You are here

22 posts / 0 new
Last post
Worst Case Scenario - Continued Use of Aperture #1
Ewing's picture
by Ewing
July 31, 2014 - 12:35pm

I like I’m sure most people on here have been using Aperture for years and love it. I gave Lightroom a shot before I tried Aperture and found it way to cumbersome to keep my pictures organized and could never really understand it. Not only that but I till this day can’t for the life of me understand why it’s the market leader for pro photographers but I’m an amateur so I always figured that’s why I don’t get it. I was completely floored when the news came that Apple was stopping support of Aperture and was even filled with mild panic.

I still have Lightroom 4 on my Mac and booted it up for the first time in well over a year and quickly shut it down. I don’t even want to try and learn it. It doesn’t even seem to have as many editing options as Aperture but again, I never really learned it either. My main question is what is the worst case scenario of continuing to use Aperture even after Apple’s Photos app comes out? Apple will obviously update Aperture to work with Yosemite but besides not adding features or improving it’s performance, what would be bad about continuing to use it? I can see maybe it not being compatible with another Mac OS in the future but I’d think that would be years away so until then what would the real drawbacks be of using it for years ahead? Just wondering what I haven’t thought of yet…

On a side note, does anyone really think that the new “Photos” app will ever be developed enough to Aperture standards given that it’s going to be a free consumer app and it’s doubtful Apple will restart another pro-grade photo app?

 

 

 

Charles Putnam's picture
by Charles Putnam
July 31, 2014 - 1:24pm

Everything is a WAG a this point.  Apple could change the way the support camera RAW updates.  That’s an unknown with the new Photos app.  Worst case could be that Apple changes how they update camera RAW, and stops providing RAW updates for iPhoto/Aperture.

Aperture already works with Yosemite (something that I can neither confirm nor deny that I may or may not have direct knowledge of), so it would seem no further updates will be needed.

As to what specific features Photos will initially ship with, Craig Federighi and the Photos app group at Apple know the answer to this.  We’ll find out when it ships.  Third party add-ons, enhancements and plug-ins may be available to add capabilities, but again….we’ll find out when it ships.

Ewing's picture
by Ewing
August 1, 2014 - 12:36pm

Don’t know what WAG means…

As far as RAW updates…If the camera you have and even intend to step up to in the future are supported I assume you’re fine right? They wouldn’t remove what’s already there I assume…I guess I intend to keep using Aperture until I no longer can for some reason or something else comes along that is as good and easy to use.

bjurasz's picture
by bjurasz
August 1, 2014 - 1:01pm

WAG = wild assed guess

And as far as dropping RAW support for older cameras, its been done before and it will happen again.  Current software does not, in many cases, support all prior RAW versions the industry has ever created.  Its one reason why Adobe created the DNG format.

Bill Jurasz
Austin Texas

jwarthman's picture
by jwarthman
August 2, 2014 - 6:37am

Bill, when you say “Current software does not, in many cases, support all prior RAW versions the industry has ever created. “, is this simple hearsay, or can you be more specific, or point us to a list of such omissions in the current version of Apple’s raw converter?

Thanks!

Jim

-- Jim

bjurasz's picture
by bjurasz
August 8, 2014 - 6:56am

I didn’t mean Aperture specifically.  But there are numerous examples of older camera RAW formats that are not supported by the likes of ACR, Aperture, etc.  Its the whole reason DNG exists.

Bill Jurasz
Austin Texas

jwarthman's picture
by jwarthman
August 8, 2014 - 7:39am

Hi Bill,

Once a raw converter supports a particular camera, I don’t know why that support would later be removed. You say “numerous examples” where this has happened - please cite a few for us.

Thanks,

Jim

-- Jim

Ariel Glaze's picture
by Ariel Glaze
August 11, 2014 - 5:39pm

Photos may not be up to Aperture’s level of promise, but I’m 100% sure it will be superior to iPhoto. I’m also sure that RAW support will continue because it’s through the OS that Aperture reads. The urge to compare Photos to Lightroom is inevitable, but I invite people to wait and see what Photos brings to the table before making such comparison. As far as Apple abandoned Pro’s is concerned, anyone needing an App to define professionalism and skill has serious self esteem issues. Get this a, the professional defines the tool, the tool does not define the professional. People who understand this will take Photos and turn it into a pro tool if they so wish. On the gripe side of this, I’m glad Photos will be free because I’m not spending another dime on Apple’s apps. And I feel like they had plenty of time for us to already have Photos. I’m not waiting for it. Plus, I’m sure it will not be worth the wait. When it gets here, it gets here. Till then go out and take shots.

Tom McKay's picture
by Tom McKay
August 11, 2014 - 9:24pm

I am exactly the same as Ewing’s first post. The importing in LR5 is so cumbersome I really don’t use it as a database for my photo’s. AP3 is so much better unless the new prog matches it I will use AP3 as long as it will run on a computer I have.

I have always been one to have the latest software. Now I am thinking - why? A piece of stable working software that does all I need, why change it?

Who at corporate level decides these things? It not the same folks who have kept the Coke or Ford logo, is it?

Just what else do we need Aperture to do? 

You never have enough gear!

Ewing's picture
by Ewing
August 12, 2014 - 6:20am

I’m glad to see that post about dropping RAW formats discredited…and Ariel makes a great point about Aperture reading through the OS. I now remember seeing specific camera support updates mentioned in the notes whenever the system updates…I’m a Nikonhead so I doubt Apple will all of a sudden drop it. Frankly if it continues to work as it has I’ll keep running Aperture until it won’t run any longer…The one thing I can think of that will suck is that many plugin apps like those from MacPhun will probably halt support for the plugins. I use a few of them too.

Philip's picture
by Philip
August 12, 2014 - 4:02pm

I wouldn’t count MacPhun out just yet. Since Aperture will not change - their current plugins should continue to work just fine. In addition - I emailed them recently about a technical issue but also asked if they were planning to support Photos with their suite of software. The reply I got was - the programmers are looking into what it would take to add their plugins to Photos. No guarantees, but they are considering it.

Now that may be a polite brush-off or it may be something more. Regardless of what MacPhun decides - there is one thing we do know. Apple has created a new environment that will let developers add their extensions directly into the raw processing flow. That is - I think - a real game changer and I suspect more than a few developers understand what that can mean for them and their creations.

Bob Rockefeller's picture
by Bob Rockefeller
August 12, 2014 - 4:06pm

A non-destestructive “pure” RAW workflow would be a game changer. If Capture One Pro could plug it’s fine RAW adjustment tools into a Photos front end and keep it all RAW and non-destructive until final output, we he’d have something no other platform yet has.

If that’s where Apple is going, I hope they get there before Adobe does.

 

Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com

Philip's picture
by Philip
August 12, 2014 - 4:16pm

Ok - This is a WAG - but I’m betting on the little guy. Adobe has so much invested in their CC stuff they may not be all that interested in creating extensions. Call me crazy but I think a smaller, hungrier outfit will see the potential and jump into the market. It may be MacPhun, or Pixelmator, or one of the other smaller players - but somebody will fill the gap. Heck, it’s just too tempting not to.

Simon's picture
by Simon
August 12, 2014 - 1:03pm

I intend to run Aperture as long as possible, with some caveats and care I expect that to be for as long as the next 10yrs as a minimum. Some things to bear in mind:

Library format - Photos will almost certainly work with the current iPhoto/Aperture library format, it would be crazy to do otherwise. There is a risk that a future version of Photos will update the library format to one that iPhoto/Aperture won’t work with. This has happened with the iPhoto library format in the recent past. To avoid this make double-sure you have a backup of your library and look out for such a warning, then simply don’t accept that upgrade to Photos and/or never run Photos.

RAW support - removing support for a raw format takes effort, I don’t believe this has ever been done. What has happened is that where a major App re-write has taken place and RAW support needs to be rewritten then that hasn’t been done for some older raw formats. Obviously this is triggered by the App rewrite so if Aperture isn’t being changed I can’t see any risk to existing raw format support.

New RAW format support is a different matter, if that happens AND you choose a camera with such a new format then a middle RAW-format converter may be required - by definition almost Photos should be able to do that, you would just need to them import the interim format to Aperture rather than the original RAW format. The interim could be TIFF, DNG etc as you choose.

Change is the enemy of running old software, if you can control change in its environment then you can run it indefinitely.

Regards, Simon

Bob Rockefeller's picture
by Bob Rockefeller
August 12, 2014 - 3:37pm

While there are few reasons not to be able to run Aperture just the way it is today for as long as your Yosemite-supporting hardware lasts, there’s a strong chance of missing out on real RAW adjustment feature improvements.

We are now missing lens and perspective corrections. What new things will come along that Aperture can’t do that you’ll want done? What will software be able to fix in a year or five that make for a lost image today? Photoshop is moving into even camera shake corrections.

Although there would be no harm in switching horses from Aperture to whatever when that moment came. For me, I’m keeping my options open. I own and use Lightroom and own Capture One Pro, but use it sparingly. For now I’m working in Lightroom, but leaving paths open to get back to Photos, via Aperture, if will be powerful enough for serious photographers.

 

Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com

John Newman's picture
by John Newman
August 18, 2014 - 7:24am

I bought into Photoshop CC last year and have been trying Lightroom for some 7 months now. I much prefer using Aperture but agree with many that some of the adjustments (highlights/shadows, noise reduction, etc) are far superior in Adobe.

I was going to dump Aperture (with regret) but have recently been opening Raws as a PSD straight into Photoshop and then using the Camera Raw filter for those adjustments I was struggling with. Plus this lets me use my Nik software as a Smart Object. I then save back into Aperture knowing I can re-open back into Photoshop if needed and do further adjustments.

Yes, this means an extra file which is on the large side but I only do this on selected images and, if I’m happy with the result, I can flatten/export as a Tiff or Jpeg if I choose.

Works for me but YMMV of course.

John

Gary with a big Mac's picture
by Gary with a big Mac
August 21, 2014 - 7:37am

More of the same for me I guess

I am running 2 platforms at the moment, Aperture and LR, lightroom is winning over, time will tell, I have started the LR trial on 2 new drives, so far all good, love the features

I believe ACR is the same in LR as PS? I have CC 2014 also but just for PS initially, but now I’m having a hard look at LR

Have the last few years over in LR now to “trial” how I like it, after all, most here would have too many images to be managed so Aperture/LR catalogs are easily handled by the main PC or Mac, haven’t got my head around the transfer of metadata yet

……..Gary

I have a photographic memory but never got it developed

Bob Rockefeller's picture
by Bob Rockefeller
August 21, 2014 - 8:43am

Gary,

You’re right, Adobe keeps LR and ACR in sync so that passing images back and forth works as it should. That’s a natural advantage LR has - it’s smooth integration with PS., especially using “smart objects.”

Bob

Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com

jwarthman's picture
by jwarthman
August 21, 2014 - 9:13am

Bob, I know we can round-trip from Aperture to Photoshop, and use PS Smart Objects. What advantage does LR offer when doing something similar?

-- Jim

Bob Rockefeller's picture
by Bob Rockefeller
August 21, 2014 - 9:18am

Can Aperture send out and receive back a PS file and understand smart objects? I didn’t think it could. I know it can round-trip, but thought it generated a plain PSD on the way out and could handle a layered PSD on the way back, but couldn’t send the smart object.

LR, since it uses ACR, can send out a PSD with an ACR “layer” containing LR’s adjustments. When that file comes back, that layer is still there. Round trip again and LR’s adjustments are still there - really, really non-destruction round trip!

Bob
----------
Bob Rockefeller
Midway, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com

Tom's picture
by Tom
September 19, 2014 - 7:38am

I like to come back to Aperture vs Lightroom discussion.  I find that after comparing Aperture and Lightroom 5 (1 year special offer from Adobe for LR and PS) , that Lightroom can do some of the basic adjustments better that Aperture, however, I have stll not found some basic Aperture functionality in Lightroom and the application is more than just cumbersome - it has proved over the last week extremely annoying.  Simple matters such as importing photographs from different cameras - D600, D300 and P7000 - in this weeks project it seems to struggle greatly with.  It took 4 to 5 time longer in LR than Aperture because it duplicated the folder structure, and required extensive manual intervention using LR and Finder to sort out the mess it created.  

Just one example where I waisted and lost time….

Tom Sheckleston
Manchester

helalwi's picture
by helalwi
September 20, 2014 - 1:56pm

Well, we all still hope that Photos will develop into something that will be better than Aperture. Then we will all be happy … . I hope.

Best regards, Alex

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