Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Photos preview

r.harris1 said:
...
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.
...
Click to expand...

Really, some people need to re-read this 100 times every day.

If Adobe Released LR 6 tomorrow with a noise reduction that gave you 2 more stops at high ISO and a magic sharpening tool that could fix out of focus pictures at twice the price, we would hear about the game changing advances and see a line to rival the next Star Wars movie.

If instead, they released the same features, but included a big red button that would do it perfectly, just the way you wanted, and slashed the price to $19.99 we would hear screams of "abandoned the pros" "lost their focus" and "its just for soccer moms."

Every time a Pro app reduces its price or simplifies common tasks, I hear this. Its like supposed pros want expensive, difficult to use tools to keep the barrier to entry high.

First of all, the more work I can pawn off onto a computer, the more time I have to do the things that I want. If MagicPhoto (TM) can lift the detail out of that shadow without adding noise in 1 click, that is way better than 5 clicks and a slider, right? If it is your JOB, then that is more time you can spend with the family or racing tricycles or whatever floats your boat. It is more time you can spend working on the more difficult photos that could be perfect if you just had a little more time.

Second, abandoning the pro market is just a silly idea. To use a car analogy, "Win the race on Sunday, and sales are up the rest of the week." So I use the same movie editor as was used on [Insert famous movie], or This is the software that [Insert famous photographer] uses. And 'soccer moms' will buy that software and use it. Why do you think there are celebrity endorsements for ANY product? They will not use it as well as a pro, but they will pay for it and play around with it. I have the same guitar that Steve Vai used to play, but neither David Lee Roth nor Frank Zappa ever came knocking on my door.

Pinnacle (the $100 movie editor for Windows) bought Avid (THE Avid - the one the pros use). Why? Because Pinnacle had the money (from massive sales), and wanted to bring some of those features to their $100 product. Selling 100,000 copies for $100 is far better than selling 1000 copies for $700. Avid did not cease to be. They didn't "abandon the pros" in spite of all the predictions.

Remember when Apple pretty much only catered to "pros" back in 1998? When they had to borrow $200 million from Microsoft to stay in business? Then came a couple of consumer products and Apple is outshining Microsoft.

I have seen this same thing crop up every time a "Pro" product drops its price.
FCP X, NewTek Lightwave, and Softimage XSI (though they gave up on their entry level product) to name a few.

Remember the $499 Windows Ultimate Edition? Now Windows 10 is FREE. Do you thing Microsoft is abandoning the pros? And Apple is of course, since they have been free even longer. You can't go to Linux or Chrome because they are free. So I guess there are no "pro" operating systems to work on anymore.
 
bankshot said:
No worries, the author was wrong about this. Apple uses hard links to reference the original iPhoto files from within the Photos library.
Click to expand...

Ahh... thanks for the reply and that makes more sense. I am familiar with hard links from Time Machine.
 
v3rlon said:
Really, some people need to re-read this 100 times every day.

If Adobe Released LR 6 tomorrow with a noise reduction that gave you 2 more stops at high ISO and a magic sharpening tool that could fix out of focus pictures at twice the price, we would hear about the game changing advances and see a line to rival the next Star Wars movie.

If instead, they released the same features, but included a big red button that would do it perfectly, just the way you wanted, and slashed the price to $19.99 we would hear screams of "abandoned the pros" "lost their focus" and "its just for soccer moms."

...
Click to expand...

You missed the point entirely, :apple: has replaced a relatively good photo manipulation application with a TOY. The TOY is nothing more than a way to sell hardware... They don't give a rip about anything else...
 
jms969 said:
You missed the point entirely, :apple: has replaced a relatively good photo manipulation application with a TOY. The TOY is nothing more than a way to sell hardware... They don't give a rip about anything else...
Click to expand...
He doesn't miss the point, v3rlon and others such as myself disagree with it. The premise that Apple is a hardware company is flawed in the same way that Google is not »just« an ad company. You confuse Apple's monetization strategy with what Apple's products are – software and services.
 
Well the "toy" might actually be a way to sell subscriptions to iCloud; 5GB free is like second gen iPod size in a world of 20megapixels cameras. :)

And c'mon, any OS developer has to have a pictures program. MS is making one for Windows 10 with some similar goals.

And as for pro, not pro, who cares? Aperture was great but even at its height it was Adobe, with Photoshop, that was the king of the hill. You don't "aperture" or "pixelmate" photos, you photoshop 'em. It's the standard, and more like Word or Excel in that regard. There will always be alternatives, but Photos is as likely to take over the desktop photo processing world as Pages or Numbers is in the business world. But that doesn't mean it can't be all you need if you're a Mac fan and do a lot of photography.

As Breen said in the article: if Photos doesn't meet your needs move on, and get over what Apple will or won't do. As long as they keep making the platform there will always be alternatives, even excepting LR. Why does it matter whether they have a "pro" app? I doubt shareholders are complaining.
 
jms969 said:
You missed the point entirely, :apple: has replaced a relatively good photo manipulation application with a TOY. The TOY is nothing more than a way to sell hardware... They don't give a rip about anything else...
Click to expand...

When you say 'relatively good,' do you mean 'fantastic?' Perhaps some other superlative that Apple would like to use in a keynote? No?

Do you see Cook getting up on stage and saying "we have a relatively good app here?"

If Aperture is good enough for you, keep using it while Photos matures in the same way that FCP X has. Heck, Photos isn't even out yet, so noting has been replaced by anything at this time.

This is a test. It isn't even a public BETA yet. They may have even deliberately restricted features so that people would focus on the part that needs testing (yes, this happens).

If Aperture is not good enough, and you moved on years ago, then you have nothing to worry about anyway (other than extended network outage ending your CC subscription and losing all your photos and hard work when Adobe gets hacked again, but that is another topic).
 
robgendreau said:
Well the "toy" might actually be a way to sell subscriptions to iCloud; 5GB free is like second gen iPod size in a world of 20megapixels cameras. :)
Click to expand...

Definitely is. Apple's new focus is less on one time hardware sales and rather, selling solutions that require continual payments, such as iCloud storage.
 
robgendreau said:
You don't "aperture" or "pixelmate" photos, you photoshop 'em. It's the standard, and more like Word or Excel in that regard.
Click to expand...
In some regions of the world you still »hoover« when you vacuum even though Hoover is no longer the dominant brand of vacuum cleaners. I reckon that commercial photographers use Lightroom or Bridge rather than »just« Photoshop, i. e. even in an Adobe universe, the verb »to photoshop« seems outdated.
 
maflynn said:
Definitely is. Apple's new focus is less on one time hardware sales and rather, selling solutions that require continual payments, such as iCloud storage.
Click to expand...

Wait. Did you actually just make this statement in a thread where everyone and their dog is talking about switching to Adobe products?
 
Photos preview

v3rlon said:
When you say 'relatively good,' do you mean 'fantastic?' Perhaps some other superlative that Apple would like to use in a keynote? No?



Do you see Cook getting up on stage and saying "we have a relatively good app here?"



If Aperture is good enough for you, keep using it while Photos matures in the same way that FCP X has. Heck, Photos isn't even out yet, so noting has been replaced by anything at this time.



This is a test. It isn't even a public BETA yet. They may have even deliberately restricted features so that people would focus on the part that needs testing (yes, this happens).



If Aperture is not good enough, and you moved on years ago, then you have nothing to worry about anyway (other than extended network outage ending your CC subscription and losing all your photos and hard work when Adobe gets hacked again, but that is another topic).
Click to expand...


Photos is more like iPhoto not Aperture. So it bares no comparison to FCP X. As I said elsewhere, If Apple followed suit in video editing, they would EOL both FCP and iMovie for a new app called Videos that was like iMovie with better sync across devices.

If we were all talking about Aperture X, this would be a much different discussion.

Consider that many here patiently waited for Aperture to catch up with the rest in terms of noise reduction, lens correction and perspective adjustments and now, rather than address those shortcomings, we've got an App which is even further behind.

I think if you were an iPhotos user, this app would look promising but as an Aperture user... It's a slap in the face (to wake up and move on).
 
FWRLCK said:
Wait. Did you actually just make this statement in a thread where everyone and their dog is talking about switching to Adobe products?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what your point is, btw, I've already switched to Lightroom.

I was just agreeing with robgendreau that Photo's represent an option for apple to create a constant revenue source since most people who use it will need more iCloud storage.
 
v3rlon said:
Really, some people need to re-read this 100 times every day.

If Adobe Released LR 6 tomorrow with a noise reduction that gave you 2 more stops at high ISO and a magic sharpening tool that could fix out of focus pictures at twice the price, we would hear about the game changing advances and see a line to rival the next Star Wars movie.

If instead, they released the same features, but included a big red button that would do it perfectly, just the way you wanted, and slashed the price to $19.99 we would hear screams of "abandoned the pros" "lost their focus" and "its just for soccer moms."

Every time a Pro app reduces its price or simplifies common tasks, I hear this. Its like supposed pros want expensive, difficult to use tools to keep the barrier to entry high.

[...]

I have seen this same thing crop up every time a "Pro" product drops its price.
FCP X, NewTek Lightwave, and Softimage XSI (though they gave up on their entry level product) to name a few.

Remember the $499 Windows Ultimate Edition? Now Windows 10 is FREE. Do you thing Microsoft is abandoning the pros? And Apple is of course, since they have been free even longer. You can't go to Linux or Chrome because they are free. So I guess there are no "pro" operating systems to work on anymore.
Click to expand...
QFT :thumbsup:
I would just add two things: I find the distinction between pros and »amateurs« misused, it has nothing to do with quality but only refers to how you make a living. Plenty of amateurs are better photographers than some professionals. Secondly, making software simpler allows more people to express themselves creatively. I have never liked Photoshop (and I have never gotten into using a classical, analog dark room either). But Aperture (and similar software) allows me to do much more with my digital photos.
 
Can I ask a question for people using the Photos App.

1) If you delete a picture from the photos app does it remove it from the Cloud?

2) How is the pictures stored on the Mac? Is it like the iPhotos way of is there a list of Albums?

Cheers
 
http://www.macworld.com/article/2882832/heavens-even-more-photos-questions.html

Photos and time
I have used iPhoto’s Events to construct many (hundreds) of scanned/restored photos (plus digital photos) by date and year, dating back to the 1800s. Will Photos respect this organization with its version of events? Will there still be the ability to batch change the dates so that scanned photos flow in date order?

Bob Reed

As I’ve explained elsewhere, Photos doesn’t have events. Rather, imported events appear as albums. Despite the new name, Photos will indeed support the previous organizational scheme. When you double-click on the iPhone Events album you’ll see collections of images, gathered together by date.

And yes, you can batch change dates. Just select the images you want to edit and choose Image > Adjust Date and Time. In the resulting sheet you can change the date, time, and time zone. When you export those images to other apps, those time changes will be respected.



Photos and plug-ins
I believe at the keynote Apple said that Photos would allow third party plugins, have we seen anything of this yet?

Trevor Sims

We have not, though you’re correct that Apple has said that Photos would be open to third-party extensions. Should this come to pass, some people’s complaints about the lack of truly professional features may be addressed.
 
v3rlon said:
When you say 'relatively good,' do you mean 'fantastic?' Perhaps some other superlative that Apple would like to use in a keynote? No?

Do you see Cook getting up on stage and saying "we have a relatively good app here?"
Click to expand...

Definitely not fantastic :confused:

v3rlon said:
If Aperture is good enough for you, keep using it while Photos matures in the same way that FCP X has. Heck, Photos isn't even out yet, so noting has been replaced by anything at this time.
Click to expand...

Aperture is not good enough for me...

v3rlon said:
This is a test. It isn't even a public BETA yet. They may have even deliberately restricted features so that people would focus on the part that needs testing (yes, this happens).
Click to expand...

I suspect it is very close to 1.0

v3rlon said:
If Aperture is not good enough, and you moved on years ago, then you have nothing to worry about anyway (other than extended network outage ending your CC subscription and losing all your photos and hard work when Adobe gets hacked again, but that is another topic).
Click to expand...

I moved on two years ago when it was abundantly clear :apple: had abandoned that portion of the market.

Losing my photos??? What are they going to do reach into my hard drive and remove them. I do not store photos on the cloud...

----------
OreoCookie said:
He doesn't miss the point, v3rlon and others such as myself disagree with it. The premise that Apple is a hardware company is flawed in the same way that Google is not »just« an ad company. You confuse Apple's monetization strategy with what Apple's products are – software and services.
Click to expand...

I am certainly not confusing their strategy. They are simply enhancing the ecosystem to support hardware sales... Will cloud services be a good revenue source??? Probably... Cloud services are simply an extension of hardware :cool:
 
Last edited:
jms969 said:
Definitely not fantastic :confused:

I am certainly not confusing their strategy. They are simply enhancing the ecosystem to support hardware sales... Will cloud services be a good revenue source??? Probably... Cloud services are simply an extension of hardware :cool:
Click to expand...

Apple is a hardware and services company. They want you in their ecosystem and one way they think they can do that is to offer the "convenience" of cloud storage that integrates across devices. Cloud storage services revenue for Apple would be like its adjunct with Adobe. Nice but relatively negligible income, especially since most people have cheaper/better alternatives. There's no need or requirement to store anything in Apple's cloud storage.
 
r.harris1 said:
Apple is a hardware and services company. They want you in their ecosystem and one way they think they can do that is to offer the "convenience" of cloud storage that integrates across devices. Cloud storage services revenue for Apple would be like its adjunct with Adobe. Nice but relatively negligible income, especially since most people have cheaper/better alternatives. There's no need or requirement to store anything in Apple's cloud storage.
Click to expand...

Precisely!!! :)
 
v3rlon said:
Really, some people need to re-read this 100 times every day.

If Adobe Released LR 6 tomorrow with a noise reduction that gave you 2 more stops at high ISO and a magic sharpening tool that could fix out of focus pictures at twice the price, we would hear about the game changing advances and see a line to rival the next Star Wars movie.

If instead, they released the same features, but included a big red button that would do it perfectly, just the way you wanted, and slashed the price to $19.99 we would hear screams of "abandoned the pros" "lost their focus" and "its just for soccer moms."

Every time a Pro app reduces its price or simplifies common tasks, I hear this. Its like supposed pros want expensive, difficult to use tools to keep the barrier to entry high.

First of all, the more work I can pawn off onto a computer, the more time I have to do the things that I want. If MagicPhoto (TM) can lift the detail out of that shadow without adding noise in 1 click, that is way better than 5 clicks and a slider, right? If it is your JOB, then that is more time you can spend with the family or racing tricycles or whatever floats your boat. It is more time you can spend working on the more difficult photos that could be perfect if you just had a little more time.

Second, abandoning the pro market is just a silly idea. To use a car analogy, "Win the race on Sunday, and sales are up the rest of the week." So I use the same movie editor as was used on [Insert famous movie], or This is the software that [Insert famous photographer] uses. And 'soccer moms' will buy that software and use it. Why do you think there are celebrity endorsements for ANY product? They will not use it as well as a pro, but they will pay for it and play around with it. I have the same guitar that Steve Vai used to play, but neither David Lee Roth nor Frank Zappa ever came knocking on my door.

Pinnacle (the $100 movie editor for Windows) bought Avid (THE Avid - the one the pros use). Why? Because Pinnacle had the money (from massive sales), and wanted to bring some of those features to their $100 product. Selling 100,000 copies for $100 is far better than selling 1000 copies for $700. Avid did not cease to be. They didn't "abandon the pros" in spite of all the predictions.

Remember when Apple pretty much only catered to "pros" back in 1998? When they had to borrow $200 million from Microsoft to stay in business? Then came a couple of consumer products and Apple is outshining Microsoft.

I have seen this same thing crop up every time a "Pro" product drops its price.
FCP X, NewTek Lightwave, and Softimage XSI (though they gave up on their entry level product) to name a few.

Remember the $499 Windows Ultimate Edition? Now Windows 10 is FREE. Do you thing Microsoft is abandoning the pros? And Apple is of course, since they have been free even longer. You can't go to Linux or Chrome because they are free. So I guess there are no "pro" operating systems to work on anymore.
Click to expand...

I don't mind easier. However, there have been instances where Apple has not simplified features, but eliminated them.

Look at FCP X: it took them a few .1 versions to add features back in to it.

Plus, look at hardware. We used to have the Xserve. No we don't. Yes, I realize that Apple didn't sell very many Xserves, but that doesn't mean it's not important. As a sports analogy: we have a lot more football players than football coaches. That doesn't mean coaches aren't important.
 
guzhogi said:
I don't mind easier. However, there have been instances where Apple has not simplified features, but eliminated them.

Look at FCP X: it took them a few .1 versions to add features back in to it.

...
Click to expand...

But they DID get added, and that is my point. FCP X is a far better application than on release, one used by 'pros' and everything. The workflow enhancements are really helpful.

I expect Photos will prove to be quite solid, and much more quickly than FCP. Apple has the FCP episode behind them, and they learned from it, "We will allow import of Aperture/iPhotos libraries." Must plugins are already written, and just need to be adapted to Photos framework. Change a little syntax and you're in business.
 
Must plugins are already written, and just need to be adapted to Photos framework. Change a little syntax and you're in business.
Click to expand...

Do we seriously think Nik, Topaz, OnOneSoftware, Pixelmator, DxO and others will release their existing or new plugins/apps this year reworked for Photos?
 
MCAsan said:
Do we seriously think Nik, Topaz, OnOneSoftware, Pixelmator, DxO and others will release their existing or new plugins/apps this year reworked for Photos?
Click to expand...

It appears not in 1.0:

https://thephotosexpert.com/forum/derrick-storys-podcast-where-he-talks-about-apples-photo-app/14267#.VNuUhIY8KnM
 
v3rlon said:
Photos API notes

https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/Photos/Reference/Photos_Framework/index.html

And, as noted above, Pixelmator already SHOWED one iOS side.
http://www.pixelmator.com/ipad/

Also Apple showed written extensions for examples and talked about how easy it was. So yeah, I kind of expect some to show up.
Click to expand...
Last time I checked, the Photos Framework as it was presented at WWDC was iOS-only for now. There is no point in making the framework public when the Photos app hasn't been finished yet. But it's completely obvious that there will be access to the Photos Framework and a photos Extension also on the Mac. The only question is timing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back