no new aperture

Paddy C said:
No at all surprising. I never used Aperture but always thought it didn't have much change against Lightroom and Adobe. "Photos" isn't going to be a substitute for Aperture so I feel for all the folks who are going to have to make a switch. Especially those with large libraries.
Click to expand...

You mean people with libraries with over 13,000 pictures? :bang:
 
Darthfeeble said:
Is this guy talking about photography or social networking? "Everyone" does it that way now? Have I been missing something?
Click to expand...

Where apple is going w/ this is something I am not interested in... It seems more for the Facebook/google crowd and those that want cloud based world.

Gary
 
Several years ago, I started with Acrobat because I found the user interface more intuitive (more elegant, really) than Lightroom. At that time I was shooting with a Ricoh GRD3. Then, after getting the GXR/M-Module, I found that Lightroom gave me somewhat better resolution and color than Aperture, but neither was as good for that camera as Raw Photo Processor (RPP).

By the time I got an M9 in Feb 2013, I found that I could achieve the color rendition that I liked much more easily using Lightroom 4/5 (Process PV2012) than using Aperture. I also found that, once you make up your mind to switch, it's quite easy to adjust to the Lightroom user interface, which now I find convenient and efficient to use. So no tears from me if Aperure disappears.

MITCH ALLAND/Potomac, MD
Nightshots from Tristes Tropiques
Download link for PDF file of 16-shot portfolio
 
Disappointed in Apple. It's no surprise they do this, but I much preferred Aperture to Lightroom and therefore kept using what for me was the better product. Let's see how difficult and time-consuming the transition will be. Sooner or later I need to do it.
 
I am not an Apple user but it is always sad when a company does this. I feel for you aperture users. It just ain't fair!
 
Aperture does not store the data in a proprietary database, it's a standard mac filesystem. Use the finder and look for the aperture library file. Right click. Use the third option from above, it's "Paketinhalt zeigen" in german, maybe something like "Show package content" in english. Now you see the filesystem content. The folder "Masters" contains your original images. You can copy the whole folder to a new destination if you want.

It's not really nice to navigate this structure but people don't need to fear that they maybe can't access their images someday.
 
tom.w.bn said:
Aperture does not store the data in a proprietary database, it's a standard mac filesystem. Use the finder and look for the aperture library file. Right click. Use the third option from above, it's "Paketinhalt zeigen" in german, maybe something like "Show package content" in english. Now you see the filesystem content. The folder "Masters" contains your original images. You can copy the whole folder to a new destination if you want.

It's not really nice to navigate this structure but people don't need to fear that they maybe can't access their images someday.
Click to expand...

Thanks! That's great to know - I have used referenced files with both LR and Aperture, but family and friends have not. Does this work with iPhoto libraries?

Someone needs to come up with a bit of software that can read the adjustments for each file in the database and we're good to go. (That would be fantastic for LR users as well - the ability to export the adjustments - giving them the freedom to move their work to other software.

I can see Apple letting this happen, Adobe, not so much.
 
GaryLH said:
Where apple is going w/ this is something I am not interested in... It seems more for the Facebook/google crowd and those that want cloud based world.
Click to expand...

I find it best not to pre-judge things like this until I see what the actual product is. What it seems like and what it is are often quite different.

Change is coming, that's for sure, as it always has been. It might just be great. Can't know until it gets here.

G
 
Ess aych 1 Tee. I read about it earlier today. I rather like Aperture, apart from it being a resource hog. Migrating the images with non-destructive adjustments to LR will be interesting to see if they can pull off.
 
I really like Aperture's interface, and use a lot of it's functionality so I'm hoping that the new photos app won't be a radical departure. I'm a bit pissed as I only very recently purchased Aperture, and I see that it's still available to buy on the Apple Store?

Let's see what happens early next year - Aperture will continue to work for some time yet and although I really don't want to go down the Adobe route with Lightroom, I guess that's always an option if things don't work out with the new app.
 
I've always found Lightroom more intuitive, interfaz friendly than Aperture, with all those project, folders, albums, etc. At least the folder system.

And the tools? 90% of them, more powerful in LR.
 
It maybe that Lightroom is more capable than Aperture but I can't deal with the subscription scheme. Aperture is 70€ in germany .. Creative Photo is 13€ per months: after half a year I paid already more. I use Aperture mainly as a library tool and for very basic corrections but more then the new App will give me. I can't believe they are going to kill it! Hec I'm even still on Aperture 2: I was waiting for a new version because there was always a rumor that it is coming soon and I did not wanted to pay twice
Now I think I'll pay the f$%"n 70€ and hope it floats me for a couple of years lie V2 did.
 
Since new cameras are added via OS updates, that should not be a problem, as it is in PS and LR, where you need Adobe to add the cameras. So Aperture could go on and be useable for some time, even with new cameras (unless they change that in the new OS or Photos app).
 
Paddy C said:
No at all surprising. I never used Aperture but always thought it didn't have much change against Lightroom and Adobe. "Photos" isn't going to be a substitute for Aperture so I feel for all the folks who are going to have to make a switch. Especially those with large libraries.
Click to expand...

Why I do not want any program that has a library. Whomever came up with that concept should never be allowed to write another line of code.
 
I suspect apple did it to protect the average user from deleting critical meta data since. Aperture is a non-destructive photo editor. The so call 'library' is nothing more then the root directory of the photo file tree managed by aperture. The operating system recognizes this special directory as a library because it has a '.aplibrary' associated with the directory name. It has been a long time since I have explored what was actually inside that file structure. U can do a right click and click on 'show package contents'... This will show u the tree structure. Unless u know what u are doing, I would suggest not doing more than browsing this structure otherwise u can corrupt the library by mistake. Since Mac OS X is based on Unix, they did not have to do this.. They could have create hidden directories and dot files instead.

Gary
 
I don't want to waste much thought about all this yet, but I will say that: (1) I feel like Apple's 20-something engineers think I'm a sheep that would LOVE to flock to the cloud, and (2) Adobe thinks I'd LOVE to join their parade to subsciption-based services. Both of these are dead wrong in my case.

Why the hell does Apple think I want to give control of my data to hacker heaven (uh.. I mean The Cloud)?? And I guess Adobe thinks I'm a pro that somehow makes money with my photography, enough to pay them whatever monthly subscription they decide to charge... whenever! Right... I'm an idiot... sign me up.
 
Last edited:
k__43 said:
I can't deal with the subscription scheme.
Click to expand...
It certainly quickly gets vastly overpriced for my needs. The stand-alone Lightroom, which is hidden well on Adobe's site, is twice what Aperture costs, but I guess I will buy it now. If Adobe completely goes subscription service, I need to consider again what to do. Sadly, customer is seldom right with these guys.

I'm even still on Aperture 2
Click to expand...
Well, you have a nice upgrade path. :) Go Aperture 3 or consider Lightroom, you will get better tools and performance in any case.
 
Jamie Pillers said:
I don't want to waste much thought about all this yet, but I will say that: (1) I feel like Apple's 20-something engineers think I'm a sheep that would LOVE to flock to the cloud, and (2) Adobe thinks I'd LOVE to join their parade to subsciption-based services. Both of these are dead wrong in my case.

Why the hell does Apple think I want to give control of my data to hacker heaven (uh.. I mean The Cloud)?? And I guess Adobe thinks I'm a pro that somehow makes money with my photography, enough to pay them whatever monthly subscription they decide to charge... whenever! Right... I'm an idiot... sign me up.
Click to expand...

There is no indication Apple is forcing anyone to use the cloud for OS X.

For iOS almost certainly because devices do not have the storage space.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom