Migrating from Aperture - Capture One vs Photos & Questions

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by rick3000, Sep 9, 2016.

  1. rick3000 macrumors 6502a

    rick3000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    West Coast
    #1
    Hi Everyone!

    I have been clinging to Aperture as long as possible, but I think Sierra may be the last OS to support it (Sierra appears to have limited support), so I am beginning to look for alternatives. I really like the look of Capture One, and prefer the one time pricing vs. Adobe's subscription.

    My main questions about Capture One are:
    -What do people think of the company?
    -Do they appear to be committed to the software? ​
    I don't want to transition and have them ditch it like Apple did with Aperture. I was impressed by their quick reply to an email I sent them, were they confirmed they do not plan to switch to a subscription only model like Adobe, which is very nice to know.


    My second question has to do with the transition from Aperture:
    My managed Aperture Library is about 300GB with a file structure that mostly looks like this:
    Year > Season > Event (Project) > Best of Event (Album)​
    *The 'Best of' folders are about 75% edited images.​

    -Should I just import directly into Capture One and let that software manage everything or should I export into Folders that maintain my existing file structure then reference it in Capture One?
    -Does Capture One have the ability to import the Original and an Edited Version?

    I don't plan on going back in time to re-edit past photos, so my main concern is maintaining the file structure and any edits/versions. I am considering moving Aperture to Photos, then starting a new library with Capture One.
    -Should I consider exporting from Aperture to Photos? Should I do it managed or referenced?
    -Would Photos maintain the file structure mentioned above?​

    Thank you so much for taking the time to read/reply it is very much appreciated!
    Best,
    -Rick
     
  2. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #2
    If I were to leave Lightroom, it would not be for C1P. It would be for Photo RAW from OnOneSoftware. I will get a copy when it releases and at least use it as a plugin to Lr. But I always have the option to use it directly, not as a plugin.

    https://www.on1.com/landing/photo-raw-offer/


    Huge problem moving edits between different software apps that have different names and algorithms for editing parameters. There are no universal standards, open APIs, that let edited images move easily between all editors. And I am sure the app developers like it this way. They get to make a differentiated product that way.
     
  3. simonsi macrumors 601

    simonsi

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Auckland
    #3
    I moved to C1P from Aperture. The RAW conversion is second to none IMHO so I chose to re-process my Aperture images as I imported them.

    Phase One are committed to the software, its core to their business of high-end digital imaging equipment as a look at their website will show. Way more skin in the game than Apple ever had to Aperture.

    Photos isn't really even comparable to Aperture let alone C1P, not sure why you would see them as alternatives.

    I exported my Aperture library to Folders (ie converted it to Referenced), then imported those Folders as Referenced into C1P. New images I import into the C1P library.

    My current C1P library is approx 550GB and I have approx 450GB of Referenced images from Aperture. Approx 95k images all told.
     
  4. rick3000 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rick3000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    West Coast
    #4
    I like your two library idea of referencing the old library and letting C1P manage new photos. Can C1P automatically identify images with edits and reprocess them on import, or is that something you had to do manually?

    I was mostly looking at Photos as a photo storage/management tool for my old library, since I don't plan to go back and re-edit anything. I am wondering if Photos might be a good option for my old photos (aka - existing Aperture Library), if it could help me maintain my existing file structure.

    Thanks!
     
  5. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #5
    With a managed library of all masters in a single database package file, you really don't have a physical file structure. What you have is a series of logical groupings by year, album, project....etc. When you move to a referenced library you have to different ways to organize. The first folders and subfolders in the file system. The second way is the logical groupings by collections and collection sets or whatever names the editor gives these logical separators. So if you have not planned on the file system organization you want....good time to start that planning.
     
  6. simonsi macrumors 601

    simonsi

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Auckland
    #6
    When I did it there was an Aperture import tool in C1P but I didn't use it as I wanted to reprocess everything through C1P I setup a Style in C1P then imported them using that default style on import, worked like a charm (took 3 days though Lol).

    C1P can certainly maintain your existing file structure as a referenced library, no problems there.
     
  7. rick3000 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rick3000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    West Coast
    #7
    Thanks, I really appreciate the input.
    I'm going work on transferring my Aperture library to referenced then play with the C1P trial before I buy.
     
  8. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #8
    Good idea. Tackle moving from managed to referenced library with file system folders and subfolders first. Then you check many different apps to find the DAM/editor that best fits your needs.
     
  9. simonsi macrumors 601

    simonsi

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    Location:
    Auckland
    #9
    Why not, its the equivalent of securing the move from the Aperture-only proprietry library format to the independant referenced folders and files.

    You do understand the driver is to move away from Aperture?
     
  10. Ray2 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    #10
    Before you purchase C1 make sure it can import all of your library. I tried v7. Out of 33,000 images 1,300 jpegs and tifs would not import. At the time, v7, the filtering tools were so poor it was not possible to identify what was missing. All it would tell me was 1,300 images did not import. Problems with jpegs was a known problem at the time, don't know about current versions.

    Lightroom is my default. I still have C1. I prefer the initial demosiac in C1 but with a little work there's little to no difference. The only downside I see is C1 can take liberties with color accuracy at times. This appears to be a frequent comment. I shoot Fuji and some features in C1 don't work with Fuji's files (smart brushes). Make sure your camera is fully supported or, at least know what's not. I would not worry about their staying power. Though if you jump from one new camera to another there will times you wait for RAW support.
     
  11. Reality4711 macrumors 6502

    Reality4711

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    scotland
    #11
    Those who remember my trials and tribulations going to C1 will know that the library caused me the most hassle. In the end the fact that one person said wonderful and another would say crap my confidence finally (after three months of effort) disappeared.
    Not working professionally any more , after much deliberation and messed up images (past & present) and being unable to put it all down to operator error I decided to give it DAM+Editing software packages and look around for something more basic but powerful.
    Almost a year later and after one month of use I am now totally happy without a DAM.; using FRV (Fast Raw Viewer) on my MAC filing system and editing in Affinity Photo. Saving finished edits back to original files and using Finder to remind later. FRV only reads RAW files so any other file types are not visible to it. It takes a bit of thinking about as a method but; no lost images/no damaged files. I recognise this will not suite the Pros among us or the the avid record keeper but for an amateur "now" with no time restraints who only wants reliability and quality (Affinity IS Quality) I could not be better served.

    Regards

    Sharkey
     
  12. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #12
    I considered migrating to Phase One's product quite a while ago. I was moving from Aperture to Lr, but having some issues with some RAWs and frankly I like C1's default RAW processing better. I could get the same results with Aperture or Lr, but it required more tweaking and the presets weren't always suitable to all images and hence it was a bit of work.

    So I tried C1 Express, which at the time had fewer features than C1P (mainly the lack of tethering and session support).

    Unfortunately, although I liked the RAW thing, the rest lagged.

    C1 had poor metadata editing support. It didn't even have hierarchical keywording, although this has changed. But it was much harder to do a lot of IPTC, geolocating, and other metadata work. I kept going back to Lr for that.

    The organizational stuff was OK, but I came to like Lr's use of Finder folders better.

    Not as much plugin support. I was finding I could extend Lr much further both with image adjusting and metadata editing.

    Finally, it was expensive. Within a year Phase One cancelled Express. So I had to decide whether to upgrade. And with a new camera on the horizon, I had to consider yearly costs since I'd need upgrades. And the price of C1P over time looked to be about the same as the CC plan from Adobe. But without the utility of Photoshop, Lr Mobile, etc. So it was a pretty easy decision to ditch C1. Express stopped working altogether shortly thereafter as I did a system update. It also had a very annoying DRM scheme of requiring a connection and then failing, and I had to keep asking Phase One to reset it, which rendered it useless in the interim. I hope they ditched that.

    That's only my experience, mind you. Others love it. Do the trial and since it's about the same cost as alternative maybe it's gonna work well for you. I dunno if their subscription is a better deal; they didn't have that when I used their products.

    BTW, +1 on FastRawViewer. It's amazing if you use RAW, and cheap. With a (free) copy of Bridge or maybe another browser like Graphic Converter you can do an awful lot, and then use something else for adjusting, like Sharkey with Affinity.
     
  13. Reality4711, Sep 11, 2016
    Last edited: Sep 11, 2016

    Reality4711 macrumors 6502

    Reality4711

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2009
    Location:
    scotland
    #13
    Thanks for the + there. It may be that in time I may reinstall the Bridge as a browser as you suggest. It would smooth out one or two wrinkles.

    Just to add that although I will consider Bridge there is NO WAY I would return to a packaged software offering again. The complexity and shear weight of such software seems disproportionately dense for me; suspect that is true for many of the users out there. In fact if you look at your usual work flow/methodology and find (as I did) that only 15/20% of the software is ever used it may be time to think about a change of direction. Powerful editing exist out there without the mega package and filing need not be the complex and confusing thing that I have found packages make of it.

    If you decide what you need first e.g. security, ease of use and speed (in my case) you may find that your DAM does not provide as well as you think it does. The marketing drive is towards making amateurs think that using software
    (complex&expensive) written with professional needs in mind is necessary to help improve their photography and their self esteem (peer pressure).

    Personally that journey has proved fruitless, frustrating and ultimately a waste of good photography time.

    When working full time a very sharp young lady to run the library/website and distribution service and concentrated my own limited digital efforts on image production; this being almost exactly how my studio worked with film when the darkroom held little attraction for me (or filing)..

    Why I got dragged down the XML,EXIF,DAM,KEYWORD & Flagging maze now seems unknowable. If only I could talk sense to myself back then:mad:;)..

    Oh Well, knowing that the majority of the people likely to read this will dismiss it as 'oldie drivel' makes me a bit sad but you never know it may be of use to someone.

    Regards

    Sharkey
     
  14. rick3000 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rick3000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    West Coast
    #14
    Thank you to everyone for the insight, I have a lot to look at and consider. I am more a prosumer/hobbyist, and my main priority is to maintain the best organization system possible for my photos that is as close to future proof as possible, my second priority is ease of use. I think switching to a referenced library will probably be the best first step. As for the software, I will take a look at all of programs mentioned in this thread.
     
  15. HantaYo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    #15
    I totally got bogged down with meta data in Aperture. Every picture putting hierarchal keywords for sunsets, fog, had water in it, a mountain, a canyon, a plant, type of plant, if it had berries, etc., etc., etc......

    Then I asked myself, "Why am I doing this? This is not enjoyable at all." I have taken a hiatus from most PP and all meta data. If I get back to meta data it will just be people's names, names of bird species (a lot of my pictures are of birds), and place names or the caption/title.

    Right now I am kinda using Lightroom, but more sitting on the fence. Really like C1s default RAW conversion, color editing (you cannot beat it), the level's tool, creating masks from color values, and mask layers. But it's mask edge detection is terrible and with a lot of my pictures I do local adjustments. Healing tool is terrible as well. And I use heavily Lightroom's Dehaze for landscape pictures. One thing that I cannot forgive C1 for, is not having a keyboard shortcut for before/after. Creating a variant to see a before image is just down right stupid. I am constantly comparing before and afters.

    As with all software, photography software is a compromise. C1 is great at a lot of things, but does have some glaring holes. I have not looked at Photos at all as Apple burned me too hard with Aperture. I just do not trust Apple anymore for maintaining and developing software. Likely will be migrating to Windows as well.

    Looking forward to OnOne's new RAW processing software release next month. Perhaps it will have all my "must have" functionality. Any way I am going to get off the fence real soon, or be facing a huge backlog of photo edits and very basic meta data.
     
  16. TheDrift- macrumors 6502a

    TheDrift-

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    #16
    FWIW....Lightroom can still be bought as a stand alone (although it takes a bit of hunting down on adobe's website)

    I went cold turkey on aperture (kept both on my machine) and started LR fresh, and if I need an old file I load up aperture and go get it, you will be surprised at how often you don't, especially after a couple of months.

    Scott Kelby has an excellent book in LR,
     
  17. JDDavis macrumors 65816

    JDDavis

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2009
    #17
    I suggest you trial everything you find interesting. Pick one that you understand the design and intent of, gives you the results your looking for, and you enjoy using. If it's free then...bonus! If it's expensive, then chalk it up to the cost of enjoying your hobby or business. If you compromise for something that doesn't give you the results or features you want because of price you'll be disappointed in the end and your enjoyment of the process will suffer. Same thing if you spend a ton on the most powerful piece of software out there and you don't understand / need half the features.

    I trailed as much as I could and landed on C1P. I personally found it intuitive to use and I like the results with Nikon RAW files. I thought LR was nearly as good (maybe better with color) but I did not find the UI to my liking. I actually thought Nikon's Capture NXD processed RAWs beautifully and I wanted to like it (it was free) but the user experience was horrible. I'd have been miserable working with it for any number of images.

    Best of luck...the initial switch is the hardest part. I still haven't moved all of my images out of Aperture.
     
  18. oakrrl macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2006
    #18
    Like many here, I've also played with pretty much all the options and finally decided on C19, mostly because I love its RAW processing - definitely best I've see. One thing not mentioned by others is the C1 is free for Sony users, or its Pro version is a very reasonable $50 for Sony users. So if you're in the Sony camp, C1 is almost a no-brainer.

    I wasn't too happy about my initial attempts to move my Aperture photos to C1 (but confess I didn't spend lots of time on this). Instead, I went through my Aperture photos and did a careful culling, creating three Aperture libraries: a "best of...I want easy access to these on my phone, laptop, and desktop," a more extensive "good ones, I want on my laptop and desktop" and finally an "all photos." Then I sent the "best of..." photos to Photos, which is convenient in how it syncs between devices, kept the other two Aperture libraries in case I want to go back to them sometime.

    Now all new photos go through C1, with some Photoshopping or Affinity tweaks. When done I export my favorites as jpegs to Photos, keeping all the originals in C1.

    It's a bit fragmented, but works for me.
     
  19. redkamel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    #19
    I just came to this forum to actually ask a C1P question. I am moving to C1P from LR (Originally I was from Aperture).
    C1P Benefits: best RAW converter. Customizable workspace. Natural to use. Session workflow is very nice. Keyboarding system has been improved
    C1P Cons: Keywords don't really kick in for the images until you export the file. That means, other programs won't see them. The Catalog is very prone to crashing once you hit 10K. As a DAM, it is just not up to snuff.

    My recommendation: Try it out for a month. Like, REALLY try it out. Map out a workflow and think of every contingency. I tried C18, loved it, couldn't handle the lack of DAM, went to LR. Now I am back to C1, trying to find a way to edit my photos and have a DAM/searchable library or something that will let me batch metadata easily.

    My current workflow idea is to edit/cull in C1, Keyword those files in Photosupreme or C1P, export jpegs, and then store the jpegs in Photos. I'm having trouble finding something that can see the edits in C1P, edit their metadata, and allow global search.

    Photo Supreme supposedly does, but I haven't gotten it quite down and it doesn't support retina...
    I haven't figure out Photomechanic.
     
  20. Ray2 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    #20
    Don't know how pleased you are with your approach but it mirrors my transition quite well. Had used Lightroom when Aperture did not support my Fuji's for a year, was used to it. Preferred C1 for conversions but the DAM was too weak. Went to PhotoSupreme and lived with its limitations. Woke up and went back to Lightroom for DAM. I started out using C1 in Sessions mode for editing. But frankly, I haven't opened C1 for a year. It takes a bit more work in LR but once I had that down, C1 v8 fell into the do not upgrade category.
     
  21. rick3000 thread starter macrumors 6502a

    rick3000

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Location:
    West Coast
    #21
    I have not had time to test the software but I found a good, albeit time consuming way to move from Managed to Referenced that fits my desire to maintain my 'best of' organization.

    Aperture ignores albums when you go to Relocate Originals and move from Managed to Referenced, but it does recognize Projects. So I started to transfer all of my albums into projects.

    I started with:
    Project (Containing All Photos)
    > Best of Album (or other album)​

    I ended with:
    Folder
    > Project (Containing All Photos Not in Another Project)
    > Best of Project (or other sub category)​

    *One issue with dividing the photos between projects is that if two albums had the same image I had to pick which project it should be in. This was not a huge issue for me, because when I had more than one album, it is normally 'Selects' then 'Best of'. So I moved the images from the original Project containing everything, into the Selects Project, then into the Best of Project. This allowed me to make sure tier 2 pictures ended up in the tier 2 (Selects) project, and tier 1 pictures ended up in the tier 1 (Best of) project.

    I then renamed all of the folders and projects with the same hierarchy:
    So the Folder looks like:
    Year - Season - Event​
    And the Projects look like:
    Year - Season - Event
    Year - Season - Event - Best (or other subfolder)
    When I go to export I manual create a Year folder and export the Seasons into that folder. Because the 'catch all' Project has the same name as the enclosing Event folder I end up with this:
    Event folder (Year - Season - Event)
    >Images from 'Catch All' Project (Year - Season - Event)
    > Sub-Folders from Specific Projects (Year - Season - Event - Best (or other subfolder)
    My next step will be to export Versions of any photos with edits, then start looking at different software. Thanks for the great discussion!
     
  22. redkamel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    #22
    Yeah I had a similar experience, but I never got LR able to match C1 I guess. I also just don't like how it looks, how Adobe installs stuff all over my computer, subscriptions and its just not "fun" to use.
    If I had to process tons of images for work or something I would use LR, but since its purely my own enjoyment I can live with a little kludginess to get the output I want...I don't have time constraints!
     
  23. FWRLCK macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    #23


    1. Migrating from Aperture to Photos is pretty painless, so no reason why you shouldn't. It's really the only way you're going to keep access to your current library edits and metadata as-is.
    2. Photos has no way to move from managed to referenced, so this is a one way journey. If you want a referenced library, do it in Aperture before you create your Photos library. Photos can consolidate masters the same as Aperture.
    3. When you create a Photos library from an Aperture library, it creates an album that mimics the structure of your old Aperture albums. Some smart album stuff doesn't transfer directly, so be aware that you may have to rebuild some of those if you want them.
    Also, if you're looking for a less expensive option to Capture One, I've been having good luck with Affinity Photo, which was $50 from the MAS last I checked.
     
  24. v3rlon macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2014
    Location:
    Earth (usually)
    #24
    Phase One is very committed to their product. A one time price of $300 is a bit more than the $150 for Lightroom.
    You can get either at $10 a month, but Adobe throws in Photoshop, which is no small thing. I agree that C1Pro has better RAW import, but you have to be LOOKING to notice the difference.

    The On-One Raw thing is interesting.

    I ended up using Photos + external extensions like MacPhun and Affinity, and it works for me. I like the easy integration with all my devices. Most of my 'editing' is minor tweaks. If you are in Edit mode, click Adjust (the little dial looking thing), and then go to Add on the top right, you can add many more options like you would see in Lightroom. You cannot batch process, but you can copy and paste adjustments (just to dispel some off-cited misinformation).

    If I can sort by date, location, event, or name, I can usually find the image I want. This is not to imply that my answers are your best solutions or to insult your workflow. I am only trying to explain what I accomplish so you can judge for yourself.

    Affinity Photo is outstanding, but it is a Photoshop alternative, not a photo management tool. It will not in any way help organize your photos. It wasn't meant to.
     
  25. FWRLCK macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    #25
    I do basically the same thing as v3rlon. Photos is fine for global edits and the various plugins even give a bit more flexibility for local/advanced edits. Anything I want to to work more I roundtrip through the "External Editors" plugin, which is excellent and cheap to Affinity, or just export the raws and use that same plugin to re-import the processed JPEGs.
     

Share This Page