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 28, 2014 - 8:03pm
Photos app will be Apple’s replacement for iPhone and Aperture. But I have ZERO confidence that it will successfully replace Aperture. Photos app is going to be a dumbed down for the masses. I don’t see it EVER approaching the level of editing sophistication we have in Aperture.
I’ll be happy to eat my words if Apple proves me wrong. In the meantime, anyone that truly believes that Photos app will be a professional level app, well, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you!
Mark
on June 28, 2014 - 8:26pm
Not to be adverserial… but seriously, how can you make this kind of post/comment. You emphatically state: “Photos app is going to be a dumbed down for the masses.”
What information do you possess to publicly make such a statement? Where are you getting your facts?
Sorry… but it’s this sort of uninformed rhetoric that is fanning the flames of this issue all across the internet. It’s ridiculous.
State what you know.
This entire thread/dialogue is beginning to read like a bad Saturday Night Live skit.
Everybody needs to step back and take a breath.
Aperture is going to receive upgrades to make it compatible with Yosemite. It works now… it’ll work later…. so relax.
Photos WILL READ your Aperture or iPhoto libraries… and why wouldn’t it. Your libraries are no different than the architecture used in iTunes and many other Apple applications.
You will be able to rely on your Aperture DAM indefinitely and the adjustment tools for a couple of more years. At which time, I’m sure Photos will include more robust editing capabilities.
So the bottom line is… carry on and just don’t expect Photos 1.0 to have the robust editing capabilities right out of the box.
JT
http://www.johnthawley.com
on June 28, 2014 - 8:41pm
What I know is EXACTLY what you posted in your last sentence. Photos app 1.0 isn’t going to have the robust editing capabilities right out of the box. Translation: Dumbed down for the masses.
At NO point has Apple said that Photos app is going to be a product for professionals. Even during the Final Cut Pro debacle, Apple continued to identify FCP X as a professional application. So, it was reasonable to assume that FCP X would grow to be more robust and return to its former greatness.
No such expectation can be held for Photos app. It is UNreasonable to assume that Photos app will ever approach the professional level of editing that we have in Aperture. Photos app simply has not been deemed a professional application!
If you use Aperture mostly to crop photos and eliminate red eye, then Photos app will probably be perfect for you. But if you dig deep into the powerful editing features of Aperture, I’m pretty darn certain Photos app is going to leave you wanting.
Mark
on June 28, 2014 - 9:04pm
@Mark
Why is it unreasonable to assume Photos will ever approach, or even surpass the level of editing we have in Aperture? It is based on the next version of the same frameworks. Even the early screenshots show many of the tools we already know from Aperture. It is extensible. This is a fact. Your estimate of “red eye elimination and crop” is even contradicted by those very early screenshots we see now. It is more likely that they will stack up on that. You have absolutely no reason to believe that Photos needs to be a “dumbed down” application.
It IS a good idea though, to hold back expectations for an V1.0 release. We all know how V1.0 releases look like. There will be missing things. But I'm equally certain, that even this V1.0 will be similar promising to what Aperture has shown in its V1.0.
So like others already did say - calm down. The level of information doesn't account for any outcry.
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 10:17pm
@ Mark:
“Photos app 1.0 isn’t going to have the robust editing capabilities right out of the box.”
This DOES NOT translate to a dumbed down product for the masses. It says what it says. It is what happens when you create to a new platform from a clean sheet of paper with lots of head room for new and improved platform.
You’d do better to stop reading into things and take them at face value. :)
http://www.johnthawley.com
on June 29, 2014 - 2:44pm
I’ve slept on this a couple of days and where I was originally in the doom and gloom camp wondering what I was going to do in the future I have since felt a lot more upbeat about this. I agree with you John that to expect the Photos app to be as robust as Aperture is today is setting ourselves up for disappointment. It will be different and better in some ways and lesser in others. Given time I think it will be a more robust application. Until it gets to that point just use Aperture or change. I’m staying the course for now because for now Aperture does what I need it to do and I know the program. I’ll see what I think about the Photos app and make a decision then or still opt to hold the course.
on June 28, 2014 - 7:51pm
That is why I will continue to use Aperture, because it’s fabulous for sharing, and as cataloguing software. However from yesterday forward, I will not use Aperture for editing.
I downloaded LightZone a while back, need to give that a real trial, also I have used Nikon software to edit NEF files no other program interprets NEFs as well as Nikon-ware. So what’s happening is I’m simply moving to other editing platform(s). I will start a folder for each editing software I use and reference those images from Aperture. I probably should have done that a long time ago anyway. Thank you Apple, for kicking me into a better way of doing things!
The downside with this approach is it will double the disk space needed for each edited image because of the need to save the edited version. With Aperture there was no need to save a physical copy of the edited version.
on June 28, 2014 - 7:53pm
Hi! Main thing for me to stick with Photos - if it will work with NikSoft and other plugins… As for site name - PhotosappExpert.com?
Igor
on June 28, 2014 - 8:16pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be them libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally!
Now iPhoto and aperture are the only ones that can share their library because it’s proprietary, if it’s generally available imagine that you have. Any tool available to any part of your library at any time leven any device.
Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And as today TB are getting ate common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard.
On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - don’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of oictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet).
As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again).
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 8:18pm
What about those of us who just purchased Lessons 1 - 25 with the intention of learning Aperture better? I feel like I just threw away $30. Is there any refund policy or at least some kind of credit for the money I just wasted?
on June 28, 2014 - 8:20pm
What about those of us who just purchased Lessons 1 - 25 with the intention of learning Aperture better? I feel like I just threw away $30. Is there any refund policy or at least some kind of credit for the money I just wasted?
on June 28, 2014 - 8:20pm
Joseph,
Thanks for trying to put a positive spin on all this. But, frankly, I’m in the “Sounds great, but eff this, I’m outta here!” camp. Matter of fact, I’ve been outa this for months, having switched to Lightroom, which I think is a great program. Why people get so incensed about the subscription option beats me. I believe Lightroom AND Photoshop are now available for $9.99 per month. That price beats what I used to have to pay for upgrading either product every three years, or whatever.
Anyway, I agree with William Beem, who’s been running an “Aperture versus Lightroom” blog at: http://aperturevslightroom.com. Here’s some of his thoughts about Aperture’s demise.
“I’ve read reports that Photos may work with third party plugins and include some of the advanced features of Aperture. I’ve also read reports that it will only work with files hosted in iCloud. Such reports are, to me, nothing more than rumors.
“My choice is to migrate to Lightroom now rather than wait for the next magical unicorn to appear out of Cupertino. I would not invest any money in a professional product from Apple at this time. The company has systematically shed itself of its professional products and signaled that it doesn’t want or need to be in that market.
“That’s not an evil thing, but it’s rather disappointing when you’re invested in a system that the creator doesn’t want to continue improving.
“…Adobe isn’t my favorite company in the world, but it’s shown interest in continuing development for professional photography, video and other services. That’s where I’ll put my own images and I recommend the same to you.”
As for me, like Beem, I just don’t trust Apple for professional-level software anymore and I don’t like their corporate “style,” which is closed, secretive and authoritarian — a long way from the vision I bought into back in the early 1980s. I think the long dwindling death of Aperture has been an absolute disgrace.
Ry Glover
on June 28, 2014 - 8:30pm
And I don’t trust Adobe! Once Adobe has you 100% dependent on their product, they can jack the price up to $20 or even $30 a month whenever they want. Without viable competitive alternatives (such as Aperture), it’s probably MORE likely that Adobe will jack up the price.
Mark
on June 28, 2014 - 9:02pm
Guys,
Do you all realize that you are assuming on a product for which we have even not seen a real beta? So… for now, go out and shoot (pictures not at apple!)
Keep calm,
J.
on June 28, 2014 - 9:14pm
In 30 years I have never seen Apple give so much lead time to consumers and developers regarding a product line.
There was literally none with iWeb and minimal with .Mac. Even HyperCard was left to dangle and then was dropped completely despite even internal rumours coming from Apple that it would survive the move to new OSs.
As they build a new Photos product perhaps this website could be used to compile reader keeps and must-haves?
on June 28, 2014 - 9:37pm
Its time to wait and see what Photo’s app is really like, theres to much speculation and guessing at present. It seems reading some posts, the reaction has more to do with the fact that its unlikely to carry a professional software label than what it will actually be able to do.
on June 28, 2014 - 9:47pm
Will have to watch this space.
Michael Young
on June 28, 2014 - 9:58pm
I definitely agree that sharing photos across multiple devices is a problem that needs to be solved, and maybe Photos has the solution. It could very well be a very exciting future, and I don’t think we can really judge until we see what Photos actually offers. That said, Apple has kept us waiting far too long, and there is now a lot of uncertainty, and I’m afraid I’m going to migrate a few projects to LR and start getting up to speed with it, so that when Photos materialises, I can make an informed choice. Time will tell …
on June 28, 2014 - 11:10pm
When I first saw the news I was annoyed as I have just spent a week getting back in to Aperture, I’ve been using LR for the past 3 years but recently changed to a Fuji camera and found Aperture to be a better raw convertor.
After a day or so to think about it I’m hoping that the new Photos app will still allow me to convert my raw photos to something useful, and I expect it will. My main problem is with the way Apple communicate (as always), I need information about how Photos will work. I’m happy for shareable previews being stored in the cloud but my main library of raw files will have to be local, we don’t have the internet connection bandwidth to store everything in the cloud. I work a lot while traveling too and don’t have access to the internet in many places.
So here is my dilemma, do I bother with Aperture ? I don’t want to invest time in it if I have to store everything in the cloud in Photos as *I cannot do that*. getting that kind of information from Apple is impossible and that is what really pi$$e$ me off.
on June 29, 2014 - 8:09am
This announcement sends a *very* clear message to pro photographers: We’re not interested in you. They sent the same message to video pros with the FCPX debacle, and now Adobe has a 90% market share in both spaces.
Should you bother learning Aperture?! The app has not future. So no, you should not.
on June 28, 2014 - 11:19pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be it libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally! So as most of us uses plugins in aperture, the point will be to find and use your tools to work with the photo holder. If photo itself will not be sufficient, then use the onone app or nik app in the assumption that these vendors follow the line. Compared to LR - let’s assume for a moment that LR would stay with its own photo library, container… All those other tools would work with the default/standard photo container while they would not… (Just continuing the thought here of) and if not and LR would be able to work witht the photo holder …. The it’s just a tool on top of the photo holder as any other tool/app would be and you can switch and combine as many apps as you want since it all work so the America photo holder…. Let’s just hope not one of them. Was badly tested and destroys your entire collection….. Go backup go :-)
Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And get something all photos from I devices to the Mac but not all Mac. Photos to the idevices. And as today TB are getting quite common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard. But let’s be honest here, even those of you that have multiple 100s of GB per week or month, you don’t have those Ono all your iPads either today.
On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - indon’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of pictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. But both categories will use the same collection, just maybe a different toolset on top of that.
Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet).
As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again). I think we should not see what aperture is today but what the toolset will be tomorrow (aperture + plugins vs. whole bunch of apps to work on the same collection accords devices.)
Just my personal take on this….
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:19pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be it libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally! So as most of us uses plugins in aperture, the point will be to find and use your tools to work with the photo holder. If photo itself will not be sufficient, then use the onone app or nik app in the assumption that these vendors follow the line. Compared to LR - let’s assume for a moment that LR would stay with its own photo library, container… All those other tools would work with the default/standard photo container while they would not… (Just continuing the thought here of) and if not and LR would be able to work witht the photo holder …. The it’s just a tool on top of the photo holder as any other tool/app would be and you can switch and combine as many apps as you want since it all work so the America photo holder…. Let’s just hope not one of them. Was badly tested and destroys your entire collection….. Go backup go :-)
Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And get something all photos from I devices to the Mac but not all Mac. Photos to the idevices. And as today TB are getting quite common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard. But let’s be honest here, even those of you that have multiple 100s of GB per week or month, you don’t have those Ono all your iPads either today.
On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - indon’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of pictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. But both categories will use the same collection, just maybe a different toolset on top of that.
Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet).
As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again). I think we should not see what aperture is today but what the toolset will be tomorrow (aperture + plugins vs. whole bunch of apps to work on the same collection accords devices.)
Just my personal take on this….
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:20pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be it libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally! So as most of us uses plugins in aperture, the point will be to find and use your tools to work with the photo holder. If photo itself will not be sufficient, then use the onone app or nik app in the assumption that these vendors follow the line. Compared to LR - let’s assume for a moment that LR would stay with its own photo library, container… All those other tools would work with the default/standard photo container while they would not… (Just continuing the thought here of) and if not and LR would be able to work witht the photo holder …. The it’s just a tool on top of the photo holder as any other tool/app would be and you can switch and combine as many apps as you want since it all work so the America photo holder…. Let’s just hope not one of them. Was badly tested and destroys your entire collection….. Go backup go :-)
Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And get something all photos from I devices to the Mac but not all Mac. Photos to the idevices. And as today TB are getting quite common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard. But let’s be honest here, even those of you that have multiple 100s of GB per week or month, you don’t have those Ono all your iPads either today.
On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - indon’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of pictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. But both categories will use the same collection, just maybe a different toolset on top of that.
Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet).
As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again). I think we should not see what aperture is today but what the toolset will be tomorrow (aperture + plugins vs. whole bunch of apps to work on the same collection accords devices.)
Just my personal take on this….
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:20pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be it libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally! So as most of us uses plugins in aperture, the point will be to find and use your tools to work with the photo holder. If photo itself will not be sufficient, then use the onone app or nik app in the assumption that these vendors follow the line. Compared to LR - let’s assume for a moment that LR would stay with its own photo library, container… All those other tools would work with the default/standard photo container while they would not… (Just continuing the thought here of) and if not and LR would be able to work witht the photo holder …. The it’s just a tool on top of the photo holder as any other tool/app would be and you can switch and combine as many apps as you want since it all work so the America photo holder…. Let’s just hope not one of them. Was badly tested and destroys your entire collection….. Go backup go :-)
Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And get something all photos from I devices to the Mac but not all Mac. Photos to the idevices. And as today TB are getting quite common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard. But let’s be honest here, even those of you that have multiple 100s of GB per week or month, you don’t have those Ono all your iPads either today.
On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - indon’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of pictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. But both categories will use the same collection, just maybe a different toolset on top of that.
Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet).
As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again). I think we should not see what aperture is today but what the toolset will be tomorrow (aperture + plugins vs. whole bunch of apps to work on the same collection accords devices.)
Just my personal take on this….
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:21pm
Agree, there can be a great future ahead and the way as this is integrated in the OS layer, is a great leap. But as we are all humans we are not easy to change, but I think we have to start distinguish between the holder of the photos and the tools to work with them. This seems to get completely de-coupled. Which is a great step forward. No more -potential - moving photo storage holders, be it libraries folders or anything else, as it’s irrelevant, as is today changing between iPhoto and aperture when you share the library, but then in a more integrated way. Finally! So as most of us uses plugins in aperture, the point will be to find and use your tools to work with the photo holder. If photo itself will not be sufficient, then use the onone app or nik app in the assumption that these vendors follow the line. Compared to LR - let’s assume for a moment that LR would stay with its own photo library, container… All those other tools would work with the default/standard photo container while they would not… (Just continuing the thought here of) and if not and LR would be able to work witht the photo holder …. The it’s just a tool on top of the photo holder as any other tool/app would be and you can switch and combine as many apps as you want since it all work so the America photo holder…. Let’s just hope not one of them. Was badly tested and destroys your entire collection….. Go backup go :-) Just as you can today share via itunes a subset of your library with other applications I’m quite sure there would - if not in the beginning then later- an option to only put a subset into the cloud. And get something all photos from I devices to the Mac but not all Mac. Photos to the idevices. And as today TB are getting quite common in the cloud, probably in a few years even 10s of TB would get standard. But let’s be honest here, even those of you that have multiple 100s of GB per week or month, you don’t have those Ono all your iPads either today. On the point - why not consulting (prof) photographers - indon’t want me to get hated here :-) - but let’s be honest, in the past you required a pro photographer to have a person that had a huge catalog of negatives, these days every person has tons of pictures (I’m not saying they are of the same quality ;-) ) but at the end the market of who is using these tools is getting much wider than only pro photographers. But both categories will use the same collection, just maybe a different toolset on top of that. Look around and see how many people there live between yourself and the next pro photographer that has to deal with many pictures on their laptops, and the use of macs is also increasing. So as Job said: don’t ask the customer what they want as they don’t know it (yet). As it may take time, I think the Mac platform will be again a leader in how to deal with media … And LR just providing more storage in the cloud does not make that fundamental change as what we seem to believe we might get in the near future from Apple (again). I think we should not see what aperture is today but what the toolset will be tomorrow (aperture + plugins vs. whole bunch of apps to work on the same collection accords devices.) Just my personal take on this….
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:33pm
Apologies for the multi post of the same comment…. iPad Safari issue :-)
Luc - Mini/MBP/MBPR - QNAP NAS, Nikon D5300, AW100, Sony TR3
on June 28, 2014 - 11:49pm
I certainly hope your crystal ball is working because I really don’t want to get sucked into Adobe’s CC world. My fear is that once Aperture is gone then Adobe can stop offering a stand alone LightRoom and force us to use the CC option; then after we are hooked into the CC they can do what the cable companies do and start gouging us.
I’ve invested a lot of time and an enormous number of photos in Aperture and it does concern me that it is all for naught. I really hope that your experience with Apple follows the path you laid out and that those of us who have used Aperture from the beginning will be pleasantly surprised with the new Photos app.
http://speeddemon2.com
on June 29, 2014 - 12:08am
Hi Joseph, I read this post this morning. I’ve read through your original post and I can see the possibilities with this new direction. But I rarely use instagram or any of the other apps. I capture images and do post work in Aperture and post to FB, 500px. Yes I’m boring, but at 51 I really don’t care about sending all of my life to Twitter or Instagram.
I’m wondering about the actual program. How long until Aperture 3 no longer can be opened on my desktop? How will I do post production work when this day comes? Is this an end to high level photo editing? Will the Aperture program be bought by someone (hint, hint), renamed, and allowed to grow? I’ve read several posts, but not all. I have not seen anything about what us Aperture users will be working with. I can’t go back to a lesser photos program.
I posted something about this in Oct of last year. My fears have come true. Below is the original post to ApertureExpert.
Reading this post brings up a question that is somewhat related. At least I believe. What if?
What if Apple no longer has an Aperture? Or I move to another system, PC based: not really but the question should be asked. How, or what should I be doing with my images? I have them backed up to a external hard drive in a vault; but as to the later question, what if I’m no longer a Apple user. Trying to find the original master in the library is a frustrating job and seems to be impossibly difficult.
I know pc users who can quickly and painlessly go to the original image files, and copy them, move them, cloud storage them, etc, etc.
iPhoto years ago use to let me right click and find the master files simply. Now trying to do this in Aperture I have endless folders within folders, within folders.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Steve B
Steve Benkovich
Top
#5
by CJ M
October 9, 2013 - 4:18pm
I completely agree. It seems an awful lot like Aperture & iPhoto are set up so that once you start using them, you are essentially stuck with them. Moving your photos elsewhere is very difficult. This is my biggest hesitation with jumping in. What if years from now, I need to get my photos out of Aperture. Will I be able to get the full, intact files out?
Top
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 12:10am
Hi Joseph, I read this post this morning. I’ve read through your original post and I can see the possibilities with this new direction. But I rarely use instagram or any of the other apps. I capture images and do post work in Aperture and post to FB, 500px. Yes I’m boring, but at 51 I really don’t care about sending all of my life to Twitter or Instagram.
I’m wondering about the actual program. How long until Aperture 3 no longer can be opened on my desktop? How will I do post production work when this day comes? Is this an end to high level photo editing? Will the Aperture program be bought by someone (hint, hint), renamed, and allowed to grow? I’ve read several posts, but not all. I have not seen anything about what us Aperture users will be working with. I can’t go back to a lesser photos program.
I posted something about this in Oct of last year. My fears have come true. Below is the original post to ApertureExpert.
Reading this post brings up a question that is somewhat related. At least I believe. What if?
What if Apple no longer has an Aperture? Or I move to another system, PC based: not really but the question should be asked. How, or what should I be doing with my images? I have them backed up to a external hard drive in a vault; but as to the later question, what if I’m no longer a Apple user. Trying to find the original master in the library is a frustrating job and seems to be impossibly difficult.
I know pc users who can quickly and painlessly go to the original image files, and copy them, move them, cloud storage them, etc, etc.
iPhoto years ago use to let me right click and find the master files simply. Now trying to do this in Aperture I have endless folders within folders, within folders.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Steve B
Steve Benkovich
Top
#5
by CJ M
October 9, 2013 - 4:18pm
I completely agree. It seems an awful lot like Aperture & iPhoto are set up so that once you start using them, you are essentially stuck with them. Moving your photos elsewhere is very difficult. This is my biggest hesitation with jumping in. What if years from now, I need to get my photos out of Aperture. Will I be able to get the full, intact files out?
Top
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 1:22am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 29, 2014 - 1:38am
Maybe I didn’t explain what i’m wondering. First, yes I have my 430 gigs of images backed up to 2 vaults on 2 different externals. Now I’m considering a 3rd backup where I export image files to another external as jpegs and or RAW however I captured the images at that time or job.
Yes I understand that Aperture will work until at least Yosemite, but I don’t want to go to a lesser whimper program. I see this “photo” program on my iPad, have used it. It’s far from Aperture. I love the ability to do so much post work in Aperture that photos (iPad version) does not have, and I REALLY love the archiving of my images that Aperture supports.
What I haven’t heard is what will become of this program?
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 12:11am
Hi Joseph, I read this post this morning. I’ve read through your original post and I can see the possibilities with this new direction. But I rarely use instagram or any of the other apps. I capture images and do post work in Aperture and post to FB, 500px. Yes I’m boring, but at 51 I really don’t care about sending all of my life to Twitter or Instagram.
I’m wondering about the actual program. How long until Aperture 3 no longer can be opened on my desktop? How will I do post production work when this day comes? Is this an end to high level photo editing? Will the Aperture program be bought by someone (hint, hint), renamed, and allowed to grow? I’ve read several posts, but not all. I have not seen anything about what us Aperture users will be working with. I can’t go back to a lesser photos program.
I posted something about this in Oct of last year. My fears have come true. Below is the original post to ApertureExpert.
Reading this post brings up a question that is somewhat related. At least I believe. What if?
What if Apple no longer has an Aperture? Or I move to another system, PC based: not really but the question should be asked. How, or what should I be doing with my images? I have them backed up to a external hard drive in a vault; but as to the later question, what if I’m no longer a Apple user. Trying to find the original master in the library is a frustrating job and seems to be impossibly difficult.
I know pc users who can quickly and painlessly go to the original image files, and copy them, move them, cloud storage them, etc, etc.
iPhoto years ago use to let me right click and find the master files simply. Now trying to do this in Aperture I have endless folders within folders, within folders.
Any ideas?
Thanks
Steve B
Steve Benkovich
Top
#5
by CJ M
October 9, 2013 - 4:18pm
I completely agree. It seems an awful lot like Aperture & iPhoto are set up so that once you start using them, you are essentially stuck with them. Moving your photos elsewhere is very difficult. This is my biggest hesitation with jumping in. What if years from now, I need to get my photos out of Aperture. Will I be able to get the full, intact files out?
Top
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 12:20am
Sorry for the extra posts. I kept getting a error when I tried to post my concern.
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 12:36am
Joseph, thanks for adding some actual critical thinking to Apple’s announcement. Although all of the things you cite as being the future are already doable (either that or I am missing something). I am a LR user and do editing in Photoshop and OnOne Perfect Photo Suite. I can designate a collection to be shared online and it will be available to me on my iPhone. I can open any file I want in Perfect Photo Suite or Photoshop. If I want the LR edits I just export a tiff or psd file. Save it back to a folder that’s in LR and I’m all set to go.
If this is where Apple is going, a hub for all your photos, Adobe has beaten them to the party. Maybe Apple is trying to make all of this seamless for the end user and I applaud them for that, but it seems a day late and a dollar short if you ask me.
on June 29, 2014 - 12:42am
Hi all,
Thanks for the impressive flow of comments. Keep 'em coming!
I've responded en-masse to all the comments here in a new post, “Comment Follow-up on the Demise of Aperture”. Check that out then come on back to continue the conversation!
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
on June 29, 2014 - 1:50am
Putting tens of thousands of RAW files in the cloud is not realistic in the least. Having them as JPGs might be possible but a huge hog of bandwidth.
In the end Apple is recognizing that the vast majority of photo users are only hobbyists. Their demands are minimal and they are willing to surrender to the Borg that is the Apple ecosystem by cloud based storage and possibly app accessibility. Apple will get the benefit of a ton of info from users and we will pay them to be stuck in their world.
on June 29, 2014 - 2:03am
Local storage will be the dominant storage. Those who think Apple is forcing all-Cloud storage are not thinking clearly.
Apple’s press release clearly states that your Aperture Library will transfer to Photos. It does not say to the Cloud. Photos is an upcoming OS X app on a Mac. It is not an iCloud service.
If you read the iOS 8 and OS X Yosemite intros on Apple’s website you see clearly there will be a selective Photostream system to using iCloud.
on June 29, 2014 - 2:00am
Thank you for staying positive with this post. Of all people with all the time you’ve invested in Aperture, you, Joseph, have the most right to be down.
But I have to agree with the piggy lipstick comments. I absolutely dread the cloud. I can’t even get my Reminders to sync correctly in the Cloud. The iWork analogy is not reassuring, either.
I really don’t think iCloud works the way you would like. I could live with it if it just duplicated the contents of a designated source device, i.e. your desktop, but that hasn’t been my experience. I keep meaning to run some experiments when I have time (LOL- who has extra time?), but once I turn the Cloud on, I can’t turn it off without being warned that I’m WIPING the contents of my local device. Not a good feeling. I can’t afford to pay Apple to store my photos against my will either.
Frankly, I think the best solution for those who don’t plan to use the cloud anytime soon, is to get a new Mac with Yosemite and Aperture on it, and just plan on keeping that system forever. I have an old mac mini that couldn’t be upgraded due to the microprocessor and it’s the best thing that ever happened. I have Adobe Creative Suite 3 on OSX 10.6.8. It works just fine. Eventually, the hardware will fail, but by then we can hope the Cloud will be a more mature system.
FlyingPigDesign.com
on June 29, 2014 - 2:16am
iOS 8 will have the iCloud Photo Library:
https://www.apple.com/ca/ios/ios8/photos/
Read carefully. Nowhere does it say your iCloud Photo Library will be used the same way on a Mac. In fact, it only ever lists iOS devices and “the web” once.
Before jumping to conclusions people here have to remember a few things:
1) Apple makes the world’s most popular camera
2) Desktop and even laptop PCs or Macs of all types are in stagnant sales to consumers, even declining
3) Tablets and smartphones are replacing most day-to-day computing use, especially anything requiring connectivity
4) Photos and photo sharing are a HUGE part of connectivity; we take photos mostly to share, pro or consumer or in between
5) A large and growing number of people in Apple’s base do not own and never will own a home computer…a Mac
6) But supplying the world’s most popular camera, and video device, chews up RAM storage space on said equipment
7) So Apple has created a cloud library system with persistent connection and updating
8) This does NOT mean that Photos for OS X Yosemite, due in early 2015, will do the same
9) In fact, the press reports we have directly from Apple say your current Aperture AND iPhoto libraries will migrate to the new Photos app
10) Adobe has done far more to lock PC users into the cloud wit Photoshop LR that anything we have heard here about Aperture and Apple’s plans
on June 29, 2014 - 2:37am
so reading through most of the posts-and all of the posts since i posted my comments. It would seem that Apple in the enthusiasts to pro world will move to only support the pop culture, only todays cutting edge, that will change tomorrow. Which is what Apple has done all their life
What about those who require, or want the level of processing that Aperture offers? The archiving that Aperture offers? It seems like most posts here are, “Well we’ll just have to do with what Apple gives us”. I’m a person who brought back the old highlight and shadows adjustment because I love it better than the new whimper update.
It would seem that many have to make a switch to a pro level stand alone program.
Steve Benkovich
on June 29, 2014 - 3:00am
I really don’t get this “Dumbed Down” attitude. Results matter much more than the number of sliders available.
For me … if the new Photos app comes in as “dumbed down” as FCP X … I’m all for the new Photos app. FCP X had a rocky beginning … but is now a beautiful toolset that I thoroughly enjoy working with. It is by far much more capable, streamlined, configurable and free flowing than previous iterations.
If Apple can offer that same result for my RAW images … I don’t care if they call it “Steve’s Simple Sloppy One Slider Fixes Everything App” … If I can export or print images of the same or better quality as I do now with less time and effort … that’s a step up.
Are you folks aware how many “sophisticated pros” have ALWAYS considered Aperture as “dumbed down” software? Most of those folks have NEVER used Aperture or even worked on a Mac. Just like most of us have NEVER used the Photos app for OS X yet so many are convinced, for a fact, the Photos app for OS X will be a dog only fit for rank amateurs. It may be a real dog. But won’t we have to actually see it and use to “know” what it is?
While I have no way of knowing for sure, the photo used to illustrate the announcement certainly indicates much more promise and sophistication in image processing than what is available in iPhoto today. It likely wouldn’t take too much time and effort to match the capabilities or nearly match what is currently in Aperture. Plus the fact, according to info from the WWDC demonstration, the Photos app already has lens correction and indications of vastly improved noise reduction. To me that’s already a leap forward … dumbed down or not.
on June 29, 2014 - 3:02am
Steve Jobs was an inveterate tinkerer and always wanted to start something new before he finished what he was working on. So multiple ways to do the same thing evolved, sometimes for the best, sometimes not. Often this crept into Apple’s photographic philosophy. How many ways does Apple have to load, display, or transmit photos:
1. Aperture plug-ins to Flickr, SmugMug, Facebook, email
2. iCloud Photo Sharing and Photo Stream
3. Aperture Web Pages
4. Aperture Web Journals
5. Aperture Books + Prints
6. Aperture Slideshows
6. iPhoto can share all Aperture can + Twitter + Messages
7. iPhoto adds Cards + Calendars
8. Apple TV has a bizarre way of displaying photos even though it is ostensibly an iOS device
9. We hade iWeb
10. And MobileMe Gallery
11. iOS has Photos
12. It can do “Shared Streams”
13. It supports Albums from other Apps
14. Its own Stream is called “Activity”
15. iPhoto for iPad has its own Journals (which is really, really good)
16. iPhoto for iPad also connects to the same services as iPhoto for the Mac
17. We even have Image Capture on the Mac
18. iTunes supposedly calls upon a Media Library including photos
19. So does iMovie
20. So does FCP
The whole Apple photography experience is an ongoing melee. I thank heaven they are finally cleaning it up and appear to be doing so with a wholesale iOS 8 and Yosemite overhaul. If Tim Cook is cleaning house along with Jony Ives and Craig Federighi then they appear to be mapping out improvements, not setbacks.
I also think they are setting up a structure where pro apps are made by pros for pros on Apple hardware. I anticipate plug-ins to take the place of advanced built-in features because Photos will be free.
on June 29, 2014 - 1:57pm
Thanks for taking the time to put into words what I’ve felt for some time. Between managing photos in AP, and my wife using iPhoto, and then learning the intricacies of Photostream and its relation to AP and IOS photos….there is just too much to juggle. It is hard to argue that Apple’s imaging ecosystem in its current form is a pleasurable, intuitive experience for most users. Like you, I am hopeful that this current effort to ‘clean house’ will result in many improvements to not only the apps, but the underlying architecture.
Phil in Midland
on June 29, 2014 - 3:20am
Re new domain name; photos.expert is available for about $900/yr on GoDaddy. Probably cheaper if you shop around. (I know that’s a long way from the $5/yr you pay now for apertureexpert.com but that’s how that goes). And Apple may hit you with a TM infringement although you have precedence with your current domain.
on June 29, 2014 - 4:16am
Thanks hugely for your follow-up article.
What Apple Inc. does from time to time is to sever itself from aging software so that it does not become bloated like MS. More efficient code results in decreased processing time and better battery life as well as increased efficiency in using the updated processors.
Also this is an opportunity to include those who do the “photo to cloud” thing. It remains to be seen how this will work out to include the Professional. It may just be the thing to integrate IOS with OSX.
Looking at Apple Inc.’s past efforts to improving the “User Experience” I am confident this will result in a better product for amateur as well as professional photographers.
I would say we have 2yrs of Aperture left to play with and make a decision if we want to bail to Lightroom or Corel or Nik or On1 software.
Don’t Panic; Have faith!
Cheers:
Bob
on June 29, 2014 - 4:22am
I’d think “PhotosJoseph” would be the right choice for a new name. ;)
on June 29, 2014 - 6:57am
So far things have taken a turn that isn’t too far from what I predicted over the last few months. Photos is likely to become a new ecosystem for consumer where publisher of photo editing add-on can hope to generate as much profit from the consumer market as editors of games do.
But one thing sounds off: why did Apple need NOW to disclose that they stop Aperture development? At WWDC they announced Photos and without being committal it sounded that Photos would not come before early 2015. They have not said anything about Aperture really since the Mac Pro was launched last year and that wasn’t much more than “look Aperture works so well on the new Mac Pro” and not to announce any development. So why the rush? They could have launched Photos in a few month and just let everyone know that Photos replace both iPhoto and Aperture and that libraries can be migrated. So why now, why the urge?
Either Apple is ahead of its schedule and will launch Photos much sooner than expected (but we all remember what rush does when launching major upgrade of pro apps…) but again why announcing the demise of Aperture before the launch?
The only reason I can come up with is: they want to manage expectations, unlike what they’ve done with the other Pro apps, that Photos will be targeted at the mass market and NOT at both mass and pro market. Photos might be a thrill for most consumers (probably around automation, ease of use and no reliance on any technical processing skills) and they don’t want medias full of mixed messages from resentful complaining that they’ve been let down.
Another reason, but far fetched, might be that in fact Photos won’t be a standalone apps but be part of both Yosemite and OS8, maybe because they are so deeply integrated with the OSes they must be tested together with the OS. As I’d expect the 3rd betas to be launched soon to developers, if Photos beta is shipped together they won’t be able to keep the secret: thus they needed to announce it now (a bit like the first iPhone was announced 6 months before launch because with the submission to the FCC everybody would have known anyway).
Let’s see what the future holds but I’m getting ready to move to LR…
Christian C. Berclaz
www.photoanimalium.com
on June 29, 2014 - 10:22am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 29, 2014 - 8:01am
I have not read all the comments so please forgive this if it has already been asked. What is to happen about all the plug ins that we have purchased? I am thinking especially of The Nik suite, will they be applicable to Photos? (Incidentally anyone know why I am unable to get Photoshop or Lightroom for Mavericks where I can use the plugins?)
on June 29, 2014 - 8:12am
My own investigation took me back to the WWDC Keynote, where they demonstrated the simple interface of Photos and offered a peak behind the curtain at the deeper software underneath.
The simple interface has a”Light” slider and a “Color” slider. Want to adjust an image? The software will brighten or darken or saturate or desaturate your image when you adjust that slider. But they showed, without going into too much detail, that these smart adjustments were actually several adjustments made in concert with each other. So making the image brighter with the “Light” slider might actually adjust the exposure up but the highlights down, while boosting shadows and contrast. All handled automagiclally with that one slider and based on the content of the image, to keep it looking good. But you have access to all of those sliders if you want that.
So I looked at the interface of the OSX Photos in the UI still that was released yesterday, and here’s what I found:
Under the “Light” slider, you have: Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Brightness, Contrast, and Blacks.
Under the “Color” slider, you have: Saturation, Contrast, and Cast. Note: this “contrast” is shown having a different value than in the Light heading, leading me to guess that it is color contrast, or what Lightroom calls “Vibrance” and Aperture calls “Vibrancy.”
Under the “Black and White” heading, Hue Strength, Neutral Boost, Photo Tone, and Grain.
Definition and Vignette have sliders.
White Balance can be selected (“Neutral Gray” is shown) and Warmth has a slider.
There is also a five point levels tool with a monochrome histogram. This is in addition to the 6-color histogram at the top of the UI.
These are all shown to be the tools in one of four toolsets on the far right of the UI. The other icons are Crop, Band-Aid, and a three-circle Venn Diagram icon (“effects” in iOS iPhoto).
So that’s plenty to work with. More than Aperture, in fact.
Reminding myself of the Aperture UI by visiting the product page (I no longer have it installed, having switched to LR years back), the adjustment tools there are:
White Balance (“Natural Gray” selected) with a warmth slider. Identical in Photos.
Exposure, Recovery, Black Point, and Brightness. All but Recovery is in Photos, but Photos has Highlights and Shadows.
Contrast, Definition, Saturation, and Vibrancy: All but Vibrancy is in Photos, but I’m guessing the “Color Contrast” is exactly Vibrancy.
Tint has no obvious analogue in Photos from the still that was released. Unless that’s “Cast.”
So there we go. No guarantee, obviously, but I’m willing to bet that importing an image library from Aperture will see edits transitioned seamlessly, or at least as seamlessly as the move from Aperture 2 to Aperture 3. And haven’t people been clamoring for a new, more-feature-rich version of Aperture for years now? It seems to be called Photos.
Pages