Photos preview

[ipedro]

iMore reported you CAN reference image files in Photos.

http://www.imore.com/what-you-need-know-about-photos-os-x

Whew...that's a big deal.

But you can't merge libraries.

Keep in mind that this is a pre-beta version. I'll reserve my criticism for when we actually know the feature set of 1.0. Allowing for multiple libraries certainly requires the ability to merge them or otherwise import libraries into one another. This sounds more like an unfinished feature, than one that is missing.

 

[maflynn]

Keep in mind that this is a pre-beta version.

Agreed, its lacking features, and we have no idea what apple will add between now and the gold version. I'm pretty sure though most of the editing and categorization tools found in Aperture will not be in version 1.0 of Photos.

Hopefully some of those categorization tools such as rating, flagging etc.

 

[ipedro]

Agreed, its lacking features, and we have no idea what apple will add between now and the gold version. I'm pretty sure though most of the editing and categorization tools found in Aperture will not be in version 1.0 of Photos.

Hopefully some of those categorization tools such as rating, flagging etc.

Some "missing" Aperture features are already included in Photos but without a UI to control them. For example, there's support for Brushes for selective adjustments, cloning and repair. We know this because when importing an Aperture library, Photos preserves brushes non-destructively. In other words, it's generating the adjustments itself as per the same instructions that Aperture used.

Other missing features like the Loupe for example have been made obsolete by new methods. Why would you pull out a loupe to zoom in on a portion of an image when you could quickly pinch to zoom in and then retract by reversing the pinch? Photos is incredibly fast and designed from the ground up for gestures. Many of those gestures will displace old ways of doing things.

As for organization, Apple is moving to tags which are pretty much exactly the same as keywords so nothing is lost there. You still have folders and you can pull down a side bar in the same left side as Aperture and organize your shoots in folders. I'll personally use tags for client codes, photoshoot type, then create a folder for the shoot and smart folders for clients and shoot types. It'll organize beautifully.

 

[maflynn]

Some "missing" Aperture features are already included in Photos but without a UI to control them

The question is when will we see them? The product does lack a lot of features found in Aperture. Some things will be re-added before it goes gold, I don't believe every missing feature will be added before it goes gold.

So then that means how many months, years will it take to bring Photos back on par to Aperture.

so far, I'm not seeing the beauty of tags, I used flagging, keywords and ratings. I can do that now in LR. I suppose going to tags is ok, it may be semantics calling keywords tags. Managing my images in projects, folders and smart albums seems to be missing. I do have smart albums but I'm not sure I like how its set up with events.

It used to be, that I chose apple products because OS X, Aperture and other apps allowed me to work without getting in the way. True any application requires a certain amount of adjustment by the user. Lately Apple's software changes things, such as keyboard short cuts in pages to some inspector based interaction. My point is Photos like apple's recent software is getting in the way to what I want to do. Maybe this is not the case for everyone, and my opinion may be colored by the fact that I've already transitioned over to LR, but as I work on Photos I find it lacking in a lot the basic functionality that I've come to expect.

 

[v3rlon]

All right, can we keep the thread focused on what Photos does and doesn't do as opposed to your switch, past, present, or future, to some other application?

While the yahoo article mentions no roundtrip edits, I thought that was something that Apple said was in when they demo'd it.

Also, has anyone found a review by an advanced user? It looks like most of these are by, well, iPhoto users. Anyway, here is the list with notes. No judging - just the features and how it may be handled. Hard to believe we have all of this interest, but none of us have a dev account.

•Flags, star ratings, color labels < replaced by hearts? Still able to search by stars so you do not lose them.
•Projects < becomes albums? But Albums already existed.
•Merge/split libraries
•Split view
•Loupe < replaced by pinch to zoom?
•Camera tethering
•Stacks
•Brushable adjustments < Brushed work supported, so perhaps just the UI is not done. Brushes are there, can control size but not intensity.
•Adjustment resets < Seems odd to be out in a non-destructive workflow, did you mean custom PRESETS?
•Curves
•Metadata batch adjustments
•iMore reported you CAN reference image files in Photos.
•Events - basically replaced with "Collections" and "Moments".
•Round-trip editing - not there but mentioned in demo
•Sort by...
•Geotagging - <can search by though so maybe coming soon
•Faces - <can search by though so maybe coming soon
(for next three, thanks to links from skaeight a couple posts down)
•Custom CIFilter which is explained as the ability for third party filters to be added to the RAW process before the image is drawn. We all know that any render as part of the RAW process is the highest quality, so I’d like to think that this means filters like the Google Nik Collection could feasibly be added earlier in the chain, non-destrucively, which would be huge.
•Lens Correction seems to be available throughout the OS
•Noise reduction improvements

 

[robgendreau]

As for organization, Apple is moving to tags which are pretty much exactly the same as keywords so nothing is lost there. You still have folders and you can pull down a side bar in the same left side as Aperture and organize your shoots in folders. I'll personally use tags for client codes, photoshoot type, then create a folder for the shoot and smart folders for clients and shoot types. It'll organize beautifully.

OMG...I hope this isn't true, or that you're conflating tags and keywords (which is an unfortunate problem given the similar names).

OS X tags are fundamentally different than image keywords; the only thing they have in common is that they are words.

First, OS tags are extended file attributes, stored in the filesystem itself. Not all filesystems can store OS X tags.

Second, OS tags are not hierarchical.

Third, lots of photo software is designed to use standard image keywords, not OS X tags.

Fourth, IPTC keywords have been a standard for decades. Pros in fields besides journalism rely extensively on them, stock photo agencies or online galleries for example. OS X tags are worthless for this.

Fifth, image keywords can be hierarchical, as in Aperture and LR and Photo Mechanic. There are even standardized keyword lists and hierarchies.

Sixth, IPTC keywords are stored in the image files or in XMP sidecars. That's different than storing tags in extended attributes. I can send a jpeg with keywords to virtually anyone using a digital device and they can make use of those keywords. Tags, no.

I point this out because lots of people can confuse the two, and because although Apple could (and should) promote tags more, they DO support keywords in Photos. And since keywords are so standard you can use other software to put keywords into your photos, and Photos can read them. And Spotlight can search them.

TL;DR: Photos DOES support standard IPTC keywords and Apple is NOT moving to tags in Photos.

 

[skaeight]

All right, can we keep the thread focused on what Photos does and doesn't do as opposed to your switch, past, present, or future, to some other application?

While the yahoo article mentions no roundtrip edits, I thought that was something that Apple said was in when they demo'd it.

Also, has anyone found a review by an advanced user? It looks like most of these are by, well, iPhoto users. Anyway, here is the list with notes. No judging - just the features and how it may be handled. Hard to believe we have all of this interest, but none of us have a dev account.

•Flags, star ratings, color labels < replaced by hearts? Still able to search by stars so you do not lose them.
•Projects < becomes albums? But Albums already existed.
•Merge/split libraries
•Split view
•Loupe < replaced by pinch to zoom?
•Camera tethering
•Stacks
•Brushable adjustments < Brushed work supported, so perhaps just the UI is not done. Brushes are there, can control size but not intensity.
•Adjustment resets < Seems odd to be out in a non-destructive workflow
•Curves
•Metadata batch adjustments
•iMore reported you CAN reference image files in Photos.
•Events - basically replaced with "Collections" and "Moments".
•Round-trip editing - not there but mentioned in demo
•Sort by...
•Geotagging - <can search by though so maybe coming soon
•Faces - <can search by though so maybe coming soon

What are Adjustment resets? I saw this in the Pouge piece, I assumed he meant Adjustment Presets. Is this just reverting back to the original image? If that's not possible, that's really odd, because you can do that on iOS.

If that wasn't supposed to be presets, does anybody know if it is possible to build your own presets?

Regarding round trip editing, I'm almost positive this will be coming with extensions. According to these two sites, it appears extensions will be able to work in RAW space making non-destructive edits which is much better than working off a baked TIFF as used to be the case.

(Look at the comments):
https://thephotosexpert.com/tips/2015/2/5/photos-os-x-beta-os-x-10103-developer-release#.VNesOoY8KnM


https://thephotosexpert.com/tips/2014/6/6/wwdc-session-shows-lens-correction-and-noise-reduction-os-x-mentions-iphoto-and#.VNejcoY8KnM

 

[robgendreau]

I think what Pogue was referring to is the ability to roll back individual adjustments? As opposed to just "revert?" But I dunno if he tried undo to several levels.

I guess I just don't care that much about using TIFFs and standalone applications and such. I tend to save presets and I have RAWs and original JPEGs, so it just isn't much of a big deal. And I have to share photos a lot, so exporting is pretty routine for me, but I guess others will have to wait for that, if it is coming.

But I definitely need snapshots, unlimited undos or the equivalent, versions, history, etc. WHILE I'm editing. I haven't seen that Photos has anything like those features. Except maybe the undo's. I hope.

 

[KittyKatta]

The question is when will we see them?

Actually, I think the problem is "IF".

I really want to stay within Apple's walls and Aperture works "good enough" that I can wait for 2.0 in order to get the features I feel are missing in Photos. But the problem is that Apple probably won't give us a timeline of any sort so people like me may be waiting for nothing.

The question is when will we see them? The product does lack a lot of features found in Aperture. Some things will be re-added before it goes gold, I don't believe every missing feature will be added before it goes gold.

So then that means how many months, years will it take to bring Photos back on par to Aperture.

And lets not forget that the last major Aperture update was 3.5 back in 2013. Aperture users are waiting for several important features and IF they may not be released until 2.0 in 2016 then that would be a solid 3years between? (And I'm not even looking to compete with LR, all I want is parity with their own existing product with the iCloud additions.)

 

[MCAsan]

Grumble grumble grumble Aperture replacement grumble professionals grumble no substitute grumble grumble….

Some people have made the argument that because Apple will no longer support Aperture as well as iPhoto, Photos is a failure because it doesn’t offer all the power of Aperture. I would suggest, in the most respectful way possible, that we all get over it.

Photos is not an Aperture replacement. It doesn’t offer Aperture’s organizational powers, brushes, versions, and so on. You can certainly be disappointed that a free bundled app doesn’t replace one that once cost a couple of hundred dollars, but all that’s going to earn you is frustration. Apple’s moved on and it seems you’ll have to as well.

Much as I counseled AppleWorks users to stop doing work in an app that had no future, so too would I suggest that Aperture users start looking for the next way forward. While Aperture will continue to work perfectly well for quite awhile, if you continue adding images and editing them extensively, you’re making more work for your future self when you finally have to jump to another app.

Most of the pro shooters I know moved to Adobe Lightroom years ago. And unlike most of Adobe’s pro apps, it can be purchased with a perpetual license (versus requiring a Creative Cloud subscription). The latest version includes a plug-in for importing Aperture and iPhoto libraries. The migration is hardly seamless—you can’t import your adjustments, for example—but, as I suggested, doing it now will save you some work should you wait a year to take this step. If Lightroom doesn’t rock your boat, Capture One is another option you might consider.

http://www.macworld.com/article/2880207/your-photos-for-os-x-questions-answered.html

 

[Weaselboy]

http://www.macworld.com/article/2880207/your-photos-for-os-x-questions-answered.html

I noticed this in the article and the author mentioned it in his earlier review also. So if I am understanding what he is saying here, users will start Photos and import their iPhoto library. Then later on thinking they don't need the iPhoto library any longer they will delete it only to find out they just deleted all their photos since the Photos library was referencing the images in the iPhoto library.

For those testing the Photos app, is it made clear at any point that this is what is going on?

I can see a lot of people losing their photos by deleting the iPhoto library after the Photos import if they don't understand this.

When you launch Photos and it pulls images from your iPhoto library, a new Photos Library archive appears in the same location as your iPhoto library. And the Finder tells us that it’s a bit bigger than the iPhoto library. But the truth is that it’s not really consuming that amount of space. The Finder simply reflects the size of the library as if it held all the original files, which it isn’t as it’s referencing the original images.

 

[VirtualRain]

The best way to describe what Apple is doing with photos, is like what IMAP did for email... Synchronization across multiple email clients. The new Photos app is a like an IMAP client for photos. It's not a DAM or RAW converter or anything of the sort.

Apple likely recognizes that with iPhones outselling Macs well over 10:1 that there's a huge opportunity to continue to tie the two together in ways only Apple can... to drive the ecosystem benefits so whenever an iPhone owner needs a new computer, they don't even consider anything other than a Mac.

The sad part of all this, is that Apple could have carried out this strategy without EOL'ing or deprecating Aperture... The two could have co-existed very easily. It's very clear that Apple doesn't want to invest resources in pro applications... I guess they need every developer they have working on the ecosystem.

 

[r.harris1]

Because most of the reviewers on the various sites are neither developers nor photographers, they missed what is to me the most important aspect of Photos: extensions. This is how to eliminate round tripping, it's how to add in best-of-breed functionality, it's how to make non-destructive edits. For example, Pixelmator already has limited extension capability in the iOS Photos app - imagine what they can do on a Mac. To me, this really opens the door to a lot of new and potentially better functionality, more so than Aperture ever had or was ever going to get.

Aperture and LR work in a plugin-centric world where it's about round-tripping out to Nik/MacPhun/etc. This could eliminate that all together. Obviously, I get that different vendors need to step in here but in a world where I could get Nik or DxO noise capabilities, PTLen's lens correction capabilities, functionality from the always improving Pixelmator and maybe additional DAM capabilities, I'd be very, very happy.

 

[KittyKatta]

The sad part of all this, is that Apple could have carried out this strategy without EOL'ing or deprecating Aperture... The two could have co-existed very easily. It's very clear that Apple doesn't want to invest resources in pro applications... I guess they need every developer they have working on the ecosystem.

Actually, the sad thing is that they quit at Aperture 3.5.

If they only put in enough resources to get 4.0 with the new iCloud sync then it would've been a Win/Win for both the consumer and Apple.

Consumer wins:
- New Photos iCloud sync functionality exists for Aperture libraries
- It may not be as powerful as LR2 but it's still a great program
- Aperture still remains within Apple's ecosystem

Apple wins:
- iCloud sync functionality means more subscribers for data packages
- Rather than losing ALL Aperture users then they still keep some on board
- Aperture still remains within Apple's ecosystem

 

[Michaelgtrusa]

The Photos application is now being released to developers, and Apple says it will be available this spring.

https://www.apple.com/osx/photos-preview/

Rather than speculate endlessly about it, can we have a thread where people confirm/deny features that Aperture/iPhoto etc users might be interested in?

I noted, eg, that re/code had a screen shot that showed an info box that had a field for keywords, and for faces. So that's in.

The Verge reported it does not do star ratings or color labels or flags (uses a heart, but they say existing star ratings can be searched for). From David Pogue's preview I gleaned that these deprecated attributes are changed into tags or keywords, hence the ability to search for them. So perhaps adding "blue" is your substitute for a color label, or "one star" or whatever.

They say projects get turned into albums, which I'm skeptical about since projects exist in Photos; maybe it's just a definition switch.

It does not do geolocation.

Based on Apple's summer 2014 statement regarding Photo's, i'm certain that new pro level features will be added before the final this spring.

 

[robgendreau]

Because most of the reviewers on the various sites are neither developers nor photographers, they missed what is to me the most important aspect of Photos: extensions. This is how to eliminate round tripping, it's how to add in best-of-breed functionality, it's how to make non-destructive edits. For example, Pixelmator already has limited extension capability in the iOS Photos app - imagine what they can do on a Mac. To me, this really opens the door to a lot of new and potentially better functionality, more so than Aperture ever had or was ever going to get.

Aperture and LR work in a plugin-centric world where it's about round-tripping out to Nik/MacPhun/etc. This could eliminate that all together. Obviously, I get that different vendors need to step in here but in a world where I could get Nik or DxO noise capabilities, PTLen's lens correction capabilities, functionality from the always improving Pixelmator and maybe additional DAM capabilities, I'd be very, very happy.

They missed them because Photos extensions will likely be as common and popular as iPhoto plugins. Step back a bit and think of when you last heard iPhoto users clamoring for "round trip" editing or lens correction or whatnot.

The kind of extensions will be the ones you already have in Extensions: ways to upload to Facebook, Shutterbuy, Twitter. Even on iOS among the dozen or so editing apps I have only a couple show up for editing in Photos.

Breen's right; it's not that kind of progam.

 

[r.harris1]

They missed them because Photos extensions will likely be as common and popular as iPhoto plugins. Step back a bit and think of when you last heard iPhoto users clamoring for "round trip" editing or lens correction or whatnot.

The kind of extensions will be the ones you already have in Extensions: ways to upload to Facebook, Shutterbuy, Twitter. Even on iOS among the dozen or so editing apps I have only a couple show up for editing in Photos.

Breen's right; it's not that kind of progam.

Maybe. Time will tell. Hell, maybe I'll write something.

 

[v3rlon]

Given that Apple repeatedly talked about how easy they were and has shown extensions that were 5-6 lines of code, I really don't think it is 'that kind of program.'

Given that Pixelmator already has an extension for Photos IOS, it seems reasonable that they might have one for OS X.

And 'reviews' by folks who are neither Devs nor Photographers are probably why Apple has not been more forthcoming with information.

We already have misinformation (are there brushes or aren't there? ONE of those groups is wrong - probably the ones with all the bent brand new iPhone 6+'s)

 

[VirtualRain]

They missed them because Photos extensions will likely be as common and popular as iPhoto plugins. Step back a bit and think of when you last heard iPhoto users clamoring for "round trip" editing or lens correction or whatnot.



The kind of extensions will be the ones you already have in Extensions: ways to upload to Facebook, Shutterbuy, Twitter. Even on iOS among the dozen or so editing apps I have only a couple show up for editing in Photos.



Breen's right; it's not that kind of progam.

Agreed... But who really wants more round-tripping as a bandaid for an app lacking features? Even if they offered plugins that did everything I wanted with various round-trip edits, it wouldn't interest me... that's a very poor way to work. I desperately want someone to implement NIK's control point concept so I can eliminate round-tripping completely.

 

[bankshot]

I noticed this in the article and the author mentioned it in his earlier review also. So if I am understanding what he is saying here, users will start Photos and import their iPhoto library. Then later on thinking they don't need the iPhoto library any longer they will delete it only to find out they just deleted all their photos since the Photos library was referencing the images in the iPhoto library.

For those testing the Photos app, is it made clear at any point that this is what is going on?

I can see a lot of people losing their photos by deleting the iPhoto library after the Photos import if they don't understand this.

No worries, the author was wrong about this. Apple uses hard links to reference the original iPhoto files from within the Photos library. Like a traditional Mac alias, a hard link references the same underlying data as the original file, so no extra copy is made. But unlike an alias, you can delete the original file without affecting the new hard link to it. As far as the system is concerned, both the original and the new hard link are equal pointers to the same data on disk; it doesn't care which came first. The underlying data is only deleted when the last hard link referring to it is deleted.

This means every photo in both libraries ends up with 2 hard links - the original in the iPhoto library, and a new one in the Photos library. You can delete either one and the data will still remain in the other. So when you delete your iPhoto library, all of the data remains safely intact in the Photos library.

In the comments on that article, the author did a test and confirmed that deleting the iPhoto library didn't delete anything in the Photos library. He simply didn't understand how hard links work.

 

[maflynn]

They missed them because Photos extensions will likely be as common and popular as iPhoto plugins. Step back a bit and think of when you last heard iPhoto users clamoring for "round trip" editing or lens correction or whatnot.

The kind of extensions will be the ones you already have in Extensions: ways to upload to Facebook, Shutterbuy, Twitter. Even on iOS among the dozen or so editing apps I have only a couple show up for editing in Photos.

Breen's right; it's not that kind of progam.

Agreed, I don't think the market will be there for plugins that everyone is expecting - at least aperture users are hoping for.

Also consider this: Do you really want to wait (and hope) for extensions to fill the gap of missing features? I'd rather not use a brand new application that has less abilities then its predecessor.

To put it bluntly I think its a mistake buying on a promise when there are alternatives out there now that are much more feature rich and capable.

 

[r.harris1]

Agreed, I don't think the market will be there for plugins that everyone is expecting - at least aperture users are hoping for.

Also consider this: Do you really want to wait (and hope) for extensions to fill the gap of missing features? I'd rather not use a brand new application that has less abilities then its predecessor.

To put it bluntly I think its a mistake buying on a promise when there are alternatives out there now that are much more feature rich and capable.

I personally think there's a huge market of people who want a quality workflow toolset that isn't defined by Adobe. Don't get me wrong, I use Photoshop and I think it's a great tool, but I'm also pulling for Pixelmator and the recently released Affinity Photo (check it out and sign up for the beta here).

Anytime there's just one perceived tool (LR, for example), there's always a market. I have (but can't get into using) LR and luckily, I don't need its DAM capabilities. So while I would never "live in hope" for Photos, I've been reasonably impressed with the limited functionality that's there in the early beta in my day-to-day use of it this past week and I'm very impressed with the capability potential. It's a clean, simple interface.

To your point, there's no reason to assume that any potential there will be realized, but I'm going to keep an eye on it for a year or so to see how it pans out. People are always disparaging of "soccer moms" and the unwashed masses taking photos. Adobe would kill for that market. Right now, Adobe doesn't have anything in the way of a growth product and the potential for Photos to capitalize on that is in my mind reasonably large. Even Soccer Moms want the best for at least a handful of their photos and Apple is great at providing an ecosystem for doing at least certain things reasonably easily. People get that confused with dumbing down. I disagree.

Too, tools vendors are always looking at ways to expand their markets. They too would want the Soccer Moms market and maybe some of those Moms want to tweak their photos in a more detailed fashion like you can with the Nik plugins or with Pixelmator. Enter non-destructive extensions (Pixelmator already has a bit of that in their iOS variant). The tool vendors make some money, the Moms are happy, and Apple is Mom central. Seems like it could be a good thing.

 

[maflynn]

I personally think there's a huge market of people who want a quality workflow toolset that isn't defined by Adobe.

That may be true but I think most serious/semi-serious photographers will not be looking at photos. To put it another way, I don't think too many prosumers are going to get Photos just because it came from apple. Likewise I seriously doubt that segment of photographers will be willing to wait to see if apple and/or plugin developers extend the usefulness of photos.

Apple is clear in its focus with Photos, its the consumer market who wants some limited editing capability, and is interested in uploading their picks to their phone/ipad and also facebook. Apple is has not been interested in the hobbyist/serious photographer for years.

While I do think there will be some decent plugins being released in the course of time, the foundation of the those plugins is an application that is limiting, and is being supported by a company that has shown a habit of not improving its professional apps.

 

[r.harris1]

That may be true but I think most serious/semi-serious photographers will not be looking at photos. To put it another way, I don't think too many prosumers are going to get Photos just because it came from apple. Likewise I seriously doubt that segment of photographers will be willing to wait to see if apple and/or plugin developers extend the usefulness of photos.

Apple is clear in its focus with Photos, its the consumer market who wants some limited editing capability, and is interested in uploading their picks to their phone/ipad and also facebook. Apple is has not been interested in the hobbyist/serious photographer for years.

While I do think there will be some decent plugins being released in the course of time, the foundation of the those plugins is an application that is limiting, and is being supported by a company that has shown a habit of not improving its professional apps.

I've only worked with the beta version of Photos so I don't have insight into what the application will look like in a few months or a years' time. However, I can say that the extension capabilities (these are not the same as plugins) built into OS X (including the photos pieces), are very, very powerful and having the capabilities of non-destructive pixel level editing (say with a Pixelmator extension) would be very compelling, just as one example.

Whether any of this gets defined as Professional Software by Professionals or other Serious People, I can't say.

 

[maflynn]

Whether any of this gets defined as Professional Software by Professionals or other Serious People, I can't say.

That's the crux of my argument. Wait/hope or use something from Adobe, Phase One, DX0, etc that already has that ability.