You are here

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Take Apple to task for permitting Photos for OS X to seriously break Aperture's superior metadata tools. Take it viral. #1's picture
February 17, 2015 - 11:09pm

I have posted part of this in another stream. But I think it is so important I decided to start a new thread to underscore the proposal. It is clear that this community is genuinely troubled by the impending loss of Aperture’s metadata tools. So many have been generous in testing and reporting back on the pros and cons of various alternative applications. But it seems clear there is no evident satisfaction with substitute applications when it comes to their metadata tools. 

So perhaps it  may be worth while to take our dissatisfaction with OSX’s  knife in the heart of Aperture metadata tools viral.  If you live in the social universe with Twitter, Google Plus, Facebook and other forms of communication– let’s consider detailing the disappointment in alternative approaches to metadata and appeal to the COMMON SENSE AND GOOD WILL of Apple to bring Aperture style ROBUST AND FLEXIBLE metadata tools to OS X Photos.

Please consider this idea. thanks.

PhotoJoseph's picture
by PhotoJoseph
February 17, 2015 - 11:56pm


By all means fight the good fight, but the fight is done. It was done before we even knew about it. I know the battle that was waged. Tears were shed, blood was spilled, but no ground was gained and we all know the result.

It's time to focus our energy on the next stage.

— Have you signed up for the mailing list?'s picture
February 18, 2015 - 5:04pm

Well, Joseph: you certainly put a lot of ice in that glass of water. I certainly defer to your sourced-insight. Now I encourage you to find a way to license and develop the code–AT LEAST for the metadata tools.

Stephen Wandzura's picture
by Stephen Wandzura
March 5, 2015 - 12:47am



Since you know the story behind the demise of Aperture, could you, without betraying any confidences, tell us what was the reasoning of those who eventually prevailed? Why did they not at least see a need to provide a way forward to dedicated Aperture users? After Tim Cook’s comments with regard to the Mac Pro, what happened to the purported concern that Apple has for its professional customers? In short, what the **** were they thinking?




Francois Arbour's picture
by Francois Arbour
March 5, 2015 - 7:35pm


I understand your point of view but here is another interesting point of view I got from

a known photo blogger (I cannot reveal his name)

“Right now is the time to fix and seal the smartphone photo workflow. 

What I don’t understand is that Apple apparently has built Photos as an “extendable” app and was going to solicit third parties to do that. To date, I’ve seen no evidence that this was done. 

However, everyone’s making a common mistake about Apple. Apple has a long, long history of pulling apps down to basics to shore them up for architectural changes necessary to compete in FUTURE markets, then building them back up. I suspect those looking at the beta are underestimated what, say, a year or so from now, Photos will actually look like and be able to do.”

Rick's picture
by Rick
March 22, 2015 - 9:42pm


After reading what you wrote about Photos I am not sure there was any kind of a fight waged at all. You were asked who did you you talk to and what was the decision process but I never saw a response. Why not make it public? 

I personally hope that Photo does damage to Apple and their credibility with professional photographers like me. You said in one of your posts that Apple cares about photography. I agree as long as the camera is an iPhone. That is all this application is about. An iPhone is not a camera by any stretch of the imagination.

Photos is a joke and I am surprised you don’t share in that sediment having used Aperture for as long as you have. 

Best Regards,


Brian Houle's picture
by Brian Houle
February 24, 2015 - 1:27am

Well, for what it’s worth - Apple has pulled any mention of Photos from their website and it’s now rumoured to be a late April releases.

I sent in my feedback explaining the differences we’d miss if they didn’t incorporate parts of Aperture. In fact, I regurgitated some of Joe’s post from 2 weeks ago.

I urge everyone to do the same:

Jim Burgess's picture
by Jim Burgess
February 24, 2015 - 4:38pm


Not sure where you are seeing that they pulled Photos from their site. This link is still active:

And FWIW I’m not holding my breath that Apple will incorporate anything from Aperture in Photos. They are too far down the path of how they envision photography within their ecosystem. Hope I’m wrong, but…

Brian Houle's picture
by Brian Houle
February 24, 2015 - 7:29pm

I stand corrected! I will admit a huge error in not double checking - my bad :(

No offense, I hope you’re wrong too!

I don’t think it’s the wisest business move for them personally, but who knows…all speculation until it comes out.


Andrew Mumford's picture
by Andrew Mumford
February 25, 2015 - 10:24pm

If your concern is purely metadata, not DAM type organization then there is and has not been, any substitute for Photo Mechanic.

It does anything Aperture has ever done and a thousand things more and unlike Aperture it does it correctly.

If for nothing else the fact alone that it will reliably embed Metadata into RAW files making your metadata “truly” portable and enduring vs the XMP sidecar approach - makes it head and tails better than any other solution out there - and it’s faster than anything else.

Learning curve may be steep and it’s a quirky looking beast for sure but once you’ve established your workflow it just works.

If you shoot in any volume at all this is your best solution currently.

My Tuppence

It is clear that this community is genuinely troubled by the impending loss of Aperture’s metadata tools. So many have been generous in testing and reporting back on the pros and cons of various alternative applications. But it seems clear there is no evident satisfaction with substitute applications when it comes to their metadata tools. 

Andrew Mumford

Jim Burgess's picture
by Jim Burgess
February 25, 2015 - 11:40pm

Yes… PhotoMechanic is probably best-in-class when it comes to handling metadata. But organizing and managing a library of a few hundred thousand photos… not so much. IMO Aperture is currently best at that, and that’s what has people concerned. And speaking of the waiting game… how long have PM customers been waiting for the catalog add-on to PM? Five years? And it’s still nothing but vaporware. So if handling metadata is all you are after, PhotoMechanic certainly fits. But if an overall DAM solution is required, then the search is on for an Aperture replacement. And at this point… it isn’t PhotoMechanic.

Mark Rosen's picture
by Mark Rosen
February 26, 2015 - 2:42am

Take a look Photo Supreme. It’s an excellent DAM. Has metadata options including xmp. Keeps keywords, color labels and most smart albums from Aperture. I’ve imported my referenced  Aperture DB. I am using DXO, Iridient, and Pixelmator as processing apps. DXO accesses my Nik standalone plugins. One feature I like is that the import is customizable for each camera. (metadata exclusive to each camera)

Jim Burgess's picture
by Jim Burgess
February 26, 2015 - 2:01pm

A key feature of Aperture, and LightRoom, is the tight integration between the file management and image adjustments. More specifically, batch adjustments. As much as I dislike lift-and-stamp, it is essential to my workflow. How does Photo Supreme handle the equivalent of batch adjustments? The software is on my list to evaluate, but a quick answer would be appreciated.

Mark Rosen's picture
by Mark Rosen
February 26, 2015 - 4:09pm

I don’t usually do batch changes. I did a test. 8  TIFF files Batch change. Crop square, ( from 3:2), add film grain, convert gray scale. Took about 2O seconds. Versioned (stacked) them with the originals in the file system and exported them to a folder on the desktop. ( I chose that as option so to see if i could out put them to a different place) It created separate files not part of the a DB. I have 2 separate  files of the same image

Jim Burgess's picture
by Jim Burgess
February 27, 2015 - 4:13am

Thanks for the info. Will give the software a trial.'s picture
February 26, 2015 - 3:23am

Andrew, Jim, Mark: Thanks for pushing me to more precision. Yes, Aperture’s DAM tools are the issue. Also: thanks for the suggestions and discussion re PhotoMechanic/PhotoSupreme.

You may login with either your assigned username or your e-mail address.
Passwords are case-sensitive - Forgot your password?