Having thought that I had uploaded the Macphun Creative Kit 2016 into Photos successfully as plug ins, I’ve just noticed that the interface installed in Photos is different to the apps as stand alones. For example, in Photos I don’t have the opportunity to do a split screen to show before and after images, nor do I have the ‘loop’ button or help button, but these are in the apps when I open them up as a stand alone. However, even in stand alone I am unable to share images back to Photos. Can anyone please tell me if this is the way it is, or help me to correct what I might have done wrong when I initially uploaded the apps. I do find it a great help with the apps directly in Photos as a plug-in. Your comments will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Patricia
I went ahead and got them too. These are much cheaper – a quarter to a third of the price – than the stand-alone versions. They do most of the same work, but without all the conveniences, bells and whistles. I'm assuming that some things will improve over time. Personally I think most of them are very handy and a bargain – I'm not very enamored of Intensify in either version, but then I do very little color work.
jcraig
I think that is how it is. I can’t do split screen when using the CK 2016 apps as Photos extensions, but I can in the standalone apps.
Thank you to both jcraig and Mike for your responses to my Macphun issue. I took my concern at not having certain features in the Creative Kit 2016 plug-in in Photos to the Macphun people for their advice. I had an extremely helpful response. As I understand it now, this is an issue with Apple’s guidelines for software developers on what they can and cannot do whilst running inside of Photos. Plus, developers have a minimum window size restriction; therefore, for the time being at least, Photo users will have to use the settings that come close to the ones we are currently missing. Hope this helps.
Patricia
Patricia Hansen
I have the Pro suite and it is the same, restricted functionality in Apple Photos. Macphun should have mentioned this in their advertising, but if they did I never saw it. Fortunately it all works well in LR so I shall stick there for the moment. Interestingly Focus does not work in Apple Photos at all - does not show up. Again ok in LR.
I get the impression Macphun are moving too fast, although the products do work well. I am currently trying Topaz and ON 1 version 10. If they work well I shall move on from Macphun.
I have contacted MacPhun support about Focus not working as an extension. They have been fully aware of this from the start and say an update will be released very soon.
I agree about MacPhun moving too fast, and I don’t like their style. There were no release notes for Creative Kit 2016 which could have explained that Focus doesn’t work yet, and that you have to restart to get the apps to show up in the extensions pref pane.
I also suspect they blurred the description between the pro and non pro versions as far as use in Photos is involved, causing some like me to get the pro version when the non pro was available earlier and would have been sufficient.
Also too many junk emails from them.
Won’t argue with any of that. I pre purchased CK and would not do that again. I just wish they would come across as a professional photographer-centric enterprise. They appear more like a bunch of salesman just pushing stuff out the door. What really annoyed me was I bought CK and then within a couple of weeks or so they launch this new HDR software outside the deal.
The apps work very well (as plug-ins to LR) but I am now looking very closely at On One and Topaz, mainly because, like you, I do not like Macphuns style …..that awful email of their’s “Thank you for reaching out” Arrrrrrrgh!. Mind you On One can be a bit pushy but at least they give 60 day trials of version 10.
Have now spent time with On One’s offering and it is not for me. Great integration and love the file browser but hate having to mess around with all those presets and filters. Topaz is good (very) but I still find Macphun’s stuff easier to work with and the results are very good indeed. So, whilst Macphun might well need to work on their image and marketing technique they do, in my view, produce a really good product. As an aside, I hear some of the team at Macphun originate from Nik. If true that is some pedigree!
Thank you to Colin and to the other guys who responded to my earlier Post.
All’s Well that Ends Well, so it would seem. I think we are all agreed that the new Macphun apps are terrific and we now have to wait for them to be more Photos friendly, which I understand will appear in future updates. Hopefully, they are not long in coming, especially Focus CF and the ability to use all the functions directly in Photos and not in stand alone versions only.
Patricia
Patricia Hansen
If one is a Photos person then the integration is important and at the moment it is poor - rushed out the door I would say. I use LR and to be honest I can find no substitute for that (other than Capture One), although On One’s browse model is well on the way to being a lighter alternative. Been playing with Apple Photos but it is too iPhone(ish) for me, if you see what I mean. For me LR running alongside something like FLICKR gives me all the cloud stuff I really need and the Macphun stuff integrates well as a LR plug-in. On One is good in that area too as it also provides layers. But I do like Macphun’s results and I sort of understand how the apps work (what the sliders do) :-)
I have now deleted OnOne’s Photo 10 mid trial. I found it slow, resource hungry and I did not like the filter based approach. Macphun wins so lets hope it gets its act together. Topaz Adjust has its uses too and I have that as a reserve plugin. But seriously I am really trying to do all post processing in LR alone. It is too easy to become reliant on plugins, although there is not a lot of option if using Apple Photos. I am still playing with that :-)
Been playing with Photos, out of curiosity really. Certainly it is no Lightroom but it seems ok and with the Macphun plugins now working, albeit they don’t have quite the same functionality as when working outside go Photos, the app does seem as though it could be useful and especially so if using iCloud for sharing. It got me thinking about keeping my LR library in the cloud - has anybody tried running their entire library from iCloud? I am a photography hobbyist so it is more than a few snap shots.
Thanks
Colin
I would like to buy all of the Macphun plug-ins for Photos only (I don’t see an immediate need for the stand-alone versions). So, I’m about to purchase the Macphun plug-ins from the AppStore individually. Do you get the the Photos-versions of the plug-ins when buying the Creative Kit stand-alone suite as well?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/studio460/
Yes the standalone `Creative Kit 2016 apps can be used as Photos Extensions (plugins).
I am unclear about whether the actual plug in is the same whether bought from Apple or the much more expensive CK 2016. When I bought the standalones there were words in the blurb which implied that the more expensive ones were more capable but not sure that is true.
I find MacPhun a tricky company to deal with. They don’t tell you everything and what they do tell is intentionally misleading. Example, Focus CK still does not work as a plugin. Update promised late October. But you only find out after trying to make it work and contacting support.
Thanks for your reply! Appreciate the info!
https://www.flickr.com/photos/studio460/
mikebhm - So, you find Macphun a tricky company to deal with do you? And they are “intentionally misleading” are they. You have evidence that they mislead intentionally do you? If not you have just made what I see as a slanderous statement and do hope Macphun pick up on it. I am also surprised your post has not been moderated. For what it is worth, I do not favour Macphun’s marketing methods and others feel likewise. Macphun have been told and I am sure they will address the issue going forward. Their products however are good and their support second to none in my experience.
OP - As for Photos, there is absolutely no comparison between it and the likes of Lightroom. It will work well enough if your requirements are limited but if you are at the more serious end of photography you will find it limiting, even with plugins which have to convert everything to jpeg before returning it to Photos. You will not therefore have an edited raw file for future ref. However if you shoot in jpeg this is probably not an issue. Try Photos and see how you get on but it really is limited in all respects. Of course, it might improve with future updates. Trouble is I cannot find a road map!
Thanks for your input. I think I’m now planning a multi-tiered approach. I actually quite like Photos’ browser UI design: Double-click for browser, double-click for full-screen, press ‘Z’ for 100%-zoom, etc. These are three things I liked a lot about Aperture, and these Aperture-esque features are enough to turn me into a user. It’s also very clean–I like looking at its ultra-minimalist display. It has a very calming effect, and it’s utterly non-distracting (this kinda shit is uber-important to me). So … Aperture/El Capitan for now, as I transition to Photos for casual shooting, and then likely a two-tier process dedicated to for-hire work:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/studio460/
I see you are using CNX-D. Personally i cannot get on with the interface and there is no local editing (brushes etc). However if you are in to Nikon software, have you looked a ViewNXI which now has its own set of editing tools and is a free download?
No, I’m not an NX-D user (though, I do plan to give it a go soon). I just know that Nikon owners tend to favor its RAW development results over others (though, most generally decry SilkyPix’ execution of the software). It’s also the only other app which shows focus points! I tried NX-2 a few years ago, and I actually kind of liked it. However, I chose DxO over NX-2 as my RAW developer, mainly because I saw a significant improvement in my RAW files when paired with DxO’s camera- and lens-specific profiles (especially with the AF Nikkor 14mm f/2.8D). For sheer technical prowess, DxO is tough to beat.
But, most seem to favor Capture One Pro’s RAW development results overall, especially for skin tones, but I just can’t seem to get past their interface quirks.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/studio460/
I think I’ve decided while typing my reply to your post. It’s those key navigational cues in Photos which got me: Everything works as I expect. Plus, I’ll still have more robust tools for professional work when needed (I already own Photo Mechanic and DxO licenses). And, I still have Aperture running just fine in El Capitan 10.11.1, so I do have some time. Just think where Photos may be in a year from now. The upcoming DxO Photos extension looks very interesting (I wonder if they’ll include their entire lens database?). Time will tell, and thanks to El Capitan compatibility, I have some.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/studio460/
I am not a lawyer but selling a product that is described as an extension in Photos (Focus CK) when it doesn’t work, and they knew it didn’t work, is pretty misleading, and certainly not accidental, don’t you think?
No you are not a lawyer. You are making an accusation which as far as I can tell is based on an assumption that Macphun knowingly sold software that did not perform as advertised. This may be true or it may not be true. You are acting as judge and jury and if you are wrong that is slanderous. If you do have proof then that is great and perhaps you would share it with us so we can all demand recompense in some way.
I agree 100% that they have been less than smart and if it were my business I would be looking at my sales and marketing strategy very closely indeed. That however does not mean they intended to deceive, it could just be a new company being over enthusiastic. Maybe a little less of this “thank you for reaching out” nonsense and a greater focus on quality control might help!
Sounds like you may be a lawyer and as I don’t intend to employ one to supply the right words or evidence to prolong this discussion, which has already become boring to everyone else, I hereby withdraw my accusation and say that it appears to me that MacPhun may possibly have been intentionally misleading to increase sales in the example I quoted and others mentioned here and other forums.
I think you agree with the intent of what I wrote so please leave the legal stuff at the office!
If you get it wrong you also run the risk of bringing the Forum into disrepute. Yes we understand what you are driving at and why - it is only a matter of keeping the words under control. It is easy for feelings to run high - believe me I was not overly impressed by what appeared to be a confused/rushed launch either.
And I do not believe others are not interested in this thread. I am sure Macphun is! And I have no connection with that company other than being a customer.
You have done the right thing now, in my opinion. But it is only my opinion. You are of course free to post as you wish but must accept the consequences (if any) of that post.
As you say, matter closed. Time to move on.
Agreed. To get back on topic, I was hoping the question implied in my post #14 would get an answer…
Does anyone know if the Macphun plugins bought from the Apple store are identical to the plugins installed by the Creative Kit 2016 apps ? (as I had believed when I bought CK 2016).
or is the benefit for CK 2016 simply the existence of the standalone apps, which do have extra capability compared to their plugins ?
EDIT PS I understand about the split screen feature not being available due to Apple restrictions, but trying to discover if there are any additional capabilities in the plug ins in the CK 2016 versions.
Have only tried the CK plugins but recall reading somewhere they are no different to those emanating from the App Store. As you say CK can run stand-alone and it also acts as a very decent plugin to LR and PS (and Aperture I believe), which is functionality the App Store stuff does not have. One other difference with the Photos plugin, it can open say a raw or tiff for editing but can only send a jpeg back to Photos (an Apple restriction).
Thank you.
removed from here, reposted as reply to Colin
Using the CK version I can confirm that they do, as stand-alone app, have some things different. It differs per app. Some of them do edit RAW-files. They all do have Aperture- Lightroom plug-in’s (the App-store versions don’t). All the CK versions when used as stand -alone do have split screen functions and when appropriate “loop” functionality. At the same the I notice that their RAW-conversion at least for Panasonic G7 and FZ300/330 isn’ t quite ok. It differs quite a bit from the Apple RAW-conversion and for example FOCUS shows distortions in wide-angle. Which is corrected by all other photo-apps I use.
I have contacted Macphun for this and they are working on it.
P.S. For those interested I managed thanks to the Apple forum to have improved rating/sorting functionality and batch functionality for a couple of things using Automator and AppleScript as service within Photos. Not ideal but definitely an improvement. Contact me if interested .
BenB
http://www.videoidee.nl
http://www.benssite.nl
I can confirm this is an issue with ALL the MacPhun software, stand-alone, not standalone, app-store or not.
If you try to process ANY RAW from any camera system that has correction data built into the RAW file that EVERY OTHER APP using apples RAW automatically applies (pretty much always has) somehow they have managed to turn it off????? I won't bother looking at the API but good luck getting this fixed…
I spent two hours on the phone with them after jumping through moronic hoops attempting to get some acknowledgment of even understanding what I was talking about. THEN I carefully crafted step-by-step with attached RAW files (as if you need special instructions on how to re-create considering it NEVER EVER NEVER has worked in any of their apps) sent that off to them. Got a thanks. Ever since then CRICKETS! not a peep. Not a word. NOT FIXED, nothing.
This was A VERY LONG TIME AGO. Months and months. Their support seems setup for people that have never used a computer or something???
Anyway here's another thing for you to ponder considering Photo-plug-ins and Photos.app. Honestly have not been bothered to really get to the bottom of this but…
I tried using Photos (which does apply built-in lens corrections) as a work-around to opening a RAW direction. Here's the rub, it seems that Photos will just hand off the RAW to Tonality if there are no photos.app adjustments applied which obviously will show the same issue. The frustrating part is that to work-around you must apply one adjustment but THEN it seems as if an 8-bit JPEG is handed off to MacPhun and round-tripped back into photos so… that's useless. None of this stuff is ready for prime-time it seems.
RB
@ Robert,
Thanks for sharing your experience.
I am afraid you are quite right, (of course you are -;)). Didn’t hear anything since at least 8 weeks from Macphun in solving the issue. Wonder why they don’t use the built-in functionality of Apple.
Seems to me Photo’s is handing off jpeg in 8 bit also to other apps, after any kind of adjustment in Photo’s.
DXO Optics for Photo’s by the way is correcting the RAW files correctly, as does for example GraphicConverter, (using it’s own RAW converter). However the latter has no extension support. How difficult can it be to get this right, if others seem to have no problem.
Anyway Phun software it is, but not as you say for prime-time. Not sure if I will continue using this stuff.
Still quite enthusiastic about Photos by the way.
BenB
BenB
http://www.videoidee.nl
http://www.benssite.nl
Glad to hear they are not just ignoring me. Was getting paranoid for a moment ;-)
Anyway you might enjoy this on my stream of consciousness project specific blog…. maybe not but read warning before proceeding.
WARNING
There it's big so don't blame me about wife/work/whatever.
1. not safe for work NSFW
2. I use the F word about 32 times.
3. I call people in general (nobody specific) names. If you are sensitive to micro-agression (whatever that is???) this is the real thing.
4. I hallucinate halfway thru and pretend I work at adobe and fire everyone…
5. I bash on MacPhun a lot too… but don't worry. I wrote another post that praises what they get right but haven't posted it yet.
Okay here we go…
http://bw.ipcloud.mobi/2015/12/26/why-lightroom-grain-sucks/
Title = Why Lightroom grain sucks.
Enjoy (or not)
RB
Ps. I wrote this because I call out how bad LR “film grain” is all the time and someone asked me why via email, I thought it was obvious but maybe not. This was clearly pointing out what a cluster-f@## it is in no uncertain terms. UTTERLY USELESS.
Thanks Robert,
I indeed did enjoy.
I like your style and your profound knowledge (way out of my league -;)). I already bookmarked your website before.
Cheers
BenB
BenB
http://www.videoidee.nl
http://www.benssite.nl