk for any kind of volume work, so it's hard for me to believe any pro focused only on a basic raw workflow (i.e. raw to TIFF or something similar) isn't already using something else.

Well, we're all using our own variations, but it looks like Aperture hit the nail on the head! One thing I really liked, and no one appears to be talking about, is the Vault backups. While I use Retrospect, this appears to save both the original files, as well as the non-destructive "change order", inside the Vault.

This move to non-destructive (I know it's not the first) is a very interesting one for APple, more like FCP or pro audio programs.

 

[Judo]

This program is more powerful for image manipulation than photoshop.

No it isn't. Color correction and fixing spots maybe. But photo manipulation, absolutely not.

 

[Village]

anyone catch the aussie naration in this guided tour?

http://www.apple.com/aperture/quicktours/

He said: "Metadat-er", lol

 

[Lacero]

No it isn't. Color correction and fixing spots maybe. But photo manipulation, absolutely not.

He probably meant file manipulation. PS is better at pixel and colorspace manipulation.

Aperature does seem to have really robust ICC control and color management tools. We'll have to see if Pro photographers and design agencies agree.

 

[ajshades]

Look at it this way. Apple carries two lines of computers and usually 3 lines of software.

Consumer Hardware- mac mini, iBook, and iMac
Professional Hardware- powerbook, Powermac

Consumer Software- iLife
Prosumer Software- FinalCut Express, Logic Express, Photoshop Elements. etc.
Professional Software- FinalCut Studio, Logic, Aperture, Photoshop CS

You bought an ibook, a consumer level computer, Apple doesn't have to cater its professional software to you, it was your mistake to buy a consumer level laptop and hope it will last to do professional level work. The Powerbooks aren't just powerbooks because there lightweight and thin, its because they're much more expandable to meet a professional workflow. As for Apple being hypocritical with the iMac being able to run Apeture, well, I guess you need a G5 to really process all those ridiculous RAW images. All in all, its your fault for buying a consumer model and expect to be catered to with professional software.

Excuse me? It's my fault?

No sir. I purchased the ibook because for the money it was the best deal. There is not nearly enough diffrence between the powerbook and ibook.

.2 more processor speed and only a slightly better graphics card (more memory I know)? Due monitors is great, but 90% of the time my computer is moblie not tied to a desktop. Sorry, not worth the money.

You totally are misunderstanding.

I ALREDY use the following programs: FinalCut Studio, DVD Studio Pro, Motion 2, Photoshop, Illustrator and Indesign CS.

Don't tell me it's my fault for buying a "consumer" machine. I bought this computer because the powerbook is NOT worth the money.

I am saying apple did a bad job of who they are trying to market this product to.

I can already edit video and burn dvd's, and use all of these "pro" applications and yet I can't use a "pro" application that deals with photographs?

It's like saying you can ride your drive your car but you can't ride your bike to the store. I am already doing more advanced things with my computer yet apple short hands users again for not having "the right equipment".

Apple has goten increasingly more agessive with thier software over the last 3 years. Soon it will be as bad that if you don't have a computer put out in the last 6 months you can't use the latest apps.

If they do it for one, they should do it for all. I should be able to run all pro apps or no pro apps.

 

[Judo]

He probably meant file manipulation. PS is better at pixel and colorspace manipulation.

Aperature does seem to have really robust ICC control and color management tools. We'll have to see if Pro photographers and design agencies agree.

Maybe. It was his comparason to Photoshop that kinda threw me off a bit.

Aperture looks like some awesome software. I love the nondestructive image-processing, and the way it organises them.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Ya know, apple really burns my hide sometime.

So I've got a brand new ibook. G4 1.4 - 1 gig ram etc

I can run programs like motion, final cut pro, dvd studio - etc.

I can edit video and I can edit HD video for sakes

But I can't work with Photographs? A program I need more than I need the video editing stuff?

Come on apple.

You're leaving alot of people in the dark with that program.

(I don't wanna hear how it's a "pro" app either - to me that term doesn't mean squat. - I do all the "pro" things with my ibook just fine)

RAR

And you could edit a feature length movie on an 2 year old eMac and iMovie. Does that mean that Apple, when developing brand new software aimed a professionals, should keep 2 year old eMacs in mind?


Lethal

 

[ajshades]

And you could edit a feature length movie on an 2 year old eMac and iMovie. Does that mean that Apple, when developing brand new software aimed a professionals, should keep 2 year old eMacs in mind?


Lethal

No but they shouldn't leave out brand new computers that already run "pro" applications.

 

[iMeowbot]

4.) This is for photographers only. The designers that also wear the "photographer" hat are going to get annoyed with this quickly because it's ANOTHER way to manage content, most designers already have a working system for entire projects (including photos). If this stores images anything like iPhoto i can see people getting pissed of quickly.

Yeah, it's this deal with yet another self contained database for assets that's already making me cringe. So it's yet another place where finished bits and pieces will have to be exported, meaning that there's yet more duplication and information that will inevitably get out of sync. Blech!

 

[Bern]

Take a look at the interview with Rob Schoeben at Macworld regarding Apple's take on Aperture and Photoshop. Maybe that will help clear some confusion.

 

[ctzInsane]

Unbelievable!

They did it again!!! I am really crying right now looking at all this quick tours!!! Fantastic!!! Go Apple go!

 

[JCT]

And you could edit a feature length movie on an 2 year old eMac and iMovie. Does that mean that Apple, when developing brand new software aimed a professionals, should keep 2 year old eMacs in mind?

This is exactly the point. Holy cow, don't some folks realize how great Apple has been with their backward-compatible software? On the PC side it's "tough-luck" with tons of software updates or (heaven-forfend) games.

This app will probably "run" on the iBook, but photo manipulation is completely hands-on except for a few batch processes. With a video render the extended time issues may not matter since you can just leave it running and go elsewhere, thus, the slow performance is not as big a deal. Working with a photo manipulation program on minimal hardware would be unpleasant.

The people that this App is designed for need speed (less post-production = more shooting time) so Apple pushed the specs to deliver the goods to the targeted individuals. And they don't use iBooks.

JT

 

[Lacero]

Aperature is about SPEED!

Those photographers who remained leery of digital photography because of the amount of time it took to work with RAW files, I think Aperature will change how they view their workflow. I am hearing that Aperature is so fast, film photographers are seriously considering moving over to all digital workflows.

 

[iEric]

i cannot believe that the price for educators and students for this program is discounted so much!

CAD$599 to $299!! that's amazing.

and btw, there are a lot of diffs between photoshop and aperture, yet there are some similarities, but together they make an excellent program. wait for aperture 2!

also, even though photoshop is a pro photography app, the managment of photos is poor. look at how aperture does it - everything is SO streamlined and neat. love it. too bad i dont need it. lol

 

[ctzInsane]

So... when should i expect Apple pro image manipulating app now?

 

[Platform]

WOW.......sweet app

iGary where are you

 

[studiographiko]

If that's all a "pro shooter" cares about, then why would they be replacing Adobe Phothshop to begin with? Prior to CS2, a "pro shooter" would have been stuck with (at best) the File Browser and Camera RAW 2.x or worse. Those stunk for any kind of volume work, so it's hard for me to believe any pro focused only on a basic raw workflow (i.e. raw to TIFF or something similar) isn't already using something else.

Fundamental image correction is what pro shooters care about MOSTLY, not all, MOSTLY--that, and not having to gnaw their own arm off to achieve it. For many of my friends, it's been a supremely bumpy ride. Between considering the software, the hardware, the color calibration, the stuff that's "supposed" to be their pictures spewing out of the Epson printer--the list goes on--, anything that will make it go faster, make sense of the huge pile of discreet images files floating on the desktop, and flatten out what seems to be an unending wave of learning curves, will make it worth switching to. Yeah, I can drop in a different sky in Photoshop, or move a mail box over a couple of feet, but that's not speaking to me as a photographer is it? The more I futz around with a picture in Photoshop, the more I think I screwed up behind the camera. It's not a question of whether I NEED both of them or want both of them, I just want to replicate the results of shooting Fujichrome 100 in my old Nikon F3 as closely as possible. If Photoshop gets me there, great. If Aperture gets me there faster, better. We know what we want, we've been cobbling together solutions over the last couple of years, asset management, image editing, processes and workflows. All costly in terms of time and effort invested and it all sort of work, most of the time. So I am talking from the perspective of a fairly entrenched Photoshop user. We put together the best solution that was available at the time. But if Aperture will get me there faster and easier, why not? I don't want more stuff on the computer, I want less stuff. As little as I can get away with.

 

[ericschmerick]

WOW - I just watched the various quicktime demos of the software, and my reaction was - holy moses, this is how image processing workflow should have been done all along. Raw workflow has been the buzz of nearly every pro photo forum for years now, I think because it's been such a pain in the butt. This app just blows me away! I can't wait.

The image stack and organizing functions look amazing. The dual monitor support looks fabulous. The lift and stamp (or whatever it's called) looks unbelievable. I don't know what machine they used for recording the demos (perhaps the new quad), but it was fast fast. Those are D2x RAWs, and it seemed lightning fast.

This is a great example of what makes Apple unique. While everyone else is tagging on a bucket of new features to their bloated image processing and cataloging apps, Apple steps in and just completely re-thinks what people are REALLY TRYING TO DO, and the introduces something that elegantly does just that. Perfect perfect perfect.

Now, if only they'd rush the release of a 3ghz dual core intel based laptop for me to run this app with.