or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by bikertwin

I think we're all gonna drive ourselves stir crazy waiting for Apple to release Aperture!
You're not seeing the big picture. With Adobe making the Windows and Mac versions of PS identical, that causes a commoditization of the operating system. There's no reason to buy a Mac if PS runs exactly the same on Windows as it does on OS X. By coming out with all this cutting edge pro software--only on the Mac--Apple is saying, "Look. We make the very best software that will make your job the easiest. The only way to get our software is to use a Mac." If you want the...
I don't understand. On the one hand hand you're derisive of anyone who isn't a super-high-dollar pro, but on the other hand you seem to be a cheerleader for the little guy, who only makes 40 grand a year. The guy (or gal) who makes 40 grand a year as a photographer simply cannot expect his or her computer to run any pro app the way a six-figure-income pro will. That's life.No. It's no different from all the "realtime" brouhaha in Final Cut Pro. Sure, on a super high end...
Yeah, Aperture is a really comprehensive way of dealing with photographs, isn't it? I can't wait 'til it's released.
It would be round trip: Tweak your raw file in Aperture, and if you need to make pixel-level adjustments, then open it in Photoshop and do your thing. When you're done, it gets reimported to Aperture. At this point it's not clear if it would considered the same image or a new image. In any case your Photoshopped image could now be "louped", stacked, "light-tabled", printed, exported to books, etc. All the stuff that Aperture is good at. Photoshop becomes just an editor....
I think you're being just a tad bit ridiculous. Does FCP run best on dual 30" monitors and a quad PowerMac? Does Motion? Will Aperture? Yes, yes, and yes. Of course. Will FCP, Motion, and Aperture run less than perfect on lesser Macs. Of course. Does it matter to some people? Yes. Does it matter to others? No. Heck, a few posts above this, MacCrazy said that Motion ran "fine" (for him) on his PowerBook. Will some people find that Aperture runs "good enough" on their...
But isn't this exactly who Apple is targeting? Professionals who don't want to bother with PC incompatibilities and drivers and the complexity of a Photoshop-based raw workflow? Tell 'em to buy the low-end dual core Mac for $1999 and a Dell 24-inch monitor for under a grand on sale. Easy, and not too expensive for a professional. There's no worry about converting raw images before use. And Aperture will let them use a loupe and a light table, and group photos into...
I like the way you think! That would be awesome.
Oh, good point. Certain things might be faster on a smaller monitor with fewer pixels, but probably not as much a difference as I hoped. Good thing I have a dual processor G5. Just need a better video card than the crappy GeForce FX 5200 I have now. Any suggestions for the $250-$300 range? I haven't really kept up with video card technology since I'm not a gamer.
But think about it. By its very design, it should scale well. On the one hand everyone is complaining that they don't have quad G5s with dual 30" monitors. Well, dual 30" monitors is a *lot* of pixels to push around. You need a quad G5 for that. If you have a more modest monitor setup, then the hardware requirements would scale down proportionally, so you can get by with less.
New Posts  All Forums: