Aperture is Dead. Long Live Photos!
I received an official call from Apple PR this morning about the future of Aperture. My phone, twitter and Messages have been ringing off the hook since the announcement was publicly made. But I wanted to take some time to really think this through before shouting from the rooftops. So here we go.
On the surface, it doesn't seem like good news, but there's a lot more to this than a few lines of text. First, the official words.
“With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture. When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X.” — Apple, Inc.
In short, Aperture as we know it is dead. So let's take a step back and figure out what this really means, because obviously photography is far from unimportant to Apple. There are more questions than answers now than ever before, and I'll try to come up with all the right questions and all my best answers. Call this interpretation, speculation, or clairvoyance — but here's how I'm reading into this.
Why? Why Photos 1 and not Aperture 4?
Before we can look to the future, let's look at the past. Aperture itself has been around since 2005; nearly a decade. And of course it started being written well before that, so we are talking about 10+ year old code. The cloud, the iPhone, and pocket sized digital cameras that surpass the quality of film not only didn't exist, but were barely a twinkle in Steve Jobs' or any technologist's eye. Aperture is a photo editing and management tool written for users used to an old school workflow. Go on a shoot. Sit down to edit. Share when you're done. But that's not the world we live in anymore. Today we want to shoot, share immediately with a cool effect, edit on an iPad, sit down at your 4k display and get serious, pick up the iPad and show off what you've done, mix, repeat. We want our devices, our libraries, our experience integrated and seamless. This simply can not happen with Aperture as it is today.
This is a case of evolution vs revolution. Apple could continue to evolve Aperture, and to be honest I wish they had—in 2011, 2012, 2013. But now it's too late. Now it's time to focus on the future. The next generation of photos architecture. The revolution. We saw this in the WWDC 2014 keynote. We saw Photos in iCloud. We saw seamless integration between an iOS device and the desktop. We saw a glimpse of features that clearly couldn't exist in Aperture. We saw the future.
Everything could be based on PhotoKit. It is now for iOS, but that same thing could happen in OS X. That would mean seamless integration between iOS and OS X, and unheard of third party developer access. We saw the new raw processing engine with lens correction and phenomenal noise reduction, for example, in WWDC sessions. All the groundwork is in place for an amazing experience.
For those of you who edit video, you'll remember the transition from Final Cut Pro to Final Cut Pro X. It sucked. Big time. And frankly, Apple handled the PR of that poorly. Major features were missing, the software was buggy as hell, and yet Apple told the Pro market that it was time to move. After some serious backlash they relented, and re-relesed Final Cut Pro 7 for the existing users, so they could wait for FCP X to mature. And mature it has. Today, Final Cut Pro X is an amazing piece of software. Apple isn't making that mistake with Aperture. But it doesn't change the fact that it's time to move on.
For a happier look at the migration path, look at iWork — Pages, Keynote and Numbers. Great apps that were developed long before iOS, and once iOS came out, new versions of those apps showed up there. Lots of feature parity, lots of feature disparity. The more the iOS versions advanced, the more inferior the OS X versions felt. Until finally, Apple threw away the old apps, and released all new versions that were based on the same new code. At first, all the features of the old iWork weren't there. But Apple worked relentlessly and continued to update the software (free updates, by the way) and today those apps are fantastic. And more to the point, they are virtually identical across platforms (except for font support. Don't get me started on font support).
Now, it's the third time for this to happen. To your photos. And it has begun.
Will Photos.app version 1 have all the features of Aperture 3?
Very unlikely. Apple has stated that users will be able to migrate their existing libraries. They have also stated that there will be at least one maintenance release to ensure that Aperture is fully compatible with OS X Yosemite. Put those together, and it tell us that just because you can migrate, doesn't necessarily mean that you should. Since they say that you can however, that has to mean that any existing effects and metadata will be intact. I just wouldn't necessarily expect to be able to edit them in version 1. As Photos.app evolves however, at some point you should have all the same features — and of course a ton of new ones.
When should I migrate to Photos?
It's too soon to tell that now, but I'd wager that iPhoto and beginner Aperture users will be able to migrate immediately, while more advanced Aperture users may want to wait for another version or two. Since Aperture will continue to be supported at minimum for OS X Yosemite, personally I think version 1 will be fun to play with, and probably start a new library with. Maybe not for pro work, but I'll use it where I can. The integration between iOS and OS X will be too sweet to ignore. And as long as it has the “open in editor” feature, I can always use Photoshop and plug-ins for anything Photos can't do. Then as Photos.app progresses, once the legacy Aperture is no longer needed, I'd migrate my entire library. It'll take time, but it won't stop me from doing my job. And I think it'll be worth the wait.
I'm a pro—I don't need iOS iCloud iPad iShare
No? That's OK, I still enjoy shooting film, too. But for the rest of the world that has gone digital, this is happening. You may not be posting your client shoots to Instagram, but your clients are getting more demanding. Wanting on-site reviews. Remote reviews! Fast turnaround to their never-ending change requests. High resolution images delivered to prepress and small ones for their Facebook page. All these iFeatures will come in handy.
What if OS X was more like iOS from a developer standpoint?
OK, now let's have some fun. Think about your iPhone or iPad for a minute. You shoot or import or download a photo, and where does it go? To the Photos app. That' a super simple app today, but we already know that's changing. OK.
Now, think about all the other third party photo apps on your iPhone. Where do they get their photos from? Photos app. Where do they put them when you're done editing them? Photos app. Some have their own storage as well, but thats only for one reason — to maintain non-destructive edit-ability. Even iPhoto for iOS works that way.
Now, look at iOS 8. We already know that iOS 8 elevates third party apps to the same level as Apple apps. They can access the same library in the same way that native apps can. So that whole “store it in your own app” issue should go away.
What does that mean? Simply put, that Photos is a single storage location for all your pictures, regardless of what app you choose to edit them with. Pretty cool, right?
Now for the big reveal.
Consider the possibilities
Extrapolate that to OS X. What if OS X worked the same way? What if Photos for OS X was built on PhotoKit, and what if PhotoKit was integrated into the OS itself. What if third party apps on OS X could access your Photos.app photo library the same way that iOS apps can (and will be able to in iOS 8)?
Suddenly you have an ecosystem where the library is the hub. No more one-time, stuck-with-it-forever decision if you should use Aperture or Lightroom or Bridge or anything else. Photos.app stores your photos and allows some level of editing. Future Nik plugins apps access that same library. Future Lightroom accesses the same Library (!!). Future Photo Mechanic. MacPhun, onOne, Alien Skin… name your app, name your plugin. In this utopian future, all apps have the same access to all photos. PhotoKit could make that possible.
Now that's cool. All this on a photo library based in the cloud.
1TB isn't enough for me
We saw in WWDC that Apple will have pricing plans for iCloud up to 1TB, which we've already observed isn't enough. But that's an easy problem to solve. So don't worry about that. I think by the time you're ready to move your entire 5TB Aperture library to Photos, there will be an iCloud option available to you.
Sounds great, but eff this, I'm outta here!
Undoubtedly Apple will lose some users to Lightroom. That's inevitable, and I'm not going to say “they'll be back!”. But they probably will :-) As before, for most of us diehard Aperture users, we've added plugins or other apps to enhance the Aperture experience to do everything Lightroom does, and more. There's no reason for that to change. At least now, finally, we can see the future, and we don't need a crystal ball to do it.
What does this mean for ApertureExpert.com?
Well, a name change at minimum :-) Any suggestions? I'm serious… I looked at PhotosExpert.com but it's owned and is being held anonymously. I'm open to suggestions, because the future of this site will be awesome. I will be able to write about not only a single app and it's plugins, but any OS X or iOS app that connects to the Photos architecture. I smell growth.
Now, go make some photos
We can chat and comment and speculate and pontificate endlessly about this, but at the end of the day, if you're not out shooting, none of this matters. So stop reading, and go make some pretty pictures. And dream big about the future. Because it's coming, and it'll be awesome.
UPDATE
I've responded to the many comments here in a new post, “Comment Follow-up on the Demise of Aperture”. Please read that before commenting here. Thanks!
Official Apple image of Photos on OS X Yosemite
Comments
on June 30, 2014 - 5:20am
Guys it really isn’t that bad to migrate from Aperture to LR. Just convert your library to Referenced in Aperture. There are a few snags but if you do a quick google search for Scott Kelby Aperture to Lightroom you will find his show on this. He just posted a few days ago. I have gone from Aperture to LR, to Aperture and back to LR with 2 TB of photos. What you really loose is the non destructive edits. So save those as JPEGs or TIFFs before you migrate.
Adobe is making the cloud Photoshop/Lightroom bundle available to all for $10 a month. It is a great deal IMO, even though I do hate the subscription model.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:45am
Tried, but couldn’t find anything like what you describe. Could you provide a link?
on June 30, 2014 - 6:45am
Tried, but couldn’t find anything like what you describe. Could you provide a link?
on June 30, 2014 - 3:03pm
http://kelbyone.com/aperture-to-lightroom/
on June 30, 2014 - 9:42am
“What you really loose (sic) is the non destructive edits.”
You mean the most important part of any professional photo editing and management software application.
Pray tell, why have you switched back to Aperture from Lightroom, and then back again?
on June 30, 2014 - 11:50am
You will NOT lose the non destructive edits. Even the current editing tool on the iPad has non destructive edits. I shot some images recently where I wanted to get them out directly from the venue. I put them on my iPad… did some quick edits and sent them off. Later, when I went to put them into Aperture, I had the opportunity to remove the edits and re do them in Aperture.
http://www.johnthawley.com
on June 30, 2014 - 3:07pm
John we mean if you go from Aperture to Lightroom. You will loose the edits on RAW files. At least you always would in the past.
on June 28, 2014 - 2:41am
As a 70 year old guy with giant libraries, the transition to some other DAM software is a nightmare
I’m lost for words
I’m thinking Photo Mechanic?
……..Gary
Aperture RIP
I have a photographic memory but never got it developed
on June 28, 2014 - 2:56am
Photo Mechanic is not DAM software. And the only editing feature they have is cropping, and a lousy implementation at that.
They have been promising a “catalog” version of Photo Mechanic for about 5 years, but have nothing to show for it.
on June 28, 2014 - 2:47am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 3:16am
Tks for the reassurance guys
I do have CC PS and LR but only use PS as needed and find PS an amazing tool
Guess I just have to bite the bullet with LR and try and work out the transition
………….Gary
I have a photographic memory but never got it developed
on June 28, 2014 - 3:21am
I’m sure Lynda.com is going to reap the rewards of this announcement !
Which DAM software now is the question?
Looking like LR is the winner?
I have a photographic memory but never got it developed
on June 28, 2014 - 4:03am
Stay Calm
And Aperture On!
For now anyways.
Florian Cortese
www.fotosbyflorian.com
on June 28, 2014 - 4:04am
I suspect DAM is being built into OS X, and being less reliant on an app. Photos and videos are now integral to all our devices. We already see this with the managed library in Aperture shared quid pro quo with iPhoto. Don’t forget that they are killing iPhoto as well, and that’s a vaster audience (including my 75 year-old mother and mother in law) to annoy.
I think it is safer t say the library structure we are all familiar with is going to stay. I am not sure about referenced filing, however. The iMovie approach is more likely, meaning you can store on whatever drive you want, but in a Apple container, not your own file structure. I suspect custom, Finder-level folder systems are done for with Apple’s media file storage.
Interesting times. As much as we are making hay about Aperture, I think the far bigger story is the buried lead: the death of iLife, now known as the Apple Creativity Apps.
on June 28, 2014 - 4:10am
I couldn’t agree more, Joseph. I too got the call.
With over 12TB of Aperture Libraries residing on my desk, I, like many others, have healthy, albeit guarded, concerns for the future of my workflow and libraries. However, I am confident in Apple’s vision of the future. For years I’ve listened to other professionals ask me “how is Aperture different to Photoshop?”, or …. “I prefer Photoshop!” As we all came to learn… there’s virtually no comparison.
My point is, we would never have fallen in love with a better way to do our job had it not been for the vision of Apple’s developers and the introduction of Aperture. One stop workflow… non-destructive edits, and lots of quick efficient new ways to get our images in the hands of customers, viewers, family and friends. Apple developers gave us something we didn’t know we wanted…. and showed us a better way.
They were the first to drop the floppy drive… the first to drop the CD/DVD drive. All to the typical uproar of naysayers.
The Cloud is the future. Shared images and universal access is the future. I cherish the thought of having all my images available on all my devices no matter where I am. The thought of standing in front of client… “away from my desk”… and being able to share or access any file any time… priceless.
Case in point: Today, I shot an afternoon session. Later in the day I sent 8 images to a client that he needed to distribute to his team. He works from an iPhone most the time… and he doesn’t know what he’s doing. He deleted the email with the images I had sent. I’m sitting in a restaurant making the most out of my dinner when I get the panicked email. Sadly, I had to tell him I’d be back at my hotel in about 45 minutes and would resend the images.
Had I been able to access them from my phone, I would have remailed them on the spot. Instead, I had to fret for 45 minutes that my client (who happens to be not tech savvy… doesn’t want to understand… doesn’t want to learn… doesn’t want to hear excuses… ) wouldn’t boil over before I got back to the hotel.
I believe in the people at Apple. Having had the pleasure of sitting with the development team at Aperture…. and having shared time with Phil Schiller explaining Apple’s philosophy of developing software that enables their Mac users to enjoy the potential and benefits of Mac tools, I’m thoroughly convinced the change (while possibly bumpy) will pave the way to a new and exciting future… and a workflow that suits the times and our needs. Never have I sat with people so enthusiastic… so genuinely excited about what they are doing and so committed to getting it right.
Sometimes you can’t just keep adding on and patching. There comes a time to rebuild. That doesn’t mean throwing out the baby with the bathwater. :)
Keep the faith…. I believe we’re on the right side of thise.
http://www.johnthawley.com
on June 28, 2014 - 7:54am
“That doesn’t mean throwing out the baby with the bathwater….” That’s exactly what Apple just did.
What Apple does not understand is that by ceding the market to Adobe, creatives now have *zero* reason to continue paying for Apple’s overpriced hardware. We were happy to pay extra because we knew it was funding future development. But Apple *isn’t* developing for pros any more. Soooo, why buy from Apple?
As I discussed with our video guy (who just switched from Final Cut to Adobe Premiere) the question is, why are we paying through the nose for Apple gear when Adobe software runs faster on a PC??
Our company is switching to PC for Lightroom/Photoshop/Premiere/etc and keeping our current Mac Pros for email and so on.
Good work Apple.
on June 28, 2014 - 11:30pm
My feelings toward Apple are compromised right now. However, making a case that you paid for Apple’s ‘overpriced’ hardware because you thought they were funding future development, is insincere and a cheap shot. Most professionals pay dearly for the tools they need to make their jobs easier, yet most effective. Who says Adobe software runs faster on a PC? Your Mac Pros are being used only for email now? Sounds like you have a bone to pick with Apple, and your argument goes beyond this current issue.
Phil in Midland
on June 28, 2014 - 11:32pm
My feelings toward Apple are compromised right now. However, making a case that you paid for Apple’s ‘overpriced’ hardware because you thought they were funding future development, is insincere and a cheap shot. Most professionals pay dearly for the tools they need to make their jobs easier, yet most effective. Who says Adobe software runs faster on a PC? Your Mac Pros are being used only for email now? Sounds like you have a bone to pick with Apple, and your argument goes beyond this current issue.
Phil in Midland
on June 28, 2014 - 5:21pm
I accept your optimism and your faith, JT. I might have to re-read your post again, several times, over the next few months, but I’ll go with your philosophy.
Thanks …
~~~>--} threeshoes photography
on June 28, 2014 - 6:24pm
“Case in point: Today, I shot an afternoon session. Later in the day I sent 8 images to a client that he needed to distribute to his team. He works from an iPhone most the time… and he doesn’t know what he’s doing. He deleted the email with the images I had sent. I’m sitting in a restaurant making the most out of my dinner when I get the panicked email. Sadly, I had to tell him I’d be back at my hotel in about 45 minutes and would resend the images.”
Well … just as an aside to the topic in hand … if you had your telephone with you, you could have just gone into your mail app, found the mail you sent and re-sent it.
on June 28, 2014 - 6:34pm
Had I used my .mac account, you’d be correct.
http://www.johnthawley.com
on June 28, 2014 - 4:19am
This intriguing. But…
The melding of iOS & MacOs in a common storage cloud system is literally impossible for those of us not living in medium to large metro areas. First our DSL connectivity is still too slow to even reliably download full movies. Upload less than 1 megabit. And we live in those dreaded areas on cellular coverage maps that are colorless. Barely voice & NO data. At all. No smartphone for me. The seamless cloud just doesn’t exist.
Also in every single discussion of cloud photo back there’s the mention of more data than throughput capacity. So I just can’t see all of my library actually getting to the cloud in my lifetime.
Now that bring said, IF Apple lets us choose which assets live in the cloud. I could make it work. And IF Photos is open to developers this might be great. No more onOne or Topaz mothership apps. Round tripping AND back again to make further corrections. I’d love that now. And if we can skip creating a space hogging .tiff even better.
I’m not a pro so I will wait through Yosemite to see what happens. Fingers crossed.
on June 28, 2014 - 4:53am
Hmm, I like the thought of current photos on my hard drive and older ones in the cloud. Like what I have now with referenced and managed files. Interesting thought. Hopefully, Apple is listening to the explosion they created today on the internet.
Florian Cortese
www.fotosbyflorian.com
on June 28, 2014 - 4:45am
How about photosexpert.info? Of course the “sex” in the middle may confuse a few….
on June 28, 2014 - 5:18am
LOL
on June 28, 2014 - 12:05pm
it will increase traffic nicely :D
on June 28, 2014 - 5:26am
Good positive story Joseph, but I wish I could share your outlook. For me, and I am sure many others, we LOVED the Aperture experience inside the Apple universe. The thought of going to Lightroom personally makes me sick, particular because you never stop paying for it…subscription only, last time I checked. And, I certainly don’t expect Adobe sympathy for a single version traditional purchase to “help Aperture users migrate.” Sorry, but I’m not a cloud surfing, quick edit, sloppy photographer. I take pride in my work and don’t want another ‘online/cloud’ app controlling it. No cloud storage will every be good enough at acceptable cost (on top of your LR rental fee). So, where does that leave me…tonight, scared and extremely disappointed in Apple! Here’s to hoping some photographers/coders start-up an application to replace Aperture. Hell, let’s buy the code. I guess my only real option is to continue as is and watch the first two or three versions of Photos…it will be as dumbed-down as iPhoto was three years ago…guaranteed…at launch…just to fit the iOS integration. (Remember iMovie and FCP). Really, I’ve never been this pissed at Apple! Send your feedback (www.apple.com/feedback).
--
M.A.Stough Photography
on June 28, 2014 - 5:35am
Lightroom has a non-subscrption, standalone version.
The dumbed down iPhoto is also gone, and if you look at the screenshots at what is replacing it, it looks an awful lot like…..Aperture.
None of us should labour under the assumption that all our photos will live in the Cloud and that is Apple’s intent.
It is all the organizational tweaks in Aperture NOT getting carried over to Photos that is the concern because whole libraries are based on those features and taxonomies.The last version added Labels, but we also have Ratings and Keywords and Faces and Places and Calendars and Projects and Albums and Folders and Light Tables and Books and Slideshows and Web Journals and Web Pages and Stacks.
In Aperture we can organize by orientation and a whole slew of other metadata attributes. We can search by lens or camera type and of course, Smart Albums.
So the major problem is how much of that is retained because any migration to LR or an alternative will lose much of that, if not all.
So badger Apple to keep what we have in terms of DAM.
on June 28, 2014 - 4:26pm
“Lightroom has a non-subscrption, standalone version.”
True. But I suspect the writing is on the wall and support for it will soon be abandoned.
“…what is replacing it, it looks an awful lot like…..Aperture.”
But that’s the problem. Aperture has stood still for years and fallen behind the competition. Let’s not get too excited that Photos might be as-good-as Aperture.
It’s 2014 and I, for one, am not prepared to wait another two years to find that we’ve progressed(?) to what was state-of-the-art in 2011.
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
on June 28, 2014 - 5:28am
I wonder what Apple will charge for 5TB of cloud space….
Like I posted here on the Forum earlier today, I’m making the switch to LR5. Hopefully moving the images over isn’t too stressful and I’ll take baby steps on that.
The new Photo App I’m sure will be great but it’s time to move on with regard to editing in LR and leaving Aperture.
on June 28, 2014 - 5:47am
Matt wrote: Send your feedback (www.apple.com/feedback).
Done.
on June 28, 2014 - 6:49am
Joseph,
Interesting points. I wish Apple hadn’t screwed up each iteration of anything cloud based that they have tried in the past. I have zero confidence in their ability to safeguard my photos and subsequently moved over to LR at version 3.
I learned a tremendous amount from you about how to catalog and process my images. Thank you.
Chris Connors, Lambertville NJ
on June 28, 2014 - 7:20am
I have 2 serious problems with this announcement. 1) I have nearly 60 TB of EDITED Aperture libraries and 2) I just spent 8 months consolidating my libraries!!!! I feel extremely disenfranchised. I’ve been an Apple evangelist since the 80’s, and feel completely abandoned with this announcement. My general feeling today is…why bother…
Scott Stuart
on June 28, 2014 - 2:31pm
Your library will probably be fine. Remember: the same Library structure is used for iPhoto and in a similar way iMovie. No we are talking about 50x more customers than ever existed for Aperture.
The facts appear that the new Photos is going to be a lot more like Aperture than iPhoto. The key question for power users is how much of the DAM is kept, especially the organizational identifiers.
on June 28, 2014 - 2:31pm
Your library will probably be fine. Remember: the same Library structure is used for iPhoto and in a similar way iMovie. No we are talking about 50x more customers than ever existed for Aperture.
The facts appear that the new Photos is going to be a lot more like Aperture than iPhoto. The key question for power users is how much of the DAM is kept, especially the organizational identifiers.
on June 28, 2014 - 11:48pm
I haven’t done nearly the work you’ve done with Aperture, Scott, but I do feel your pain. I have book projects and numerous slideshows that are stored in AP libraries. And, I’ve spent hours customizing the Places and Faces features (yes, I do use Faces). I’ve also used the light table feature to set up gallery exhibits. My ventures into time lapse photography are archived in AP libraries, and I have several stacks containing my panos and HDR sets. What happens to all the work I’ve done over the past several years? My photo world revolved around Aperture. Now, I’m left dangling, not knowing where to import my next set of images.
Phil in Midland
on June 28, 2014 - 7:43am
Hi Joseph,
Just thought of a new name,
ApertureExit.com
……….Gary
I have a photographic memory but never got it developed
on June 28, 2014 - 7:44am
How about ApplePhotosExpert.com?
on June 28, 2014 - 8:50am
Well, you have certainly flushed out the glass is half empty crowd.
The sense I get is people are reacting to cloud based storage and DAM. Not a mention of any editing capability, or lack thereof.
I started a migration away from Aperture about 2 years ago. Cut a 50,000 image library down to 25,000 and went to referenced. After looking/using what was available, I decided to stick with Aperture.
For DAM, even if Keywords don’t have a home in the new approach (I feel its pretty much a given it will), labels can be used to migrate the library. Spend a little time in iPhoto and you’ll find Aperture libraries work quite well.
Apple will not force the cloud on us. My experience with PhotoStream and iCloud Journals is its a mess. Twice I’ve lost not only links to images but the images as well (reflected in my usage). Apple has to know this and rank amateur or serious pro, Apple is not going to take the risk of constant negative posts all over the web.
That leaves editing. Do the existing edits survive? No idea and one that requires clarification. The rest is easily covered whether within the new Photos app or outside. The aspect of 3rd party developers having access to the workflow makes this interesting as, from what I’ve seen shooting Fuji XTrans, the smaller shops have a better handle on the editing side than Apple or Adobe. That applies to Nikon as well.
Do I have time to migrate in a sensible manner? Looks like Aperture will run on Yosemite. That buys me a year or two and still allows me to continue my current replacement of all computing and peripherals in the house (all Apple: 3 Mac’s, 11tb of drives, all networking, at least one display).
What I’m left with is the hope whatever Apple comes up with my libraries on externals will actually open when I start Photos. Jpeg’s, that displayed yesterday, will actually display today. No missing images in the smart album I created to keep track of what images need to be located. And noise reduction and highlights control that are competitive with the competition.
I look forward to this. Worst case is I’m back to a transition process I started 2 years ago and am now much smarter in terms what’s available, what works for me and what does not work. One thing I learned using Lightroom for 2 years before Apple supported XTrans, is Lightroom is not the solution for DAM (too many variables and a pain to sort out after I chose the wrong one). I find a referenced iPhoto far more reliable and, I assume, Photos will be even better.
I think give this one some time and see what develops. Its a bit early to jump ship.
on June 28, 2014 - 10:16am
You are putting a lot of faith into a few so-far marketing terms that Apple has promoted – the Photos app and PhotoKit. Right now they’re nothing but promises, and although you say “consider the possibilities”, we’re completely at Apple’s mercy about what they consider important.
Having used Apple products for decades (since the Apple 2e), they’ve always been the best of all alternatives. But in the last two years they have made more seemingly arbitrary and painful changes to OSX and various apps than I recall any any previous period. Podcasts were crippled for 6 months in iTunes. “Save As” menu items temporarily disappeared for many apps as they explored a useless always-saved concept that didn’t match how people actually use computers. iPhoto turned into a confusing mess. I briefly turned on iCloud and lost files as it synced the wrong way with my mostly empty lap top.
I don’t see on what you base your trust for an excellent new Photos app. I have no use for iOS or iPads, but I do have a large intensely keyworded photo collection that I will need to find a way to manage. I’ll give it some time, but I’m getting sick of feeling screwed by Apple over and over.
on June 28, 2014 - 2:35pm
Given the new Spotlight structure in Yosemite I think your keywords and Labels for photos will survive and transition perfectly.
Referenced libraries may become a thing of the past, however. Just my thinking about how Apple is simplifying.
on June 28, 2014 - 11:01am
My hope is that Apple invite you to join the Photos team Joseph, then will all be reassured that the new software will be better than what we were hoping from Aperture 4.
Peter Ward
Mac-Access Au 3666
on June 28, 2014 - 11:31am
I’m afraid that there’s a lot of wishful thinking going on here in this optimistic view.
Well that is what so many pros have been fearing about Aperture. “LR can do that too” may end up being just one of many such sayings, as Apple shows what looks like a failure to support the core creative audience that has been what drives the brand. It’s a tough lesson that Kodak had to learn, too. The boys with the spreadsheets look at the big market share of amateurs over pros and decide that pros aren’t worth the trouble. Kodak… didn’t they used to be a big company?
In this case, Apple is going gaga over the cloud and the iOS platform, and even what we now call a computer is likely to become a niche part of their business. Does that matter?
Meanwhile, it will be a tough transition for all of us when we are forced to migrate years of work and tens, hundreds of thousands of images into LR or whatever else might be a feasible alternative. I don’t doubt that LR will be functional, but in my experience it never had the combination of powerful asset management with subtle creative control that Aperture had.
Is abandoning a core audience a winning strategy for a highly competitive tech company? I’d like to think that Steve Jobs would never have allowed such a decision. The dumbing down of other pro apps (at least in the view of many video editors with Final Cut Pro X) is another example.
on June 28, 2014 - 11:38am
Another quick thought: When I first evaluated Aperture, it was obvious that the developers spent many hours watching how photographers really worked, and then built metaphors of that workflow into the software tools that made tasks not only familiar but vastly more powerful and efficient. It was that user-centric approach that had long been what made Apple products different. Already the culture has changed in the post-Jobs era. The marketing boys and those addicted to the latest buzz phrase are driving the bus. Slick phrases about the wonders of the cloud don’t get the work done.
As other posters have noted, if we’re gonna be stuck with whatever Adobe wants to cram down our throats with CC and other marketing wonders, then the reason for sticking with Apple fades quickly.
on June 28, 2014 - 12:12pm
Based on different screenshots, rumors, post etc… my moto for some time will be:
Keep Calm and Continue to Shot and process in Aperture for now…
in other word:
Wait and see
There is enough info to make me enthusiastic and the same amount to make me purchase asap a tutorial for lightroom… so for now, I wait :)
on June 28, 2014 - 12:45pm
Thanks Joseph for the wider eyed view of this really momentous change. We’ve all be crippling along on AP3 hoping that ‘any day’ now. And we don’t have to do that any more.
Down here, we’ve used it since AP1, (and you thought 3 was a bit awkward!) Hands up all those who will be happy not to have to watch spinning beach balls while AP3 does the simplest of tasks.
Yet, its been such a great photo manager. Time after time its found that one image or series I’ve needed in a hurry. The hassle of odd raw processing has always been a drama, but we made up workarounds.
I hope that Pictures.app gives us a good interface, allows excellent searching, and is not just some half-baked interface for my iPhone.
Joseph, thanks for the positive Spin. I have been with Apple long enough to know that we get it in bits rather than a finished product, who’d have thought an iPod would evolve to an iPhone.
LIke several others, I’ll update one Mac to Yosemite, put on the latest AP3, and settle down to business as usual. When the dust settles and my new Nikon/Canon is not supported by AP3, I’ll have played with Photos.app and its variations and be in a better position to make an informed switch.
Vale, Aperture, you’ve been a staunch part of our workflow.
David.
on June 28, 2014 - 1:36pm
Thanks for the slap along side the head! I was pretty bummed at first but your view is correct.
Of course it’s a great time to be alive! and new stuff is exciting. And by then I’ll have completed my book project…let’s go!
www.msadesign.com
on June 28, 2014 - 1:50pm
I’ve just downloaded the latest version of Media Pro, from phase one.com, and it hasn’t changed much from iMedia of the old days (I might have that name wrong). It is going to be a lengthy process to migrate to a different way of managing images, when Aperture’s way was so easy to use. I like Capture One, but again it is not as easy to use as Aperture.
~~~>--} threeshoes photography
on June 28, 2014 - 1:50pm
I’ve just downloaded the latest version of Media Pro, from phase one.com, and it hasn’t changed much from iMedia of the old days (I might have that name wrong). It is going to be a lengthy process to migrate to a different way of managing images, when Aperture’s way was so easy to use. I like Capture One, but again it is not as easy to use as Aperture.
~~~>--} threeshoes photography
on June 28, 2014 - 2:09pm
That’s why for now I’m not changing. I to looked at it yesterday. There just isn’t any better way for now to add keywords than Aperture. Since we know it will be compatible with Mavericks. I’m staying put for now.
Pages