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 - 2:48am
to Aristophanes
What you said would make sense for an Apple roadmap. I only wish it was that way. There is one small problem: That is NOT the path Apple has been following. Simply look at all the software Apple has released in the last three years, including the iterations of OSX since Snow Leopard. Apple has consistently been making OSX MORE like iOS and disregarding the needs of power users in favor of the great huddled iOS masses.
on June 30, 2014 - 2:58am
I disagree that OSX has picked up many features from iOS. Other way around.
Widgets were apps before there were apps. iChat was around before FaceTime. iTunes is….iTunes, now getting very long in the tooth as the jack-of-all-trade app.
Apple has moved a number of interface elements towards a communications platform meme and away from a processing meme. Keep in mind almost half of Apple’s user base rely on laptops, with a very large chunk of those MacBook Airs recently. The new Mac Pro has dealt with ventilation, heat, and dust issues by shrinking and externalizing energy and design wasteful buses. Merging the OS user experience between platforms is a good idea i part because we’d criticize them constantly for NOT doing so. Let’s not forget that swipe appeared on PowerBooks long before it appeared on an iOS screen.
Critical is the move away from Finder-level organization towards easier navigation by design, metadata, and core search functions. You need these on small devices because most of your access will be online to servers. Well, the same holds true of Mac now.
Setting standards for 2 OSs is a good thing, especially since it’s something Microsoft has not been able to do and Google having no power desktop in any case.
I jus want Aperture’s replacement to have stacks. I’d be lost without them, especially on a library transfer.
on June 30, 2014 - 4:19am
I find it curious how easily the terms “pro” and “power user” get tossed around and how OS X is suffering because it is being “dumbed down” to iOS. (not just in this discussion but elsewhere as well.)
Could someone point out at least one “power user” function, feature or capability that has been removed from OS X because iOS exists?
While you are searching … also try and find one “pro” capability, feature or task that has been removed from OS X because Apple is “making it more like iOS”?
I’m going to go have a beer and a burger while I wait for a response because I think I’ll have plenty of time …
on June 30, 2014 - 5:28am
Eh? Look at the Apple apps (e.g. iWork) that have had their features pulled so they match the iOS versions.
On a broader (non-iOS) note, If you want to see a classic example of dumbed down, look at OSX Server.
I actually don’t mind the convergence of the 2 OSs. It bothers me more when they do stupid stuff like changing long standing workflows e.g. The removal of the ’Save As’ command
on June 30, 2014 - 6:01am
Save as has always been there even if it was not in the menu = Shift + option + command + ‘S’
I still haven’t seen any pro power user items that were eliminated …
on June 30, 2014 - 1:56pm
You can also use “Save as” by holding down the option key while in the file menu.
Scott Stuart
on June 30, 2014 - 6:02am
Response To butch: How about the full screen fiasco that lasted almost 2 years, for starters? You are obviously not a power user or you wouldn’t post such silly responses. But it’s good to see that Apple is attracting new fans! Welcome! To the light side! I too have faith. Just be aware that critique is a tradition that makes us all stronger.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:25am
You are trying to force a square peg into a round hole.
The full screen fiasco or the length of time taken to correct it, was not the result of the existence of iOS or that Apple removed something from OS X to match up a feature in iOS.
You can label me as you wish … I may not be a power user in your eyes … but I recognize an inaccurate critique when I see one … I’ve only owned and used Apple computers since March 1993. I may not know it all … but I’m not easily fooled either.
on June 30, 2014 - 7:41am
To Butch: I offer you an apology. I sincerely hope your vision is correct.
on June 30, 2014 - 8:52am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 30, 2014 - 5:31am
I’m not concerned about the practicalities of moving from A to LR, I just don’t like LR and I don’t like Adobe and their subscription model even more. Money isn’t the issue for me, I’m reasonably well off, I just hate the subscription model for software - any software.
on June 30, 2014 - 5:45am
Kim you are just blind to it :) Apple has you in a hardware subscription model. In order to run their latest OS you have to have a computer, tablet, or phone that is just a few years old. We pay monthly for car insurance and many other things. We stop paying, we don’t get to partake anymore. There really isn’t a difference. I hate it as well, but guess it is the natural maturation of the industry. I actually hate cloud computing even more than these software subscriptions!
on June 30, 2014 - 6:15am
Yes, but you get to keep your hardware. You do not rent it, and wen done with it, it has resale value.
A subscription? No.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:17am
Yes but you keep buying newer stuff right? If you don’t then it won’t run new software. They have you either way (my point).
on June 30, 2014 - 6:23am
Subscriptions to file formats are an issue. Hardware is a platform.
One can be agnostic with the latter, but never the former.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:27am
If we weren’t talking about Apple I agree. However Apple’s model is to give you the software but force you to buy their hardware.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:34am
That’s a very weak analogy … I have a 2007 MBP loaded with Mavericks that will also run Yosemite (according to current data) … but I can’t technically use CC apps one day past the expiration of a subscription.
One company is applying far greater “force” in my estimation.
on June 30, 2014 - 9:28am
I can honestly say I’ve never bought a new machine just to run newer software. I buy new machines because I want to - same reason I buy new golf clubs, a new camera, a new surfboard or a new car. I don’t have to buy any of them and nobody ‘has me’.
on June 30, 2014 - 9:22am
Sorry but you couldn’t be more incorrect. It’s not a hardware subscription offer - you buy a machine - a requirement to use ANY software, be it Mac, Windows of Linux. We have 8 year old machines here still happily running along with current software. I don’t have to pay a cent to keep using it - that’s not the way software subscriptions work.
on June 30, 2014 - 5:39am
Joseph You might want to check out TLDs such as .photography You could get Apple.photography (maybe) or something of this nature.
on June 30, 2014 - 9:53am
You’d get a UDRP in 30 seconds if you even tried for apple.photography. Apple is listed with the TMCH to prevent such trade mark infringements. Reflecting on my own suggestion of photos.expert from yesterday, the same rules may apply as there is no existing business trading under the Photos Expert banner.
on June 30, 2014 - 9:25am
Hi Joseph
I entirely agree with your positive slant on the situation that is unfolding.
Change equals opportunity and other software vendors will respond to the situation with their own improved offerings.
In addition to Aperture I already use OnOne Perfect Photo Suite 8 and it is an excellent product. Aperture provides me with asset management and PP that meets the majority of my needs. After all, I am always striving to get the picture right in camera with minimal PP.
I also use DxO Optics Pro 9, PT Lens, Catapult and Photomatix.
Corel’s Aftershot Pro 2 product shows that, even today, there are extremely good alternatives to Lightroom on the market. By the time one has to make a decision to replace Aperture I anticipate there will be an even greater list of applications available to choose from.
Meanwhile there is still a lot of life left in Aperture with Apple’s commitment to provide an upgrade for the upcoming release of OSX Yosemite.
During the remaining life of Aperture the new Photos application from Apple will be launched and I expect that Apple engineers will craft a feature rich product that is useable seamlessly across both OSX and IOS platforms. That is an exciting prospect that is certainly worth waiting to see before making any decision to replace Aperture.
Frank
on June 30, 2014 - 9:46am
How can I turn off the constant barrage of notifications that a new comment has been posted? Beyond tedious!
on June 30, 2014 - 9:47am
How can I turn off the constant barrage of notifications that a new comment has been posted? Beyond tedious!
on June 30, 2014 - 9:57am
Just set up a filter in your email app. But why do you want to send us to trash. We’re hilarious!
on June 30, 2014 - 9:56am
Is anyone else seeing an increase in Adobe Lightroom ads online and in gmail (free and biz)? Or am I being more paranoid than usual?
on June 30, 2014 - 10:23am
Joseph. I want to mute this thread. I want to stop notifications on new comments. I did not ask to be notified of new comments. How can I STOP notifications being received from this site and in particular this thread?
Do I simply have to De-Register?
on June 30, 2014 - 1:12pm
Hi,
In every notification mail, you have a link to unregister.
If not like this, just come on this website, login, then menu Me > My Subscriptions. You can then remove subscription to this thread.
I was looking for the same as it is the first time I see so many comments on a topic :)
Regards,
J.
on June 30, 2014 - 1:39pm
Aaah! Many thanks J, missed that!
Just too many coming in every second or so!
All the best.
on June 30, 2014 - 4:26pm
Also - if you look at the very bottom of Joseph’s original post - you will find an “Unsubscribe” button. Easy Peasy! ;-)
on June 30, 2014 - 4:30pm
Not so Easy Peasy it seems. I’ve I unsubscribed and I’m still getting notices. :(
Scott Stuart
on June 30, 2014 - 4:56pm
Well, I thought that link worked but now it looks like its a no go. Sorry!
on June 30, 2014 - 11:49am
How could Apple make such a mess of this?
Apple tell us that Aperture will not be updated after Yosemite.
They don’t tell us much about the Photos app and how it would better serve any enthusiast or pro photographer with large image libraries.
Joseph, I appreciate your writing and positive attitude but regardless of that Apple are really letting the existing Aperture community down.
Apple is now is calling web site editors, journalists and others for damage control but it is a big time failure from Apples part to not have benefits (if any) for the present Aperture users to migrate.
dagge
on June 30, 2014 - 1:11pm
Tuning in @ page 6 in the comments is suicidal to say the least, but, whatever.
Joseph, I wish to be more specific than 99.9% of the comments seen here. I have my doubts regarding this whole thing and I would like to see what you think about a couple of points.
I don’t have anything against iPhone photography. It’s great and it has brought a lot of attention to the world of photography, bringing great photos and new great photographers. But we have to acknowledge the fact that processing iPhone JPGs for Instagram or sharing to an iCloud album for your grandma has a completely different workflow and needs from managing tons of 22mpx 14bit RAW files.
There’s no point in *****ing ourselves and thinking “hey, we only give this “pro” label because we want to feel like that when using software X or hardware Y”. That’s not what it’s happening here.
Why is a compromise something we don’t want when it comes to keeping PCs and tablets two distinct things (see all the W8/WRT discussion) and when it comes to this we have to see how this pans out? Smells like compromise to me, with good intentions but not fitting the bill for most of us here for a long time.
One last thing: this whole mess is based on the fact that transitioning libraries between softwares is a major PITA. You lose edits, rating,s metadata and, most of all, A LOT OF TIME. Otherwise we would be just switching around without making so much noise. Transitioning video projects is NOTHING compared to this! So I say, let’s quit this FCP/FCPX comparison because it doesn’t translate at all!
on June 30, 2014 - 2:15pm
What you say makes quite some sense to me. Expressing the intent to replace two products with different target audiences is confusing to say the least and a dumb way to manage expectation.
You don’t agree with the comparison with FCP7/FCPX, but the noise that this announcement starts to look similar to what happened when FCPX was launched though. It could be what Apple was looking for: testing the market to see its reaction… Or maybe their communication department is turning clumsy (don’t forget that their head of comm just left).
Now if we take the theoretical side of things, if you had to build a compelling DAM you’d start need to work the fundamentals. Aperture and LR are too monolithic apps: one big monster of an apps that manages a centralised database (even if some of the photos can be offline) with a non-destructive editor, plugins are there but as a second thought and without deep integration. Building an apps which is based strategically on a non central database (i.e. with all or part of the database on the cloud or on a different machine) and with extensibility as a foundation is quite a good strategy. People might not want to use the cloud but they could, people might have (most pro have) one laptop and a desktop and seamlessly transfer (today’s situation is not that bad but could be much better), etc. It is not necessarily about forcing users to use the cloud but to have the ability to do so. Building something fundamentally extensible wouldn’t prevent Apple from bringing Pro functionality to it but it would allow strong alternative as well. In the extensibility area this would be a quite different ball game than with Adobe: Apple couldn’t care less that you prefer DxO as RAW engine, or any other for that matter. Adobe on the other end would prefer to make you use LR and PS when LR is not enough, there is a greater conflict of interest. Developers are going out of business everyday (I was one too) but that’s also part of the game but other will stay; incidentally there was a rumour that the developer of LightZone had rejoined Apple to work on a Photo project…; so far Google has kept Nik available and continued to improve on it, so nothing to worry too much about. So, in my opinion, all good things in theory.
In practice: the leap of faith Apple is asking us to make is simply too much. There is not even a beta product to test, not more than ONE screenshot shared (which a few have already scrutinised to the pixel). And I simply don’t get why a secretive company, which has (had?) a perfect marketing choreography, to just drop on web bloggers the news that Aperture and iPhoto are done at a time where they have literally nothing else to show (except for the above mentioned screenshot). Again, I agree with you the appearance are not good and we might be fooling ourselves to continue trusting when they have shown so little…
I don’t like it, but again, I’m getting ready to move to LR…
Christian C. Berclaz
www.photoanimalium.com
on July 1, 2014 - 6:39pm
There's a great series of questions in here. I converted your list from bullets to numbers so I could respond in kind.
Hope that helps.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
on July 2, 2014 - 12:21am
Thank you a lot for taking your time answering my points one by one! You’re great! (:
I’ll avoid wasting more of your time and try to answer super concisely :D
Ok, I can still use Aperture, but I can also use Paint Shop Pro 1 on a virtual machine if I wanted. Kinda misses the point imho. Reinstating point three, which found us on the same page, we can all afford a little setback if this means epic stuff coming, but we all feel that what is coming will be quite more that that.
BTW the more I read the comments, the more I feel like everyone is trying to speculate wether Photos will be up to our standards (in the near future) or not because if we have to transition our gigantic libraries, we have to start ASAP (: or is it only me that I feel like that? Otherwise I would have waited Aperture 4 six-twelve more months like pretty much everybody else here I think :D
(and gosh, I’m trying to use Lightroom right now… gosh…. goooossh… )): )
Thank you again so much for taking your time reading through all of this!
on July 2, 2014 - 12:44am
http://neonsqua.re
on July 2, 2014 - 1:15am
Don’t get me wrong – I, too, feel that low level access for plugins will make Photos potentially extraordinary in the future. That said, if developers catch on. I just wish I won’t have to rely on them for stuff I think is a core function. I don’t say it will happen. I just wish it won’t.
If making a low level access plugin infrastructure were easy, somebody would already have implemented it. It will be hard to pull it off, even for Apple, and I just wish they won’t break stuff.
Whops, your plugin that covered that missing vibrancy slider is buggy. Whops, the entire app crashes now, because it’s part of the low level infrastructure. See what I mean? Would you prefer a buggy vibrancy or no vibrancy?
Anyway, it’s all related to the fact that we don’t know the timeframes involved in this whole thing. If Aperture weren’t a couple of years late for a major update, if Photos were to came out with Yosemite and if we actually could trust Apple giving out timeframes, we wouldn’t be here evaluating even the slightest of the possibilities.
I know, I should look at the fact that FCP got into a 3 month update cycle and re evaluate everything from scratch once again (:
On the sliders: I guess I have to shut up q:
on July 2, 2014 - 6:30pm
OK, briefly…
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
on June 30, 2014 - 1:25pm
If you have built a library of some 30k+ pictures and in general like Aperture, you want to know how this new product compares with todays product. Until we see a detailed list of feature comparison, Apple causes unrest with its loyal user base, and this will lead to experimenting with competitive products. Bad marketing strategy Apple!!
RvZ
on June 30, 2014 - 4:02pm
Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools?
Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps?
Thank you.
on June 30, 2014 - 4:04pm
Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools? Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps? Thank you.
on June 30, 2014 - 4:05pm
Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools? Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps? Thank you.
on June 30, 2014 - 6:58pm
Here’s an interesting take on this issue. Also, some thoughtful comments can be found here too:
http://www.zdnet.com/apples-software-ju-jitsu-7000031062/
Phil in Midland
on June 30, 2014 - 8:25pm
That zdnet perspective is spot-on.
on June 30, 2014 - 8:40pm
My God. This so infuriates me its impossible to describe. Apple is making a huge mistake (which they have over and over again - why didn’t I see this coming ) by alienating professionals by taking all of their creation software ( remember iWeb ? ) and dumbing it down for Twittering housewives and pushing everyone into the cloud ; whether they want/need it or not.
I have used Aperture for 8+ years - have purchased $$thousands of dollars of plug-ins and spent numerous hours learning some of the awkward work-arounds for clients.
Aperture is a professional program and has always been separate for a reason. You are telling me, a professional photographer that I’m going to be using the same software as my mother. Screw you Apple.
Move over Lightroom you just another visitor ; and if they provide an easy migration and - solve the destructive editing - I’m in.
Wombat // Photography
www.wombatsnap.com
on June 30, 2014 - 9:03pm
iWeb was never professional. It was part of the iLife series for consumers.
There has been no indication that the cloud is required. LR for Adobe does not require the cloud either, unless you want it to.
Move to LR, by all means. I suspect all this huffing and puffing is premature. We simply do not know what is and how featured and extensible it will be.
on June 30, 2014 - 10:13pm
So somebody’s nose is out of joint because a pro has to use the same software as his mother? Awwww…poor baby. If the new ‘Photos’ works who cares? It’s far too early to be jumping to conclusions unless you’re the kind of person who doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Try and have some perspective. If it hurts your feels to be using software that the PTA Moms are using I feels sorry for you.
Relax. You can always jump to LR once the facts are known.
Remarkable how short sighted some people are being on this issue.
As I said before, I’ll wait.
on June 30, 2014 - 10:14pm
So somebody’s nose is out of joint because a pro has to use the same software as his mother? Awwww…poor baby. If the new ‘Photos’ works who cares? It’s far too early to be jumping to conclusions unless you’re the kind of person who doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Try and have some perspective. If it hurts your feels to be using software that the PTA Moms are using I feels sorry for you.
Relax. You can always jump to LR once the facts are known.
Remarkable how short sighted some people are being on this issue.
As I said before, I’ll wait.
Pages