And a camera that shoots in RAW format too. Otherwise, Aperture is sorta useless...
Uhhh.... Aperture is a pro app. For fun and kiddie stuff you have iPhoto. My Nikon D4 delivers 36 meg (uncompressed RAW files) and my Nikon D800 delivers approximately 75 meg (uncompressed RAW files) so why would you want a phone to do this. Useless is the word I'm looking for....
I know. I just keep hoping maybe they'll suddenly decide to refocus even a tiny bit of their now obscene resources to the pro arena. I still have a little Aperture 4 wish list in my Stickies- hope springs eternal and all that.
Raw in a phone camera? Does anyone offer that? Does it provide a significant benefit for phone camera use?
A camera phone probably doesn't really need it, but Aperture works best with RAW images. If they make Aperture for IOS, I would assume it would be to use with Apple hardware, as they really don't advertise the fact much that you can load pictures from "real" cameras onto the iPad fairly easily. At least, they don't yet.
Uhhh.... Aperture is a pro app. For fun and kiddie stuff you have iPhoto. My Nikon D4 delivers 36 meg (uncompressed RAW files) and my Nikon D800 delivers approximately 75 meg (uncompressed RAW files) so why would you want a phone to do this. Useless is the word I'm looking for....
The iPad (especialy with a retina display) would be a very handy tool for the photographer if it had the right software...
I don't think Aperture will move to iOS. Rather, iPhoto will eventually become iOS only, in line with the idea of iPad for casual users and Mac for pro users. The reason they mentioned OS X or iOS in the ad is that the APIs are so similar (so someone with iOS development experience could very quickly come up to speed with Mac dev).
The iPad (especialy with a retina display) would be a very handy tool for the photographer if it had the right software...
And what software would that be? Portfolio software, photo editing software? There are tons of each out there. Aperture on a Mac can be a resource intense experience. It would be even worse and overkill on an iPad. By the way I have an iPad3 or whatever it is and use iPhoto to gallery my photos. It is more than enough to show photos. As long as Apple doesn't allow for screen calibration of the iPad anything as resource intensive as Aperture would simply be a waste of time.
I don't understand why Apple would focus on iOS and not OS X with Aperture. Especially when the current version is desperately in need of a refresh (to stay competitive with Adobe). Unless they want to relinquish the pro market to LR4. I don't think they will, but man are they taking their sweet time getting this new version out the door.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail
And a camera that shoots in RAW format too. Otherwise, Aperture is sorta useless...
Uhhh.... Aperture is a pro app. For fun and kiddie stuff you have iPhoto. My Nikon D4 delivers 36 meg (uncompressed RAW files) and my Nikon D800 delivers approximately 75 meg (uncompressed RAW files) so why would you want a phone to do this. Useless is the word I'm looking for....
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikema420
I know. I just keep hoping maybe they'll suddenly decide to refocus even a tiny bit of their now obscene resources to the pro arena. I still have a little Aperture 4 wish list in my Stickies- hope springs eternal and all that.
I feel your pain...
AE in 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
Raw in a phone camera? Does anyone offer that? Does it provide a significant benefit for phone camera use?
A camera phone probably doesn't really need it, but Aperture works best with RAW images. If they make Aperture for IOS, I would assume it would be to use with Apple hardware, as they really don't advertise the fact much that you can load pictures from "real" cameras onto the iPad fairly easily. At least, they don't yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapporobabyrtrns
Uhhh.... Aperture is a pro app. For fun and kiddie stuff you have iPhoto. My Nikon D4 delivers 36 meg (uncompressed RAW files) and my Nikon D800 delivers approximately 75 meg (uncompressed RAW files) so why would you want a phone to do this. Useless is the word I'm looking for....
The iPad (especialy with a retina display) would be a very handy tool for the photographer if it had the right software...
I don't think Aperture will move to iOS. Rather, iPhoto will eventually become iOS only, in line with the idea of iPad for casual users and Mac for pro users. The reason they mentioned OS X or iOS in the ad is that the APIs are so similar (so someone with iOS development experience could very quickly come up to speed with Mac dev).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail
The iPad (especialy with a retina display) would be a very handy tool for the photographer if it had the right software...
And what software would that be? Portfolio software, photo editing software? There are tons of each out there. Aperture on a Mac can be a resource intense experience. It would be even worse and overkill on an iPad. By the way I have an iPad3 or whatever it is and use iPhoto to gallery my photos. It is more than enough to show photos. As long as Apple doesn't allow for screen calibration of the iPad anything as resource intensive as Aperture would simply be a waste of time.