Photos for Yosemite

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by colorspace, Oct 21, 2014.

  1. colorspace macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    #1
    Has anyone had a hands-on sneak peak of Photos for OS X? Waiting to hear any news as it will have huge impacts on my migration from Aperture to .... ??

    Does it look like a replacement for iPhotos only or does it have the legs for serious users? Most likely be too early to tell at this point, but early opinions would be useful.

    P
     
  2. MacTCE macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2013
    #2
    I would assume this would be released to developers first and most tech sites announce then new things are released. Due to NDA's though I don't think we'll see anything soon.
     
  3. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #3
    Maybe Apple will use the "Public Beta" program for Photos.
     
  4. colorspace thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    #4
    So no replies yet makes me think that Apple is not widely testing Photos for OS X at all.... does not give me a big warm fuzzy feeling :-(
     
  5. fisherking macrumors 603

    fisherking

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2010
    Location:
    ny somewhere
    #5
    just no 'public' testing, like a lot of apple apps. am looking forward to it, hope it's worth the wait.. :D
     
  6. Bending Pixels macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2010
    #6
    Those that are helping to test it are under a NDA - Non-Disclousure Agreement. Meaning they can't say anything publicly until it's either released or Apple releases them from the NDA.
     
  7. Duff-Man macrumors 68030

    Duff-Man

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Location:
    Albuquerque, NM
    #7
    Duff-Man says...or, that this app is supposed to replace a few apps and services, they are taking their time to try and get it right, or at least fairly usable before unleashing to everyone. People are so quick to latch onto every little bug, and quick to latch onto every little delay...can't win no matter what they do sometimes....oh yeah!
     
  8. DaveN macrumors 6502a

    DaveN

    Joined:
    May 1, 2010
    #8
    I wouldn't worry. There will be a few bugs as is true with all programs but I think that most of the critical parts are probably in place. For example, I was migrating my old iPhoto photos to a new Mac and I had to download a program to update the iPhoto database, then open in the latest iPhoto before I could open in the current Aperture. The most critical part about upgrading a program like this is that you do not lose data. Bugs can be fixed but if you lose data you will forever be brandished a failure... Or at least for a very, very long time.
     
  9. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #9
    Lightroom 5.7 now has a plugin to import Aperture/iPhoto libraries. I have no idea if it works for both managed and referenced libraries. So if Photos does not work out....there is Lightroom.
     
  10. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #10
    It works with both types of libraries. Very well, in fact. But one has to be aware of how it maps Aperture projects/albums/folders to Lightroom collections/collection sets. It also copies out photos that were in a managed (non-referenced) Aperture library to a date-based folder structure in the Finder. If you reference photos you can just leave them in situ. Best to experiment with a subset of your Aperture catalog; some things are easier to straighten out in Aperture, some in LR.

    Apparently works with iPhoto too, but haven't used that.
     
  11. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #11
    Thanks for the report. I never got passed playing with Aperture so I don't need to move an Aperture/iPhoto to LR.
     
  12. colorspace thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    #12
    Would love to hear some details about the conversion/import -- the devil is in the details they say.

    RAW files and JPEG Versions

    Does LR somehow try to emulate modifications to RAW and JPG files?
    Does it somehow export these versions from Aperture and use them in LR
    And does the import feature give you some control on how the above are handled?

    Does it deal well with metadata:

    Keywords?
    Tags?
    GPS coordinates?
    Copyright info and other IPC info?
    etc

    And almost as importantly does it somehow emulate

    Stacks
    Projects (not necessarily date based)

    Would really appreciate any info, especially with Photos still nowhere to be seen. Thanks!

     
  13. robgendreau macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2008
    #13
    The Adobe importer doesn't even attempt to deal with photo adjustments made in Aperture. There is really nothing that translates image adjustments from DAM to DAM. You have to export the adjusted images as TIFFs or JPGs or whatever. Many of us leave some of those in Aperture if you need the non-destructive edits. If they are RAWs, of course, they aren't ever changed. The exporter in the Mac App Store (or on their website; you can download a demo) has some bulk exporting features for images that are edited.

    Metadata is relatively easy. Of course one option, even without an importer, is to write that to exif and/or XMP sidecars, and that's prudent as a backup strategy no matter what you use. I don't see any reason to NOT do that; sometimes in day to day use people turn that off to speed things up but I like the redundancy. YMMV. And then the metadata is truly independent of whatever software you use, even Spotlight and non photo applications. This seems to be overlooked by many Aperture users since it's a tad less automatic than with LR, although both applications can do it. Not so with iPhoto.

    Keywords, geolocation, etc. all come over. Faces are written to keywords, but not the face space (i.e. which face is which). Labels and stacks are also written to keywords. Projects and other virtual containers map over to collections and collection sets in LR, but there are some differences. Your referenced files can stay put.

    Specifically, projects produce slightly different results, because a project can contain BOTH individual photos AND containers. In LR, a collection set can ONLY contain containers, so LR makes a project into a collection SET and a collection within that set that contains the individual photos that may have been in the project. Essentially it just moves them one level down.

    I've posted more details in a thread over at dpreview.com in the Mac forum.
     
  14. MCAsan macrumors 601

    MCAsan

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2012
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #14
    I can understand two different vendors using different post processing algorithms can not easily duplicate a set of edits made in another program. That is especially true if the image had edits made by plugins.

    Because wrote iPhoto and Aperture...and are writing Photos, they should have the ability to port all the raw edits. IF they can't I doubt any other company can.
     
  15. colorspace thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    #15
    Rob,

    Actually, I should mention that in preparation for my future departure from Aperture (I will continue to use if for the near future), I'v been using a very handy tool to clean and prepare my photo libraries....

    Rawhide (https://ssoftltd.com/RawHide-Aperture or the Apple App store)

    It's fantastic for batch "round-triping" both RAW and JPG files out and back into Aperture. I've used to finalize modified images in my library in the following ways:

    1. RAW and JPG images that are rated less than 3 stars (some times 4) are exported with modifications as a JPG of variable quality (based on rating) and automatically re-imported into Aperture. After quite a bit of testing, I felt comfortable enough to let it also delete the originals. The images keep all of their metadata as well as being tagged with whatever tags you want to signify this process (default="Rawhide Processed).

    2. For my better photos, I'm holding on to the original JPGs and RAW files awaiting to see what happens with Apple Photos. The kept files are also tagged "Rawhide Originals".

    The end result is that I have gotten rid of a huge amount of bloat from RAW images (average of 60% space savings in general), frozen my changes made in Aperture in something that should be universally usable in the future, and left the valued originals in touch.

    PS - I'm in no way associated with Rawhide, but I can also add that I did contact the author and he was very responsive to my feature requests -- I would go as far as to say amazingly responsive.




     
  16. JoeRito macrumors 6502a

    JoeRito

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2012
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #16
    Photos is horrible, don't want it in OS X .... Pixelmator fir me
     
  17. colorspace thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2005
    #17
    Joe

    But I think we are not only talking about editing but also collection management. I think Pixelmator is great software, especially considering the price, but unless I really missed something huge, it does NOT do collection management, does it?

     

Share This Page