What Do You Want to See in Photos?
Now that Photos is officially shipping, we can all get our hands on it and see what is – and isn't – there. It's a powerful little app that has some great features for the everyman, but not for the pro. So let's NOT focus on the pro features that would make it an Aperture replacement. Apple knows there's about 1,000 things missing and they may or may not focus on those. We do know that Apple is making this, at least for now, for the everyman—not for the pro. So what features are missing at that consumer/prosumer level that you'd like to see?
Don't include things that are clearly pro-targeted, like tethering, or the insanely awesome and deep metadata search, or even open in editor (which might come but I think it's more likely to be hooked in via Extensions). We all know that Extensions will eventually allow a plug-in style architecture, so we can leave that off the list.
But little things, like reverse chronological order sorting, or UI that'd make it easier to find/understand what's happening. If you think of a feature you'd like, and you could see why your non-pro-photographer spouse might like it too, put it on the list. If you think of a feature and can only justify it for advanced/pro users, then let's leave that off for now.
In the comments… go!
Comments
on April 12, 2015 - 2:05am
Emphatic agreement here. This is what I wanted to say but was too tired at the time to articulate.
on April 13, 2015 - 9:18am
“If you look at some of the WWDC coverage on Core-Image advances, you can see that Apple has been busy working on great underlying technology for Photos (noise reduction, lens correction..etc.)”
The big problem is, Apple has become completely unpredictable these days.
That might be good, if you need some surprises to make your life more exciting, but it is disastrous as the basis for any business model.
Chances are, FinalCut Pro will still be there and actively developed in 5 years from now, but I won’t bet a dollar, that it won’t be pulled by Apple within the next 3 month.
on April 13, 2015 - 5:54pm
I agree. I have noticed over the last year or so that Aperture continues to improve it’s ability to interpret my Fuji X-Trans RAW files. This has also been done silently, for no additional charge. I’m guessing this continual improvement has to do with improvements to the RAW decoding engine.
Meanwhile, many photographers complain about LR’s handling of the same files. They rushed to buy the latest version, and now are expecting that it’s next version will be acceptable.
I also note that this is the first version of Photos and hope for the best.
on April 13, 2015 - 6:09pm
Adobe, like Apple produces RAW interpreters that are used by all their applications. A new version of Lightroom won’t have any better RAW interpreter, because it doesn’t actually HAVE a RAW interpreter. It uses Adobe Camera RAW, just like Photoshop and Bridge.
on April 13, 2015 - 6:32pm
“A new version of Lightroom won’t have any better RAW interpreter”
That’s a mistaken assertion. Adobe regularly updates their RAW conversion engine with newer versions of Adobe Camera RAW. Currently ACR 8.8/Lr 5.7 includes Process versions 2003, 2010 and 2012. With each successive new process version capable of offering a different base representation of the same file. Whether the newer conversions are actually “better” is purely subjective.
While these new process versions are available in the Camera Calibration panel in Lr (or the Camera Calibration tab of ACR), the new version must be selected by the user, they are not applied automatically upon installation or upgrade. So when viewing legacy processed images, you would see no difference in rendering if you did not apply the updated process version. This is no different than updates in the RAW processing engine for Aperture, even though they are made at the system level. Legacy images will show no change in legacy processed images until the user invokes the updated process.
Not to mention, legacy versions of ACR/Lr will also never support newer cameras once they hit the next full version cycle.
on April 13, 2015 - 7:14pm
I try to be VERY precise when I make comments, but it does take critical reading. I was clear that ACR is independent of Lightroom, Photoshop or Bridge. They will all take advantage of the latest version. That said however, If a new version of Lightroom comes out it’s RAW conversion won’t be any better then its predecessor UNTIL there’s a new version of ACR, and it won’t even be any better then unless Adobe includes updates to your specific camera.
on April 13, 2015 - 9:29pm
There is no dispute that the Develop module in Lr is ACR with a different UI. Same engine. Different body. However, that is not the issue of contention.
“Critical Reading” is a two way street. I merely pointed out, despite your your self-proclaimed precision, you are wrong in your assertion.
Your comment “A new version of Lightroom won’t have any better RAW interpreter” is not accurate. No matter how patronizing you wish to be in your explanation.
Additionally, test images of ALL supported cameras are revisited and re-worked with new process versions so to update the individual profiles for those cameras when and if the user decides to invoke those profiles. If you would refer to an interview that was conducted with Thomas Knoll where he discussed this very matter and what lengths he and his team go to when developing new generations of the Camera Calibration profiles and RAW engine support.
This is neither the time or place for this discussion. I let it to others to read and research the issue of their own accord to discover for themselves.
on April 13, 2015 - 6:19pm
As for Photos getting better, it most certainly will. We may even see 3rd party plug-ins. However if history is any judge, I will remind users that when Apple released Final Cut Pro X it was still a professional-level video editor. Granted, a whole lot of pro features had been removed, but it was clear that the guts and format were pro quality, so over time Apple added the required pieces. They also maintained iMovie for amateurs. When it comes to still image editing it’s not the same story. They killed iPhoto, the amateur software and it is clear that it has been replaced with Photos. Photos does not have the feel of a Pro app that’s just missing some pieces. Yes, you’ll see improvements and additions, but I suspect they will all be for consumers, not Pros. Everyone here seems to be scurrying around, trying to find “work-arounds” to add features. Often they actually include using a 2nd application! This hardly makes for a fast, efficient Pro workflow. Personally, I hold absolutely no belief that Photos will EVER be a Pro app. If Apple wants to be in the Pro image editing arena they are going to have to resurrect Aperture or start from scratch with a Pro app. Just my 2 cents.
on April 12, 2015 - 5:05pm
By the way, Keywords are supported: cmd+i reveals the option to add a keyword (among other metadata and features), and searching for the keyword in the upper right sorts.
Hope this helps!
on April 13, 2015 - 9:19am
“If they are not in the business of great software anymore, people can just as well run Lightroom on windows machines, with the exact same interface! Or Picasa, if they want Photos level software.”
That is exactly, what I’ve wrote to Tim Cook, when the first beta of Photos was released and it became clear, they leave the playground for advanced professional photo apps. Think twice before you remove that central screw, that holds everything together, or the house collapses.
Quote from my email:
If I’m forced to switch to another Pro-Photo app, that probably runs better, smoother, faster on a non-Apple platform, why shall I stick with a Mac?
If I don’t have a Mac any more and the new machine has better integration with Android/non-Apple-cloud solutions than with iOS/iCloud, why shall I stick with iOS?
If I don’t own iOS devices any more, I’m no more in the market for an Apple Watch.
Unfortunately he either didn’t read it or he didn’t get the point.
on April 13, 2015 - 12:35pm
I have never had the pleasure of meeting Tim, but if he’s anything like his predecessor, who I have met, I suspect that he doesn’t respond well to threats… especially threats that he deems untenable. After 30 years working with companies with cross-platform environments I cannot accept that you will find photo editing software that runs better, smoother or faster on a non-Apple platform, and we already know what a nightmare Android can be. As for the Apple Watch, there’s noting out there yet that can touch it and I’m sure that sometime down the road either Apple or someone else will give it cross-platform capabilities. Frankly, I suspect you might have had a better chance of a response if you’d held out a carrot rather than an axe. ;)
on April 13, 2015 - 3:15pm
In fact I’ve gotten a response to an email I’ve sent to Steve a couple of years back and it wasn’t all about carrots as well. That might have encouraged me to try again with Tim. Sad he failed.
The only company, who is able and/or willing to make photo editing software using the hardware of your Mac to it’s full capabilities (i.e. rendering effects via OpenCL) is Apple. Compare performance between Aperture and Capture One on a MacPro with a powerful GPU for panning around several RAWs simultaneously or doing brushstrokes at 100%. Aperture is at least 5 times faster. No wonder. When Aperture was released, it was Apple’s showcase app for their new core image framework introduced with Mac OS 10.4. It was a miracle at that time to see effects update in realtime when dragging sliders or panning around at 100%.
So it was primarily Apple, that made the Mac fly by running Apple Pro Software. With Apple Pro Software gone, that advantage is gone as well.
On pure number crunching (CPU, GPU performance) the Macs usually cannot compete with equally priced PC boxes. Without software optimized for the Mac hardware and OS X , they likely fall behind performance wise.
It is similar to the old benchmark trick, where you optimized the code for a special hardware, to make it look superior. Without coercion Apple relinquished the control over which benchmark will be used now. Stupid for a company with such a level of control over their hard- and software.
on April 11, 2015 - 6:48pm
So other than the obvious DAM issues, which photo adjustments are we going to miss the most in Photos? One thing I loved in Aperture was the ability to highlight the Hot and Cold areas in a photo. Pictures always worth a thousand words or a guess!
Also they seem to have removed the recovery slider but kept the Black Point. Waaaah? Curves are gonzo too!
What other things are critical issues for Aperture users that are no longer around in Photos?
on April 12, 2015 - 12:05am
I really miss the option to hold down CMD key to see highlights when changing sliders like Black Point and Exposure settings. (Hope they bring it back from Aperture)
SKR Imaging
https://skrimaging.wordpress.com
on April 11, 2015 - 8:30pm
I was looking for a way to store photos in a hierarchy of boxes like I did in Aperture. I since found out that this is done using albums and folders of albums in Photos. This is quite acceptable for me, just missing one thing: I’d like to be able to see all those photos that are not in any albums…. that would be the only proper way to sort the new things into new event and existing theme albums.
on April 11, 2015 - 8:56pm
Nice idea.
on April 11, 2015 - 11:45pm
few things I hope they add in future updates:
1- allow thumbnails view to be positioned in bottom, left, or right side of main viewer..
2- allow to undock edit panel or switch it to left or right side (like in Aperture).
SKR Imaging
https://skrimaging.wordpress.com
on April 11, 2015 - 11:59pm
More print sizes (example: photo strip)! Also this may be considered “pro level” ; but I would like to see “highlight hot & cold overlays” that’s in Aperture! It’s a quick way to see clipping in your picture!
KEVENE HARRIS
on April 12, 2015 - 12:03am
Forgot: a quick way to see only the photos that have not been place in any album or project!
KEVENE HARRIS
on April 12, 2015 - 3:37pm
A Sepia filter would be nice.
on April 12, 2015 - 3:51pm
While I’m pretty sure Photos will “bloom” and improve, the books project abilities seem locked into allowing no customization of page layout. When Aperture goes that’s going to be a problem for some. I’ve switched to MyPublisher Bookmaker for that – fixing precision layout problems with Screen Ruler. This way I can order lay-flat books for less than Photos regular books (with sale prices). But MyPublisher does not allow printing to PDF – which Photos does – with blank pages, etc. being able to be removed in Preview. Great for carrying iPad versions of one’s books.
Otherwise, the way I work makes my need more in cataloging of exposures than anything else (primarily B&W). So I’m seriously looking now at staying with Aperture in hopes Photos fills in what few gaps are left for me. It’s the kind of intuitive interface that really speeds up work flow.
jcraig
on April 12, 2015 - 3:52pm
Would be nice to see the metadata that the photos app is said to import from aperture but cannot be seen. BTW: what’s that all about? Import but hide data?
on April 12, 2015 - 5:01pm
It might not show everything, but cmd+i will reveal metadata. You may already know this, but your comment makes it sound like you might not, so just in case. Hope this helps someone!
on April 12, 2015 - 3:54pm
This keyboard command: command -shift -b to let us batch change / enter whatever few metadata options we may have.
on April 12, 2015 - 8:14pm
I use this feature constantly! My workflow has me sitting down and adding keywords in batch to a month of pictures. Sometimes an entire year if I’ve gotten really lazy…. ;) Come to think of it, I would also enter the city, state and country with this batch metadata edit and I don’t think location is an option in the new Photos app? Does anyone know? Obviously Photos reports location based on GPS data (if available) but that sometimes labels a weird sub-city/community type name and I traditionally rely on my smart album looking at the actual “City” field I have entered with each pic in Aperture.
on April 12, 2015 - 4:45pm
Whilst Photos preserves location data on import of pics already tagged, it doesn’t seem possible to add location data in Photos to pics that do not already have it. I use a Nikon DSLR that does not have geotagging, so I’m having to resort to opening all my pics in iPhoto or Aperture, adding location data, and only then importing into Photos. It’s an unnecessary additional step in workflow, considering 90% of the required functionality is already there in Photos.
on April 12, 2015 - 4:46pm
my first shock is that there doesn’t appear to be 3rd part software support…extensions? I have used Aperture since V 0.9 (or some such). I’ve appreciated each of the improvements but the ability to use other software from within Aperture is by far the most useful for me.
Reading the previous comments though I find it hard to believe there are no star rating or keyword capabilities. How on earth could this be asset management software without these basics? If it’s not assert management then is it a giant “junk drawer?” Just rummage around ‘till you find what you’re looking for…or forget.
on April 12, 2015 - 5:03pm
You are right to find it hard to believe that Keywords aren’t supported, since they are: cmd+i reveals the option to add a keyword (among other metadata and features), and searching for the keyword in the upper right sorts.
Hope this helps!
on April 12, 2015 - 5:32pm
For me it’s simple. I don’t care what Apple does with Photos. It’s not an app that I will ever use. For musicians Apple makes GarageBand for amateurs and consumers and Logic Pro X for pros. For film makers they make iMovie for amateurs and consumers and Final Cut Pro X for pros. Photos is clearly and demonstrably for amateurs and consumers. If Apple cares as much for photographers as they do for musicians and film makers, they will make a professional-level app for us. Lipstick on a pig won’t work, and for pros, Photos is a pig.
on April 12, 2015 - 8:01pm
Well I agree with pretty much every feature that everyone has mentioned. I’ve been using Photos on OS X and iOS ever since the first beta. I exported 10,000 of my 5 star rated Aperture pics and created a new Photos library based on that. Then from that point, my iPhone has been sending anything new. Occasionally I import pics directly from sd card shot from my Nikon but I still primarily put them in Aperture. I just wanted to understand how the Photos app was going to work.
Other than what’s already been mentioned, here is my short list of non-pro features that are missing.
Great discussion here btw! Good luck to all of us!!
on April 12, 2015 - 11:13pm
Hmmm, my understanding of the optimize storage feature is that it stores full res’ of recently viewed photos depending on how much space is available. Therefor, I suspect that as you fill up your storage with other files, and your available storage shrinks, iCloud Photo Library may “re-optimize” by storing increasingly fewer full res’ images. (If I’m correct, this would operate similarly to the local storage backups feature of Time Machine; it gets out of the way when you need your storage, but it uses space when it has the luxury.)
Also, bear in mind that your 93 videos may be contributing (possibly heavily) to that 32gb storage if they’ve been viewed on that device any time recently. This would throw off your average files size estimation by quite a lot, though I think my first point (above) is more important.
Anyone feel free to correct me if you find out I’m mistaken about the way this works; I’m not certain!
on April 12, 2015 - 10:58pm
Good point on the videos. I think I’ll move them off my phone and into Aperture to eliminate them from the equation. But I can tell you those videos are newly created from my phone and the original Photos library size was around 30 GB when I created it. And it certainly consisted of nothing more than pictures at the time.
The confusing part about the optimization is for any non-iPhone taken picture the version on the phone is always a low-res version. Whenever I browse to one, it immediately downloads the full-res (whether I want it to or not). :) Look in the lower-right and you’ll see the status pie graphic in this example of my youngest kiddo.
I think another test will be to uncheck the optimized button and see what my phone does when it tries to download the 70 GB of high-res originals.
on April 12, 2015 - 11:01pm
Wait… a better test is to download all 6 Star Wars movies and fill up the rest of my storage. Then see if Photos starts to reduce file size or do some other magic to reduce the 32 GB Photos footprint. :D
on April 12, 2015 - 11:18pm
Haha I like your experiments, and that looks like one happy kiddo. ;)
I haven’t experimented yet, but I was figuring that the “low res’ ” versions would be literally the thumbnails (so you can see what you’ve got in iCloud Photo Library), and as soon as you tap to view any of them, the full res’ will download, and remain as long as you view it periodically. If I’m right, then the only space we NEED for optimized storage is just enough for all of your thumbnails (though, it makes me wonder what would happen if you were literally out of space and tried to view a photo in the cloud).
I really think this is a brilliant feature, but exactly how it operates is still a bit ambiguous, and it would be nice to have a little more control, for those of us who want it.
on April 12, 2015 - 11:48pm
Thanks! She’s nearly 10 years old already but she is still a smiley kid! :)
So deleting 93 videos reduced my overall Photos library ~12 GB (both in my optimized iOS library as well as the high-res iCloud consumption).
So now the math is better, but still ~1.7 mb per optimized photo on my phone. Given that, unless they have an algorithm to further compress, a 128 GB phone would hold ~77,000 pictures. Or, maybe they’ll keep compressing? We’ll see…
I’ll fill up my phone this week with movies and continue to push the envelope and see what happens to my now 19 GB library.
Cheers!
on April 12, 2015 - 11:50pm
Great! I’m really interested to see what you find out.
on April 13, 2015 - 10:24am
Well I think I have good news… after downloading all 6 Star Wars movies last night to my phone the Photos app library size has automatically decreased. Videos went from 12 GB to 40 GB whereas Photos went from 19 GB to 4.7 GB. Meanwhile my phone seemed to maintain around 20 GB (or more) of free space. So it never actually seemed allow the phone to run out of space.
Now the math works out to 4.7 GB / 11,278 photos = ~ 420 KB per optimized photo. Now that seems to be more inline with what I might consider a thumbnail to be.
Given this new data, 128 GB phone could hold ~ 312,000 photos if nothing else was consuming storage on it.
I’ll continue to push this iPhone 6+ to its storage limit to see what happens to the Photos app on it. I’m really curious at what point it will decide to take recent iOS pictures and swap the original with a small thumbnail?
on April 13, 2015 - 5:27pm
Great experiment, Matt! I really appreciate you sharing your result, and I’m looking forward to whatever conclusion you find when you push it to its limits.
This is exactly the sort of experiment I was devising for when I finally felt ready to tackle it! Very helpful, and great information to share with friends and colleagues. Thanks.
on April 12, 2015 - 11:58pm
I want to be able to title images, including importing those titles from Aperture. Without that, I won’t use the app except maybe for a preliminary view of pix taken with my iPhone. I’ve got images dating back to the early 1900’s, all with titles containing image date and subject. As near as I can tell there’s no way to get that info into, easy or otherwise, into Photos.
Dave Creek
on April 13, 2015 - 12:31am
Select your image(s) and press cmd+i (or click the circled “i” symbol when viewing a single image). You can add your title, among several other metadata, here.
(I’m not at my MacBook, but I remember a “show titles” somewhere in the view menu of the menu bar for displaying these in moments and albums views.)
Hope this helps!
on April 13, 2015 - 1:24am
Thank you! I can see my title in Info, but it isn’t in the Title field (it’s just below it) so it has to be copied and pasted into the Title field. With 1000’s of images that’s a LOT if work. Am I missing something?
Dave Creek
on April 13, 2015 - 2:43am
Hmm that’s weird. By title field, do you mean the top line of the info pane that opens with cmd+i, or something else? That’s where I see mine when I test this; it appears both below the images in grid views and in that top, “title” line of the metadata in the info pane. When I edit one, the other updates. If yours is showing in only one of those places, then that’s very strange to me.
on April 13, 2015 - 3:16am
The best feature would be to keep aperture.
on April 13, 2015 - 3:39pm
It is a bit ridiculous. Everyone is sneaking in the one or other Aperture feature double checking is still not already too Pro-targeted.
Probably it would be best to keep Aperture and simply put a simplified Photos UI on top of it, hiding all of the dangerous, confusing, overcomplicated Aperture UI from the eyes off the absolute beginner.
You can unlock the Aperture interface with an intense 3 days Apple one-on-one training.
Aperture Experts get away with a compact 1 day training at reduced price. ;-)
on April 13, 2015 - 1:53pm
Apple is really good at telling users what they need even if they didn’t know they need it. Sometimes though it make them look arrogant.
on April 13, 2015 - 3:19pm
And after we submissively learnt what we didn't know that we need, they tell us that we don't need it any more. ;-)
on April 13, 2015 - 3:29pm
I’d like to see Photos reinstate some of the basic feature of iPhoto - capacity to order photos in a sensible way (latest at the top); batch processing for addition of titles, descriptions, date changes; and numerous other fixes (see my post under first impressions). To improve on iPhoto I’d also like to see an information pane that is adjustable in size (I like to add a fair bit of information in ‘description’ for historical photos and the small scroll space is irritating); I’d also like the information pane to list the names of the albums and projects the photo is in.
on April 13, 2015 - 5:15pm
I like your list, too, Lynne.
However, a batch Adjust Date & Time feature is already included! It can be found in the Image menu of the menu bar. (They even included timezone support, which I don’t remember seeing in Aperture’s Adjust Date & Time.)
My guess is that Apple views Title and Description as unique to each image, and therefor decided it wouldn’t make sense to apply these to a selection of multiple images. If they do implement this one, it will need to have prepend/append functionality, to preserve existing unique Title and Description information, which I suspect is specifically what you’re asking for.
(Keywords aren’t on Lynne’s list, but I want to point out to other readers that Keywords can be updated in batch by selecting multiple images before pressing cmd+i.)
on April 14, 2015 - 10:37am
Thanks, you’re right tyeNewton, adjust date and time is there. It is title and description that I particularly miss. In iPhoto there was the capacity to bulk edit these functions and, as you point out, to choose to either replace or append.
on April 14, 2015 - 10:39am
Thanks, you’re right tyeNewton, adjust date and time is there. It is title and description that I particularly miss. In iPhoto there was the capacity to bulk edit these functions and, as you point out, to choose to either replace or append.
Pages