As I've recently bought a fancy DSLR (well, technically it's not a DSLR as it's a Micro 4/3rds Lumix GH1), I'm now wondering if I should upgrade iPhoto to Aperture 3.
It may very well be worth it. I'm by no means a professional photographer but one of the reasons for my Mac purchase was Aperture. Of course iPhoto has improved significantly since then too so maybe not as easy to justify now. This looks like a massive update so old justifications go out the window.
Quote:
I have an ancient copy of Photoshop that I find a bit of a pain for retouching (usually removing things from photos, or stitching panoramas), and iPhoto for all the basic stuff.
The old version of Aperture was nothing like Photoshop and could best be described as a archiveing and light touch up program.
Quote:
So, what benefit would Aperture 3 give me as a fairly new and inexperienced hobbyist photographer?
Err nobody has Aperture 3 yet, so you won't get a valid answer. Instead look at the docs Apple has. That being said I see it as a worthwhile investment if you have a lot of pics to manage.
OK - i guess I'd consider myself an "advanced amateur" photographer/photoshop-er and am still not certain what I gain in Aperture 3 over my current iPhoto library.
Greater variety in organizing and storing your photo's. Some pretty good editing tools that are non-destructive and also keep multiple versions of your files without consuming all of your disk space.
I do 95% of my editing in Aperture combined with Nik Softwares excellent plugins. Aperture allows me to quickly organize my files after a shoot, process them and move on. I'd rather be taking photo's instead of jockying Photoshop, so it's a great tool - YMMV
Do you have a DSLR and shoot RAW? Aperture is primarily a tool for managing RAW files first and foremost. It will manage JPEG, but it really shines when you shoot RAW.
Quote:
And...how easy it to import my nearly 11K images into Aperture 3 (or do I need to import them at all - can it access my existing iPhoto library?)
Trivial. You can import the entire library or do it album, event or selections at a time. I recommend doing it in little bunches so you can update the metadata as you go (location, your name, basic description of the shoot or event, copyright, etc.)
Also, when you install Aperture, an Aperture library media browser is added. So any program that shows your iPhoto library, will gain a new entry for your Aperture library. You can also open each library in the other program and pull pictures back and forth between iPhoto and Aperture that way.
Download the trial and try it out. Watch the tutorial video's - they are excellent. There are also some really great Apple provided podcasts, as well as other video podcasts on running Aperture (version 2, of course but the basics should translate). Finally there are awesome sites like Lynda.com that have excellent training as well.
You could download the 30-day free trial in the meantime.
Excellent point - thanks! I think I'll do that and just order it when it becomes available online - hopefully can find it a little discounted at a site like Amazon
The new Aperture 3 database format offers many benefits, including better performance, the ability to split and merge libraries, and switch between libraries without relaunching Aperture.
Unless something has gone horribly wrong, I generally stick with the JPEGs. I have the camera set up to store the RAW and the JPEG just in case I do something stupid with the settings
Shooting .jpg is going horribly wrong! Of course your software has to be able to work with the RAW files from the camera. This may not mean much to you now but it will down the road when your skills increase.
Quote:
The bundled SilkyPix does a decent enough job of allowing fiddling with the RAW before saving as JPEG. The UI is pretty horrible, so 'built in' handling of the GH1 RAW files would certainly be a bonus!
I'll take a look at Acorn -- though to me Acorn means BBC Model B and Archimedes! Elite and Chucky Egg FTW!
That was funny because that is what came to my mind too.
Not that this will help solve your Photoshop crashing problem, but I'm running Photoshop CS4 on a late-'07 iMac 2.4GHz Core2Duo with 4GB of RAM and a 1.5TB 7200 RPM HDD and it runs flawlessly. OS is the latest version of SL. Obviously, there are other variables, but I don't find anything wrong with the program.
You obviously haven't used it enough.
I use CS4 on a Mac Pro 8 core machine with 10 GB of RAM and it's the slowest, buggy POS imaginable. I guess you don't use many of Snow Leopards new features either because Photoshop regularly fails at using "spaces," is only 32 bit, needs Flash to even run and has trouble even making a simple icon preview for cover-flow. I could write for pages on what's wrong with CS4 on a Mac. Quite literally the worst designed, and yet most expensive program I own.
It may very well be worth it. I'm by no means a professional photographer but one of the reasons for my Mac purchase was Aperture. Of course iPhoto has improved significantly since then too so maybe not as easy to justify now. This looks like a massive update so old justifications go out the window.
The old version of Aperture was nothing like Photoshop and could best be described as a archiveing and light touch up program.
Err nobody has Aperture 3 yet, so you won't get a valid answer. Instead look at the docs Apple has. That being said I see it as a worthwhile investment if you have a lot of pics to manage.
Dave
So you're answer is also invalid and should be ignored? I think people can give a valid answer.. It's not THAT different from Aperture 2. I've been using Aperture for years. And yeah Aperture's not supposed to be like Photoshop. It's a workflow app and light editor and Photoshop is your retoucher.
Then again they probably write the GPS data to the database and not the photo - if true, then the third party programs still have some value. I can't wait to play with that feature! And the iPhone integration is pretty slick too! But having a GPS track log from a cheap Garmin looks to still be the best solution (other than having GPS built into the camera - hear that Nikon and Canon?!?!)
I use CS4 on a Mac Pro 8 core machine with 10 GB of RAM and it's the slowest, buggy POS imaginable. I guess you don't use many of Snow Leopards new features either because Photoshop regularly fails at using "spaces," is only 32 bit, needs Flash to even run and has trouble even making a simple icon preview for cover-flow. I could write for pages on what's wrong with CS4 on a Mac. Quite literally the worst designed, and yet most expensive program I own.
My favourite bit of 'WTF' with Photoshop is that it installs a crippled version of Opera deep within your system for the purposes of running the help files. Why?
That and the fact that you can't move the application from the default directory without some serious hackery.
Flash looks like a piece of tight, well written code by comparison.
Then again they probably write the GPS data to the database and not the photo - if true, then the third party programs still have some value. I can't wait to play with that feature! And the iPhone integration is pretty slick too! But having a GPS track log from a cheap Garmin looks to still be the best solution (other than having GPS built into the camera - hear that Nikon and Canon?!?!)
Multiple display support - finally!
Yup, the 'Places' feature of iPhoto stopped me looking any further at Aperture. Now it's integrated with A3, I think I'll give the trial a go.
It'll be interesting to see how it works exactly and if I still need GPSPhotoLinker.
Oh, and my cheap-off-eBay GPS logger only does GPX tracks. Does anyone know of A3 copes with these, or do I need to RTFM?
Just remember that OSX (that means including Preview, iPhoto and Aperture) does not yet support RAW for the Lumix G cameras. So you are OK if you stay with .jpg.
Actually, with the new version Aperture now (finally) supports RAW from the Lumix DMC-LX3!
Also from the Lumix DMC-GH1 & Lumix DMC-G1, so the Lumix DMC-GF1 can't be far behind
Yeah, that's the only thing i have been wondering about, when will the camera manufacturers come with a DSLR that has a GPS? This feature has been on phones for ages, and i def do not feel for having to get one more device to be able to geotag:-( Big Fail!
I was so hoping the EOS 550D would be the one to go for, it has everything i was hoping for, except geotag. Oh well, hopefully somebody can come up with a small receiver that would be placed e.g. where the ext-flash goes? Otherwise it'll probably be the EOS 600D...or 650D for me.
I tried Aperture for a year and then had the pleasure of using lightroom. Both are excellent apps. But there are some issues with Aperture that I can't get over. I have a Nehalem 8 core 2.66 mac pro with 6gb ram and a 4870. I always find that after using Aperture for an hour or so, my computer feels a lot slower. Aperture can be the ONLY program I use and it feels slower. There was an obvious underlying issue with 2.x.
And yes, you can "import" to an external folder, but not directly from a camera. You had to drag your imaes to a folder, then import into the library. Lightroom lets you do that in 1 window. I'm sure these brushes are a nice addition for some people that don't have photoshop, but for those of us that do, I'm sure we'd rather have the editing power of photoshop than use Aperture to do it.
Eitherway, as I said I like both programs. They are very similar. I just hope Aperture can fix/fixed the performance issues.
I've just ordered my update. I haven't seen mention of the Vault archive system in the new version. I wonder if it is still there?
One feature I wish Apple would add (201st new feature) would be the ability to do what Photomatix does, merge RAW files of wide ranging f stops to give massive tonal ranges within one HDR image.
I wish Apple would make Aperture an alternative to Adobe's Photoshop. I have problems with CS4 crashing on a lean Mac Pro with 10 gigs of ram. Adobe is not the company it was in the 90's when it comes to Mac support and development and someone needs to challenge their monopoly of photo editing, desktop publishing and website authoring software. I will be taking a serious look at Aperture 3.
I hope for the same thing, but Apple doesn't even have a toe-hold in the vector graphics market. Would love an alternative to Illustrator and InDesign. It is hard to believe that is their long-term strategy...
I shoot raw and use DPP, Canon software to convert and then export to Photoshop CS2. Have a old Dual G4 Mac. Will be buying new 27 quad soon so I will need new software. Have thought of Elements because I don't need full Photoshop. Will Aperture let me directly import from DPP like Photoshop or is the conversion software good enough that I can open raw directly in Aperture. Can I adjust curves, crop, sharpen and resize with Aperture or will I still need another program? Thanks
Perfect update. Now all the typical curves adjustment, vignette control, selective sharpening and much of the look testing seemingly can be done in Aperture. That's serilously a big Wow! I also really love the possibility of version control, flickr-integration and of course GPS/Faces.
This is a really great improvement, and I think - pushing Aperture far ahead of even the Lightroom+PS combo in usability, while not compromissing one bit with the necessities of pro photographers.
Comments
As I've recently bought a fancy DSLR (well, technically it's not a DSLR as it's a Micro 4/3rds Lumix GH1), I'm now wondering if I should upgrade iPhoto to Aperture 3.
It may very well be worth it. I'm by no means a professional photographer but one of the reasons for my Mac purchase was Aperture. Of course iPhoto has improved significantly since then too so maybe not as easy to justify now. This looks like a massive update so old justifications go out the window.
I have an ancient copy of Photoshop that I find a bit of a pain for retouching (usually removing things from photos, or stitching panoramas), and iPhoto for all the basic stuff.
The old version of Aperture was nothing like Photoshop and could best be described as a archiveing and light touch up program.
So, what benefit would Aperture 3 give me as a fairly new and inexperienced hobbyist photographer?
Err nobody has Aperture 3 yet, so you won't get a valid answer. Instead look at the docs Apple has. That being said I see it as a worthwhile investment if you have a lot of pics to manage.
Dave
OK - i guess I'd consider myself an "advanced amateur" photographer/photoshop-er and am still not certain what I gain in Aperture 3 over my current iPhoto library.
Greater variety in organizing and storing your photo's. Some pretty good editing tools that are non-destructive and also keep multiple versions of your files without consuming all of your disk space.
I do 95% of my editing in Aperture combined with Nik Softwares excellent plugins. Aperture allows me to quickly organize my files after a shoot, process them and move on. I'd rather be taking photo's instead of jockying Photoshop, so it's a great tool - YMMV
Do you have a DSLR and shoot RAW? Aperture is primarily a tool for managing RAW files first and foremost. It will manage JPEG, but it really shines when you shoot RAW.
And...how easy it to import my nearly 11K images into Aperture 3 (or do I need to import them at all - can it access my existing iPhoto library?)
Trivial. You can import the entire library or do it album, event or selections at a time. I recommend doing it in little bunches so you can update the metadata as you go (location, your name, basic description of the shoot or event, copyright, etc.)
Also, when you install Aperture, an Aperture library media browser is added. So any program that shows your iPhoto library, will gain a new entry for your Aperture library. You can also open each library in the other program and pull pictures back and forth between iPhoto and Aperture that way.
Download the trial and try it out. Watch the tutorial video's - they are excellent. There are also some really great Apple provided podcasts, as well as other video podcasts on running Aperture (version 2, of course but the basics should translate). Finally there are awesome sites like Lynda.com that have excellent training as well.
You could download the 30-day free trial in the meantime.
Excellent point - thanks! I think I'll do that and just order it when it becomes available online - hopefully can find it a little discounted at a site like Amazon
The new Aperture 3 database format offers many benefits, including better performance, the ability to split and merge libraries, and switch between libraries without relaunching Aperture.
Yay!
Thanks.
Unless something has gone horribly wrong, I generally stick with the JPEGs. I have the camera set up to store the RAW and the JPEG just in case I do something stupid with the settings
Shooting .jpg is going horribly wrong! Of course your software has to be able to work with the RAW files from the camera. This may not mean much to you now but it will down the road when your skills increase.
The bundled SilkyPix does a decent enough job of allowing fiddling with the RAW before saving as JPEG. The UI is pretty horrible, so 'built in' handling of the GH1 RAW files would certainly be a bonus!
I'll take a look at Acorn -- though to me Acorn means BBC Model B and Archimedes! Elite and Chucky Egg FTW!
That was funny because that is what came to my mind too.
Dave
Not that this will help solve your Photoshop crashing problem, but I'm running Photoshop CS4 on a late-'07 iMac 2.4GHz Core2Duo with 4GB of RAM and a 1.5TB 7200 RPM HDD and it runs flawlessly. OS is the latest version of SL. Obviously, there are other variables, but I don't find anything wrong with the program.
You obviously haven't used it enough.
I use CS4 on a Mac Pro 8 core machine with 10 GB of RAM and it's the slowest, buggy POS imaginable. I guess you don't use many of Snow Leopards new features either because Photoshop regularly fails at using "spaces," is only 32 bit, needs Flash to even run and has trouble even making a simple icon preview for cover-flow. I could write for pages on what's wrong with CS4 on a Mac. Quite literally the worst designed, and yet most expensive program I own.
It may very well be worth it. I'm by no means a professional photographer but one of the reasons for my Mac purchase was Aperture. Of course iPhoto has improved significantly since then too so maybe not as easy to justify now. This looks like a massive update so old justifications go out the window.
The old version of Aperture was nothing like Photoshop and could best be described as a archiveing and light touch up program.
Err nobody has Aperture 3 yet, so you won't get a valid answer. Instead look at the docs Apple has. That being said I see it as a worthwhile investment if you have a lot of pics to manage.
Dave
So you're answer is also invalid and should be ignored? I think people can give a valid answer.. It's not THAT different from Aperture 2. I've been using Aperture for years. And yeah Aperture's not supposed to be like Photoshop. It's a workflow app and light editor and Photoshop is your retoucher.
http://www.apple.com/aperture/how-to/#video-welcome
Then again they probably write the GPS data to the database and not the photo - if true, then the third party programs still have some value. I can't wait to play with that feature! And the iPhone integration is pretty slick too! But having a GPS track log from a cheap Garmin looks to still be the best solution (other than having GPS built into the camera - hear that Nikon and Canon?!?!)
Multiple display support - finally!
You obviously haven't used it enough.
I use CS4 on a Mac Pro 8 core machine with 10 GB of RAM and it's the slowest, buggy POS imaginable. I guess you don't use many of Snow Leopards new features either because Photoshop regularly fails at using "spaces," is only 32 bit, needs Flash to even run and has trouble even making a simple icon preview for cover-flow. I could write for pages on what's wrong with CS4 on a Mac. Quite literally the worst designed, and yet most expensive program I own.
My favourite bit of 'WTF' with Photoshop is that it installs a crippled version of Opera deep within your system for the purposes of running the help files. Why?
That and the fact that you can't move the application from the default directory without some serious hackery.
Flash looks like a piece of tight, well written code by comparison.
They also removed the need for 3rd party GPS software to link a GPS track log to your Photo's - watch the "Importing GPS locations..." video:
http://www.apple.com/aperture/how-to/#video-welcome
Then again they probably write the GPS data to the database and not the photo - if true, then the third party programs still have some value. I can't wait to play with that feature! And the iPhone integration is pretty slick too! But having a GPS track log from a cheap Garmin looks to still be the best solution (other than having GPS built into the camera - hear that Nikon and Canon?!?!)
Multiple display support - finally!
Yup, the 'Places' feature of iPhoto stopped me looking any further at Aperture. Now it's integrated with A3, I think I'll give the trial a go.
It'll be interesting to see how it works exactly and if I still need GPSPhotoLinker.
Oh, and my cheap-off-eBay GPS logger only does GPX tracks. Does anyone know of A3 copes with these, or do I need to RTFM?
Just remember that OSX (that means including Preview, iPhoto and Aperture) does not yet support RAW for the Lumix G cameras. So you are OK if you stay with .jpg.
Actually, with the new version Aperture now (finally) supports RAW from the Lumix DMC-LX3!
Also from the Lumix DMC-GH1 & Lumix DMC-G1, so the Lumix DMC-GF1 can't be far behind
Reason enough to upgrade
I was so hoping the EOS 550D would be the one to go for, it has everything i was hoping for, except geotag. Oh well, hopefully somebody can come up with a small receiver that would be placed e.g. where the ext-flash goes? Otherwise it'll probably be the EOS 600D...or 650D for me.
How do you guys geotag? Thanks!
And yes, you can "import" to an external folder, but not directly from a camera. You had to drag your imaes to a folder, then import into the library. Lightroom lets you do that in 1 window. I'm sure these brushes are a nice addition for some people that don't have photoshop, but for those of us that do, I'm sure we'd rather have the editing power of photoshop than use Aperture to do it.
Eitherway, as I said I like both programs. They are very similar. I just hope Aperture can fix/fixed the performance issues.
One feature I wish Apple would add (201st new feature) would be the ability to do what Photomatix does, merge RAW files of wide ranging f stops to give massive tonal ranges within one HDR image.
I wish Apple would make Aperture an alternative to Adobe's Photoshop. I have problems with CS4 crashing on a lean Mac Pro with 10 gigs of ram. Adobe is not the company it was in the 90's when it comes to Mac support and development and someone needs to challenge their monopoly of photo editing, desktop publishing and website authoring software. I will be taking a serious look at Aperture 3.
I hope for the same thing, but Apple doesn't even have a toe-hold in the vector graphics market. Would love an alternative to Illustrator and InDesign. It is hard to believe that is their long-term strategy...
Oh, and my cheap-off-eBay GPS logger only does GPX tracks. Does anyone know of A3 copes with these, or do I need to RTFM?
No need to read, just watch the video
EDIT: Oh yeah, you won't need third party software - Aperture does it all internally now. Again, watch the video!
This is a really great improvement, and I think - pushing Aperture far ahead of even the Lightroom+PS combo in usability, while not compromissing one bit with the necessities of pro photographers.
A big smile, and a definite upgrade for me.
Actually, with the new version Aperture now (finally) supports RAW from the Lumix DMC-LX3!
Also from the Lumix DMC-GH1 & Lumix DMC-G1, so the Lumix DMC-GF1 can't be far behind
Reason enough to upgrade
Well, I'm sold!