I read Somewhere that Aperture is Limited in Sierra?

Discussion in 'macOS Sierra (10.12)' started by jadot, Jul 11, 2016.

  1. jadot macrumors 6502

    jadot

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    In one of the broken/working apps wiki I read that Aperture is restricted (or something like) in Sierra.

    I haven't used Aperture for some time, but I still have libraries (3 or 4 libraries around 1TB each!) full of RAW files and so on...

    Anyone had any experience with Sierra and Aperture? Am I going to have to re-archive my archive?

    Thanks, J•
     
  2. Weaselboy Moderator

    Weaselboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Location:
    California
    #2
    There is a post here from a forum member saying it is working okay for them.
     
  3. Crazy Badger macrumors 65816

    Crazy Badger

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #3
    Restricted in what way? I've been using macOS since DP1 and haven't had any problems using Aperture.
     
  4. fenderbass146 macrumors 65816

    fenderbass146

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Northwest Indiana
    #4
    Just went to Europe and my wife used Aperture to edit all of our pictures on Sierra...also by the way...Whats the best option to replace Aperture. I have been telling her we are going to have to eventually. I know Lightroom is probably the best option but will require a lot of learning to get good at using it.
     
  5. comptr macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Location:
    Arizona
    #5
    Its Lightroom. I used to use aperture and when apple announced that they are discontinuing aperture, I made the switch to Lightroom and its better. You can also still find Lightroom in boxed copies so that you don't have to subscribe to adobes CC.
     
  6. Crazy Badger macrumors 65816

    Crazy Badger

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Location:
    Scotland
    #6
    Yes, I think the sensible answer is Lightroom, although I'm in the same position in that I'm hanging onto Aperture for as long as I can :D

    Capture One is another option, and having played with it a little seems a little more Aperture-like on the surface. That said, I think Lightroom is the more sensible way to go, and it's what I'll be doing when Aperture doesn't work anymore :(
     
  7. fenderbass146 macrumors 65816

    fenderbass146

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Northwest Indiana
    #7
    Yea, that's a must. I hate this subscription crap.
     
  8. chrfr macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2009
    #8
    The trouble with buying Lightroom outright is that you miss out on features added to the CC version. At $120 a year to get access to Photoshop and Lightroom, buying standalone isn't really a very good deal.
     
  9. fenderbass146 macrumors 65816

    fenderbass146

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Northwest Indiana
    #9
    $120 a year over 5 years is $600 that I will never get back. The subscription model is great for companys but shafts the customers in the long run. I refuse to do it as long as I can. I already feel shafted by Apple music and other subscription services like it. If you want to keep your music collection your forced to pay for it the rest of your life.
     
  10. mixel macrumors 65816

    mixel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Location:
    Leeds, UK
    #10
    I know a lot of people will laugh at this but Photos with its current extension support really isn't that bad. Particularly if you support projects like Affinity and Pixelmator. Having things like liquify tools and lense correction inside Photos without having to leave to do it is finally showing *why* Apple went down what seemed like a crazy path. I've been using Lightroom for years since apple dropped Aperture.. But now I just use LR for individual shoots where i know I'm going to be doing a lot of photo manipulation and keep my main family library in icloud photo library. (I export projects from LR back into Photos when needed.) Lightroom's photo syncing is all a bit "one main machine focused" and fiddly if you use a lot of different cameras and idevices. (you can set a folder to autosync to the Adobe CC but its slow and .. not ideal.. Never mind the fact that Adobe CC doesn't have any sort of decent or 2 factor security, so storing all your photos there seems a bit.. weird. Adobe don't want you do sync your entire library.. But I dont want to be doing wired photo syncs in this day and age outside of offloading from my SLR) Apples workflow between iPad+Photos, if you have a good suite of extensions in both.. IMO.. Is actually more pleasant than the equivalent with LR.

    I do really like LR though, its just overkill much of the time.
     
  11. fenderbass146 macrumors 65816

    fenderbass146

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2009
    Location:
    Northwest Indiana
    #11
    I agree, for me I am happy with Apple Photos especially since I have 4 Apple devices. I have almost gotten to a point where all of my media/data is on all my platforms automatically...really the only thing that hasn't gotten there yet is video media. (It's great, when I get a new iPhone, iPad, or even Mac I don't really have to even worry about transferring data, music with iTunes Match shows up, photos in cloud, they finally added iBooks to the cloud, documents are also in the cloud. Really the only stuff I have to worry about is my really big pc repair tools and images along with my movies. The future is here. (Obviously Applications but that a different story, depending on the app they may be in the App Store)

    Back to photos, my wife the one hanging on to aperture and I've been telling her she's going to have to make a change soon lol.
     

Share This Page