Aperture 3

sohonycsohonyc Posts: 11Member
edited January 2013 in General Discussions
Thought about starting a new Aperture 3 Discussion for all Mac people out there :)
Post edited by sohonyc on
Tagged:
«1345

Comments

  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    edited January 2013
    Okay, I confess to be guilty of using Aperture ^:)^
    But with increasingly mixed feelings against Apple. They're bleeding money and could catch up easily with LR and C1 but they are as lazy as Steve Jobs complained Adobe to be. Shame on them.

    To get benefit out of the latest version*, I first would need to update from OS X10.6 to 10.8. I don't because I hate having a monochrome desert of user interface. Also, the latest Aperture version has that "GREY looks sooooo professional, it has to be cool!" look. Yuck! After bringing colors for different folders, albums, projects and icons into the interface, they suck them out again, making their world as grey as they were advertising against, back in the old days of the 1984 advertisement.
    * meaning a different way of white balance AND the possibility of working with D600's RAW files.

    Now the good thing is, I'm familiar with the interface and the functions and the possibilities. Happy with my workflow, as there is a good add-on to export to smugmug. But of course, I sometimes miss the possibilities of perspective correction like C1 offers, the lens profiles like everybody except the lazy Apple folks offers and whenever I think I'd like to try NIK PlugIns, this inner voice keeps telling me "a lot of money, if you have to abandon the sinking Aperture ship".

    I hope, my big iMac will keep up it's work for quite a while, because at the moment I'm really unhappy about what Apple does and more unhappy with they don't do after Steve's passing. Good news is, that Windows catched up with copying OS X and provides a stable system, just for the price of needing virus scanners and other performance eaters. But I still will buy an iPad mini for the CamRanger, as it will perfectly fit in my needs.
    Post edited by JJ_SO on
  • DenverShooterDenverShooter Posts: 340Member
    Been running Aperture since 1.0 and am now running the 3.4.3 version on a 2011 MPB 2.3 GHz Intel Core I7 with 16 GB SDRAM. Runs fast, is stable and doesn't mind tossing around D800E RAW file sizes. Very good workflow for what I need to get done.

    The 3.0 version has added a couple more adjustment controls including a "definition" adjustment and refined several others. The mapping function works well with the Nikon GPS data.

    I have HDR Expose, Fisheye Hemi and Topaz Fusion Express 2 plugins and they all work just fine.

    I also have Photoshop CS6 which also runs very nicely on the MPB and perhaps one of these days I will figure out how to effectively use it.

    And of course the Mac platform is BSD Unix based which makes it just about unstoppable. The only time I reboot is when there is an update that requires it.

    Denver Shooter
  • adamzadamz Posts: 842Moderator
    I've also been using Aperture since 1.0 and... if they don't upgrade it and listen to user needs I'll move to LR. Overall I like the workflow in Aperture more than in LR, the ability to do everything I want in every moment - which I can't say about LR (though I guess it's changed a lot since version 1). I like the retouch brush and the ability to integrate photos from aperture library pretty much with every other apple application with simple click. What I don't like. It looks and feels like iPhoto bigger brother - big NO for me. Places, faces... who needs it. I need to get into my pictures fast. I need to be able to correct my lens... LR users can do it for a long. I need better integration with external plugins - LAYERS!!! sure I do have PS, and can do layers over there... but do I really need to go to PS for simple adjustments?
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    ... not to forget face-recognition (which is still Aperture only feature) and a very good way to handle highlights close to the upper limit. I know the pros of AA, I just complain they are not doing much of a progress although they'd have tons of money and man-power.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    places and faces - I like it, it's one of the main reasons I stick with Aperture. I'm very lazy with keywords, so faces can do a good job on some, okay, most faces. Others cause constantly confusion.
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,396Moderator
    I used Aperture but found LR, currently 4.3 to work better on what I needed. I think Aperture has better clone tools, but then I may not have learned all there is to learn in LR. The brush in LR is much better, IMO.
    Msmoto, mod
  • CorrelliCorrelli Posts: 135Member
    I use Aperture as well (iMac with 10.7.5) and I like the way it works. I import all images into Aperture and go from there. As plugins I use Silver Efex 2 and FilmPack 3 as well as PS CS6. But most stuff I do in Aperture.

    I read (fstoppers or petapixel) that a new version "Aperture X" might be on the way. The concluded that from a book that showed up on Amazon about Aperture X scheduled for release in March (the book, not Aperture). Getting lens correction and automatic CA would really be nice.

    I once downloaded a test version of LR but never actually installed it (no special reason, just lack of time). One of the things I like better in Aperture is the RAW integration. The RAW conversion is part of the OS and upgrading the OS is a lot cheaper than upgrading LR. But then again, if they publish Aperture X who knows what will happen with the current version...
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    I also saw this rumor about Aperture X, but I guess, the X is only stand-in for a version yet to be announced. Well, it would be great, if Apple puts some effort in. After all and after my complaints, I still like OS X more than Windows 7
  • adamzadamz Posts: 842Moderator
    slightly off topic... does anyone know a fast & smooth way of transforming Aperture library into LR. I have over 50k of snaps in my aperture library, so wouldn't like to keyword them again in LR if I ever make the switch.

    as for LR, You can get the creative cloud subscription and that saves a lot of money and You use the latest adobe software on the market.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,030Moderator
    That sounds like the sort of question that Adobe would like to answer Adam. :-c
    Always learning.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    edited January 2013
    Also an Aperture user, since 2.1. I've tried each version of LR, and each time I do I end up hating the user interface and control layout more. I also dislike Abobe, as a company, and their current drive to the online cloud app. Users of Adobe products who don't buy in will end up left in the dark, and those who do move to the service will be paying two or three times as much for the same software, on a yearly basis. Even if Apple never updates Aperture again, I wouldn't switch, there are better solutions with better controls and UIs. (Capture 1 for example)

    IMO the most powerful tool in Aperture is the curves tool, far superior to the one in LR. I find the brushes in Aperture 3 to be very useful, much better than verson 2, but they do use a lot of RAM.

    BTW, if you need lens correction in Aperture, get the PT Lens plugin, it works very well.

    To the OP: Frankly not upgrading because you don't like the colour? Isn't that kind of a childish reaction? I didn't like it at first either, but I adjusted quickly, because version 3.3 is more stable, faster, and fixes some of the memory leaks in the app.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    edited January 2013
    ...
    BTW, if you need lens correction in Aperture, get the PT Lens plugin, it works very well.

    To the OP: Frankly not upgrading because you don't like the colour? Isn't that kind of a childish reaction? I didn't like it at first either, but I adjusted quickly, because version 3.3 is more stable, faster, and fixes some of the memory leaks in the app.
    PT lens needs at first a TIF to do what it's good at. I have the tool, but don't use it for the Nikons. And for the Canon G11, C1 turned out to be the right thing, I'm just not updating to the new version because the UI is quite dark and the typo very small, what I'm childishliy considering to be less user-friendly.

    If I can be called childish, that's fine to me. I just don't see no ergonomically reasonable point not to use the colors of the different controls to help the user using it. image
    Left side: New icons, right side: the "old ones" - I just like them much more!
    I do have much more troubles to recognize the shape only. The colors always help me to navigate. And there's still the possibilty to flag your photos with - colors! not shapes.
    Post edited by JJ_SO on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    edited January 2013
    I'm not calling you childish, I'm calling peoples unwilling to accept minor chaninges to get improvments a childish reaction. (comparison, not name calling). It's like the the people who wont buy the D800 because "the files are too big".

    Flagging hasn't changed one bit, so I don't get that. The colour tags for photos are still there. As for icons, I terned them off (I use text only) , they just waste screen space when editing.

    I also don't buy the argument against plugins that must convert to TIFF. You make your edits as normal, edit in the plugin and your done and ready to export as usual. PT lens works extremely well with Nikon's so I don't get why you wouldn't use it with them specifically.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    Excuse me, pulling out the colors out of icons is no "minor changing", that's like compare a b/w picture against a color pic. ;) And if you're good a deciphering text instead of recognizing colors, great for you =D>
    I'm not. I prefer colors as a big help to navigate (traffic lights, traffic and warning signs use them, too. Even animals or flowers). Apple brought them back with iTunes 11, I read.

    Exactly, flagging hasn't changed a bit. Now, why didn't they replace the colors by grey shapes? rectangles, circles, triangles... you name it. Because it's too complicate for the brain to recognize them quickly. It's only ergonomics, and if I have a choice, I don't give a damn on stylish grey icons. That is sacrifying usability to design. And I have my reasons to dislike that.

    The PlugIn of PT lens is working that way, that I run it, Aperture creates a TIF and exports that into the PlugIn. After editing, I still have the RAW plus a very fat (16bit) TIF. That's overkill. That should be done natively in Aperture and if you export the pictures all changes will be applied - not earlier.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    Ideally Apple would include lens correction, I wont argue with that.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    edited January 2013
    Yup. If they'd do so, I had seriously to consider to move out my childish reaction :-/

    But they won't B-) , guess, too busy with fighting with Samsung...
    Post edited by JJ_SO on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    edited January 2013
    Aperture 3 may be almost 3 years old, but besides the lens corrections I don't see any glaring things missing. Frankly lens corrections could be added as a point update, I'd even pay $10-20 on the app store for it. I simply fail to see the obsession with having a x.0 release. Considering how bad the Aperture 3.0 release was, I'm in no rush to be a beta tester again.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    edited January 2013
    Lens and perspective correction, some tiny changings in working with places and faces (but that's more high-level whining...) and I'd be happy again.

    *just corrected "hangings" to "changings"*
    Post edited by JJ_SO on
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    edited January 2013
    If you dislike face and places, simply turn them off in the perferences. Places is actually very useful, if you do a lot of travel photography.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    I'm a fan of places and faces and I use them often. It only should be a bit easier to add a new place and sometimes faces behave a bit wild when it comes to enter names with special characters in them, like ü, ä, ö, ø, ñ, ë, ç or Å - it's ignoring them in it's alphabetical order
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    I agree, adding photos without GPS data is a pain.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 880Member
    I make a lot of use of Aperature 3. First it is the best slide sound show device I have ever used. The National Park System still uses at several venues the slide sound show system I USED to use. For photo manipulation I use however is iPhoto and I still use photoshop for the rest and a fairly old one at that. GPS data on Aperature 3 is very useful and I do use that all the time. I have tried all the systems listed by other posters but i do less mods than many of you do. I am sure I also store my images the old file way and by using external hard drive manually.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    Tonight I was in a workshop about colormanagement. The trainer was also responsible for their Apple portfolio. Afterwards I asked about Aperture "What do you think, should I take the saddle off a dead horse?" "Yes", he replied "I don't think they will do a new version".

    At the moment, I don't know what to do:
    New D7100 will probably get a RAW-update.
    To benefit of it, I'd need to update Aperture 2 or 3 small versions with not much more improvements than the iClod stuff I don't use and to get finally this (in my eyes) superdull and ugly grey interface.
    To update Aperture, I'd need to update to OS 10.7.or better 10.8 - more dull grey surfaces, lots of stuff I don't need like versions, which can cause more problems and sometimes arr not working together with old hardware.
    I don't want to have Adobe stuff on my private Mac.
    Capture One has a very good RAW engine and a stone age assessment management.
    Transferring all pictures to C1 could give me three dozen nightmares with loads of Zombies and dragons

    Best will be, I sell the D7100 as soon as I get it and before the inevitable price drop. @-)
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,973Member
    edited March 2013
    @JJ_SO Your still running Aperture 1 or 2? Kind of confused by what you said. You are missing a lot more than versions and icloud... by not updating. The highlight/shadow recovery tool has been greatly improved, and the curves tool alone is worth upgrading to Aperture 3.

    There is more to Mac OSX 10.7 and 10.8 than interface changes. It's the under the hood stuff, like better multi-core CPU support, that is of most benefit to high end users (like people who use Aperture).
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • JJ_SOJJ_SO Posts: 1,158Member
    @PB_PM I'm currently using 3.2.4 which is the last version usable with 10.6.8. Most of the time happily. It still has more features than other DAM systems, which are very strong in converting and partly in editing the RAW files, but unfortunately lack a lot of comfort and elegance in managing the pictures. No one else has face-recognition, few have GPS-support and a lot of my organization is based as well on intelligent folders which Apple perfected and others copied poorly. The integration into the OS and with other Apple apps is hard to beat.

    The latest version is 3.4.3, which, as you said, has improvements under the hood and white balance also extendable on skin tones. That'd be a nice feature. You're right, I missed more versions, but so far no major ones and I doubt if there will ever be 4.x.x In that department Apple has become as lazy as Steve called the Adobe guys because of Flash.

    What really scares me is the switch from OS 10.6.8 to. 10.8.x only because otherwise Apple doesn't support newer cameras from D600 on. So, I became very conservative to my own surprise with Apple OS X. I gave 10.7 a try but after a week or so I downgraded again to 10.6 and tried to get used to the feeling being excluded by a manufacturer whose products i was happy to work with since 2005. Steve was wrong when he thought his spirit remains in the concern because that spirit needs a charismatic person to radiate and come up with great ideas - I don't see such a person at Apple, Steve himself would have thrown him/her out as long as he was alive. Okay, that get's really off Nikon the longer I think about, so I better put a stop on it.

    First plan B is to check out if I also can work with C1 and it's limited asset management.
Sign In or Register to comment.