# Apple to Cease work on Aperture



## npherno (Jun 27, 2014)

Apple is reported to be ceasing work on Aperture, and migrating users to the new Photos app in OSX, and to Lightroom.

_Apple has told The Loop that the company will be ceasing development of Aperture and iPhoto, offering Photos for OS X as a replacement, which was first shown at WWDC.

“With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture,” said Apple in a statement provided to The Loop. “When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS.”

Apple says libraries will be able to migrate across to the new application when the application ships. Apple is working with Adobe to offer a upgrade path to Lightroom.

The state of iPhoto on iOS is currently unknown, but its outlook doesn’t seem good given the retirement of the application on the Mac._

Not good at all.

http://9to5mac.com/2014/06/27/apple-to-replace-aperture-and-iphoto-with-photos-for-os-x-early-next-year/#more-330059


----------



## e17paul (Jun 27, 2014)

I was just about to post the Appleinsider report, I was beaten to it!
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/06/27/apple-announces-it-will-no-longer-develop-aperture-or-iphoto-os-x-yosemite-photos-app-to-serve-as-replacement 
I cannot see from Apple's website whether the new photo app for OS X Yosemite will support RAW files, though Apple offers support at the OS level, so there is hope. However, word of transistioning Aperture users to Lightroom kills that hope.

I'm nervous of Adobe trapping me into a subscription which may rise in price, so I'm going to give Canon's new update a try.


----------



## npherno (Jun 27, 2014)

It is a strange strategy. If they intend to keep the pro users, why would they offer Aperture pros a path to migrate to Lightroom? Its not inspiring to think that advanced features will be making it to the new product.

Why not keep the pro features, while still monetizing the cloud storage?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 27, 2014)

Bummer. 

Might be ok for me personally, I use Aperture for image triage and library management, but not RAW conversions (for which I use DxO Optics Pro). Hopefully they keep the ability to have multiple libraries and referenced images, which are key differentiators for me compared to iPhoto.


----------



## AlanF (Jun 27, 2014)

One of the worse things about Apple is that they will dump software or facilities without caring about their customers. I once had Apple as an ISP, and it lasted about a year, iDisk, and they dropped it, a paid subscription to MobileMe for many years, and it was suddenly pulled.


----------



## captainkanji (Jun 27, 2014)

This sucks! No more competition for Adobe. I have a bad feeling about this.


----------



## Lee Jay (Jun 27, 2014)

npherno said:


> Not good at all.



Isn't this ordinary, every-day behavior for Apple? They discontinued the Pro tower with no replacement (later putting it back). They discontinued the Macbook Pro 17 with no replacement. They're about to obsolete all the head phones all their customers currently own and use, and the likely path to "continue using what you have" is bulky, cumbersome and expensive.

Why anyone does business with that company is beyond me.


----------



## stefsan (Jun 27, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> They're about to obsolete all the head phones all their customers currently own and use, and the likely path to "continue using what you have" is bulky, cumbersome and expensive.



I must have missed that one. What could they do to my head phoes?


----------



## preppyak (Jun 27, 2014)

Lee Jay said:


> Why anyone does business with that company is beyond me.


Because prior to them pulling the rug out on video editors with Final Cut X, they had the most accessible and simplest workflow. Then, as they seem to be doing with Aperture, they decided those customers dont matter in the immediate.


----------



## that1guyy (Jun 27, 2014)

Yeah what are you on about headphones? Haven't heard anything about that.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 27, 2014)

Apparently new iPhones will come without a headphone jack – there will be headphones using the lightening connector or Bluetooth only.


----------



## StephenC (Jun 27, 2014)

that1guyy said:


> Yeah what are you on about headphones? Haven't heard anything about that.



Apple recently bought Beats - a trendy headphone company, which also has a music streaming service and a famous front man, Dr Dre. 

I'm pretty disappointed with the loss of Aperture. I'm not a pro and use it more for organising than for editing. Traditionally iPhoto has been a bit too basic for my needs but its feature set has continued to improve and these days I would probably make do with it, if I didn't have Aperture. I'm therefore hoping the new Photos software will cover my needs. If not I guess it's going to be Lightroom, or just stick with the current version of Aperture.


----------



## JonB8305 (Jun 27, 2014)

captainkanji said:


> This sucks! No more competition for Adobe. I have a bad feeling about this.



There's still Capture One and Pixelmator


----------



## the blackfox (Jun 27, 2014)

i,m pretty pissed about it ,i only use it for handy storage of my files as i process in cs6 these days ,but i have around 6 years worth of files backed up in storage ,hope i don't lose them .
not sure which path will be best just wait and hope i suppose


----------



## applecider (Jun 27, 2014)

At least in this case apple is being public about their plans and proposing an upgrade path. The usual apple MO is to just be quiet about their plans until they really have to go public from user outcry.

A little detail about the future photos program like raw handling library size, location options and post processing tools would not kill them, not their style to give us that though.


----------



## npherno (Jun 28, 2014)

JonB8305 said:


> captainkanji said:
> 
> 
> > This sucks! No more competition for Adobe. I have a bad feeling about this.
> ...



I looked at Capture One again today. it looks good! And it also has a similar DB based organization structure similar to Aperture, as well as a first rate RAW converter. I hate to buy it, but its better than file based organization or a cloud subscription.

--UPDATE--

I edited a shoot I did of an engagement party. The RAW engine is WAY, WAY better than the one in Aperture with regard to noise/low ISO. I read that this uped to be the weak point in Cature One, but it really performed well for me. If you want DB archiving like Aperture, set up a catalog, and store the images in the catalog. 

I shot with a 50D @ 1600, which were basically noise free.
They offer a free full feature 60 day trial. I'd be curious to see what you all think.

BTW. Capture One is resource intensive. It is slower than Aperture for me. Perhaps it is 32 bit, I havent looked.


----------



## sjprg (Jun 28, 2014)

DXO works very well.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 28, 2014)

I'm glad I left the apple ship years ago.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 28, 2014)

I do not use Macs, so I am wondering why or how a person would risk losing their images. Surly they are stored either on a hard drive, or online somewhere (always risky).
In either event, a person should have a backup, since no storage is all that reliable.
It is a bit puzzling as to why Apple would eliminate a highly regarded piece of software, at the very least, they might sell it to another software developer. The only reason that comes to mind is that Apple sees jpeg images from iphones, tablets, etc as the way forward. Its certainly true that camera sales are dropping like a rock.


----------



## Aglet (Jun 28, 2014)

no loss to me, the few times I tried Aperture it was quirky but interesting but it completely choked and died on my large collections. LR, DXO, DPP, ViewNX, ACR, Irridient, PhotoNinja, GIMP, and more, all have a useful place in my workflow.


----------



## melbournite (Jun 28, 2014)

This comes as a disspointment to me. Only yesterday (while working on Aperture) I was telling a colleague that either Apple will drop Aperture completely or come out with a killer update with possible layers (yeah, I was dreaming) as well as lens correction etc.. to blow the competition away. Unfortunately, the former is true.

Now, like many others, I will have to look at moving lots of libraries over to new software although I am not unfamilar with Lightroom and have still occassionaly used it . I began with it years ago but decided to switch my entire workflow to Aperture when v3 was released. 

I’ve also used the Canon software but haven’t looked at the new release. I also might consider Capture One as a few of you have mentioned on here.

If Apple comes through with the promise of helping everyone transition to Lightroom (via software I assume), that might help with my decision making, although I would like to see it in action before I make the big move.


----------



## CaiLeDao (Jun 28, 2014)

I was also disappointed as photo manipulation was the reason I moved to Macs and Aperture was quite revolutionary as I learned my needs to manage photos. I now have 3TB of images and a very slow upload to the cloud so it would take months to move the library contents (in file system).

However I am becoming more optimistic as in reality what do I use Aperture for now? Its actually raw conversation, basic photo edits, storage and organisation. I do all the image manipulation in other non adobe software, as I read about Apples direction it seems to continue to fit my needs quite well, so long as I don't have to have everything in the cloud and can continue to use local attached storage.

In effect what I use Aperture for is largely related to the things found in operating system file management and organisation tools and perhaps better integrates the searching of them. I have preferred to use DXO, Pixelmator, "on one" software and Nik Suite (B+W and HDR) for a long time. Hopefully the books will stay available but again there are several options there. 

So after my initial negative response I can see a sensible logic and don't mind losing Aperture as a brand provided the main catalogue and management capabilities are available through OSX. If forced to move to a pure cloud approach then I would have to find an alternative. Is Adobe a choice I want to be pushed into, well at present I don't think I am, although the PR around this is pretty poor for Apple standards and may be reflects the sponsorship within the Company.


----------



## Vivid Color (Jun 28, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Bummer.
> 
> Might be ok for me personally, I use Aperture for image triage and library management, but not RAW conversions (for which I use DxO Optics Pro). Hopefully they keep the ability to have multiple libraries and referenced images, which are key differentiators for me compared to iPhoto.



I too really like Aperture's library system and hopefully the new Photos app will carry that on. While Apple said Aperture will work on Yosemite, it may or may not work on future versions of their operating system, and the lack of recent Aperture upgrades has put further distance between it and other programs. I've been thinking about getting Lightroom/Photoshop via the cloud, but before doing that, I'll check out DxO Optics Pro. 

Neuro, what do you see as DxO's strengths vs. Lightroom/Photoshop?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 28, 2014)

Vivid Color said:


> Neuro, what do you see as DxO's strengths vs. Lightroom/Photoshop?



Better NR and lens corrections, IMO.


----------



## Vivid Color (Jun 28, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Vivid Color said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro, what do you see as DxO's strengths vs. Lightroom/Photoshop?
> ...



Thank you, Neuro!


----------



## AlanF (Jun 28, 2014)

DxO PRIME NR is truly remarkable.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 28, 2014)

Vivid Color said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Vivid Color said:
> ...


 
I tried it, and it was better with one click. It was also pretty slow, but greatly improved over past versions. Still, I would be reluctant to try and edit 2500 images. 
The big drawback for me is the lack of organizing capability, so I still need software like Lightroom, which is a wonderful organizer. I was reluctant to buy two pieces of software.


----------



## Vivid Color (Jun 28, 2014)

How are the organizational abilities of Lightroom for Mac in comparison with Aperture?


----------



## StephenC (Jun 29, 2014)

Two things:

Firstly, I believe Apple plans to ensure Aperture will work with Yosemite so there is no immediate need to switch and everything you can currently do you can continue to do.

Secondly, here is a good article that gives an optimistic outlook to what is going to happen: https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos?utm_source=ApertureExpert+List&utm_campaign=c1ff07a87b-ApertureExpert+Newsletter+33&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&ct=t()&goal=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&mc_cid=c1ff07a87b&mc_eid=74702e67a7#.U6-9gxaUkVT


----------



## wopbv4 (Jun 29, 2014)

Let's hope that Apple also fixes the problem that OSX 10.9 only support 8 bits/color channel.
I complained many times about this before. Adobe, Eizo, Nec, most graphic cards.... all support at least 10 bit/color channel, the bottleneck is OSX.


----------



## Menace (Jun 29, 2014)

RLPhoto said:


> I'm glad I left the apple ship years ago.



+1

Only ever invested in iPad2 (using as portfolio) - only because there was no viable alternative tablet option at that time. Now I have Samsung note 2014 - managing files is so much easier!


----------



## RadioPath (Jun 29, 2014)

Pity, really. I also have a copy of LR, but just prefer Aperture, since I "got" it immediately as opposed to LR that I found unintuitive. Pretty sure I can learn it as I think of myself as a reasonably smart guy, but since this is a hobby, why not enjoy it? 

The question is, is it maybe a good thing after all? I don't edit most of my pictures terribly much anyways (basically WB, bit of cropping, adjusting Exposure a bit, etc.). If the new Photos app could do all of that, would it be possible to just open LR for the more complex cases and have Photos display the results, or would I have to alway export jpg's? Where do the adjustments for pictures get saved in general? In the RAW file itself, or in a data base of the program used?

Still a pity, though

RadioPath


----------



## Sith Zombie (Jun 29, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I do not use Macs, so I am wondering why or how a person would risk losing their images. Surly they are stored either on a hard drive, or online somewhere (always risky).
> In either event, a person should have a backup, since no storage is all that reliable.
> It is a bit puzzling as to why Apple would eliminate a highly regarded piece of software, at the very least, they might sell it to another software developer. The only reason that comes to mind is that Apple sees jpeg images from iphones, tablets, etc as the way forward. Its certainly true that camera sales are dropping like a rock.



Nobody would loose any images, they are all stored in a 'library' folder. You can view the contents and all your master images are in there, but i'm not denying it would be a total nightmare switching to something else without some software to automate the process. 
I agree, it is puzzling to why they are stopping development for it? I mean in the grand scheme of things, they probably don't even notice the development costs and it's always smart to keep your options open right? You raise an interesting point about how they see jpegs/iphone images as the future, this is quite possible. Hopefully the new software will support RAW, otherwise i'm not sure what to do. ???


----------



## melbournite (Jun 29, 2014)

StephenC said:


> Two things:
> 
> Firstly, I believe Apple plans to ensure Aperture will work with Yosemite so there is no immediate need to switch and everything you can currently do you can continue to do.
> 
> Secondly, here is a good article that gives an optimistic outlook to what is going to happen: https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos?utm_source=ApertureExpert+List&utm_campaign=c1ff07a87b-ApertureExpert+Newsletter+33&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&ct=t()&goal=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&mc_cid=c1ff07a87b&mc_eid=74702e67a7#.U6-9gxaUkVT



Encouraging. I can't see the new app 'Photos' ever being a professional level application but the idea of it being a library that other applications can access/plugin to, seems to make sense.

What doesn't make sense, is why would Apple discontinue a pro app like Aperture (photography) but continue pro apps like Final Cut X (movie editing) and Logic Pro X (audio)?

Maybe Photos will be _that_ good (one day)?


----------



## Badger (Jun 29, 2014)

I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.


----------



## Badger (Jun 29, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Apparently new iPhones will come without a headphone jack – there will be headphones using the lightening connector or Bluetooth only.



Neuro, with love and respect, you might be a bit off on this. The way I read what Apple recently did, is that all existing Lightning Cable devices already have the ability, it will be a software switch. I also believe this will appeal to high end audiophiles who crave and desire high quality lossless audio. 

So, if I were to edit your post, I would remove the word "only" from the sentence. I think you will still be able to add a $30 or $60 pair of traditional headphones to currents and future iPhones, but you will also be able to add a $600 Lossless Lightning pair. BTW, notice I said think? I really have no idea what Apple has up their sleeves 

http://9to5mac.com/2014/06/03/apple-introduces-mfi-specs-for-lightning-cable-headphones-support-arriving-in-future-ios-update/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2014)

@ Badger – thanks!!


----------



## IslanderMV (Jun 29, 2014)

Badger said:


> I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.



Ditto - 
For Mac users, file handling in LR is somewhat of a change, other than that LR has moved way ahead of Aperture in features. I used it for a few weddings and found it to be exceptional for handling large amounts of images very quickly. The easy "round trip" to photoshop is huge. Anyway, there are tons of free tutorials available to make the transition. I would also recommend the paid tutorials at lynda.com.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 29, 2014)

Badger said:


> I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.



One thing to consider is the 'system level' integration with Aperture – like iPhoto, libraries are available in iTunes for sync to iPhone/iPad, in iMovie for slide shows, as a screensaver, etc.


----------



## agierke (Jun 29, 2014)

This doesn't surprise me at all though I understand current users trepidation over the immediate future of their workflow.

When aperture was first released, I thought it was a viable alternative to LR and other programs out there. LR soon left aperture in the dust however and I remember cautioning my students against using aperture. My most pressing concern at the time was a non photo company developing a photo orientated software. I didn't trust that Apple would develop it appropriately to suit the needs of professionals (and though they did an admirable job for a period of time, ultimately they came up short of the competition).

With Adobe's shift towards the subscription model, I have lost faith in them being my primary software solution and am looking into other options to sustain my workflow in the future. CaptureOne has impressed me so far though I have primarily only used it for tethered capture of commercial product shoots. I'm not sure how it would handle an import and edit of 4000 wedding shots. It seems all the tools are there to handle it well though.

From what I have noticed so far, there are some ups and downs with Capture One. Pluses are an extensive and powerful set of editing tools, a smart method of quickly batching edits of multiple images, and pretty good file management. Minuses are it's not a very intuitive program (I find LR to be pretty much plug in and play while CO takes a learning curve), it can be quite buggy with freezing and crashing when you do something it doesn't like (ie tethered camera powers down or manually changing folder structure outside of CO).

For now I would probably still recommend LR to current aperture users as the transition would probably be more comfortable. I am growing more comfortable with endorsing CO but I think it is definitely geared towards the serious pro and thus may turn off some users with its less than intuitive UI.


----------



## Vivid Color (Jun 29, 2014)

StephenC said:


> Two things:
> 
> Firstly, I believe Apple plans to ensure Aperture will work with Yosemite so there is no immediate need to switch and everything you can currently do you can continue to do.
> 
> Secondly, here is a good article that gives an optimistic outlook to what is going to happen: https://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos?utm_source=ApertureExpert+List&utm_campaign=c1ff07a87b-ApertureExpert+Newsletter+33&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&ct=t()&goal=0_ee6b582cde-c1ff07a87b-326426797&mc_cid=c1ff07a87b&mc_eid=74702e67a7#.U6-9gxaUkVT



Great article – thank you for sharing. And good to know about this website.


----------



## StephenC (Jun 30, 2014)

> One thing to consider is the 'system level' integration with Aperture – like iPhoto, libraries are available in iTunes for sync to iPhone/iPad, in iMovie for slide shows, as a screensaver, etc.



This is one of the main reasons I'll stick with Aperture, until I see what Photos actually offers. Caveat: I am not a professional and only have to do basic editing of small numbers of photos.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jun 30, 2014)

I'm not an apple user but I do work in the computer industry. I've seen things like this before and have a speculation on why they might be doing this. Its no secret that the computer industry is going through a major evolution and traditional hardware makers are having a tough time making adjustments. Though apple has lead the way and been successful, they are not immune. Companies like this are looking for ways to secure and stabilize revenue streams in the consumer market as consumers are fickle and are more apt now to chase the shiny new cool thing from any company rather than be brand loyal. This fickle market can make or break you on wall street on a quarterly basis. This is where the subscription model comes in. 

So how does this relate to aperture? Apple is run by some pretty sharp people, so there has to be a win for them to do this. My speculation is that their own creation, the app store, is killing their software business. The app store has allowed anyone to build quality, and crappy, software to sell to the mass market. Most users don't need the power of Photoshop or aperture and would be just fine with snapseed or any of the other hundreds of apps or lower cost/free software available now. Given the popularity of the mobile market, apps are selling far better that traditional software, which is why you are seeing subscription models there too. So apples target market for aperture is shrinking which makes the software more expensive to them to maintain due to the employee, r&d, and marketing costs associated with maintaining it.

So where is the win for them? It was easy to see from the OP. Apple's new photo software is more integrated with their icloud offering. Cloud computing is one of every major hardware (and some software) company's solutions to smoothing out their quarterly balance sheets. They do this by offering a service to you that is enticing and convenient for you to use, but would require you to get at least to the next level of subscription to really benefit you. They also put in enough non-standard perks to keep you from wanting to leave for a competitors offering knowing that once you start using their service as part of your daily workflow, and not as a convenience, as you will find it difficult to leave them. Apple will use their new software to push users to buy more cloud space and they will continue to offer software perks to get you to do so.

I'm sure that there is also some sort of partnership between apple and adobe on this announcement. Given all of effort from adobe to get people on their cloud bandwagon, I suspect it isn't going as well as they had hoped. Anyone notice that adobe came out with Lightroom for the iPad only? Now, not too long after their announcement, apple is dumping aperture? I don't think this is coincidence. I'll also speculate that apple is getting a kickback from adobe by removing themselves as a competitor, then recommending adobe products as a replacement. Referral money is the best money to make. Also, should there be an actual agreement, then I could see adobe delaying releasing an android version of LR to help increase sales of ipads. 

Last, the money saved by cutting departments or services that are not in growth segments will make their stock price go up. Wall street loves to see restructuring like that. 

Of course, this is my speculation on why apple is cutting their pro software package.


----------



## R1-7D (Jun 30, 2014)

Does anyone use Corel's AfterShot Pro 2?

Apparently it has similar functionality to Aperture in terms of photo management. 



I've spent the weekend learning new photo apps, and I think I might give it a try. I've used Corel products before, mainly Painter, and while they are good they all tend to be major resource hogs on the system.


----------



## Zv (Jun 30, 2014)

Vivid Color said:


> How are the organizational abilities of Lightroom for Mac in comparison with Aperture?



You can organize files and collections pretty easily. You can also rate and label using various methods (stars, colors, flags). I have no experience with Aperture so I don't know if it's easier but LR was designed with Pro photogs in mind and they deal in large volumes of photos. My fave organizational feature is the collections / smart collections and virtual copies. 

I recommend one of Kelby's books for learning you way around LR. He not only goes over the development tools but also all the organizational features of LR which was very helpful for me as I was all over the place with my photos! 

When you upload images to LR from a card you can have it make a back up to your hard drive at the same time and then set this up as a preset, just makes life easier really. 

Random off topic numerical coincidence tidbit - my number of posts is 1122 and earlier today I ordered the
EF-M 11-22!


----------



## caruser (Jun 30, 2014)

Badger said:


> I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.


The people like me who were holding out on Aperture were waiting for "Aperture X", i.e. a complete overhaul of the application like Final Cut Pro and Logic received. Seems that we have to change to Lightroom after all.

How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?


----------



## kbmelb (Jun 30, 2014)

caruser said:


> Badger said:
> 
> 
> > I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.
> ...



Slow, clunky and completely GPU unaware. Takes for ever to render edited images and lot of spinning beach balls. My fingers are crossed for v6. It's all we can do.


----------



## caruser (Jun 30, 2014)

kbmelb said:


> caruser said:
> 
> 
> > Badger said:
> ...


Now that's a let-down. And without competition, how much time and money will Adobe spend to spice things up? Or are there other serious alternatives?

What do other people on a Mac use? How are the new version of Canon's tools? For a long time they used to be even worse than the ones from Adobe...


----------



## LDS (Jun 30, 2014)

kbmelb said:


> Slow, clunky and completely GPU unaware. Takes for ever to render edited images and lot of spinning beach balls. My fingers are crossed for v6. It's all we can do.


It is true it's still GPU unware, but Lightroom 5 on Windows *is* fast - it renders my 5D mk3 images immediately. Or probably my Windows machine is much faster than most Apples out there...


----------



## LDS (Jun 30, 2014)

caruser said:


> How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?


As long as Apple keeps on changing development languages to lock-in application developers it will cause this kind of problems to large, complex applications like Adobe's. Carbon was a C/C++ interface, while Cocoa is Objective-C, and porting from one to the other required a whole rewrite of the user interface code in a very different language.
Slow - this kind of applications usually require enough powerful and fast hardware is you're going to work on large images - CPU, memory and disk.
There are trial versions of Adobe software you can try it yourself. Lightroom user interface is far more intuitive than Photoshop, being designed for the photographic workflow, but as any powerful applications it requires some knowledge of how it is designed and works to really take advantage of it. Don't believe to start it, move some sliders and get great photos...
Anyway if there was software that keep Apple alive before the iPhone it was Adobe software. Without it, Apple would have gone years ago, only the media/graphics market keep it alive thanks to Adobe applications. It's funny how many Apple users complain about Adobe...


----------



## LDS (Jun 30, 2014)

R1-7D said:


> Does anyone use Corel's AfterShot Pro 2?



I've been a very long time user of Paint Shop and after it was bought by Corel it became worse and worse, very aimed at the beginner/casual user - after X3 I stopped updating and looked for something else. I never used AfterShot, but being Corel and priced more or less at the same price of Lightroom, I'd buy the latter without esitation. It has become the de-facto standard for photo workflow management for professionals also, and it will be far easier to find tutorials, books, tips, etc. etc.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jun 30, 2014)

caruser said:


> How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?



Still clunky, but bearable with an SSD. Native, properly-coded apps are much faster. Adobe obviously feel no need to update their code for the current decade. Even DxO has used the GPU for a few versions now. Adobe seems to have made _some_ minor improvements in usability...⌘-H actually hides the apps now.


----------



## LDS (Jun 30, 2014)

Zv said:


> I recommend one of Kelby's books for learning you way around LR. He not only goes over the development



IMHO the best book about Lightroom is "The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5 Book: The Complete Guide for Photographers" by Martin Evening. It covers everything about Lightroom - probably this is the manual that should be sold together it. Just, it may be more formal and with less images than Kelby's - but if really need to understand how Lightroom works, this is a very good book. Also Schewe's "The Digital Negative: Raw Image Processing in Lightroom, Camera Raw, and Photoshop" is a very interesting reading on how managing the photo workflow from capture to processing the final image for output using Lightroom and Photoshop.


----------



## wsmith96 (Jun 30, 2014)

R1-7D said:


> Does anyone use Corel's AfterShot Pro 2?
> 
> Apparently it has similar functionality to Aperture in terms of photo management.
> 
> ...



Ive tried it and I have aftershot pro 1. Not a bad piece of software, but I liked LR better. My only complaint with Corel is that they are inconsistent. In aftershot 1, they had an 'update' that actually removed noise ninja from the program since their license expired. How does that happen especially when that was a listed feature when I bought the software???? Similar quirks occur with paintshop pro as well. Last, you never know when they will dump a piece of software. 

I like Corel - they have a full like of editing products that can compete with adobe. They just seems to be satisfied with hanging out in third place. 

Of course, give it a try to see if you like it.


----------



## Badger (Jun 30, 2014)

caruser said:


> Badger said:
> 
> 
> > I am quite shocked as to how many people actually care that Aperture isn't going to be supported anymore. I don't use Aperture, I use Lightroom on the Mac and until a few minutes ago, I didn't know anyone who used Aperture. My understanding is that Aperture hasn't seen an update in quite a while so I guess my question is, why be all upset at Apple now? If you were using Aperture and liked it, keep using it till you can't anymore then migrate.
> ...



The funny thing is, my decision to use LightRoom had nothing to do with features or benefits. I am usually an Apple Fan Boy and I eat anything Apple :-\ Unfortunately for Apple, when Aperture was released, I was rocking an Apple eMac (remember those?) and the system requirements for Aperture were beyond my hardware. Enter LightRoom which had no problems playing on my eMac. I was growing as a photographer, was learning that RAW was the way to go, and I don't think back then iPhoto did RAW. So, my decision was made for me. If I had a more powerful Mac back then, I probably would have went down the Aperture path.


----------



## Dick (Jun 30, 2014)

Well. I guess it's then time to switch to Lightroom as there are no real alternatives. I have nothing against change in general, but being quite a busy person, I don't really look forward to learning how to use that software. I have a unique way to edit photos in Aperture and I bet I cannot do the same things in Lightroom.


----------



## caruser (Jun 30, 2014)

LDS said:


> caruser said:
> 
> 
> > How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?
> ...


Cocoa has been around for quite a while, and given the quality of Adobe's code-base they had to do some serious rewritings for 64bit anyhow. I also do not understand the Objective-C and vendor-lock-in argument; it's the technology they inherited with NextStep, and they've been as much hostage to that language and run-time as everybody else!

I will try Lightroom; at first it seemed that the "cloud"-stuff subscription was the only option to get it, but there does seem to be a possibility of buying it, too. I don't mind that it's a professional application that needs some know-how, otherwise I'd be happy using iPhoto, which I'm not.

Regarding the complaining about Adobe: I'm not one of the old-school Apple users, i.e. not a creative guy that has been using a Mac since the pre-OS X days. I never even looked at a Mac before OS X, when suddenly a Mac could do 99% of what a Linux could do, natively


----------



## caruser (Jun 30, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> caruser said:
> 
> 
> > How is Lightroom on the Mac anyhow? From some years back I remember Adobe software being really crappy Carbon-based legacy-ware, many bugs, slow, unintuitive. Is Adobe software from today state-of-the-art 64-bit Cocoa? With good usability?
> ...


Doesn't sound particularly encouraging, even though a 2013 RMBP should be fast enough. "Luckily" I've stopped using case-sensitive file-systems for other reasons, IIRC Adobe software was one of the few that didn't handle a case-sensitive FS correctly. So many signs of bit-rot and badly maintained software.


----------



## LDS (Jun 30, 2014)

caruser said:


> Cocoa has been around for quite a while, and given the quality of Adobe's code-base they had to do some serious rewritings for 64bit anyhow. I also do not understand the Objective-C and vendor-lock-in argument; it's the technology they inherited with NextStep, and they've been as much hostage to that language and run-time as everybody else!


If you force developers to use a language nobody else uses (and outside Apple nobody uses Objective-C, and now Apple would like to replace it with the new Swift too), porting applications to other operating systems becomes harder. Windows applications are mostly C/C++, and Adobe has also to work on its Windows ones and ensure compatibility. AFAIK Carbon->Cocoa migration was an issue with Photoshop, Lightroom came later and probably used Cocoa/Objective-C from the start. Next was another idea of Jobs, and Apple could have rewritten it to use C++ instead of Objective-C. It preferred the latter, and I'm sure it was a marketing decision, not a technical one. Probably it came too late - Windows machines no longer lagged behind Apples in hw features (but design, maybe) and companies like Adobe have no reason to write Apple-only software and renounce to the other 90% of the market.


----------



## caruser (Jul 2, 2014)

Recent news suggests that the Aperture and iPhoto "replacement" will have some kind of plug-in support, I have read "third party extensibility", which might actually open the door to it, with some good add-ons, becoming a valid tool. Time will tell.

Personally I'll have to balance the perhaps not-so-nice, and not-immediately-powerful-enough new photo app from Apple against the licensing and general barf-ness of Adobe's software. I'm really looking forward to that. Not.



LDS said:


> If you force developers to use a language nobody else uses (and outside Apple nobody uses Objective-C, and now Apple would like to replace it with the new Swift too) ...


While a more in-depth discussion could be had, it's a bit too off-topic here.


----------



## Badger (Jul 2, 2014)

caruser said:


> Recent news suggests that the Aperture and iPhoto "replacement" will have some kind of plug-in support, I have read "third party extensibility", which might actually open the door to it, with some good add-ons, becoming a valid tool. Time will tell.
> 
> Personally I'll have to balance the perhaps not-so-nice, and not-immediately-powerful-enough new photo app from Apple against the licensing and general barf-ness of Adobe's software. I'm really looking forward to that. Not.
> 
> ...



Update: When asked about what Aperture-like features users can expect from the new Photos app, an Apple representative mentioned plans for professional-grade features such as image search, editing, effects, and most notably, third-party extensibility. The representative also clarified the timeframe when Aperture development will end, along with an announcement about its other Pro app offerings receiving updates today; those details have been updated in the text above.

In addition to telling users that iPhoto will be discontinued and rolled into the new Photos app, Apple also confirmed to Ars Technica that Aperture will be updated to ensure Yosemite compatibility, but users shouldn't expect any further development or updates beyond that.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/06/apple-to-cease-development-support-of-pro-photo-app-aperture/


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 2, 2014)

Badger said:


> In addition to telling users that iPhoto will be discontinued and rolled into the new Photos app, Apple also confirmed to Ars Technica that Aperture will be updated to ensure Yosemite compatibility, but users shouldn't expect any further development or updates beyond that.
> 
> http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/06/apple-to-cease-development-support-of-pro-photo-app-aperture/



Thanks! This bit:



> Today, after weeks of speculation—fueled particularly by beta versions of Yosemite not supporting Aperture



...means Yosemite won't see much use on my Macs for the time being.


----------



## caruser (Jul 2, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Thanks! This bit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well it's not out yet, and hopefully they'll have Aperture patched up by the time Yosemite is released. I mean, hopefully they didn't use too many of their "secret"/private OS APIs to make it a difficult task!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 2, 2014)

caruser said:


> ...means Yosemite won't see much use on my Macs for the time being.



Well it's not out yet, and hopefully they'll have Aperture patched up by the time Yosemite is released. I mean, hopefully they didn't use too many of their "secret"/private OS APIs to make it a difficult task!
[/quote]

Not launched, no...but available. I still may install Yosemite on one of a backup clones (run off a FW800 drive) to have a play. Who knows - the post about Aperture not running on Yosemite is a month old, and may be an issue on the OS X side rather than the Aperture side so it may work on the current pre-release version of the OS.


----------



## StephenC (Jul 3, 2014)

Don't the articles state that there will be one more update, to make Aperture compatible with Yosemite (I don't know about the beta)?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 3, 2014)

StephenC said:


> Don't the articles state that there will be one more update, to make Aperture compatible with Yosemite (I don't know about the beta)?



Yes, Apple has stated Aperture will be compatible with Yosemite. They didn't say it would be at launch of the new OS, but I expect it will be (if not before).


----------



## Grumbaki (Jul 3, 2014)

Except from my wallet standpoint, this finally might be a good thing. This forces me to up my game to an editor that will do the lil bit that aperture could'nt do. The new app will just be a way for me to sort my "prints" as Apple always had a strong suit in data management.


----------



## e17paul (Jul 3, 2014)

Reading this article, I think (or hope) that our disappointment with Apple's decision may be shortlived:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/07/03/inside-app-extensions-the-cloud-kit-savvy-photos-future-of-apples-iphoto-aperture 

If app extensions give the ability to process/adjust RAW files in addition to the possibilities discussed in the article, then Photos could become all that is needed. OS X already has RAW file support built in, so it's not so far fetched. when starting from a clean sheet, Apple tend to start with the basics then build into something far greater. If this all happens, then it will be a great alternative to Lightroom - free apart form buying the hardware. I will keep my fingers crossed, and trial Canon's updated software while I'm waiting.

Don't forget that Apple have already announced the ability to take RAW photos in iOS8, which is as good a confirmation as any that Apple's new app will support RAW to JPEG processing.
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/06/19/ios-8-manual-camera-control/ 

Am I being overly optimistic? Or reading too much between the lines?


----------



## BoneDoc (Jul 3, 2014)

I was initially sad to see this happen. But reflecting upon what's at hand, this is the logical thing to do. They're doing to photos what they did to video with FCPX. Except, they wanted to avoid the FCP X debacle about releasing half-baked "pro" editor when they had to rewrite the code from the ground up. 

There will be some growing pains for sure, but in the long term, it will be good. There will be plenty of inter-platform compatibility, something that's not present at the moment because of the original programs were written before cross-platform is viable.

The API extensions will be a boon for developers as well. it will spur competition and creativity. Al this extensions will live inside Photo app. So I'm hopeful .


----------



## Badger (Jul 3, 2014)

"Support for Photo Editing Extensions means that developers don't have to try to woo users into switching to an entirely new app in order to try their imaging tools. Instead, after installing a new app that includes a Photo Editing Extension, any new editing capabilities the developer implements as an Extension will show up right within Photos, allowing users to integrate new features from third parties into the existing Photos app."

Sounds almost like if those of us who liked Apples file management, but preferred to post process on a different app could be in for a pleasant surprise. Of course, we would have to wait for Apple to roll out their app, then, for Adobe to roll out their plug in. 

http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/07/03/inside-app-extensions-the-cloud-kit-savvy-photos-future-of-apples-iphoto-aperture


----------

