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 July 2, 2014 - 11:45pm
I am not a professional photographer, but chose Aperture a few years ago as the photo program I wanted to grow into. I have been consolidating and collecting the family’s archives, spanning a few generations, digitizing and cataloging in Aperture libraries.
As someone with a mac.com, me.com, and now iCloud.com email alias against my wishes, an Apple ID that ends in mac.com, and scars of the transitions between all of the above, I have to ask, “What has Apple done to restore my confidence in it’s ability to develop and deliver an online service with any reliability?”
I don’t see it. I get chucking old code over the side, but if I had a photo business I would not trust it to Apple cloud storage. I also get native integration of photo manipulation features to make better use of assets that have been produced, but if there is no confidence in the storage features, doesn’t that undermine all other features of the service especially those promoting high-availability?
Just my $.02.
Apple wants to be patted on the back for the next features even when the previous ones haven’t been stabilized. That just doesn’t sit right with me.
Regards,
Doug Jones
D. Jones
phillydrj@me.com
on July 3, 2014 - 3:59am
As someone whose online presence goes back to eWorld the fact that Apple, by revenues primarily a hardware design and manufacturing shop, has struggled to get its online presence right does not surprise me.
Then again, neither has Microsoft, Google (how many start-ups have they bought, devalued, and then buried?), Cisco, Oracle, etc.?
Do we trust Facebook? Google+? Photosforeveronthecloud.du jour?
Aperture gave jus a dedicated Photo Vault and Time Machine pretty much before anyone was hip with backup.
I think Apple’s record speaks to little stability, which appears par for the industry. I don’t think industry will reach standards and consensus until forced to by insurance and liability laws based on trying to find bank records and wills. Just my personal opinion.
on July 3, 2014 - 3:39am
I saw the latest report from I think PetaPixel and I’m pretty excited by what Apple seems to be doing. Although the Photos app itself may not have all of the functionality of Aperture right out of the box there are quite a few opportunities for 3rd party developers to broaden the functionality tremendously and even non-destructively! Although I wasn’t initially excited there seems to be more and more reason to stay the course and see what happens. I don’t know who said it but it’s not like I’m any worse off today than I was Friday at 9:01am.
on July 3, 2014 - 4:02am
Workflow?
What an awful term.
on July 3, 2014 - 5:18am
I saw this post from Darrick Story for those that want to switch to Lightroom.
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheDigitalStory/~3/-apOx3iaSCM/switch-fro…
on July 3, 2014 - 5:18am
I saw this post from Darrick Story for those that want to switch to Lightroom.
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheDigitalStory/~3/-apOx3iaSCM/switch-fro…
on July 4, 2014 - 2:25am
I just had to take a moment to say thank you, Joseph, for your candid comments and your initial response to all of the negativism with a separate post to rebut some of it. Contrary to seeing it myself as “lipstick on a pig”, I trust your years of experience and being careful/slow to make any judgement calls all up front. While there is a lot that is going to require a “wait and see” approach, I also appreciate your postulating/theorizing approach without overreaching. I can empathize with those who are not happy; I’m certainly not thrilled with the phasing out of Aperture. Those who need to move on need to do that. I prefer to move forward with hearing what is yet to come and to keep your web site, whatever it will be named, at the forefront of my trust for continuing to help me develop in 2 ways: as a photographer and continuing to improve on my post-editing skills since I work with mainly RAW files myself. Thanks again, Joseph, for keeping the optimism in a currently volatile circumstance!
Steve Hadeen
on July 5, 2014 - 8:58am
Good evening Joseph
I’m an ex 30 year Windows user now delighted with my new Macbook Pro. My photography is far from professional. I’m currently using aPanasonic Lumix ZS30/TZ40.
A couple of weeks ago I decided to use Aperture to organise my very disorganised, fifteen year old, three thousand photo library.
On Friday after many hours of hard work I had managed to sort out my library and was quite elated that I had chosen Aperture. That evening I was also very happy to discover your site, albeit belatedly, but became very disappointed to hear about Apertures planned demise.
On the other hand I was greatly inspired by your professional attitude and my immediate response is to use your support to continue with my love affair for Aperture by using all the appropriate resources from your wonderful site.
There are many ‘go-getters’ out there and unfortunately ‘go-givers’ like you are too rare. They deserve our strongest support.
I am very confident you have the right attributes and reputation to convert this Aperture situation into a great opportunity for exponential growth.
Best Regards
Baz
Baz
on July 5, 2014 - 9:00am
Good evening Joseph
I’m an ex 30 year Windows user now delighted with my new Macbook Pro. My photography is far from professional. I’m currently using aPanasonic Lumix ZS30/TZ40.
A couple of weeks ago I decided to use Aperture to organise my very disorganised, fifteen year old, three thousand photo library.
On Friday after many hours of hard work I had managed to sort out my library and was quite elated that I had chosen Aperture. That evening I was also very happy to discover your site, albeit belatedly, but became very disappointed to hear about Apertures planned demise.
On the other hand I was greatly inspired by your professional attitude and my immediate response is to use your support to continue with my love affair for Aperture by using all the appropriate resources from your wonderful site.
There are many ‘go-getters’ out there and unfortunately ‘go-givers’ like you are too rare. They deserve our strongest support.
I am very confident you have the right attributes and reputation to convert this Aperture situation into a great opportunity for exponential growth.
Best Regards
Baz
Baz
on July 5, 2014 - 8:07pm
Based on what I viewed in the WWDC about CoreImage and PhotoKit improvements in Yosemite, I’m hopeful that Apple will take true advantage of the potential performance available in their hardware, especially with respect to dual gpu machines. Not just in their Mac Pros, but older hardware as well.
I know that many MacBook Pro models as well as the Mac Mini I have (upgraded Core i7 with Radeon 6630m gpu) had dual gpus, with very similar hardware (the “Core” cpus have Intel HD versions and there were the Nvidia gpu systems as well). Surely the weaker ones would be able to handle the real-time rendering of non-essential edits, as described in the video. I’m hopeful that the various CoreImage or PhotoKit APIs will be aware of these and take advantage.
Any indications from the developers that this might be a good assumption? :)
on July 5, 2014 - 8:17pm
Nicely written and kudos for not giving in to knee-jerk responses. I’ve relied on this site for years as my primary go-to place for questions related to Aperture and I’m just as enthused that I’ll have this site to rely upon when Photos begins to deploy in order to work out the future workflow possibilities, most of which I can only barely imagine. Currently I use Aperture as the bookends to a workflow that involves Lr5 for darkroom basic edits and Photoshop CC plus Nik/Topaz/Onone for final edits. I will probably continue to use Photo Mechanic + Capture 1 Pro for large session work, and will hopefully be able to migrate the family archives and some non-paying volunteer photography libraries that span a decade or more to the new Photos, making my life easier with regard to the access/sharing portion of those assets and allowing me to use the specific power-user apps on a smaller subset of projects. The real possibility that many of those non-destructive editors could have access to the same library that’s backed up to the cloud and simply keep their ‘versions’ recorded as edit lists, much like C1 does now, brings to mind some very interesting possibilities as I ponder this. Since I’m old enough to have spent a couple of decades in wet dark room developing and began programming with punch cards, I think I have a more optimistic, patient outlook on this and will not experience much vertigo from the disruption. As someone who once had walls of LP albums and then thousands of CDs, it seems almost surreal that for a the price of a a half dozen lattes I now have 50,000 plus tracks backed up and available on all my devices from almost anywhere at almost anytime.
on July 6, 2014 - 9:17pm
Joseph, thanks for the integrity evident throughout your site. Your handling of this latest BigDog-wagging is no exception.
I used Capture One Pro 7 about a month ago for the first time, and when I emerged from my inaugural session8 hours later (over 700 images shot in an afternoon at a Memorial service) , I had 80 or so beautiful b&w images ready to plug into a book, a dandy slide show (Aperture. C1 doesn’t support music…yet*) for those interested, and a tremendous feeling of accomplishment. Two things hit me: “Wow, this is so cool”, and “How come I trusted Apple for so long?”. I promptly purchased Capture One and Media Pro, and haven’t looked back except to wonder how to migrate my (usually non-working) libraries from Aperture.
Gone is my hot laptop, gone are lag times, and here are beautiful images right out of the camera.
I will NEVER blindly trust my creative output to Apple software again. Maybe it’s me, but I didn’t go into this with a bone to pick with Apple. Aperture, from the outset, never allowed me the freedom I felt with my first day using C1. I can understand the logic, the tutorials are clear, and the user base is friendly. I am rediscovering what I loved about digital photography in the first place.
No matter how great the new “photos” app will be, I smell money, and loss of control. Apple long ago abandoned the customer in favor of the Corporation. Maybe it will feel just like real grass for all those who never experienced real grass.
*Hm. Seems C1 does support music in slide shows. I underestimated this program. I have a feeling it won’t be the last time. Contrast this with Apple, where I am continually OVERESTIMATING their creative programs. Wow. Just wow.
The first time I used Capture One, I was angry at Apple for days.
on July 16, 2014 - 6:02pm
Allow me to add myself to those who covet the choice of keeping their photo libraries within a vaulted hard drive. While the potential for sharing information via the cloud is wonderful for some uses, I don’t feel that being on the cloud for any reason should be mandatory, especially when there is an additional fee involved. If the new Photo allows for the transfer of data/photos directly from the device to the computer hard drive, I’m all for the transition. If I will be required to transfer data directly to the cloud before storing it on my computer or external hard drive, I’m going to be looking for something else, if will exist anywhere.
One of the biggest reasons for my choice of Aperture was the excellence of the library storage. I’m not a detailed user of the photo editing yet, but it seemed like Aperture was more than capable of being there when I chose to expand my photo editing. The sanctity and excellent logic of the Aperture library needs to be maintained!
on July 17, 2014 - 1:54am
Use of the cloud for storage will not be mandatory.
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
on August 21, 2014 - 4:20am
And this is a very good thing for those of us with slow broadband. Stuff you want to work on while traveling can be in the cloud, everything else can live on your computer at home. It’ll be interesting to see how finely Apple lets us slice things (i.e., a folder / project of images by itself on the cloud, or a whole separate library).
Oh, how I wish the Yosemite public beta included Photos…
Eric
Eric Seale
Seldom Scene Photography
http://www.seldomscenephotography.com
on August 1, 2014 - 7:28am
I have been feeling totally panicked about this whole announcement–I have never been an Adobe user, and have always been ready to fall on my sword over how I don’t need another program besides Aperture. This has given me a little hope that maybe it will all turn out OK. I really, really don’t want to have to learn Lightroom! Thanks for the perspective.
Elizabeth
on August 25, 2014 - 1:12pm
Hi Joseph,
An excellent, considered and calming set of thoughts regarding the demise of Aperture.
I confess to an initial panic but have since calmed down. :-)
For me, I will stay with Aperture for the foreseeable future as I love Final Cut Pro X and the ease by which I can access my photos from the Aperture Library for building into my videos. (I wouldn’t know how to get photos in otherwise!)
If Aperture does all I need it to do, then what’s the point of moving to a new system with all the transition headaches that brings?
But maybe that’s the attitude of someone from a previous generation that isn’t desperate to always have the latest thing… Ha! Ha!
Mike.
on August 25, 2014 - 7:37pm
I’ve resisted moving away from Aperture too. Every time I use it, I get more and more enamored with its features. I’ve used the slideshow functionality numerous times over the years. I take stills and movies from an event. I’ll combine them, create text credits, etc., transitions, and background music. I’ll export the show to iDVD or a movie. Amazingly easy to do and quite robust.
I, too, rely on access to my Aperture library from Keynote and Pages. I’m really hoping that the new Photos app duplicates some of the functionality of Aperture. I have a lot of respect for the developers who put together Aperture and kept improving it over the years.
Phil in Midland
on August 25, 2014 - 6:24pm
Hi - I’ve been following this and initially got pretty concerned as to what I’m going to do, especially as I believe Aperture isn’t going to be supported after Yosemite. Decision is (unless anyone tells me I’ve a screw loose) to stay with my existing Library on Harddrive, hope the new “Photos” will let me access them, but for the new stuff go to Capture One Pro 7 and start up a fresh Library with Capture One. Decided not to go the Lightroom route as I suspect Adobe likely to shift to the Cloud, which with my Broadband speed would be impossible. Also, Capture One Pro7 RAW processor is exceptionally good and for the Fuji Pro X1 much better than Lightroom - so I am told by a friend who tried both
Dave B
on August 25, 2014 - 7:56pm
I am completely with you on all of that you say. IMHO Aperture is still the best program ,for me, it has the best combination of DAM, Image editing and plug-in accecptbaility. I will keep an Aperture Legacy Lib hopefully it will integrate into Photos. However I’m starting a new referenced image system now. I tried several programs and for me it came down to LR and C1 Pro7. I like LR’s workflow and ease of use, it’s great for DAM, there is a ton of community support available, and it’s the most like Aperture. Capture 1 Pro7’s interface is foreign to me, not nearly as much community support, and not as good with DAM. However C1 RAW rending just simply kicks LR’s butt for both my cameras (Nikon D7000 and Panasonic DMC-G1). I get better results instantly with C1 and I have been unable to duplicate those results in LR even with considerable work. So I spend less time getting good results, but more time trying to learn the program. After my trial periods, I decided I couldn’t decide, so I purchased both the Adobe Photographers, special for 1 year, and C1. Who knows I may ultimately keep them both and use them for different things.
on August 29, 2014 - 10:31am
Hi, I am new to MAC and started using iPhoto and want to upgrade to Aperture! After hearing of its demise, is it still worth buying Aperture (Aug 2014) and getting 1 - 2 years out of it?
on August 29, 2014 - 12:04pm
Hi Mr Mock,
I think everyone has their own requirements which dictates their reaction to the news about the demise of the support of Aperture.
Personally, I love Aperture but bear in mind that if the Photos application is going to replace both iPhoto and Aperture, then it will more than likely have all the iPhoto features that you’ve been used to and more….
If you’re really concerned about being able to rely on support for the application you use, then perhaps you should bide your time and look at the new Photos app when it comes out, garner some other views and then take a view…
Mike.
on August 29, 2014 - 12:18pm
As much as I love Aperture I’d be inclined to stick with iPhoto if that’s what you’re currently using. I’d then move to Photos when it arrives. At the end of the day Photos is the future if you want an Apple app.
on August 29, 2014 - 5:44pm
It´s cheap, and it´s damn good ! So, no real reason to not digging in.
on August 30, 2014 - 2:42am
Is it worth buying Aperture? I don’t think anybody can answer that. Photos is the future not Aperture. Given Apple’s recent track record of making newer computer programs more like i-device apps, dumbing them down and removing features, I have justifiable concerns about Photos. Why would they break that trend for Photos?
So buying Aperture now is like starting a relationship with a great girl who you know is going to move away in two years. You’ll miss her when she’s gone, but you could have a couple of fun fun years. Is it worth it? Only you can say.
on August 30, 2014 - 3:03am
I’m with you. Great analogy!
Phil in Midland
on August 30, 2014 - 3:50am
While the analogy is cute, the prediction that Photos will be a dumbed down iApp is a bit presumptuous. The reason for the departure is a new language that is lighter and faster, while being more robust. Yosemite will allow cross device integration and better platforms for sharing “apps” across those devices. Assuming things will be dumbed down would be the same as assuming that cell phones would have never incorporated computing power and that we should prepare for nothing more than the ability to flip them open. Quite the contrary… most of us are holding devices in the palm of our hand that wield the power available to our desktop merely a decade ago. The new direction will open doors for developers to contribute to the functionality of the Photos app. And… let’s face it, apps have become far more powerful than what we originally called “apps.” Most are fairly full featured. The new environment will allow for even more robust “apps” and the ability to incorporate “apps within apps” or what we currently call plugins. Will Photos 1.0 be as robust as Aperture 3.x… obviously not. But you can bet once there is a green light, developers will run at it full tilt. Our only real concern is how simply Photos accesses and reads our existing libraries. Given everything on a Mac seems to function on the iTunes-like architecture, I really don’t anticipate any major hiccups. Just my opinion… but I think within 18-24 months of Photos launch, we’ll find out this was all much ado about nothing.
http://www.johnthawley.com
on August 30, 2014 - 3:51am
While the analogy is cute, the prediction that Photos will be a dumbed down iApp is a bit presumptuous. The reason for the departure is a new language that is lighter and faster, while being more robust. Yosemite will allow cross device integration and better platforms for sharing “apps” across those devices. Assuming things will be dumbed down would be the same as assuming that cell phones would have never incorporated computing power and that we should prepare for nothing more than the ability to flip them open. Quite the contrary… most of us are holding devices in the palm of our hand that wield the power available to our desktop merely a decade ago. The new direction will open doors for developers to contribute to the functionality of the Photos app. And… let’s face it, apps have become far more powerful than what we originally called “apps.” Most are fairly full featured. The new environment will allow for even more robust “apps” and the ability to incorporate “apps within apps” or what we currently call plugins. Will Photos 1.0 be as robust as Aperture 3.x… obviously not. But you can bet once there is a green light, developers will run at it full tilt. Our only real concern is how simply Photos accesses and reads our existing libraries. Given everything on a Mac seems to function on the iTunes-like architecture, I really don’t anticipate any major hiccups. Just my opinion… but I think within 18-24 months of Photos launch, we’ll find out this was all much ado about nothing.
http://www.johnthawley.com
on August 30, 2014 - 4:02am
I appreciate your right to speculate just as much as me. I, however, have borne witness to the diversion of time, resources, and talent away from the Mac, away from apps, and away from “Pro” apps in particular. Everytime I go to MacRumors, I remember when it used to be about the mac. Now it’s iEverything.
So, we each have our own opinion. I have absolutely zero confidence in Photos and even if your presumptions are correct, am not willing to wait around for the developers and plug-ins to start happening. So, I am learning to do the same things in LR that I did in Aperture. And pleasantly surprised. Nowhere near Aperture’s DAM, but automatic lens correction on import by itself is worth giving that up.
on August 30, 2014 - 4:47am
Well then, since you have “borne witness” to the demise of all things good for Apple pro software, acknowledged the death of Aperture and the failings of Photos, and have found a new and better path to follow with Lightroom - I suppose that only leaves one question. Why are you wasting your time on this website? There is obviously not much here for you anymore.
on August 30, 2014 - 8:34am
@PhotoJoseph
— Have you signed up for the mailing list?
on August 30, 2014 - 5:54pm
My lips are sealed ;-)
on August 30, 2014 - 3:56pm
Because I have invested untold hours learning Aperture (and purchasing training from Joseph) and am still interested in the discussion. Because I don’t find it “wasting my time.” Because I think I have the right to my opinion.
Once upon a time, I was an Apple fanboy. If you want to dispute anything I said about the direction Apple has taken over recent years or the future of Photos (which can only be speculation on my part or yours), that would be a lot more appropriate than telling me how to spend my time.
on August 30, 2014 - 5:53pm
You had me agreeing with you except the part where you stated (paraphrased as I understood it) that
Apple has a track recording of making new OS/X apps that are dumbed down and lacking features they could have on more powerful systems such as OS/X.
First off, my apologies if I got your meaning wrong, it wouldn’t be the first time.
The implication is that Apple is going to cheapen their Mac line of offerings which seems odd, given that they are investing great sums of money in improving the hardware and software of those systems.
my $.02 worth at a discount,
Bill
Bill
on August 30, 2014 - 7:43pm
My apologies to all the readers for using the words “dumbed down” in my post. It was a bad choice of words, arising in part, from my disappointment with with recent Apple-Mac software trends that have continued with discontinuation notice of Aperture/Pro photography application support. No offense to AE readers or Apple users was intended.
Apple software offerings have taken a definite shift away from pro and toward consumer, since the late Mr Jobs’ demise. Mr Truett (see post Aug-29-2014, 7:29pm) hit the nail on the head when he cited “the diversion of time, resources, and talent away from the Mac, away from apps, and away from “Pro” apps in particular.” IMHO this is the heart of the problem.
Apple appears to be striving to make the Mac OS more like iOS, in catering to the consumer crowd. I opinion that is backwards, but nobody at Apple seems interested in my opinion. LOL.
Nowhere has Apple stated that Photos would retain the professional and advanced DAM and editing features of Aperture. Nor have they stated their commitment to the professional crowd. Adobe, like them or not, did make that commitment on the day Apple announced Aperture would be discontinued.
Currently I still think Aperture is the best program for me today. However Apple has provided a 2 year advance notice as to the end of Aperture, and they are providing a year of overlap with Photos, giving plenty of time for Aperture users to transition to… whatever.
Many of us currently own/use Aperture and we can afford to be in wait and see mode on Photos. OP does (did) not own Aperture and was asking should he buy it? That is a very different position to be in.
One more thing. Many of the learning tutorials that are offered on this site, cover topics contained in all photo-editing software. Taking Aperture tutorials on editing, etc, is useful knowledge and will translate to other photo editing programs in general. One example: White balance. Most programs handle WB in a similar mannor. There are other common topics. That’s one reason why I’m still here.
Note: I have no vested interests in this site, nor do I know Joseph personally. I recognize that Joseph has built a quality site that contains a lot of knowledge and I just want to remind readers that the knowledge gained still has great value that extends beyond the end of Aperture the program.
on August 30, 2014 - 7:55pm
I wish there was a “Like” button for your comments. Spot on!
And FWIW and to the person who questioned why I am here, I still use Aperture much of the time on my ~100,000 image library. I am just transitioning to LR for my newer shoots. I totally respect anyone who wants to hang in there and hope that Photos will be as good or better than Aperture. I just can’t wait and see. And hope. But, for those sticking around, I really do hope that I’m proven wrong.
on August 30, 2014 - 7:47pm
Well, Apple used to be all about hardware and OS when I started using them in 1990. Today, they are no longer Apple Computers, they are Apple, Inc. New operating systems used to be feature-rich. Where is the innovation of Spotlight, Quick Look, Cover Flow and such anymore. Now it’s about integration with the iDevices. As an example, see iWork and the removal of features to make it compatible with iPad and iPhones. See the features coming out with Yosemite for more of that integration.
I can’t blame Apple for that. They are a company responsible to their shareholders to maximize profit. Computers are 22% of their revenue now. iOS is 70%. iTunes and such make up the rest. So, it’s only logical to conclude that their focus is going to be on non-pros, the consumer taking iPhone photos and integrating all that into the cloud and the Mac. I wish I could conclude otherwise, but the evidence and history are staring us in the face.
And thank you for the civility of your reply. I respect your opinion, even though it may differ from mine.
on August 30, 2014 - 8:10pm
Thank you too Don, likewise.
FYI - While I continue to use Aperture I bought both LR and C1 and I am transitioning all my new shots to a Referenced Library workflow that is independent of the editing software.
on August 30, 2014 - 10:17pm
Hi Don,
this critique that Apple is doing too much “consumer-stuff” instead of “pro-stuff” is perhaps nearly as old as Apple itself - it is at least very prominent since Steve Jobs return and the creation of iMac, iPod and now iPhone and iPad.
To me Apple did never change anything really. The driving force was and is to bring high tech from the ivory towers of science and industry to the “mere” consumer masses.
The Mac itself - now being defended as the remaining bit of a “professional” offering - did actually bring computer technology to normal people. It was the real “personal computer”. With Smartphones and Tablets the vision of a personal computing device is clear to be much more like the iPhone or iPad and even lesser like those big boxes we still depend on. Look at all the stuff you can now do with those small devices - I really cannot understand all the bitterness about this development.
Aperture - our Topic - it is a Program that brings professional image processing and management with an ease of use that even non-specialists can learn and use with great success. This is exactly the thing Apple does really good. If you look at programs like Photoshop and the steep learning curve to get really productive in it - you then really can see how Apple is successful by providing solutions that are reduced to the core of what is needed and streamlined to be really efficient. Look at how Adobe solves that things: Lightroom wants to be what Aperture is. It doesn't deliver in those parts where Apple shines. Yes - it got some really powerful features - but its mainly in parts of intelligent image processing algorithms - which is were Adobes development labs shine.
All this cloud thing - at Adobe and Apple. Is it really that bad? Actually no. Computers and operating systems get really unimportant. There is no longer the central “digital hub” sitting on or under your desk. Computing devices get smaller, simpler, more powerful while needing less and less power. They get easily replacable. They get just infrastructure. There once was a slogan by John Gage at SUN - “the network is the computer”. We're there now. Most computing devices are merely windows which are open to the “clouds”.
My first computer had 512 KB RAM and used disks which could hold 880KB. My first hard disk could store 84MB of data. Even smart phones or tablets can store 500x to 1000x the amount of data of that machine. If you look at what NOW is available as cheap affordable “cloud” storage space (under 10 bucks/months) - its actually 1TB of data - and it is more than 12000x the space my first hard disk could hold.
I could outline nearly the same thing with network bandwith. My first modem hat 9600baud which boils down to 56KB per minute. We now have cheap DSL lines which allow more than 10 MB per minute and even 500MB / min is affordable to consumers in many cities. Thats a 10000x increase compared to what I had with my first modem.
Even 500MB/min are not enough if you still would depend on your good old central digital hub under the desk. Yes - you could download 1000 RAW files / hour. But with a service oriented cloud architecture and programs written for that you can dramatically reduce the amount of data you have to transfer. You could have access to thousands of RAW files in seconds. The key to all this stuff is storage transparency. It is not important anymore where your data is stored - the program will take it from where it is; optimize access and provide it even if your network access is crappy or non-existent.
Apple is not concentrating on mere iGadgets - they are directly headed defining their future computing ecosystem. This doesn't exclude professionals in any way. To the contrary.
http://neonsqua.re
on September 11, 2014 - 4:11pm
Don Truett said - “Today, they are no longer Apple Computers, they are Apple, Inc.”
So very true, Don.
Go to Adobe’s home page on the web. It’s all about creative software. Go to PhaseOne’s home page. It’s all about photography. Go to DXO’s homepage. It’s all about photography.
Then go to Apple’s home page. Today, it’s about big telephones and gaudy watches. Fire up Apple’s iTunes and go to the front page of the store. As usual, it’s all about “youth” popular music. Have a browse through the Featured section on the Apple’s OSX app store. Today’s features include “Dirt Showdown” and “Robin Hood”. Oh, and there’s “Watermark Plus” ***Featured as the best new app by Apple*** for GBP2.99.
Then ask yourself two simple questions; “Which of these companies is in tune with my hobby/profession?” and “Which of these companies am I going to bet my future on?”
I’ve made my bet.
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
on September 11, 2014 - 4:21pm
Well, somehow i am speechless.
Apple is just as much about photo as for music. They even have one of the most used cameras in the world.
And neither Adobe nor C1 nor DXO have any product like Aperture. They may have other features, yes. But i am still somehow confident that Apple and 3. parties would be able to cover my pro and adv. amateur needs in the future, w/o any need to hurry to be tangled in Adobe´s subscription and bloatware, bad user interfaces and lacking functions, nor the slow DXO or C1.
Anyhow, Aperture works for a few years on. SO i am calm and unruffled.
on September 11, 2014 - 4:34pm
“Apple … even have one of the most used cameras in the world.”
My daughter and son are getting married next year (not to each other, obviously). They’ve each asked me to check out local photographers for them. I’ve investigated about 30 pro wedding photographers.
They don’t all mention what cameras they use. But I’ll wager 10p (a dime?) that not many of them are using Apple cameras.
And that’s my point about Apple. Apple’s cameras, and Apple’s future approach to photography, will be geared towards “young people having a laugh” not professionals and serious hobbyists.
Nevertheless, I’m pleased for you if you’re happy to stick with Aperture. Honestly, I am. But I suggest you take a look at Adobe Lightroom; it is VERY like Aperture.
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
on September 11, 2014 - 4:46pm
No it's not.
I always wonder how anyone knowing (!) both programs can come to this conclusion. I heard similar things about C1 and it isn't true for that too. From a far distance - all of those may look similar, because all handle RAW converting within a non-destructive UI.
That doesn't mean that those programs are bad - they aren't - they are different though. They have different strengths and weaknesses. They can be an alternative to Aperture, but you have to change a lot of how you do things today in Aperture - at least if those things aren't trivial in any way.
http://neonsqua.re
on September 11, 2014 - 5:51pm
Last year Apple spent 2.5 billion dollars on development - that’s more than half of Adobe’s 2013 gross revenue. Now I’m not saying all that money went into Photos, I’m just trying to point out an obvious difference in size and scale. Adobe (and the rest) are responsible for developing only one thing - photo software. Apple is responsible for developing an entire ecosystem of products, software, and networked services. But… Apple is one of the worlds wealthiest and largest companies. I would suggest they have the resources to do lots of things well all at once - including Photos. So I think any direct comparison between Apple and Adobe and the rest is like comparing Apples to Oranges.
It would be interesting to know how many of apple’s developers are working on Photos and it’s connectivity compared to the number of developers working at Adobe. I have no clue. It would also be interesting to know how much of Aperture and iPhoto’s code can be rolled directly into Photos - saving time and development costs. Another unknown that could impact a fairer comparison. Knowing how much work is being done “under the hood” with CoreImage and other OSX and iOS components that have a direct impact on Apple’s commitment to photography could also shed some light. All this has an impact on photographers - unless one decides to walk away from Apple completely.
I don’t blame anyone for deciding its time to move on to greener pastures. Let’s face it - in a few short years only a tiny fraction of photographers will still be using Aperture. My sincere hope is for a smooth and trouble free transition regardless of where we all end up. Just when and where we decide to move is a very personal decision based as much on software expectations as a tolerance for ambiguity.
One thing missing from this discussion is some sense of what we need from our photo software. Of course that’s driven by our creative vision and working habits as well as the requirements of the particular kind of photography we do. That makes any “one size fits all” solution difficult and discussions like this one challenging.
Finally - I owe Don an apology. I was unkind and rather terse with a comment upstream a bit. I was not only unkind - I was wrong. This is not a time for fewer opinions - this is a time for more opinions and ideas as we move forward. Don, I am sorry.
on September 11, 2014 - 6:16pm
No worries, Philip. Thanks for the apology, although in this day and age of Internet incivility, you didn’t even make a scratch. As I said, I’m here (despite being in transition to LR), because I really do care. I watched Aperture’s birth, toddler stage, and awkward, early teen years. I LOVED it. Still do. Just never got to see its adult years. When the announcement was made, I went through all the stages of grieving. I have decided to use the opportunity to slowly make a transition. For the sake of those holding onto hope re: Photos, I really do hope that I am wrong and will continue to monitor the situation. I’ve even archived my Aperture Library at it’s max and am ready to return if I’m wrong.
on September 11, 2014 - 6:32pm
“…Adobe (and the rest) are responsible for developing only one thing - photo software.”
But that’s my point, Philip. If you want a specialist product, you go to a specialist company.
Adobe, etc. are entirely focused on meeting the needs of serious photographers. Photo software is the entire reason for the company’s existence. Those companies are not wondering where to invest for maximum profit - they’re not asking “Where should we invest our R&D budget - photo software or a bigger, more popular, phone?” If these companies don’t make outstanding photo software, they go bust.
“One thing missing from this discussion is some sense of what we need from our photo software.”
So very true. I asked a similar question on these pages a year or so ago when people were bemoaning the lack of Aperture 4. And I got some good replies of how Aperture was falling behind the competition and how it could be improved. Sadly, the tone of some of the comments on this thread seems to be “Don’t worry, the Photos.app might be too bad, it might be nearly as good as Aperture.” Sorry if I offend, but I’m setting my sights higher than that.
Believe me, I really, really, hope that Photos.app will be truly fantastic. I really hope it will make Lightroom, CaptureOne, etc. seem pathetic. But the omens don’t look good to me.
Anaxagoras, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
on September 11, 2014 - 7:04pm
@Anaxagoras
Even Adobe isn't focused on photographers very much. The Photoshop team has to find a balance between digital artists, web designers, photographers, scientists and even 3D and film is part of it. Adobe is not a “photographer” company they have solutions in nearly any field. They also have limited resources and - like Apple - have to think about where they invest in R&D. Guess what: They invest in cloud services heavily and they bring more and more Apps for smart phones and tablets. More: They invest in web development tools, app development tools - because they lost their Flash-App-Business to Apple and Google.
Yes its true - Apple is probably now one of the biggest “Camera maker” with the iPhone. The fun thing is… thats not even a joke. Photography is a very compelling argument in the smart phone world of today. People use their smart phones and not compact cameras anymore. The quality of modern smart phones is really astonishing if one relates it to the size of the camera module. This is in many ways also a product of big improvments in imaging algorithms. Apple is heavily investing in imaging algorithms that enhance digital images.
Now the interesting thing: for a software developer working on better algorithms, there is absolutely no difference in “professional” vs. “consumer”. What customers view as “professional vs. consumer” is mainly a perspective of the user interface today. This is were Apple is by far better than Adobe or PhaseOne.
There is no “One size fits all” software for photographers. Nobody can guarantee you that “Photos” will be a software that is “enough” for what you need. I can only guarantee you one thing: Photos will be the generic and omnipresent photo management solution within the whole ecosystem of Apple's devices, apps and services. This can be a problem for Adobe, if they work against this movement. If they are smart, they integrate themselves and anyone will profit.
http://neonsqua.re
on September 11, 2014 - 5:53pm
Spot on, Anaxagoras. Let’s face a sad (to me) fact. iPhones probably are the world’s most popular camera and we serious photographers are somewhat of a dying breed. I went to Spain and Portugal this year and spent a lot of time shooting some amazing cathedrals. With exposure bracketing. With two cameras for wide-angle and mid-zoom lenses without switching. But, everywhere around me were people shooting with phones. I can’t imagine what they got as I was at 5000 ISO.
Anyway, it’s clear to Apple where their bread is buttered. Their obligation is to their stockholders, not me (although I did make money from their stock). Adobe’s market is me - the serious DSLR/M43 shooter and there are enough of us using PS and LR to be profitable and continue to develop. I truly hope that I am wrong and that Photos will be an amazing product out of the gate. I’ve eaten my words before and will do so happily. I just don’t believe, based on my reading of the tea leaves that it will come to pass. But a big thanks to Apple for giving me plenty of warning and time to transition.
As to Jochen’s statement about the differences between Aperture and LR, like everything else that’s been said here, that’s a matter of opinion. For me, the similarities outweigh the differences, although there are a couple of things I still miss from Aperture, like being able to add a keyword in Develop without switching back to the Library. Still using Aperture for some work and LR for newer shoots. I’ve actually been very surprised at how much I can do in LR that I wasn’t aware of. Thanks, George Jardine for the great training videos. As I said before, it’s worth all that I’ve given up from Aperture to see my wide-angle shots get imported to the LR Catalog and have distortion and CA correction automatically applied. YMMV.
on September 11, 2014 - 7:37pm
…And the obligations of Adobe is their shareholders….too. Else there would not be so much troubles with their licenses, subscriptions, re-confirmation on licenses and all the other hazzle.
on August 29, 2014 - 1:13pm
There is also another way… I would not expect Photos to solve my workflow even nearly at all as well as Aperture so I will keep listen to other Aperture users as they start complaining that Aperture breaks up. Then I will freeze the computer and I will also tell my clients to. Only if Apple eventually nails it with Photos I will get there. I will continue to install Aperture workflows for as long as I can get licenses and will likely solve it the day we can’t. I really hope Apple did learn from the FCPX introduction that they should not stop offering new licenses as they release the brand new tool.
Pages