Heads up for Aperture users ...

proudgeek

"Seamless" plugins to me are tools which are not editing destructively. NIK doesn't belong to them and I refuse to handle (and pay the storage costs of) 200MB of 16bit TIF. Plus loosing parametric functionality. I welcome each plugin which works non-destructive, but the NIK tools, although they are great effects, were disappointing for me in this aspect.

I agree that the 200mb tiff files are a pain. But that was what I was saying: Perhaps this new version of Photos is going to make it so one can edit non-destructively through 3rd-party plug-ins. (so that adding a filter using Color Efex is no more destructive than changing the white balance in Aperture) Either way, given that it seems like there will be some time when Aperture and Photos will both be running, that we'll have the chance to find out before we have to jump in blindly.

I do agree that Photos is going to be less robust than Aperture. But maybe that's the point. Apple has realized that it can't create plug-ins better than all the 3rd-party providers, so it's giving up, settling instead for building a platform into which all of these more robust plug-ins can be seamlessly integrated to create a wider range of non-destructive editing options.

Or maybe I'm just smoking something...

PB_PM

Top level menus, Photos vs. Aperture:

This fits the rumor that Photos was originally going to be called iPhoto X.

FlowtographyBerlin

Come on, people! You can't seriously state that Photos is an option to replace Aperture! That's like you're in editing, and say if they discontinue Final Cut, you just use iMovie. Then again, if you've never used Final Cut, you wouldn't understand the problem, of course.

Photos is a consumer app, not that I'd care about this, but it implies that things are simplified so people with not much expertise can understand them and use them. It's the whole beauty of it, actually. By definition it won't provide the features that you will want when you're an expert.

And, after all, this is *not* about starting from scratch, as it was suggested on various blogs etc., the oh-so-courageous Apple strategy of throwing old things over board in order to start this incredible new thing. It's about killing a product line, that line being the pro photo DAM and batch editing. They're discontinuing it and we just need to look for something else. Period.

PB_PM

^ Bingo.

JJ_SO

Sorry @Flowtography, please exclude me from your "we just need to look for something else". I did, but so far I don't see something I want to work with, entirely.

1. there's nothing wrong with simplifying - even if it's a totally strange concept for Nikon, for instance. But Apple was pretty good in simplifying things. This is recognizable in Aperture until today. There's nothing wrong - except if simplifying leads to worse quality, of course. And most of us never used photos.app, so what do we loose by staying patient? Nothing we haven't already lost.

2. Aperture doesn't stop working today or next year. If you like to move on, better now than tomorrow, but we all know, that all edits will have to be frozen. Alright. How many pictures of last year you still use this year? Suggestion: Leave them in AA and if you feel moving on is the only thing to do, put your new pics into the new DAM.

3. Have you seen the screenshot posted by @Ade? Most of the edit sliders are there. Some not and except the highlight recovery (which might be placed somewhere else) I don't miss them.

4. if Apple manages to open photos.app to 3rd parties, and if they manage to edit non-destructive - there's a gain of something other RAW-converters or DAMs don't have. Yet.

5. lens profiles - if they find their way really into photos.app - is a good thing to have, after waiting for ages.

6. cloud is mandatory, nobody is forced to move his/her photos, at least that's what I understood.

After all the disappointment I felt by Apple's move - they did it before and they will do it again. I want to see if there's really such a lousy tool or if I can adapt to the concept. I would jump to another boat - but most of them just copied Apple, of course not perfectly. Mind you, I'm behind maybe 4 versions of AA and 3 main versions of OS, practically I can paint a sign "museum" next to my desk. I just didn't find a more powerful, elegant and useful tool which just does what I want.

Aperture once was meant for professionals - but thousands of them feel they have a better photo management done with explorer or finder by themselves. I disagree, to me Aperture was and is the best and most intuitive. But I don't need to take my pictures to where I'm traveling and I don't have to manage ten thousands per year.

It all depends on priorities, personal taste and purpose. But I disagree with "we need to move on" as well as I respect your disagreeing, if I'd say "we need to wait". I don't say that, I'm also close to the edge of turning away from Apple completely and I am upset how they handle those things.

tganiats

@JJ_SO : I agree!

Fritz

I don't mean to sound like a Luddite but "progress" is not always so. If as it appears, Apple is tracking a demographic shift towards a major market, I can understand their motivation but it leaves us rather high and dry. Fortunately DXO functions well as a plug in and is a reasonable alternative to Aperture 3.

KnockKnock

@JJ_SO x2 or x3, I lost count who is arguing which.

These are normal reactions to technological changes. For many good people, software changes require re-training and months of frustration trying to figure out where they moved the cheese and a significant loss in productivity. To others, software changes are no big deal. So when viewing a fairly large change, know which demographic you belong to. No segment will ever make the other segment change to be more like them.

If you feel significant anxiety, anger, fear, dread - then I can only suggest taking a deep breath, waiting, using what you have. That is plenty of time to see how the market moves. No one broke Aperture this month. RAW support is OS-based and Apple will certainly continue to support future cameras. For those who are invested in Aperture (as I am), jumping to Lightroom (which I respect but choose not to use) before we KNOW what option Apple is going to provide is folly and a waste of time. Sure if Photos turns out to suck by say this time next year, with not enough support for the features I need, I will move on. But doing so preemptively makes little sense.

Our office uses a royalties management software designed solely by one man who died 10 years ago - so I know what it means to run unsupported software. It's going fine in a VM of Windows 2000, but we are looking at and have rejected many options. In software 'broken' is often a matter of degree. Aperture has grown relatively weak in some areas compared to some of the options out there. I find the NIK plug-ins really help plug those gaps.

I guess it's no surprise that this is controversial. My attitude is wait and see what happens next, it will be upon us plenty soon. It may even come from some unknown source. I'm curious to see how workflow will change over the next 3-5 years. Cloud computing has tons of growing pains and many downsides but it is as inevitable a future as electricity moving into our homes. Our office gets fiber Internet, and it is a mind opening experience. We backup 50GB per night online - probably more than most people, pros included, edit in their photo library each night. I think it will not be long before 100 mbps will be common in urban areas. There are many workflow issues with the current paradigm though many wouldn't recognize them except in hindsight.

I license $20K of Microsoft product per year, budget for $5K of Apple stuff, $10K of Google stuff, $5K of IBM stuff, $5K of VMware stuff, $3K of Amazon stuff, $2K of Dell stuff. It's a tiny office with a relatively small budget and some international support. I'm not an Apple fanboi (isn't that what they all say ;-). They may drop support for a small percent of what some pros need, but Apple is not stupid - imaging is central to the bulk of computing trends - they're not going to leave much on the table.

henrik1963

I can remember a time where you could adjust the way your computer used memory - you needed to go in to HIMEM.SYS to adjust memory usage. It is a blessing that we no longer need to think about the way a computer uses memory.

Sometimes when you take options away it is because you have solved a problem for the user. I don't miss the need to to in to HIMEM.SYS. to use my computer.

Maybe there is a simpler way to adjust your images - maybe someone out there will take away a few options because they have solved an underlying problem. I hope that Photos gets simpler because someone has solved a user problem.

JJ_SO

It is difficult to keep track, @KnockKnock, because there are two things going on and the reactions of most of us are fed by experience that new things usually bring new bugs. I already waited much longer than most of the people with contemporary OS and to me switching to photos.app will mean a whole new system with a bunch of non-AA/-photos.app related bugs, missing funtions, added toys... Therefore its' not only an app-change for me. And it's hard to go back after a while.

Stopping and abandoning AA as it is when the remaining users were hoping for a major, serious update can't be anything else than a disappointment. Lots of us are used to an AA workflow (which doesn't mean everybody has the same), we're used and invested in to PlugIns and we're used to a very comfortable way of file management. I'm used to use faces and places, other people say I can tag the people I portrayed myself.

With being used to an app the development of myself includes desires and longing for solutions which were cool to have. Meanwhile tons of. To each of us a bit differently important.

When Apple cuts development of one branch and starts a new one, experience also shows they are able to make major changes and show it by changing names. For instance, I used to find a piece of music in iTunes within seconds in about 24.000 different titles. With iTunes 11, not any more. This is severe and I can't use another app because there is no one with similar functionality.

Since AA is outdated in some aspects of editing, the managing part is the one I'm afraid to loose the same way. But as you and others and me said, there's time enough and I don't need to be hasty. Waited two years now...

KnockKnock

Disappointment - yeah, have to agree there. One thought - how Aperture currently uses plug-ins is not ideal. The plug-in has to create a TIFF copy of the original and applies adjustments to it. It's possible that with a major re-think this workflow could be improved to work like all of the built-in adjustments, more like an effect layer. Agree - iTunes needs a major re-think.

JJ_SO

...
4. if Apple manages to open photos.app to 3rd parties, and if they manage to edit non-destructive - there's a gain of something other RAW-converters or DAMs don't have. Yet.

It's simpler to quote myself and the IF can't be put in too big capitals, because at first Apple needs to convince the PlugIn programmers to make non-destructive versions. And then those versions need to work convincing, fast, intuitive to use and high quality. What good is an interface if nobody cares about?

Apple already quit Quicktime and if I'd start to list what they already killed - only their own apps and interfaces - it would be a huge list.

And I understand every programmer who doesn't want to invest brains, money, time and support for something nobody knows how long Apple will support it.

KnockKnock

Indeed - the next big thing could come from anywhere. Off-topic: I recently uploaded a video to Youtube and found the edit powers they can do in the cloud are impressive - transitions, sound, still images, vibration reduction, color control, slo-mo etc. all crunching on their processors and hard drives.

PB_PM

There is no doubt that there is a use for "cloud" aka shared computing. In some applications shared computing is a great, and mutually beneficial thing, but for others not so much. Shared computing is great if all you care about is raw performance, but that kind of performance is not always needed. If it was the personal computer market as we know it would not exist.

The question is do you really trust a third party, who is purely interested in making a profit from what it provides, to securely store and protect your data/privacy? Given the track record of these big service providers, my answer is, to a limited extent yes and no. Email? For some things. Photos? Same thing. Would I trust them with all of my data? Not a chance.

Just a quick thought on the following:

Maybe there is a simpler way to adjust your images - maybe someone out there will take away a few options because they have solved an underlying problem. I hope that Photos gets simpler because someone has solved a user problem.

The problem is that until a computer can read your mind, it won't know what you want to do. That is why the options exist. Every option you give up is a loss of control over the creative process, which for many is the greatest joy of the photography experience. It is for me. If we keep stripping away creative choices, what does photography become? Computer science?

henrik1963

@PB_PM: I do agree with you - I´m not after loss of control. More like being able to do more in a simpler way. The problem with forecasting change is we don't know what is coming. I still remember people rejecting the idea of the iPhone. Compared to the old phones the new ones lets you do more in a simpler way. At least that is what I hope for. But like you I fear loss of control.

Fritz

What I fear most is a trend towards standardization with a corresponding loss of personal choice. Most of us value our individual creative expression and anything that limits our creativity is naturally going to hurt.

FlowtographyBerlin

Sorry @Flowtography, please exclude me from your "we just need to look for something else". I did, but so far I don't see something I want to work with, entirely.

I surely wasn't trying to suggest that I can define anyone's needs, nevertheless, @JJ_SO: The fact that you didn't find anything yet (just like me) does not free you from the need to keep looking.

Not that AA stops working. But if you don't stop replacing anything in your setup, you will eventually bump into the outdating phenomenon. Update your OS, your gear, whatever, one day in the near future AA will be problematic to work with (apart from the fact that there are a couple of decisive features missing that everyone was waiting for). And that day, you will be left with all the tons of non-destructive edits being lost.

Why not keep AA for the old stuff? Sure, that works, if all you have is vacation photos. But if you want a DAM solution that covers your entire database, this is not a solution. I surely do not want to juggle different databases that are separated by the criterion of recording date of the file. No thanks.

Do I go back to "old" images and re-edit them? Yes. Changing the crop would be the most frequent modification, but also other things.

FlowtographyBerlin

Now, can anyone explain me what this "Media Pro" thing by PhaseOne does? While they do promote the "seamless" connection to Capture One, isn't it a hassle to have two applications and what does this thing do that I can't do with C1?

Thanks, in case anyone knows and gives me a hint.

JJ_SO

I surely wasn't trying to suggest that I can define anyone's needs, nevertheless, @JJ_SO: The fact that you didn't find anything yet (just like me) does not free you from the need to keep looking.

Well, I can look as hard as I want. But so far I failed to create my desired solution just by the force of my looks. Blast. There are tons of converters out there. But so far I can identify three affordable DAMs: LR, mediaPro (some words to that later on) and a kind of "pimped finder" for media called Photo Supreme.

Not that AA stops working. But if you don't stop replacing anything in your setup, you will eventually bump into the outdating phenomenon. Update your OS, your gear, whatever, one day in the near future AA will be problematic to work with (apart from the fact that there are a couple of decisive features missing that everyone was waiting for). And that day, you will be left with all the tons of non-destructive edits being lost.

Why not keep AA for the old stuff? Sure, that works, if all you have is vacation photos. But if you want a DAM solution that covers your entire database, this is not a solution. I surely do not want to juggle different databases that are separated by the criterion of recording date of the file. No thanks.

Do I go back to "old" images and re-edit them? Yes. Changing the crop would be the most frequent modification, but also other things.

Well, there's another aspect. Even if AA 3.2.2 (in my case) keeps o running the next 50 years, the iMac won't. Some day I'll need to replace it, although it's working fine. This is more the scenario I'm afraid of. Simple hardware failure - then I need to be ready or redo all things I need on another DAM.

As for Media Pro. I looked at it, but Phase One and I do not agree about the meaning of "seamless". I do find Media Pro expensive for what it does, crappy interface and difficult to work with. But others are happy and I couldn't figure out if it's only lack of their imagination how easy things can be although HQ editing is possible. To me it sometimes appears, Pros always need it complicated with lots of bells and whistles otherwise the solution can't be worth to invest in.

Look, Flow, it's about the same thing if somebody tells me to do more sports or loose weight - it sure would be nice to probably feel fitter, but the effort I'll take if I have to. Not sooner. I there was a solution I could adapt to, I'd be happy to tell. I'm afraid, photos.app will no find my full hooray, but it shares that kind of success with all other DAMs I know so far and I see some potential worth to wait for it.

FlowtographyBerlin

I surely wasn't trying to suggest that I can define anyone's needs, nevertheless, @JJ_SO: The fact that you didn't find anything yet (just like me) does not free you from the need to keep looking.

Well, I can look as hard as I want. But so far I failed to create my desired solution just by the force of my looks. […]

Look, Flow, it's about the same thing if somebody tells me to do more sports or loose weight - it sure would be nice to probably feel fitter, but the effort I'll take if I have to. Not sooner.

Aaah, now I hear you. :-)

Well still, you're putting it wrong, it's not the need that you disagree on, it's the timing. But I got it. That weight-loss example is ingenious, I must say. To pick it up: Every greasy burger that I eat just makes me more nervous about eventually having to lose more pounds and needing more time and the diet being even harder. It's the same with those photos. I mean I *will* definitely lose my edits, plus I will double required HD space for any image (original and edit version). So I really want to switch as fast as possible, or at least have a new application that I import to from now on.

I just looked at Capture One again, its DAM appears to be not as bad as I always thought – in fact, I didn't see how I can't do what I did with AA (I didn't use managed media). What still is a big, big downturn is the missing healing brush.

FlowtographyBerlin

P.S.: Thanks for your assessment on Media Pro. I clicked around with it for a while and felt the exact same thing about it. Crappy interface (especially on a high-dpi display), rather expensive, no real use, no "seamlessness".

JJ_SO

The next DAM I gonna change to, has to run on Windows and Mac. I don't appreciate the experience how long Apple let us wait, how few the improvements were and how much we still miss. It feels like 2 years without relevant updates. And to me it was tow years since I stopped upgrading OS X after 10.6

Capture One is a great converter, but the psoitive DAM sides I wasn't able to discover so far - maybe I'm wrong, but my experience with C1:

Takes now very long to start up, 3 min or longer with a library of 1/5 of the biggest AA lib I have. AA is ready for edit in less than 30 sec.

Lib structure of C1 Folders are doing different things than collections and albums and projects. That's ok and I'm used to all those names from AA too, but the organization is beyond my logic. AA is clearer, easier to understand and faster to use.

Searching?

Keywords? (Okay, AA is not too advanced in keywording, too, but still better than C1)

GPS data?

A healing brush like in PS would be great, I agree, but C1 as converter gas some very powerful tools.

Ironheart

Well, there's another aspect. Even if AA 3.2.2 (in my case) keeps o running the next 50 years, the iMac won't. Some day I'll need to replace it, although it's working fine. This is more the scenario I'm afraid of. Simple hardware failure - then I need to be ready or redo all things I need on another DAM.

You should look into a product called Fusion for the Mac. It will let you run a VM of the MAC OS on your mac. This future proofs you as you can continue to run the older OS on the VM no matter what hardware you decide to upgrade

FlowtographyBerlin

A healing brush like in PS would be great, I agree, but C1 as converter gas some very powerful tools.

It was actually the healing brush (retouching tool) in AA that made me "switch" to AA.

You should look into a product called Fusion for the Mac. It will let you run a VM of the MAC OS on your mac. This future proofs you as you can continue to run the older OS on the VM no matter what hardware you decide to upgrade

There are always solutions like that, or well, often. However, this really doesn't solve anything, having to run applications in a separate container clogging the CPU and RAM (and HDD) with a second OS layer is just anything but an elegant and sustainable solution. Just like taking different apps for different uses perverts the original idea of the AA/LR/C1 concept: I want ONE application for managing my photos and being able to find whatever I want.

The one-stop character is the beauty of this genre of solutions.

JJ_SO

@Flowtography You're aware there is a dust and spot removal tool in C1? Less intuitive and non-sensitive to pen pressure when working with a Wacom digitizer or the like, but still, better than nothing.

@Ironheart Trouble with VM is the identity crisis it causes to me. When 10.6 was released, Apple introduced "Spaces". Saving 4 different desktops as multi-monitors for the poor Apple buyers who just didn't have enough cash fooling around with 4 cinema displays. Curious like I am I tried but after a while I found myself asking "on which desktop was the iTunes window, on which I edited in Aperture and did I sent the mail I was attaching the spreadsheet to?"

Same with VM - the UI feels right in fullscreen but other apps are also available in the host system. And running 10.6.8 and AA 3.2.2 in a VM still doesn't mean I could beenfit from the RAW codec updates, because those are for the contemporary OS, not for my museum OS.

I fully agree with Flow: One application with excellent file and metadata management (and also excellent, intuitive and storable search), advanced and powerful editing and non-destructive plugin interface. Print jobs should be easy and intuitive (AA and C1 are not very bad at this). Pictures on DVD, seamless access to web-galleries. That's about all people like me want. And some extras, of course, but those are nice to have.

The main part, the workhorse, should benefit of all the CPU, RAM, GPU, VRAM powers the machine delivers. I'm writing this because I do see from time to time 3 bored processor cores while the forth is steaming. All app developers can do better - so please do!