Aperture 3

KnockKnock

Not sure what the topic is at this point, but I'm not quick to think Aperture has been dropped. Both it and iPhoto were updated in November '12. v3.3 was release last summer with notable features. Yes 4.0 isn't out, but each .x update brings new features new features and no new cost, so I'm not hungry to pay more $$. I expect that once LR ships, Apple will have a new update for us.

Ade

Lightroom already shipped a major version ahead of Aperture. And they're about to ship another one.

I've stopped using Aperture for new work. With D800 files, Aperture slows down to a crawl on my computer. With LR, it's slow but still very useable. Plus Adobe quickly added Coolpix A support which I need.

The only reason I haven't switched completely to LR is because I still want to try Capture One.

Even if Apple releases Aperture 4 tomorrow, I'm not so sure I will switch back. At this point I can see why most pros switched to Adobe a long time ago.

JJ_SO

Adobe has the benefit not to make the major sales with phones. But they dumped so much in the past, I would not wonder if they dump DNG one day as well. There's nothing on the market able to compete with the whole Adobe suite, but it took them comparably long to develop a colormanagement for the complete suite. Yesterday flash player want an update - if you don't take care, they try to install McAfee virus blabla on your PC - how dumb and arrogant is that?

I hate flash, as most viruses use it as vehicle. Acrobat as well. Killing SVG, having the most instable and resource-eating media viewer Bridge makes them suspicious to me to a point where my wallet stays closed - although they do offer good apps and an acceptable integration of them if one is working in preprint. Adobe's apps get with each release more "features" and are slowing down if you don't keep up with hardware.

For photographers, Capture One sets a nice mark. A wedding of their converter, some of their features and the management capabilities of Aperture with it's clearer interface would be my dream. But a possible scenario could be, Apple brings iPhoto and Aperture together, one step is already made by using the same libs. Shortening down or abandoning Aperture as it is today appears a possibility. Funny thing is, each time I try another DAM, I realize how well Apple did the job developing a good interface and how used I'm to it. That's the hardest part to give up.

Ade, performance wise I don't have much trouble with D800 in AA - on a late 2009 iMac with SSD and 12Gig RAM (but the lib is on the standard internal HD) it's far better than DxO, i.e. Maybe it's because I set the preview size on "half" instead full size - that's still 50% more than my iMac can show me.

KnockKnock

@Ade, yeah LightRoom has always been a little lighter and quicker on its feet, but Aperture on the Retina laptop has no problems whipping around 22MP RAW files (had a 5DmkIII on loan). Can't speak to a D800's files, anyone got one I can borrow?

I guess having Photoshop (5.5) and Nik pluggin's gives a pretty well-rouned toolkit. Don't really want to upgrade to the latest CS, or make the library shift to LR, so I'm happy to just take pictures, post-process with the workflow that's been successful for the last few years and keep taking photos. We'll see if I change my mind, but I'm in no hurry.

I guess I want to add a word about the treadmill of software development. The idea that competing by releasing new major versions does not necessarily lead to better software. I'll leave it there though - more important things to read online tonight. Sadly.

JJ_SO

...I guess I want to add a word about the treadmill of software development. The idea that competing by releasing new major versions does not necessarily lead to better software. ...

That's basically a truth. Also, newer versions are not necessarily the more stable ones. But Aperture has lost nearly all advanced features, kept only the interface and faces (I use them a lot) and a more fluffy and light kind of RAW rendering - the tones of the images are by default not heavy or gravy. I still like this style. But when it comes to perspective correction or lens correction (okay, that bit could be discussed if it's increasing IQ) I miss something.

adamz

as I haven't put my last question correctly, let me rephrase it. is there any automatic way to move pictures from Aperture to LR, keeping folder structure and picture grading. exporting my files from Aperture library is not necessary as I store my files in separate drive with structured directories.

some of You may ask why I wanna do the move... well, I can't allow myself to stick to software that's in the last phase of life. at this moment I don't have any problems with Aperture as it opens all my files w/o any problems but the question is what will happen in the next 5-10years? looking at Apple approach towards Aperture I don't feel secure. for me it looks like Apple wants to drop Aperture and combine it with iPhoto... which is nice for home users but lacks the speed advanced users want. OTOH, Adobe gives the impression that they know what they do and where they wanna be in the next 5-10 years.

as for pricing, I honestly don't know where You took the $1200 PB_PM. if You talking about creative cloud (CC)... well, LR is just an addition to some spectacular software: inDesign, PS, and many more. Though, I hope Adobe will create a bundle CC offer tailored for specific professions for let's say: 25USD/month

JJ_SO

@adamz: You will be able to open all your files no matter how dead Aperture is. But I don't think, there's an automated way to transfer all structures from AA 1:1 to LR, as they use different ways to save some metadata. Also, Apertures smart folders/ projects/albums/slideshows/lighttables/photobooks will use different parameters. These are the tricky parts. GeoTags or faces and some IPTC entries come first in my mind when I think of possible troublemakers. If you don't use them, your transition will be easier, I guess. I understand your point, Apple just don't performs any resistance against Adobe.

First, you need to know which kind of organisation structure you like to keep and to find again in LR. Then you can see for some ways to transfer, but I'm pretty sure, there's no automated way because basically each photographer is free to create structures. Using folders instead of projects, albums instead of light-tables or a mixture.

Correlli

@adamz: I was thinking about the switch some time ago as well and did some searches on the internet. The result was pretty much what JJ_SO said: there is no automated way as Apple and Adobe use different ways for their databases. The "best" comment about switching I found back then was: keep your old photos in one application (in your case Aperture) and start with the new software only with the new files. Forget about porting the old database into the new one.

The one thing I really like about the long update cycle with Aperture is, that you will get all the new cameras with the update of the RAW converter for free. As soon as Lightroom 5 (or Aperture 4) comes out you can forget using newer cameras in the current software as the RAW updates will be available only for the newer version of the software.

Ade

On the flip side, Apple sometimes take months before updating the RAW pack for new cameras.

E.g., Fuji released the X-Pro 1 more than a year ago. Adobe updated ACR within weeks, but still no Aperture support to this day.

And a big reason I decided to switch to LR for new work is because support for the new Coolpix A, which isn't yet available in Aperture. Probably everyone who bought the new x100s are converting to LR for the same reason.

KnockKnock

Oh, sorry if this was posted before or common knowledge, but images are not locked up in the Aperture library. You always have access to the images, the actual RAW or JPG (or psd or whatever) files that Aperture swallows into its library.

Rt-click on your Aperture library > Show Package Contents > Masters. Of course all of the metadata, organization and adjustments will be lost. If you want your adjustments, go through the Export process, maybe choose Versions, which will create files including your adjustments.

... I think... :-P

JJ_SO

Some years ago I was in a Mac Forum, where always somebody wrote after an information like yours, knockknock: "but you need to know what you're doing! Don't delete anything in the library, don't copy, don't move, if you don't want to have a hard time with Aperture afterwards!" It was said with much more exclamation marks

paulr

Aperture is now 3.4.4

PB_PM

Very minor update. No new RAW support from the looks of things.

JJ_SO

For that they needed 5 months? :-q

DenverShooter

I am running Aperture 3.4.3 on a 2011 MacBook Pro 2.3 GHz I7 with 16 G SDRAM and it hauls my 50MB+ D800E NEF files around quite nicely.

Denver Shooter

PB_PM

Looks like we spoke too soon. New RAW compatibility update 4.05 released, which adds all Fuji cameras with X-Trans Sensors (X20, X100s, X-E1 and X-Pro 1). Oddly no other new cameras added, so still no D7100 support.

JJ_SO

Wished, we would have spoken too soon. Sigh...

Ade

It feels like Apple is reacting to Adobe, releasing minor updates and Fuji RAW support in hopes of keeping the "few" Aperture holdouts from converting to Lightroom. Just to stop the bleeding until Aperture X can be announced.

PB_PM

It's hard to say. I know a lot of people who have moved from iPhoto to Aperture, since the price went down when it moved to the app store. There may be fewer professional Aperture users, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are more Aperture users today than at any point in it's history. Whether that's a good thing for future versions of the software or not, I don't know.

Ade

Either way I don't think Apple can afford to stay still.

In just two weeks Adobe will make some key announcements at their MAX conference. Apple has to seriously revamp Aperture this year -- a major update at a minimum, if not a total re-thinking of the product (the way FCP7 became FCPX).

Also, the new Mac Pro (or Mac Pro replacement) is supposed to be coming this year. If so, it would be smart for Apple to showcase their commitment to their pro software line at the same time. At this point it would be a marketing disaster to demo a new Mac Pro running Aperture 3.

JJ_SO

@Ade: The new MacPro is supposed to come since two years, Aperture 3 is older than 3 years (Feb 2010), Snow Leopard users are forced to use an "old version" since June 2012 - to me it doesn't look like a vivid product life. Each update ever since was no big step like version 2 to 3. Most other DAM apps didn't cut off a three year old OS which was/is working fine.

Can't afford to stay still? One product more or less, for a phone company and Apple TV developer who makes most money with mobile devices and customers who are happy to queue for new phones? I don't think a lot of Apple managers know Aperture at all by using it. Maybe a small group of kinky developers is allowed to play around once in a while, one of thousands of App in the Apps store. They make less than 1% turnarround with this app, I guess.

And it's so much easier to stay on top of mobile phones just by delivering regular updates for most of devices, even if there's a faulty app like maps from time to time - Android users only can dream of that.

Ade

The probability of seeing a new Mac Pro or replacement this year nears 100%, based on Apple's own public statements.

As long as they continue to sell desktops and laptops, in the big picture the value of the pro apps to Apple isn't direct sales or revenue, but marketing. Users of pro apps tend to be the most loyal -- and evangelical -- of all Apple users. They are influencers who passionately promote Apple products to the rest of the community.

PB_PM

Early reports of Apple's RAW support for Fuji cameras is positive. A few users have stated the support is superior to that of Lightrooms.

Ade

I'm seeing very mixed early reviews on the Fuji forums, mostly negative if anything, with almost universal concerns about excessive color noise, moire, and over-sharpening.

Aperture seems to produce more saturated colors vs LR5 Beta, but less saturated colors when compared to LR4. In one of the Fuji X forum comparisons, the Aperture RAW results seem worse than the in-camera JPEG.

Still, good news for Fuji users who use Aperture.

JJ_SO

Last week, after 3 months being on the market, I saw D7100 is now supported by a RAW update of Apple.

Or should be. 2 people already complained it's not working. Though I now have a very distant position to Apple, that's not so easy to believe. Didn't they - or the single guy who needed to work three months on a simple RAW converter - test this update before? Other side: Maps is so obviously badly tested, so why do I pretend to be surprised?

Anyway, now I learnt more about CaptureOne and the next Aperture will have to be really mindblowing to get me updating to 10.8 and redoing 3 months of edit in Aperture. Don't expect that to happen.