or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Forthcoming book references unannounced 'Apple Aperture X'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Forthcoming book references unannounced 'Apple Aperture X'

post #1 of 64
Thread Starter 
A book scheduled to be released in March hints that Apple may be planning to release a major update to its Aperture software for professional photographers.

Aperture


The unannounced "Apple Aperture X" is named in the title of a book for photographers listed on Amazon's Canadian website. Potentially lending credibility to the title is the fact that the listing also notes it is "under NDA," or non-disclosure agreement.

The book, from authors Ken McMahon and Nik Rawlinson, is scheduled to arrive on March 1, 2013. However, the date could simply be a placeholder, as the book description describes Aperture 3, the current version of the software available for purchase.

The new book will be published by Focal press and has its own ISBN numbers. The paperback title is listed as being 322 pages long. The book was first discovered on Thursday by AppleInsider reader Hugh.

Aperture 3 was released in early 2010, making the professional software now almost three years old. That update added 64-bit support and more than 200 new features, including Faces, Places and Brushes.

The name "Aperture X" would fall in line with Final Cut Pro X, a major overhaul to Apple's professional video editing software that was released last year. The release of Final Cut Pro X was enveloped in controversy, as many longtime users felt the changes to the software crippled it. But Apple has since issued a number of updates to enhance features in the software.

There have also been rumors that Apple is working on a so-called Logic Pro X for its professional digital audio and music sequencing program. Rumors earlier this year that Apple had "decimated" its pro audio team were quickly dismissed, suggesting the team remains and is at work on an update to the software. Logic Pro 9, the current major release, became available in July of 2009.
post #2 of 64
Are we not nearing to XIII?
post #3 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splash-reverse View Post

Are we not nearing to XIII?

XIII? like the game!!!! 1smoking.gif

post #4 of 64
X is a placeholder. The author doesn't know what the version it is or will be. The book it also likely not finished either.
post #5 of 64
Now, if we could just get Keynote X...
post #6 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

X is a placeholder. The author doesn't know what the version it is or will be. The book it also likely not finished either.

I tend to agree.
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
post #7 of 64
How much do you guys want to bet that a bunch of pathetic ass holes will jump all over the new release claiming it is no longer a professional app because feature xyz is missing? You all know it will happen so we probably have nothing to bet on here. It is almost guaranteed that these idiots will gloss over all of the new features and improvements just to dwell on their favored functionality of the past. It is also a certainty they will see such a release as a brick wall that isn't malleable with updates even though Apple has continuously updated its professional software.

I may have to tune out when and if the software is released because it will be unbearable to listen to all of the crying from the so called adult men that label themselves professionals.
post #8 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

How much do you guys want to bet that a bunch of pathetic ass holes will jump all over the new release claiming it is no longer a professional app because feature xyz is missing? You all know it will happen so we probably have nothing to bet on here. It is almost guaranteed that these idiots will gloss over all of the new features and improvements just to dwell on their favored functionality of the past. It is also a certainty they will see such a release as a brick wall that isn't malleable with updates even though Apple has continuously updated its professional software.
I may have to tune out when and if the software is released because it will be unbearable to listen to all of the crying from the so called adult men that label themselves professionals.

Actually, it's these kinds of blanket statements that I'll be tuning out from.   

 

BTW, definitely a placeholder for an unfinished book.  Totally common.  On the photography/Aperture boards this didn't even raise an eyebrow.

post #9 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

Actually, it's these kinds of blanket statements that I'll be tuning out from.   

 

BTW, definitely a placeholder for an unfinished book.  Totally common.  On the photography/Aperture boards this didn't even raise an eyebrow.

Well the "under NDA" should raise some eyebrows.  It implies that the author was told about (or has) the new version of Aperture under NDA and somehow, this "leaked" into the metadata about the book, thereby pretty much violating the NDA.  

post #10 of 64

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don108 View Post

Now, if we could just get Keynote X...

 

Yeeeesss ... that would be great. Even iWorks '11, '12, or even '13 would be fantastic - as I'm using these every day and these really need some update.

post #11 of 64

For what it's worth, AI posted a nearly identical news item back in 2009 about Aperture 3 which turned out to be right on the money.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/09/10/23/book_listing_implies_apple_to_release_aperture_x_in_2010.html

"Apple preparing Aperture X upgrade to 3.0
By Prince McLean and Neil Hughes
Friday, October 23, 2009, 08:25 am

A new book available for preorder on Amazon.com implies that a new 3.0 version of Aperture, called Apple Aperture X, could be coming by May 2010.

The book is listed as "Apple Aperture X (3) - UNDER NDA: A Workflow Guide for Digital Photographers," and the 320-page paperback from Focal Press has a release date of May 26, 2010, perhaps suggesting a timeframe for the forthcoming software's release."


Same title, same authors, same NDA language, etc. While the title of the book was changed, it did come out as predicted, within a few months of when Aperture 3 was released in February 2010.

post #12 of 64
Well, that should make the Aperture 3 reviewed by bcbcbroderick on the right hand side of AI pages disappear in no time. It will of course be a welcomed upgrade, in spite of all the free updates we got since version 3 came out. Do wish we get an option in the prefs to turn back on colored icons in the side- and toolbar, but looking at iTunes that will be wishful thinking. Less is more and all that.

I am interested in feedback from Lightroom users; that software has caught up to Aperture and supposedly became superior. I just don't know in what way...
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #13 of 64
Not released and it's already marked down! Marketing....hah
post #14 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Well the "under NDA" should raise some eyebrows.  It implies that the author was told about (or has) the new version of Aperture under NDA and somehow, this "leaked" into the metadata about the book, thereby pretty much violating the NDA.  

True, and the authors published a guide to Aperture 3, among others, and it had the same blurb on the book pre-sale offering then.  (Having signed a NDA or two myself and not even having much to spoil or brag about knowing I take the pronouncement with a grain of salt  : )    )

 

I just think the release of a major update to Aperture is obviously coming up anyway, and them being privy to it enough to commit to the next book still means it could be Jan or it could be June.  There was no telling of when 3 would be released by the timeline of their last book's mysterious place card showing up in 2009.  This is surely a book about the next version but to me this just means they signed the deal to write it.   Could be anything in between, of course , but...

post #15 of 64
Originally Posted by MacApfel View Post
Even iWorks '11, '12, or even '13 would be fantastic - as I'm using these every day and these really need some update.

 

Not really.

 

Why would they name an update after anything but the forthcoming year?

post #16 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I am interested in feedback from Lightroom users; that software has caught up to Aperture and supposedly became superior. I just don't know in what way...
We use Aperture vs Lightroom for our photo organizer- and my wife uses Aperture vs Lightroom while doing her work mainly because that's what we use for our personal pics. Interestingly enough, she also uses photoshop elements and actions created through there to do the vast majority of her editing as opposed to full photoshop. I would love to see aperture get editing on pace with elements- allowing actions, a much more diverse editing layount, etc- and knock photoshop elements right in the jaw. Get a 2 for 1- (solid) editing & organizing program. Adobe already cripples some products and are aholes to apple as is, why not return the favor a little?

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply

2014 27" Retina iMac i5, 2012 27" iMac i7, 2011 Mac Mini i5
iPad Air 2, iPad Mini 2, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6, iPod Touch 5
Time Capsule 5, (3) AirPort Express 2, (2) Apple TV 3

Reply
post #17 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

I would love to see aperture get editing on pace with elements- allowing actions, a much more diverse editing layount, etc-

That is indeed what I am expecting, more editing options. The added adjustments and effects with live preview were welcome additions to v3 for many people so I fully expect Apple to take this further. And apart from that they will no doubt touch up the interface, speed and dumb Google Maps. What I would love for them to do is create a companion app for the iPad, as the current iPhoto, as nice as it is, does not integrate with OSX Aperture, or iPhoto for that matter. At all.
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #18 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

How much do you guys want to bet that a bunch of pathetic ass holes will jump all over the new release claiming it is no longer a professional app because feature xyz is missing? You all know it will happen so we probably have nothing to bet on here. It is almost guaranteed that these idiots will gloss over all of the new features and improvements just to dwell on their favored functionality of the past. It is also a certainty they will see such a release as a brick wall that isn't malleable with updates even though Apple has continuously updated its professional software.
I may have to tune out when and if the software is released because it will be unbearable to listen to all of the crying from the so called adult men that label themselves professionals.

 

 

The problem with your view is people relied on Final Cut Pro to make a living. Final Cut Pro X initially dropped support for certain needed plugins, multi-monitors, network sharing, projects from older versions of the software, and numerous other things. Apple billed the software as professional ready. 

 

In Apple's defense, it had to re-write the software from the ground up since it dropped its carbon development language support and went all in with cocoa. As companies like Adobe can attest to, that was a labor intensive process as well as an opportunity to make a better foundation. Apple stuck to its normal formula for doing this type of project: It left out many features. It did this when going from OS 9 to OSX. It added the features back in later.

 

 Like with the whole Maps stink, Apple should have known these issues were going to cause an uproar. It should have communicated the state of the App better, and made clear it was looking for feedback and that it would rapidly adding back features. People gave the initial release of Final Cut Pro X like one star. Now it has about four because Apple did the work to fix the app. 

 

With Maps, Apple should have took the Siri approach, and labeled the project a beta. It is hard to fault a developer who tells you from the get go the project still needs work. 

post #19 of 64
Can't wait. Aperture feels so last millennium.
post #20 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacApfel View Post

Even iWorks '11, '12, or even '13 would be fantastic - as I'm using these every day and these really need some update.

Not really.

Why would they name an update after anything but the forthcoming year?

In order to vex the anally retentive.
post #21 of 64
@TBell: excellent post!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stef View Post

Can't wait. Aperture feels so last millennium.

What? In what way?
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #22 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

How much do you guys want to bet that a bunch of pathetic ass holes will jump all over the new release claiming it is no longer a professional app because feature xyz is missing? You all know it will happen so we probably have nothing to bet on here. It is almost guaranteed that these idiots will gloss over all of the new features and improvements just to dwell on their favored functionality of the past. It is also a certainty they will see such a release as a brick wall that isn't malleable with updates even though Apple has continuously updated its professional software.
I may have to tune out when and if the software is released because it will be unbearable to listen to all of the crying from the so called adult men that label themselves professionals.

 

You are angry over nothing on this one. In terms of being viable for commercial use, Lightroom won that war long ago. Their algorithms have improved since the early versions, yet they keep a list of legacy options if you need to match something from several years ago or match the default camera software results. Their XML file instructions take up a lot less extra space on disk than the library data stored by Aperture. Neither works on its own for huge catalogs. If you were dealing with photo syndication or a stock photo agency, you'd need to look at other software. This can often include in house development. For the photographers with typically 6-10TB RAID storage online and the rest offline, Lightroom is a much better fit due to its efficiency with disk space, and it's fast. The only gripe I can think of would be if they dropped support for files from certain older digital cameras. Adobe and Lightroom preemptively handled that through .DNG conversions. If support goes away and they can no longer access old files, they could make DNGs with the last version that supports these older models. That has never been an option with Aperture, which is one of the reasons it never caught on there.

post #23 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Not really.

 

Why would they name an update after anything but the forthcoming year?

For consistency

post #24 of 64
Originally Posted by quinney View Post
In order to vex the anally retentive.

 

In order to vex those with common sense, you mean.

 

Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji View Post
For consistency

 

Consistency would be naming it after the forthcoming year.

post #25 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

. I would love to see aperture get editing on pace with elements- allowing actions, a much more diverse editing layount, etc- and knock photoshop elements right in the jaw. Get a 2 for 1- (solid) editing & organizing program.

 

  The main issue with trying to have Aperture have certain abilities of Elements is the fact that its engine has to deal with RAW images at its core for the higher end of its users.  The editing happens at the RAW level and ending up with TIFFS or JPGs happens at export (though it works fine to import those to edit as well).  Editing RAW on Elements (or any pixel based editor pretty much) is even more limited/kludgy than doing the same functions in Aperture.   There are so many areas where I would love Aperture to more closely work as well as a good pixel editor.,  Brushing on filters is the most obvious example, where it's more time consuming to not have the result look like you used sidewalk chalk to touch up your image ("detect edges" isn't nearly as effective as working within a selection for detailed work,  the no-choice blur tool is like letting the cat pee on it, etc).  The code is more intense for the higher resolution of the RAW files and the fact that they need to have an image decoded for a preview with every move adds to it.  n It's only been since getting a 2.5mhz i7 with 16 gig of ram that I could even approximate what I get using brushes in PSE without wanting to smash my computer every two minutes.  I also just assume that there are similar programming reasons why certain things that are so easy in PSE (working within selections, easily brushing with accuracy within a single level range, more sharpening/unsharp masking parameters) due to the target image being RAW.

 

  But I agree that this is high on the wish list.  Especially since Apple is only competing within itself with iPhoto, which isn't even up to the same niche PSE is.  I can see why Adobe would want to keep some of the functionality clearly owned by either LR, PS or PSE, but I don't see a strategic reason why Apple needs to keep Aperture as limited as they do.  I've always figured it to be a programming/horsepower issue due to its RAW focus.

post #26 of 64
In my forthcoming book, APple is DOomed.
post #27 of 64
I really hate the use of the roman numeral X for versioning software. I pronounced it OS "X" and not OS 10 as the roman numeral would indicate. The actual version would be OS 18 or XVIII by now. To say each version of OSX is a minor version by their internal numbering of 10.x.x is ridiculous. Apple's marketing team got carried away with this scheme that makes no sense. Maybe that's why I believe iOS is their escape from this versioning hell. If they do eventually go with iOSX for version ten then I'm switching to all Android and Chrome operating systems.
post #28 of 64
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post
The actual version would be OS 18 or XVIII by now. To say each version of OSX is a minor version by their internal numbering of 10.x.x is ridiculous. Apple's marketing team got carried away with this scheme that makes no sense.

 

It warms my heart to see this written, for we don't often, if at all. A kick to the crotch of the Microsoft posers that pretend "Mac users pay for service packs". 


If they do eventually go with iOSX for version ten then I'm switching to all Android and Chrome operating systems.

 

Abject nonsense. Abject nonsense, I repeat. Idiocy in naming versions of devices or software is a direct indicator of idiocy, yes, but it extends only to idiocy in marketing. The same minds that brought us the Genius commercials brought us the "iPhone 5" name. That is marketing, nothing more. The device itself is extraordinary. Magnificently well-built and designed, both in hardware and software. 

 

Even today, still, I find complete morons on the Internet that claim Apple is a marketing company. Apple has never invented anything. Apple has never innovated anything. They sell only because of their marketing. What does one say to these idiots? What can one say? It's vexing.

post #29 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Don108 View Post

Now, if we could just get Keynote X...
Absolutely! And please Numbers X as well. For many tasks I prefer Numbers over Excel, but when ever I have to process really huge amount of data, it get's slow as a frozen snail.
post #30 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

If they do eventually go with iOSX for version ten then I'm switching to all Android and Chrome operating systems.

Perhaps they'll do something creative, like ¡0S
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #31 of 64

Doesn't really matter what they call it. It will have bugs. People will complain. It will have new features that people will love. The fan-boys will go into a rage over any mention of the new release's faults. The Apple haters will announce that this is the death of Apple. Photographers will just continue taking pictures and managing their workflows with Aperture, Lightroom, or whatever else pleases them.

 

I have never had anyone look at one of my images and say, "Wow! You must have a really good work flow program." They do look at my pictures and say, "Wow! You must have a really good camera." Well, yeah. But, you know -- no one ever goes to the chef and says, "Wow, you must have really good pots." It is the artist, not the tools. Some tools make life a little easier for the artist. As long as Apple and Adobe remember that, all will be right with the world.

post #32 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlandd View Post

 

  The main issue with trying to have Aperture have certain abilities of Elements is the fact that its engine has to deal with RAW images at its core for the higher end of its users.  The editing happens at the RAW level and ending up with TIFFS or JPGs happens at export (though it works fine to import those to edit as well).  Editing RAW on Elements (or any pixel based editor pretty much) is even more limited/kludgy than doing the same functions in Aperture.   There are so many areas where I would love Aperture to more closely work as well as a good pixel editor.,  Brushing on filters is the most obvious example, where it's more time consuming to not have the result look like you used sidewalk chalk to touch up your image ("detect edges" isn't nearly as effective as working within a selection for detailed work,  the no-choice blur tool is like letting the cat pee on it, etc).  The code is more intense for the higher resolution of the RAW files and the fact that they need to have an image decoded for a preview with every move adds to it.  n It's only been since getting a 2.5mhz i7 with 16 gig of ram that I could even approximate what I get using brushes in PSE without wanting to smash my computer every two minutes.  I also just assume that there are similar programming reasons why certain things that are so easy in PSE (working within selections, easily brushing with accuracy within a single level range, more sharpening/unsharp masking parameters) due to the target image being RAW.

 

  But I agree that this is high on the wish list.  Especially since Apple is only competing within itself with iPhoto, which isn't even up to the same niche PSE is.  I can see why Adobe would want to keep some of the functionality clearly owned by either LR, PS or PSE, but I don't see a strategic reason why Apple needs to keep Aperture as limited as they do.  I've always figured it to be a programming/horsepower issue due to its RAW focus.

One of the big selling features of Aperture is the seamless integration with iPhoto.  On advice from users experienced with Lightroom and Aperture, I bought Aperture based on that deciding factor (and I can vouch that it is a huge benefit to be able to use both).  So to some extent, Aperture is like iPhoto on steroids.  But what I really don't know much about are a couple of the points you raised on RAW editing engines.  That said, could the limitations you speak of in Aperture be due to the file/library compatibility with iPhoto?

post #33 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

One of the big selling features of Aperture is the seamless integration with iPhoto.

Really? Why would anyone want to 'integrate' with iPhoto? There're both photo management and (light) editing applications. Personally I think iPhoto is a joke and Aperture is a great tool - especially for large libraries.
Quote:
On advice from users experienced with Lightroom and Aperture, I bought Aperture based on that deciding factor (and I can vouch that it is a huge benefit to be able to use both).

Why do you use both? Which benefit has one over the other?
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #34 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Not really.

 

Why would they name an update after anything but the forthcoming year?

 

I guess I just wanted to point out that I am so desperate for an iWork update that I would even take an iWork '11 - better than nothing. If the current version of Aperture is becoming old ... well what do you call the current iWork suite - Methusalem?

post #35 of 64
Originally Posted by MacApfel View Post
I guess I just wanted to point out that I am so desperate for an iWork update that I would even take an iWork '11 - better than nothing. If the current version of Aperture is becoming old ... well what do you call the current iWork suite - Methusalem?

 

I don't care how old it is; what's wrong with it? What about it demands a new version number? What features couldn't be added as x.x.x updates?

post #36 of 64

There have been numerous suggestions in the past, the one that come immediately to my mind are:

 

Pages: easy line numbering, reasonable full screen mode with sensible arranged controls (goes for all)

Keynote: 3D objects, new transitions (magic move is great - but doesn't work all the time), new themes, ...

Numbers: much more functions, much easier cell styling

 

and in particular: fix the 2 separate file systems!! E.g., if you save a document in iCloud and you have written an email - try to attach the iCloud document easily to your email ...

post #37 of 64
The benefit of .x updates is that they are free, as opposed to x.0 updates.
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #38 of 64
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
The benefit of .x updates is that they are free, as opposed to x.0 updates.

 

I'm actually wondering if any of us will ever pay for iWork or iLife again. We haven't had an update to either since the App Store transition, and I think that might be partially due to Apple's unwillingness (or inability) to charge for updates.

post #39 of 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

The benefit of .x updates is that they are free, as opposed to x.0 updates.

I'm actually wondering if any of us will ever pay for iWork or iLife again. We haven't had an update to either since the App Store transition, and I think that might be partially due to Apple's unwillingness (or inability) to charge for updates.

I understand your point, but don't think free updates will be the case. They do have the ability for delta updates, as they do with iOS. iLife is free with a new Mac, and you'll get the latest version. But iWork, which may have become a bit cheaper now through the MAS, still sells from what I hear. I'd be baffled if they make a new version and release it for free. Perhaps even not allowed, looking at the $2 or whatever for that WiFi update the other day year.

PS, TS, take the dot out of 'Horrible.' I think that will look better
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #40 of 64
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
They do have the ability for delta updates, as they do with iOS.

 

YEAH, AND THEY REFUSE TO DO 'EM. (And I don't see what that has to do with this; "delta updates" implies "you're only downloading the changed bits, not the whole app each time", rather than anything to do with the content of said updates) Every time I get an update it's the full size of the application OR app…


Perhaps even not allowed, looking at the $2 or whatever for that WiFi update the other day year

 

Wait, you mean the 802.11n enabler? In 2009? I'm pretty sure Apple can offer whatever (non-standard-based) applications they want for free.


PS, TS, take the dot out of 'Horrible.' I think that will look better.

 

I'm making a statement.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Forthcoming book references unannounced 'Apple Aperture X'