or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple introduces Aperture
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple introduces Aperture

post #1 of 538
Thread Starter 
Apple today introduced Aperture, the first all-in-one post production tool that provides everything photographers need immediately after a photo shoot.

Aperture offers an advanced and fast RAW workflow that makes working with a camera's RAW images as easy as JPEG. Built from the ground up for pros, Aperture features powerful compare and select tools, nondestructive image processing, color managed printing and custom web and book publishing.

"Aperture is to professional photography what Final Cut Pro is to filmmaking," said Rob Schoeben, Apple's vice president of Applications Marketing. "Finally, an innovative post production tool that revolutionizes the pro photo workflow from compare and select to retouching to output."

"Until now, RAW files have taken so long to work with," said Heinz Kluetmeier, renowned sports photographer whose credits include over 100 Sports Illustrated covers. "What amazed me about Aperture is that you can work directly with RAW files, you can loupe and stack them and it's almost instantaneous -- I suspect that I'm going to stop shooting JPEGs. Aperture just blew me away."

Unique compare and select tools in Aperture allow photographers to easily sift through massive photo projects and quickly identify their final selections. Aperture is also the first application that automatically groups sequences of photos into easy-to-manage Stacks based on the time interval between exposures.

In an industry first, Aperture allows photographers to navigate through entire projects in a full-screen workspace that can be extended to span multiple displays, tiling multiple images side-by-side for a faster, easier compare and select. With Aperture's Loupe magnifying tool, portions of images can be examined in fine detail without having to zoom and pan across large files. In addition, a virtual Light Table provides the ideal canvas for building simple photo layouts, allowing them to be arranged, resized and piled together in a free-form space.

RAW images are maintained natively throughout Aperture without any intermediate conversion process, and can be retouched with stunning results using a suite of adjustment tools designed especially for photographers. Aperture's nondestructive image processing engine never alters a single pixel of original photos so photographers have the power and flexibility to modify or delete changes at any point in the workflow.

As Aperture allows users to create multiple versions of a single image without duplicating files, photographers can experiment without risk of overwriting the master image or using up large amounts of hard drive space. Aperture images can also be launched directly into Adobe Photoshop for compositing and layer effects.

Aperture features a complete color-managed pipeline with support for device specific ColorSync profiles and a set of high-quality output tools for photographers to showcase their work. Print options include customizable contact sheets, high-quality local printing and color-managed online prints.

The new photo software comes wrapped in a deceptively simple layout environment where photographers can quickly create and order custom professional-caliber books and publish stunning web galleries. The software also makes it easy to back up an entire library of images with a single click and streamline complex workflows with AppleScript and Automator actions.

Pricing & Availability

Aperture will be available in November through the Apple Store, Apple's retail stores and Apple Authorized Resellers for a suggested retail price of $500. Full system requirements and more information on Aperture can be found at Apple's Aperture website.
post #2 of 538
Not surprisingly, the minimal hardware specifications require a CoreImage-compatible GFX chip. Aperture imho is the stick in Apple's carrot-and-stick strategy to move Adobe towards using Core* in its products.

The recommended system specs are mind-boggling, though:
- Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 or faster
- 2GB of RAM
- One of the following graphics cards:
* ATI Radeon X800 XT Mac Edition
* ATI Radeon 9800 XT or 9800 Pro
* NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL or 6800 GT DDL
* NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT
* NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500
post #3 of 538
How does Apeture compare to Photoshop?
post #4 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
How does Apeture compare to Photoshop?

I really don't know what to make of it. I went on the site and read all of the info, and still don't know what to make of it.

But $500 seems a bit high for what it looks to be doing.

It is far more a management tool with some fairly limited photo editing tools. Some of the features seem to be on the amaturish side, such as book printing, and ordering prints online. Who is that for?

When I'm at the show tomorrow I'll spend some time with it if I can push through the crowds.
post #5 of 538
Not a Photoshop competitor. Something different. Good!

Now... how about a Core Image-accelerated Photoshop?
post #6 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by nagromme
Not a Photoshop competitor. Something different. Good!

Now... how about a Core Image-accelerated Photoshop?

We have to see if core image can really offer Adobe something they need and can't do any other way.

Don't forget that whatever the OS can do Adobe can most likely do as well. Apple just puts it in one place for everyone.
post #7 of 538
I learned more from the Quick Tours at Apple than from reading the site.

It really looks like advanced iPhoto. The editing tools are much like iPhoto, but more advanced and they do have some cloning/repair tools. If that is all you need then your ok w/o Photoshop, but you will want photoshop for layers, filters and other advanced functions.

I liked the improved output for printing books. Hope to see that migrate to iPhoto sooner rather than later.
post #8 of 538
http://www.expressdigital.com/produc...PEdarkroom.htm

Windows program for 2.5x more than Aperture.

I think Apple has a winner here. This isn't iPhoto on steroids. It's not about just management and keywording. It's about a Photographer shooting hundreds of pictures and then starting the sometimes arduous task of pushing the pictures through the pipeline and distilling down to the best shots.

Working with RAW pictures is processor intensive and will only become more intensive as the megapixels of DSLR continue to increase. Thanks to Core Image and fast computers a Photographer can now process batches of photos and create a workflow that increases their efficiency. Kudos to Apple for moving into this area.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #9 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Carson O'Genic
I learned more from the Quick Tours at Apple than from reading the site.

I wish that were a mandatory prerequisite to posting here.

With every Apple product announcement people ask questions that already have answers on Apple's site.
post #10 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
http://www.expressdigital.com/produc...PEdarkroom.htm

Windows program for 2.5x more than Aperture.

With easily more than 2.5x less impressive product info than for Aperture.
post #11 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
http://www.expressdigital.com/produc...PEdarkroom.htm

Windows program for 2.5x more than Aperture.

I think Apple has a winner here. This isn't iPhoto on steroids. It's not about just management and keywording. It's about a Photographer shooting hundreds of pictures and then starting the sometimes arduous task of pushing the pictures through the pipeline and distilling down to the best shots.

Working with RAW pictures is processor intensive and will only become more intensive as the megapixels of DSLR continue to increase. Thanks to Core Image and fast computers a Photographer can now process batches of photos and create a workflow that increases their efficiency. Kudos to Apple for moving into this area.

I'm familiar with that program from my lab days. It is of a kind to Apple's new program. I don't know how more useful Apple's program will be than this one. Perhaps the price difference will help. This was sold to a fairly limited number of customers. But for a digital mini-lab it served a purpose because you can do different set-ups and send them to the machine over the network.

If Aperture can do that as well then that will help.

Insofar as the RAW converters goes, this is nothing new. Adobe's new update to their RAW converter allows such batches to be rendered out as well. As does Canon's pro program that comes with their cameras, and Nikon as well.
post #12 of 538
A quick scan of the Specs page for Aperture shows that it's only "One click to edit in Photoshop". And then that Aperture can manage your Photoshop variations.

The way I think of Photoshop and Aperture is that Photoshop is for creating a lie, and Aperture is for correcting things with the image, not with the subjects.

Apple clearly has a strong basis for a Photoshop killer though. This is impressive stuff. And it's an Apple app, so I'd bet that a few plug-ins and this would have everything necessary to kill PS. I'd agree that this is Apple's warning shot to Adobe, that they can take another market from them.

Only one question remains: how does it run on Intel?

[edit] The point of the RAW is that it does all of this in near-real time from the original RAW image, non-destructively.
post #13 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by macserverX
A quick scan of the Specs page for Aperture shows that it's only "One click to edit in Photoshop". And then that Aperture can manage your Photoshop variations.

The way I think of Photoshop and Aperture is that Photoshop is for creating a lie, and Aperture is for correcting things with the image, not with the subjects.

Apple clearly has a strong basis for a Photoshop killer though. This is impressive stuff. And it's an Apple app, so I'd bet that a few plug-ins and this would have everything necessary to kill PS. I'd agree that this is Apple's warning shot to Adobe, that they can take another market from them.

Only one question remains: how does it run on Intel?

Creating a lie vs. correcting images? What the hell does that kind of judgemental nonsense mean?

Apple =good. Adobe=bad?

This app isn't even in the same league as Adobe Expression much less PS. You'll bet that a few plug-ins will equalize the two? Obviously you have never used PS. And don't say that you're a pro and use it every day, because your comments show that you're not.
post #14 of 538
Fantastic application. Home run. I wish I could justify buying it. The latest iteration of the Apple 'pro' user interface looks very nice as well.
post #15 of 538
This maybe exacly what I need. I agree its not a replacment for Photoshop but an accompaniment. There certianly is some over lap though in photo manipulation tools. But there doesn't seem to be any of Photoshop's most advanced features.

I have more photo managment needs than most of Photoshop's advanced features, which I imagine I don't use 80% of.

I do motion film and take digital still pictures of my set ups, and add some simple color manipulation as references for color timing. So I don't really need Photoshop's layers and filters.

I have another program called 3CP which actually works in film and video RGB color space, while Photoshop is primarly for graphics.

Watching the Quicktime tour what I'm really impressed with is the user interface. Which I've never really been a fan of Photoshops user interface. I always felt like I had to go through too many pull down and sub menus to use the tools I use most.

Aperture has what I use most out front in an interactive graphic. Most namely histogram and three color wheels.

I also really like the magnifying loop tool for image manipulation. I have to play with it but I think that will be easier for me to use.
post #16 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Creating a lie vs. correcting images? What the hell does that kind of judgemental nonsense mean?

Apple =good. Adobe=bad?

I believe he is saying that Photoshop excels at photo illustration -- creating new work out of a photo. While Aperture is just about making the best photograph out of a raw file. I don't think it was meant as a value judgement.

While Adobe's RAW tool is nice, it is nowhere near as comprehensive as what Aperture claims to do. And Canon's software is a joke.
post #17 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Creating a lie vs. correcting images? What the hell does that kind of judgemental nonsense mean?

Apple =good. Adobe=bad?

This app isn't even in the same league as Adobe Expression much less PS. You'll bet that a few plug-ins will equalize the two? Obviously you have never used PS. And don't say that you're a pro and use it every day, because your comments show that you're not.

That's not what he meant to say (as I understood it) - Adobe's photoshop allows you to change, add and subtract from an image changing the nature of the image.

Apple's program is designed to manage hundreds or even thousands of shots and workflow and adjust them.

His comment has nothing to do with the characteristics of the corporations that build the software.
post #18 of 538
I know what PS does, I've been using it since 1990.

It's the absurd way of putting it that I object to. He can speak for himself on this. He could have been more succinct if he meant to be. I'm not so sure he did. Even if he says so now.

Anything that alters a picture can be considered a lie, even the minimal ones Aperture does.
post #19 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
How does Apeture compare to Photoshop?

You know what I like in Aperture, just initial impressions? That it's JUST TRYING TO BE A PHOTO APP. and a kickass one at that. Let's face it, Photoshop is still a photo app, but I am a pretty advanced user, and I can say that it's trying to be its own super-duper-uber-do-everything-you-can-think-of graphics app. which is great, but i have to wonder what photo profesionals think of the app, and how it's just kinda spread into all of these different areas that photographers never wanted/asked for...

it's like apple went, "hey, what if we took the concept of photoshop, and stripped away all of the non-photo-related stuff, and worked fromt he ground up for professionals," so instead of raw support being grafted on as a plug-in and via adobe bridge, apple doesn't even act like there's anything else. raw is it. if you love raw images, they want you to love aperture.

simply put, though, you cannot remove photoshop from your toolbox. it's like motion versus after effects. you can do some crazy cool fast compositing in motion, but it can't hold a candle to the complexities after effects can manage... yet.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #20 of 538
i have to disagree with the idea that this is not just a souped up iphoto. its basically like photoshop's bridge. it appears to be a management/workflow app that lets you organize and prune shots quickly. but what does it let you do in terms of image editing? iphoto allows for the basic elements like saturation, tints, sharpness blah blah. what can this do that iphoto cant?
and what kind of crappy documentation is that on apple's web site? surely doesnt make me want to run out and grab it.
obviously if one already has photoshop this wont add much. i guess if you dont, would you really spend $500 for this when you can get photoshop /bridge and be able to do it all?
please correct me if i am wrong but im just not seeing much to make this so compelling....
post #21 of 538
I just finished the last of the. I think it's pretty nifty but I'm not in the target market. It does appear to be a heavily upgraded iPhoto.

I think the photo "versioning" system is a stroke of genius, where you modify an image, the program only stores the changes while retaining the original photo as it was shot, and it also allows multiple image versions, so it gets you the most flexibility, highest quality and still not needelssly waste space with multiple full images.
post #22 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
You know what I like in Aperture, just initial impressions? That it's JUST TRYING TO BE A PHOTO APP. and a kickass one at that. Let's face it, Photoshop is still a photo app, but I am a pretty advanced user, and I can say that it's trying to be its own super-duper-uber-do-everything-you-can-think-of graphics app. which is great, but i have to wonder what photo profesionals think of the app, and how it's just kinda spread into all of these different areas that photographers never wanted/asked for...

it's like apple went, "hey, what if we took the concept of photoshop, and stripped away all of the non-photo-related stuff, and worked fromt he ground up for professionals," so instead of raw support being grafted on as a plug-in and via adobe bridge, apple doesn't even act like there's anything else. raw is it. if you love raw images, they want you to love aperture.

simply put, though, you cannot remove photoshop from your toolbox. it's like motion versus after effects. you can do some crazy cool fast compositing in motion, but it can't hold a candle to the complexities after effects can manage... yet.

And just what is non photo related that doesn't save a great deal of time for us when most of our (or our customers) images are going to be published?

If you are an advanced user then you must realize that saving time is above all the most important thing that any app can do. PS allows us to do work without having to leave the app. Many jobs that would have required me to go to Illustrator, and then to InDesign, can now be done directly in PS.

Is this a bad thing? Should Adobe remove all of these work saving features to make PS a "pure" photo editing app? This is one of it's most important and popular strengths.
post #23 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
I have more photo managment needs than most of Photoshop's advanced features, which I imagine I don't use 80% of.

I suspect that's true for many people (non-pros) and is why I'm still satisfied using Photoshop Elements. I'd probably get more out of Aperture than the full version of Photoshop although the hardware requirements are too demanding.
post #24 of 538
"Some of the features seem to be on the amaturish side, such as book printing, and ordering prints online. Who is that for?"

What's amaturish about that? I think it is a good feature(s).

And I think Apple has another hit on its hands.

It gives Adobe Photoshop a real kick in the nuts.

It's a grown up Photoshop. It makes Photoshop seem...unsophisticated.

Adobe's interface is a decade behind this beautiful new one!

It just seems so thoughtful and imaginative.

It makes Adobe look like the creative dinosaurs they appear to be...


Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #25 of 538
"You know what I like in Aperture, just initial impressions? That it's JUST TRYING TO BE A PHOTO APP. and a kickass one at that. Let's face it, Photoshop is still a photo app, but I am a pretty advanced user, and I can say that it's trying to be its own super-duper-uber-do-everything-you-can-think-of graphics app. which is great, but i have to wonder what photo profesionals think of the app, and how it's just kinda spread into all of these different areas that photographers never wanted/asked for...

it's like apple went, "hey, what if we took the concept of photoshop, and stripped away all of the non-photo-related stuff, and worked fromt he ground up for professionals," so instead of raw support being grafted on as a plug-in and via adobe bridge, apple doesn't even act like there's anything else. raw is it. if you love raw images, they want you to love aperture.

simply put, though, you cannot remove photoshop from your toolbox. it's like motion versus after effects. you can do some crazy cool fast compositing in motion, but it can't hold a candle to the complexities after effects can manage... yet."

An insightful post.

Just like Apple has done with 'Front Row'.

They have stripped down an image editor to what it should be for a photographer.

And done it right. And with Cutting edge technology. With a superb user interface and some great real-time implementations eg zoom which make the photoshop 'zoom' look crap and amateurish by comparison.

It's what Photoshop...should be. It makes Photoshop look a jack of all trades crayola box.


Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #26 of 538
Simple useful filters.

Non-destructive editing.

Output.

Mild touch up.

Real-time performance.

Hmmm...

Output Preview.

Sniff...is there anything we need from Photoshop that is missing from Aperture?

Just asking...perhaps Melgross can come up with a list?



Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #27 of 538
"But $500 seems a bit high for what it looks to be doing."

I sometimes think Adobe charging an obscene price for exactly the same product is a bit high for a program which is essentially doing the same thing as version 4.

Lemon Bon Bon
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
We do it because Steve Jobs is the supreme defender of the Macintosh faith, someone who led Apple back from the brink of extinction just four years ago. And we do it because his annual keynote is...
Reply
post #28 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
"Some of the features seem to be on the amaturish side, such as book printing, and ordering prints online. Who is that for?"

What's amaturish about that? I think it is a good feature(s).

And I think Apple has another hit on its hands.

It gives Adobe Photoshop a real kick in the nuts.

It's a grown up Photoshop. It makes Photoshop seem...unsophisticated.

Adobe's interface is a decade behind this beautiful new one!

It just seems so thoughtful and imaginative.

It makes Adobe look like the creative dinosaurs they appear to be...


Lemon Bon Bon

Those are similar (if not exactly the same as) the features in iPhoto. Fun, but not what a pro would want or need.

This is a good app for moving things around but other than that it seems on the light side.

To use this you would HAVE to use PS as well. Apple even more than hinted as much. Read the article on Maccentral.

Unless I missed it on Apple's site, it's missing CMYK, coordinated image sizing and sharpen control, etc.

It is pretty, I'll grant that.

I'll see tomorrow.
post #29 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Simple useful filters.

Non-destructive editing.

Output.

Mild touch up.

Real-time performance.

Hmmm...

Output Preview.

Sniff...is there anything we need from Photoshop that is missing from Aperture?

Just asking...perhaps Melgross can come up with a list?



Lemon Bon Bon

I don't have to. If you used PS then you would know. If you don't then any list isn't going to seem correct. My list would take a hour to compose. Why don't you go to Adobe's site and look at what PS can do.

There is too much being said here with too little understanding of just what PS is.

Everything you have in this post has been present in PS for quite some time.

I don't understand why people aren't willing to do the work of making a real comparison themselves before posting.This isn't some theoretical thing that we can argue all night. These are two real programs. Open two pages in your browser, side by side and compare what these programs can do. If your monitor won't let you open two pages side by side, then you're not a candidate for either of these programs anyway.

Let's be realistic. Apple is doing a bit of promotion here. Until we see the program in a presentation at the show tomorrow, we won't know just what these features offer. And until we stand in front of a computer tomorrow for 20 minutes or so playing around with it for ourselves, we won't see the "gotcha's" that all new programs seem to have.

This isn't being presented as a PS killer. In order to be one, at the very least, it would have to work with ALL PSD files, not just single layer and flattened ones.
post #30 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
"But $500 seems a bit high for what it looks to be doing."

I sometimes think Adobe charging an obscene price for exactly the same product is a bit high for a program which is essentially doing the same thing as version 4.

Lemon Bon Bon

Are you just trolling?
post #31 of 538
The education price is $249. Quite a discount.
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #32 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Creating a lie vs. correcting images? What the hell does that kind of judgemental nonsense mean?

Apple =good. Adobe=bad?

This app isn't even in the same league as Adobe Expression much less PS. You'll bet that a few plug-ins will equalize the two? Obviously you have never used PS. And don't say that you're a pro and use it every day, because your comments show that you're not.

My lie comment was meant that PS allows you to edit images to represent something that isn't real. Like touch-ups on models, iTablets, and Vista screenshots .

And plug-ins is probably a bad word here. What I meant was that by adding a few things to the application, they could add the necessary architure to allow for painting tools, etc; as well as 3rd party plug-ins.

Thank you Ranger and JoGro for pointing this out correctly.

I nearly pointed out in my earlier post that Apple has a habit of pumping out really really great v1.0s. Keynote, Pages, Final Cut, Motion, DVD Studio; Keynote is now the best thing ever, Pages has great potential, Final Cut is great, Motion is still improving, Aperture is GOING to be like that. At this time next year when they deliver the Universal Binary version 2 8).
post #33 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Smircle
Not surprisingly, the minimal hardware specifications require a CoreImage-compatible GFX chip. Aperture imho is the stick in Apple's carrot-and-stick strategy to move Adobe towards using Core* in its products.

The recommended system specs are mind-boggling, though:
- Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 or faster
- 2GB of RAM
- One of the following graphics cards:
* ATI Radeon X800 XT Mac Edition
* ATI Radeon 9800 XT or 9800 Pro
* NVIDIA GeForce 6800 Ultra DDL or 6800 GT DDL
* NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GT
* NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500

What if I wanted to use it on one of the brand-new Powerbooks (w/2GB RAM)?

Sure, the real-time effects won't work but I hope I can run 6 MP images through it (Photoshop processes them fine on a 1 GHz Powerbook).

I don't know why but I think I am going to really like the app. I am no pro but I like the power of Raw and at the same time the simplicity of iPhoto.
post #34 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross

To use this you would HAVE to use PS as well. Apple even more than hinted as much. Read the article on Maccentral.

I don't think Aperture is a Photoshop killer, and I don't think Apple planned it as such. But if you think Bridge does everything Aperture claims, you're crazy. Aperture is about managing a creative process. Bridge is about managing files.

Thinking about my own experiences and what I've read about photo editing at places like National Geographic, the problems Aperture is trying to solve strike me as real and important. Real time viewing and cataloging of RAW files alone is a huge jump forward. Combine that with stacking and Apertures other organizational features, and I think we have the potential for a new killer app. A killer app that we would use alongside Photoshop.

Photoshop solves thousands of real problems itself. It is after all one of the original killer apps. But currently my RAW workflow is awkward at best. I use iView + PS CS, and I have to browse tiny thumbnails in iView, then launch PS, and then convert the file in Adobe RAW converter just to preview an image. I haven't had a chance to look at the new Bridge yet, but I'm pretty sure they haven't eliminated the need to convert RAW files before doing anything with them. Some of these issues can be alleviated by shooting RAW+JPEG, but that has its own issues.

My father-in-law is a professional sports photographer and is constantly shooting bursts of five or more shots. For people like him, stacking is a godsend. It will ease the logical dimensions of his catalog, it will ease the selection of the pick, and it will cut down on conversion time. These are all huge wins.

As you can see, I am very excited about Aperture. I just hope the performance is real. FinalCut Pro delivers on a lot of its real time claims, and it is a hit. The original iPhoto fell flat on performance and wasn't taken seriously. Lets hope Aperture is truly worthy being in the pro lineup.
post #35 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
"But $500 seems a bit high for what it looks to be doing."

I sometimes think Adobe charging an obscene price for exactly the same product is a bit high for a program which is essentially doing the same thing as version 4.

Lemon Bon Bon

Would you rather spend $1400 on the PC equivalent?

http://www.expressdigital.com/products/epsdarkroom.shtm

The problem with Apple pricing seems to stem from many of us expecting all of Apple's apps to be consumer based when the reality is Pros need tools that have a granular amount of control that isn't evident from screenshots. Photoshop doesn't look deep until you start wading through the pallettes.

I think Apple will have a winner here. The requirements won't seem so steep in a year when the Conroe Powermacs are out complete with 4mb shared L2 cache. Love the black UI and use of Core Image. Many Photographers won't use it but those that do will likely love it...and Apple.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #36 of 538
I don't see the need for heated comparison of Photoshop and Aperture. They don't really serve the same purpose.

Aperture is primarily for managing with some manipulation, Photoshop is for graphics and editing.

Aperture is primarily for the photographer and Photoshop is primarily for the graphic artist or photo editor.

You have to admit though the UI is slick.
post #37 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by Simple Ranger
I don't think Aperture is a Photoshop killer, and I don't think Apple planned it as such. But if you think Bridge does everything Aperture claims, you're crazy. Aperture is about managing a creative process. Bridge is about managing files.

Thinking about my own experiences and what I've read about photo editing at places like National Geographic, the problems Aperture is trying to solve strike me as real and important. Real time viewing and cataloging of RAW files alone is a huge jump forward. Combine that with stacking and Apertures other organizational features, and I think we have the potential for a new killer app. A killer app that we would use alongside Photoshop.

Photoshop solves thousands of real problems itself. It is after all one of the original killer apps. But currently my RAW workflow is awkward at best. I use iView + PS CS, and I have to browse tiny thumbnails in iView, then launch PS, and then convert the file in Adobe RAW converter just to preview an image. I haven't had a chance to look at the new Bridge yet, but I'm pretty sure they haven't eliminated the need to convert RAW files before doing anything with them. Some of these issues can be alleviated by shooting RAW+JPEG, but that has its own issues.

My father-in-law is a professional sports photographer and is constantly shooting bursts of five or more shots. For people like him, stacking is a godsend. It will ease the logical dimensions of his catalog, it will ease the selection of the pick, and it will cut down on conversion time. These are all huge wins.

As you can see, I am very excited about Aperture. I just hope the performance is real. FinalCut Pro delivers on a lot of its real time claims, and it is a hit. The original iPhoto fell flat on performance and wasn't taken seriously. Lets hope Aperture is truly worthy being in the pro lineup.

I didn't say that Bridge does everything that Aperture does. What I'm doing is countering the expectations that this a revolutionary program, when it's not. The does some things pretty well, if it works as well as claimed. But there isn't anything here that can't be added to Adobe's suite with an upgrade.

Also the claims that we're getting here that this the same as PS, or that it's just short a few features that some plug-ins will solve. Or that PS 9 is the same as ver 4, etc, are nonsense.

No one here has seen the program. Most here who are making definitive statements haven't used PS either, or at least haven't used it more than many have, which is to say, a primitive pixel editing program.

Apple is saying at this time that it is mostly a feed into PS unless you don't need to work on your images. I'm still waiting to see if that claim is valid. When I see proper CMYK support, etc. , then I'll feel better about it. I probably will get it.
post #38 of 538
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
And just what is non photo related that doesn't save a great deal of time for us when most of our (or our customers) images are going to be published?

If you are an advanced user then you must realize that saving time is above all the most important thing that any app can do. PS allows us to do work without having to leave the app. Many jobs that would have required me to go to Illustrator, and then to InDesign, can now be done directly in PS.

Is this a bad thing? Should Adobe remove all of these work saving features to make PS a "pure" photo editing app? This is one of it's most important and popular strengths.

okay, first, put the pitchfork and torch DOWN.

my point is this: there are many types of photoshop users, and a lot of them are not photographers. me, for instance. my forté is creating stuff out of nothing. give me photoshop, and even a blank canvas, colors, filters, brushes and a wacom tablet, and i can WORK it. i'm even more dangerous when i have a photo to start with. i've made myself and my companies a lot of money by taking a pretty sorry photos.com image, and turning it into something unique and special. i'm not bragging (much... ahem *blush*), just proud of what i can do with the app and the experience i've gained. but i'm not a photographer.

but, and this is a guess, i don't think a non-photographer would know what to do with aperture. it's that focused (some would say niche). photoshop does a lot, A LOT, but does a photographer use the vector shape tool? i'm not being facetious here (or if i were, i'd be trying a lot harder). that's a serious question. my guess is that if you're overlaying type on the photo, and compositing it with things like, for my example, the blobby vector shape, you probably aren't aperture's target. who is photoshop's target market? EVERYone. and it can be every tool to every task and every person. the phoographer, yes. and the painter. and the typographer. and the layout artist. and the video editor... etc. it's not a bad thing, but i've said this for a logn time, if it weren't for branding, photoshop could stand to have a new name, because it's just not indicative of how WIDE its scope has become. but there are a lot of photographers who couldn't care less about those extra features. they consider the painting and typography and the video editing and the file management someone else's thing, not theirs. and they might, just might be looking for something that focused.

please note, i come not to bury photoshop, but to praise it.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #39 of 538
Photographers are finally beginning to realize that while Photoshop is the ultimate application for creativity. For their needs some specific things must be done better. OS X users now have a couple of new apps to focus on that cater moreso to the photographer. They are

www.apple.com/aperture
www.lightcrafts.com Lightzone

Do they wish to replace Photoshop? No. They wish to give photographers top billing which is a refreshing change.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #40 of 538
OK another awesome app. However...Apple is making all our apps now. Is this good or bad?
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
"Overpopulation and climate change are serious shit." Gilsch
"I was really curious how they had managed such fine granularity of alienation." addabox
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Apple introduces Aperture