Originally posted by rokokay, 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.
My pitchfork is used exclusively in my garden. My wife won't let me bring a torch in the house outside of my shoops.
Ok, let me straighten things out here.
Thursday I went to the show. This is what I did regarding Aperture.
I spoke to several Apple reps about the program and hardware needed to run it.
I sat through the 20 minute presentation.
I took the hands on class they gave.
I think I have a pretty good idea of what this program is capable of doing at this time, and who would benefit from it the most.
Wedding and event photogs.
This group of people is going to get the most out of this. The great ability to organize and select photos is this program's strength. The work ing with RAW images is well done, though it does need support for more pro cameras than it has now. That would limit it. The amount of correction available will satisfy most of their needs. Wedding photog's will still have to go to PS for "special effects" (picture in picture,etc), but most of it can be done here. For them, the book layout function can be useful, if the client doesn't object to getting something that isn't a "real" photo. Otherwise this app can be close to perfect for them
It would depend on how the photog has to work. If (s)he has to organize and select photos, while doing their own corrections, then the front end of this program will again be perfect. If, like many journalists, they don't do any of that, just sending or bringing their work in for the editors to organize and select, with the journal itself doing all of the setup and correction, then the program won't be useful. Possibly the front end will be of use to the editorial staff.
Individual pro's other than the above mentioned.
It depends on how their work is used and output. If it goes to publication, and they do the selecting, then is will be of great help, again in the front end, as long as extensive work is not required. The output part of the program is not ready for that as yet. For local printing it is fine.
Commercial studio work.
Here, this program is the least suitable. Most comm photog's who are digital are using camera's and backs that are supplied with hi level programs that suit their purpose. Two systems I work with, Leaf and Phase One are setup for the high volume studio. The programs come with realtime abilities. As photo's are being shot at speeds of up to about a photo a second (medium format backs can't shoot faster than that as yet) the pics appear on the monitor screen in a contact sheet like format. The pics parade down the screen and can be instantly picked and enlarged to look at, or discarded from the emerging group (but not actually thrown away, just put into a discard folder). The editor is usually sitting at the computer doing this as the session is live, often stopping it to consult with the people on the set. These programs also do hi level correcting to preset standards the photog can adjust to meet individual clients needs.
Aperture may have some use after this is all done, but I can't see it taking the place of these highly specialized programs. These companies also will work with the individual photog and customize certain parts of the program as needed. Apple can't give that kind of service as they are not making or selling cameras and backs in the five figures. Nor should they be expected to.
Those are the main categories. There are sub categories, but that covers it fairly well. It remains to be seen if Apple is as responsive to the needs of photographers are they have been to filmmakers.