We Aperture users have been waiting and hoping for so long now. At each opportunity for Apple to release a significant new version of Aperture, they don’t. And so we predict the next big media event, or the next OS release, or the next hardware release, or, or ,or… will be The One. And then it’s not.
Certainly I have to imagine that there will be an “Aperture X” at some point. But how far behind Adobe is Apple falling in basic image adjustment technology?
Apple is the undisputed king of interface design and hardware/software integration. And today’s Aperture shows that. But are they also the king of imaging technology? It would be hard to argue for them as Adobe’s years of Photoshop experience would seem to give them a near insurmountable lead.
But perhaps Apple can disrupt even Adobe?
Hopefully they can before the few remaining Aperture users move to Adobe for more features, more open communication and a solid history of updates.
I agree with Bob. Many of us may be moving for more features and a history of updates. However, the move may not be just to Adobe. I am personally tired of both Apple and Adobe treating me as an unimportant adjunct to their business. I only feel the “love” of Aperture on this web site … no where else do I get any encouragement. A good web site started by Rod Lawton is the Life after Photoshop site. There are other options and since I am only a hobbyist editing <1K images/month I am studying other software. At least I have my dog …. come here Rover, ah don’t run away from me!
I know there are new image processing technologies since the last major Aperture update, but I’m confused about what exactly Aperture 3+ is missing? I don’t process 1000’s of photos a day but I use it every day, and really don’t feel limited in what I can do. I occasionally use Pixelmator or Elements for things, but overall, 99% of what I need to do I can do in the current version of Aperture.
What we are really missing is furthering the effort that was so promising about Aperture. While Apple hasn’t left Aperture totally unsupported, they could have offered much more in the way of a few additional key features and enhancement of existing features … In March of next year it will be four years since Aperture 3 was introduced … Since then we have seen three major version releases in OS X … Several major hardware and design updates to iMac, Macbook Pro, Macbook Air, Mac Mini … and now even the venerable Mac Pro has seen a significant revision …
In March 2010 … Apple had yet to sell their first iPad … Both the iPad and iPhone have been revised/updated four times since the introduction of the Aperture 3 … Similarly, we have seen at least three full version upgrades in iOS over that period.
Apple has released very major versions of Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro … while Aperture … and Aperture users are shunned like a red-headed stepchild … All the while Apple is losing faithful Aperture users to competitors … the ONLY product Apple offers that falls in that category! IMHO a needless loss through a lack of effort.
I agree 100%, BopperZip. I cannot understand people complaining about the lack of a “New Aperture”.
Come on folks, tell us what FUNCTIONALITY you want in a “New Aperture”. Be specific - I need X, I want Y, Z is too slow, LightRoom does this, LightRoom does that, I need to swap out to PhotoShop for this, that and the other.
Be warned, the way Apple is behaving now you just might get a “New Aperture” and regret it - trimmed back functionality and poorer usability in the interests of pretty cosmetics, perhaps? Never forget the new iWork!
Sure … here goes … (though these lists have been offered here and elsewhere ad nauseam for years that it really is redundant)
1. Native built in user addressable FTP export.
2. Improved NR with wider user selectable settings for fine detail.
3. Employ a system for user defined custom color camera profiles that can be set as default for specific cameras based upon serial number of the camera.
4. Enhanced export watermarking/text overlays.
5. Use a single brushed-in mask/selection with multiple adjustment bricks.
6. Gradient adjustment masks/selections … both circular and linear ..
7. Lens Correction/Perspective Correction
8. Better integration for sending multiple/batch images to Ps without having to code or invoke Automator.
9. Better vignette control without having to employ multiple bricks to achieve the goal.
10. Improved, more finely tuned export sharpening to include multiple presets for different mediums.
11. Better syncing of adjustment setting for groups/batches of images … Lift and Stamp is an archaic approach to the solution and should have been addressed long ago.
Those come to mind most for me. I also submit these to Apple via the “Provide Aperture Feedback” link several times a week … so much and so often they undoubtedly have my email blocked by now because they are tired of hearing from me.
Honestly … while I really do enjoy working with Aperture I am having great difficulty in accepting that Aperture 3.5.1 should be considered pure perfection so Apple really doesn’t need to expend any effort on improving it or that we shouldn’t desire or require more.
I also can’t recall ever having to beg a developer so much to offer me something more so I could spend more money with them.
Kill off Photo Stream? Couldn’t disagree more. PhotoStream is a an extremely viable tool to pass images between devices and seamless integration to Aperture.
While I do not use it for my professional work, it has become quite a handy tool in sharing images with family, friends and social acquaintances …
I do agree that iCloud left a vacuum for personal image site hosting … nothing that a good premium Wordpress theme can’t answer …
Oh … that is item No. 12 … better integration or improved plugin support for Wordpress …
I’m not John … but I used Lightroom as my sole RAW processing pipeline from the very first public beta through v4 … though I did test Lr 5 trial … I only switched to Aperture for all my workflow a little over a year ago.
Why? Because the the Slideshow module is abysmal and the Book module is a cruel pathetic joke. I create about 150-200 books/albums per year. I design for myself and few other shooters. I create slideshows almost daily for online local news coverage. So these two items are very crucial for me.
The Lr Slideshow module only offers a single title page, ending page, a single transition, all slides must use the same duration as well … and only a single audio track … no timeline functionality, no secondary audio or ducking for voice overs or narration (though there is rudimentary ducking for video clips with the main audio track) … etc. etc. If you need audio for a long presentation, you need to splice, edit and adjust that outside of Lr into a single file.
The Book module is limited only to page sizes and limitations that you can order from Blurb. While you can export books from Lr. as Jpeg or PDF … if your lab/printer requires different page dimensions or margins/bleeds or requires spreads … you are forced into a ton of extra work to modify the files so they print properly. (so many folks consider Apple to work within a “walled garden” … Adobe has issues in this respect as well)
The Develop module in Lr does indeed outshine Aperture in many ways including Lens Correction, NR, vignette adjustments and custom camera color profiles. I also found syncing batch image adjustments to be more desirable than in Aperture 3.
The Print module is awesome in Lr. It is one of the primary reasons I adopted Lr. It’s one tool Adobe got right from the start. About the only aspect of Lr I miss.
I know I am the odd duck on this one, but I don’t see any real issues or problems between the Library module in Lr and file management in Aperture …. to me they both do a decent job of taking care of business … though all my image files are referenced … (I have over 12TB of images in my Archive.)
I also like that you can export to FTP directly from Lr without having to create derivative files that need housecleaned later … though you have to add the FTP plugin from the free SDK.
Where Aperture excels for me over Lr …
Import and initial thumbnail viewing is very fast compared to Lr …. especially if you use the import only flagged/locked images feature. New users to Lr are driven nuts that as you scroll in thumbnail view in the Library module, Lr has to re-build the thumbs … whether it is the very first view of that image or the 1,000th view … pure craziness and a tax on resources and waste of valuable time if you ask me.
Sharing images with other Apple apps without the need to export images is a pleasure with Aperture … In recent months I have added a camcorder to the mix and have moved most of my video editing to FCP X … so adding images to a project there is child’s play … also working with Keynote, Pages and Numbers is seamless … Lr not so much … you have to export the images to be used elsewhere which creates more needless files, more housecleaning to track and clear clutter after the fact.
The attraction and purpose for me to utilize either option is to get from capture to delivery creating as little clutter as possible … and to work in a single app/UI as much as possible along the way. For me, Aperture gets me to that goal easier and more efficiently than other options. However, it is high time Apple steps up to the plate and take us to the next level.
My response was aimed at John further back in the thread.
But you make the key point. Each of us has to get from click to output and we want to do it in the most effective and efficient way possible.
For me, that output is usually the old fashioned print; somehow it’s just not a “real” image unless you can hold it in your hand and pass it around.
Aperture’s killer organizational feature for me is its concept of a folder. Lightroom’s folders are simply mirrors of Finder folders. But Aperture’s are a virtual construct and can therefore hold albums, photo books, smart albums, slideshows and what ever else you may need. And in multiple copies (more than one book, for example) if you want.
But Lightroom’s develop and print modules beat Aperture.
Now, if Aperture X could just close the gap to Lightroom in development and printing, I would be a happy guy. And if they leveraged the power of the new Mac Pro’s GPUs, I would be ecstatic. :)
BopperZip .. if you search the forums there have been a number of threads on the missing features / desired enhancements for a major new version of Aperture. Lens correction is a significant one. Better noise management is another. Some of the Library features could be enhanced a little. It would be nice to be able to select a number of images and remove an adjustment brick. At present you can only add them, not remove them.
You can also search Google and find articles written on other sites that go to great lengths to love Aperture, but enumerate the things that could be improved.
While it’s not that Aperture has received NO improvements since the launch of version 3, most of those improvements have been inward facing, as opposed to outward, that is user, facing. We just haven’t seen much in the way of additional functionality. I won’t list all the missing functions again, as others have done a better job above than I.
But it strikes me as naive to think that so little has changed in computing possibilities or image processing possibilities in over 3 years that Aperture is still “current” technologically.
I suspect that, as others have said, we’re waiting for Apple’s major re-write of what Aperture even is. Maybe it is taking SOLONG because they have been sharply criticized for past releases of other major software that dropped features and only slowly began bringing them back a point revision at a time.
Regardless, it would be hard to say that Apple is near as concerned about the creative professional today as it once was. Their market focus has shifted more toward the consumer both in their software and their hardware. Lightroom is roundly criticized for having too few new features to call it a full version upgrade each time they go from 3 to 4 to 5. But add features, refine edges, fix bugs and continue to march ahead they do.
Adobe’s bread and butter is the creative professional. They simply must move their products ahead, even if by small amounts and at higher than user-pleasing costs (and don’t get me started on the full Creative Cloud). But how many among us Aperture fans would not be willing to pay for more signifiant upgrade more frequently?
What I do think I know is that Apple will need to really wow the Aperture crowd with it’s next major update, whenever it is, to avoid the end of Aperture as a professionals tool and the start of Aperture as a upwardly mobile prosumer tool. And there may be nothing wrong with that for Apple. But professional photographers will go elsewhere.
I hope we don’t ever see a “life after Aperture” website surface. :(
I really hope so. It would be nice to have better adjustment controls. There’s always this continuous discussion of “well what more do you want from Aperture?, it does what it does really well etc”. Well at one point what I wanted was a ‘grain tool’, a ‘noise reduction tool’ worth talking about, a ‘history tool’ with the ability to take ‘snap shots’ and return to them at any given point.
Having said that I no longer need those features to be honest because with modern technology there’s no longer a huge need for noise reduction tools and plus there are such incredible 3rd party filters such as Alien Skin and NIK that I’d rather do my post there. But the general adjustment tools of Aperture are a bit antiquated in my opinion. For example in LR you can hover the cursor over the adjustments slider and use the arrows on the keyboard to micro-adjust things like horizons etc. that’s a small detail but makes life so much easier ….with all adjustments to be frank. Also the crop tool needs to be addressed, it’s just not great at all compared to PS and LR. You cannot micro-adjust your crops or even preview them before committing.
Other than those things I agree that Aperture in its current state works really well but it does need a major update if only to instill a level of confidence in its users to show them that it’s safe to stick with Aperture because Apple are in it for the long hall. It’s the ‘radio silence’ from Apple which is the real killer, not knowing if it’s going to be abandoned altogether. Meanwhile iPhoto gets so much love it’s ridiculous. Remember it was Apple that sold us on this notion of Aperture being the “be all and end all”, the “one-stop pro app most of us will ever need”. And so we bought into it. I think they just need to treat the lawyalist a bit better.
Doesn’t look like it. They did release a new version of Final Cut Pro X.
Does not look like we will get an Aperture X-mas. ;-)
Milt
Still waiting, waiting, waiting…..
Florian Cortese
www.fotosbyflorian.com
This makes me sad.
We Aperture users have been waiting and hoping for so long now. At each opportunity for Apple to release a significant new version of Aperture, they don’t. And so we predict the next big media event, or the next OS release, or the next hardware release, or, or ,or… will be The One. And then it’s not.
Certainly I have to imagine that there will be an “Aperture X” at some point. But how far behind Adobe is Apple falling in basic image adjustment technology?
Apple is the undisputed king of interface design and hardware/software integration. And today’s Aperture shows that. But are they also the king of imaging technology? It would be hard to argue for them as Adobe’s years of Photoshop experience would seem to give them a near insurmountable lead.
But perhaps Apple can disrupt even Adobe?
Hopefully they can before the few remaining Aperture users move to Adobe for more features, more open communication and a solid history of updates.
Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
Apple could BUY Adobe. From the petty cash.
I agree with Bob. Many of us may be moving for more features and a history of updates. However, the move may not be just to Adobe. I am personally tired of both Apple and Adobe treating me as an unimportant adjunct to their business. I only feel the “love” of Aperture on this web site … no where else do I get any encouragement. A good web site started by Rod Lawton is the Life after Photoshop site. There are other options and since I am only a hobbyist editing <1K images/month I am studying other software. At least I have my dog …. come here Rover, ah don’t run away from me!
JWS
I know there are new image processing technologies since the last major Aperture update, but I’m confused about what exactly Aperture 3+ is missing? I don’t process 1000’s of photos a day but I use it every day, and really don’t feel limited in what I can do. I occasionally use Pixelmator or Elements for things, but overall, 99% of what I need to do I can do in the current version of Aperture.
So what are we missing/waiting for?
BopperZip
What we are really missing is furthering the effort that was so promising about Aperture. While Apple hasn’t left Aperture totally unsupported, they could have offered much more in the way of a few additional key features and enhancement of existing features … In March of next year it will be four years since Aperture 3 was introduced … Since then we have seen three major version releases in OS X … Several major hardware and design updates to iMac, Macbook Pro, Macbook Air, Mac Mini … and now even the venerable Mac Pro has seen a significant revision …
In March 2010 … Apple had yet to sell their first iPad … Both the iPad and iPhone have been revised/updated four times since the introduction of the Aperture 3 … Similarly, we have seen at least three full version upgrades in iOS over that period.
Apple has released very major versions of Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro … while Aperture … and Aperture users are shunned like a red-headed stepchild … All the while Apple is losing faithful Aperture users to competitors … the ONLY product Apple offers that falls in that category! IMHO a needless loss through a lack of effort.
The major features that Aperture needs include:
Those three things, I’d be a happy camper. There are a few other items, but those are the top three (IMHO)
I agree 100%, BopperZip. I cannot understand people complaining about the lack of a “New Aperture”.
Come on folks, tell us what FUNCTIONALITY you want in a “New Aperture”. Be specific - I need X, I want Y, Z is too slow, LightRoom does this, LightRoom does that, I need to swap out to PhotoShop for this, that and the other.
Be warned, the way Apple is behaving now you just might get a “New Aperture” and regret it - trimmed back functionality and poorer usability in the interests of pretty cosmetics, perhaps? Never forget the new iWork!
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Sure … here goes … (though these lists have been offered here and elsewhere ad nauseam for years that it really is redundant)
1. Native built in user addressable FTP export.
2. Improved NR with wider user selectable settings for fine detail.
3. Employ a system for user defined custom color camera profiles that can be set as default for specific cameras based upon serial number of the camera.
4. Enhanced export watermarking/text overlays.
5. Use a single brushed-in mask/selection with multiple adjustment bricks.
6. Gradient adjustment masks/selections … both circular and linear ..
7. Lens Correction/Perspective Correction
8. Better integration for sending multiple/batch images to Ps without having to code or invoke Automator.
9. Better vignette control without having to employ multiple bricks to achieve the goal.
10. Improved, more finely tuned export sharpening to include multiple presets for different mediums.
11. Better syncing of adjustment setting for groups/batches of images … Lift and Stamp is an archaic approach to the solution and should have been addressed long ago.
Those come to mind most for me. I also submit these to Apple via the “Provide Aperture Feedback” link several times a week … so much and so often they undoubtedly have my email blocked by now because they are tired of hearing from me.
Honestly … while I really do enjoy working with Aperture I am having great difficulty in accepting that Aperture 3.5.1 should be considered pure perfection so Apple really doesn’t need to expend any effort on improving it or that we shouldn’t desire or require more.
I also can’t recall ever having to beg a developer so much to offer me something more so I could spend more money with them.
Butch,
Excellent!
I too would love to see most of those plus much more flexible website creation.
And I wouldn’t shed any tears if they killed off PhotoStream.
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Kill off Photo Stream? Couldn’t disagree more. PhotoStream is a an extremely viable tool to pass images between devices and seamless integration to Aperture.
While I do not use it for my professional work, it has become quite a handy tool in sharing images with family, friends and social acquaintances …
I do agree that iCloud left a vacuum for personal image site hosting … nothing that a good premium Wordpress theme can’t answer …
Oh … that is item No. 12 … better integration or improved plugin support for Wordpress …
That’s a good list, Butch. I wouldn’t quibble with any of them. For me, Aperture X would need to only have two improvements to make me happy:
1. Lens correction
2. Better NR
And if they would just add #1 to a 3.x update (fat chance), I’d stop looking at Lightroom as a replacement.
John,
Have you used Lightroom 5 to any extent? It would be more clear where Aperture shines and where it falls behind if you have.
Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
I’m not John … but I used Lightroom as my sole RAW processing pipeline from the very first public beta through v4 … though I did test Lr 5 trial … I only switched to Aperture for all my workflow a little over a year ago.
Why? Because the the Slideshow module is abysmal and the Book module is a cruel pathetic joke. I create about 150-200 books/albums per year. I design for myself and few other shooters. I create slideshows almost daily for online local news coverage. So these two items are very crucial for me.
The Lr Slideshow module only offers a single title page, ending page, a single transition, all slides must use the same duration as well … and only a single audio track … no timeline functionality, no secondary audio or ducking for voice overs or narration (though there is rudimentary ducking for video clips with the main audio track) … etc. etc. If you need audio for a long presentation, you need to splice, edit and adjust that outside of Lr into a single file.
The Book module is limited only to page sizes and limitations that you can order from Blurb. While you can export books from Lr. as Jpeg or PDF … if your lab/printer requires different page dimensions or margins/bleeds or requires spreads … you are forced into a ton of extra work to modify the files so they print properly. (so many folks consider Apple to work within a “walled garden” … Adobe has issues in this respect as well)
The Develop module in Lr does indeed outshine Aperture in many ways including Lens Correction, NR, vignette adjustments and custom camera color profiles. I also found syncing batch image adjustments to be more desirable than in Aperture 3.
The Print module is awesome in Lr. It is one of the primary reasons I adopted Lr. It’s one tool Adobe got right from the start. About the only aspect of Lr I miss.
I know I am the odd duck on this one, but I don’t see any real issues or problems between the Library module in Lr and file management in Aperture …. to me they both do a decent job of taking care of business … though all my image files are referenced … (I have over 12TB of images in my Archive.)
I also like that you can export to FTP directly from Lr without having to create derivative files that need housecleaned later … though you have to add the FTP plugin from the free SDK.
Where Aperture excels for me over Lr …
Import and initial thumbnail viewing is very fast compared to Lr …. especially if you use the import only flagged/locked images feature. New users to Lr are driven nuts that as you scroll in thumbnail view in the Library module, Lr has to re-build the thumbs … whether it is the very first view of that image or the 1,000th view … pure craziness and a tax on resources and waste of valuable time if you ask me.
Sharing images with other Apple apps without the need to export images is a pleasure with Aperture … In recent months I have added a camcorder to the mix and have moved most of my video editing to FCP X … so adding images to a project there is child’s play … also working with Keynote, Pages and Numbers is seamless … Lr not so much … you have to export the images to be used elsewhere which creates more needless files, more housecleaning to track and clear clutter after the fact.
The attraction and purpose for me to utilize either option is to get from capture to delivery creating as little clutter as possible … and to work in a single app/UI as much as possible along the way. For me, Aperture gets me to that goal easier and more efficiently than other options. However, it is high time Apple steps up to the plate and take us to the next level.
Butch,
My response was aimed at John further back in the thread.
But you make the key point. Each of us has to get from click to output and we want to do it in the most effective and efficient way possible.
For me, that output is usually the old fashioned print; somehow it’s just not a “real” image unless you can hold it in your hand and pass it around.
Aperture’s killer organizational feature for me is its concept of a folder. Lightroom’s folders are simply mirrors of Finder folders. But Aperture’s are a virtual construct and can therefore hold albums, photo books, smart albums, slideshows and what ever else you may need. And in multiple copies (more than one book, for example) if you want.
But Lightroom’s develop and print modules beat Aperture.
Now, if Aperture X could just close the gap to Lightroom in development and printing, I would be a happy guy. And if they leveraged the power of the new Mac Pro’s GPUs, I would be ecstatic. :)
Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
BopperZip .. if you search the forums there have been a number of threads on the missing features / desired enhancements for a major new version of Aperture. Lens correction is a significant one. Better noise management is another. Some of the Library features could be enhanced a little. It would be nice to be able to select a number of images and remove an adjustment brick. At present you can only add them, not remove them.
You can also search Google and find articles written on other sites that go to great lengths to love Aperture, but enumerate the things that could be improved.
Photographer | https://www.walterrowe.com | https://instagram.com/walter.rowe.photo
While it’s not that Aperture has received NO improvements since the launch of version 3, most of those improvements have been inward facing, as opposed to outward, that is user, facing. We just haven’t seen much in the way of additional functionality. I won’t list all the missing functions again, as others have done a better job above than I.
But it strikes me as naive to think that so little has changed in computing possibilities or image processing possibilities in over 3 years that Aperture is still “current” technologically.
I suspect that, as others have said, we’re waiting for Apple’s major re-write of what Aperture even is. Maybe it is taking SO LONG because they have been sharply criticized for past releases of other major software that dropped features and only slowly began bringing them back a point revision at a time.
Regardless, it would be hard to say that Apple is near as concerned about the creative professional today as it once was. Their market focus has shifted more toward the consumer both in their software and their hardware. Lightroom is roundly criticized for having too few new features to call it a full version upgrade each time they go from 3 to 4 to 5. But add features, refine edges, fix bugs and continue to march ahead they do.
Adobe’s bread and butter is the creative professional. They simply must move their products ahead, even if by small amounts and at higher than user-pleasing costs (and don’t get me started on the full Creative Cloud). But how many among us Aperture fans would not be willing to pay for more signifiant upgrade more frequently?
What I do think I know is that Apple will need to really wow the Aperture crowd with it’s next major update, whenever it is, to avoid the end of Aperture as a professionals tool and the start of Aperture as a upwardly mobile prosumer tool. And there may be nothing wrong with that for Apple. But professional photographers will go elsewhere.
I hope we don’t ever see a “life after Aperture” website surface. :(
Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
I really hope so. It would be nice to have better adjustment controls. There’s always this continuous discussion of “well what more do you want from Aperture?, it does what it does really well etc”. Well at one point what I wanted was a ‘grain tool’, a ‘noise reduction tool’ worth talking about, a ‘history tool’ with the ability to take ‘snap shots’ and return to them at any given point.
Having said that I no longer need those features to be honest because with modern technology there’s no longer a huge need for noise reduction tools and plus there are such incredible 3rd party filters such as Alien Skin and NIK that I’d rather do my post there. But the general adjustment tools of Aperture are a bit antiquated in my opinion. For example in LR you can hover the cursor over the adjustments slider and use the arrows on the keyboard to micro-adjust things like horizons etc. that’s a small detail but makes life so much easier ….with all adjustments to be frank. Also the crop tool needs to be addressed, it’s just not great at all compared to PS and LR. You cannot micro-adjust your crops or even preview them before committing.
Other than those things I agree that Aperture in its current state works really well but it does need a major update if only to instill a level of confidence in its users to show them that it’s safe to stick with Aperture because Apple are in it for the long hall. It’s the ‘radio silence’ from Apple which is the real killer, not knowing if it’s going to be abandoned altogether. Meanwhile iPhoto gets so much love it’s ridiculous. Remember it was Apple that sold us on this notion of Aperture being the “be all and end all”, the “one-stop pro app most of us will ever need”. And so we bought into it. I think they just need to treat the lawyalist a bit better.