I will still use Aperture for a while yet, but then again, I don't use all of its features and I'm not a professional photographer - but I do love Aperture.
Having said that, Aperture does need to be updated. The new Photos app might be a welcome improvement, although I can't imagine that it will have all of the professional features of Aperture. Hopefully Apple progressively update it to include those key features - if they do, then I can see great value in Apple maintaining a powerful photo editing tool as part of their OS (rather than having to spend $200 on a separate application).
Fairly easy, lots out there, for sure. You will love Lightroom, I manage over a TB of photos with no problems, organized by year month day, etc. Have fun. Also, you may want to look at Photomatix Pro for HDR stuff.
I think I'll just stay with Aperture and see what Photos is like when it surfaces. Hopefully we'll get a developer version in the not too distant future with a beta Yosemite release. Yes I love the HDR plug in, I use Photomatix HDR from within Aperture and Photoshop, have for many years.
I will still use Aperture for a while yet, but then again, I don't use all of its features and I'm not a professional photographer - but I do love Aperture.
Having said that, Aperture does need to be updated. The new Photos app might be a welcome improvement, although I can't imagine that it will have all of the professional features of Aperture. Hopefully Apple progressively update it to include those key features - if they do, then I can see great value in Apple maintaining a powerful photo editing tool as part of their OS (rather than having to spend $200 on a separate application).
I agree. The only minor updates it will probably need and hopefully will get, will be 100% Yosemite compatible. It already works fine in Yosemite betas but I mean with future things not yet in the betas, like Yosemite's Photos and future FCPX's built in transfer ability. Just file handling tweaks that's all really. Surely that's not too much to ask is it ...? You listening Apple?
Quite an illuminating post. I think you and Phil have won me over. I am in the middle of setting up many 4K video slide shows from nearly 4,000 RAW images from a trip to Alaska using Aperture and FCPro X in conjunction and it is a very smooth and fast process. I really feared for a few moments I'd have to step outside my comfort zone and start learning Lightroom for a while there, no criticism of LR but my brain can only learn so much ... I feel pretty happy now I can keep going, not least of which is, continuing with Aperture for now, knowing it isn't going away any time soon as a working tool, but also comfortable there will be a seamless transition into Photos in the future. I believe ... :smokey:
Woah! Big project. Sincerely happy to hear your workflow is working for you. I have photogs on my list that get scared with anything over 500(!) pics.
Question, since I haven't looked at Aperture as an alternative since version 2: do you still have to export your final photo edits in Aperture first to a folder, or can FCPX pull photos out of your library on the fly? I thoroughly agree that would be a huge time-saver and win for Aperture.
Again, the hardest concept to get through most people's heads are what are RAWs and how to actually use them. Meaning, how to upload to FB, send an email, or put together a preview gallery/USB stick. That you have to export the edits first causes much consternation and aggressive resistance to using RAWs in the first place rather than the JPEGs.
I will still use Aperture for a while yet, but then again, I don't use all of its features and I'm not a professional photographer - but I do love Aperture.
Having said that, Aperture does need to be updated. The new Photos app might be a welcome improvement, although I can't imagine that it will have all of the professional features of Aperture. Hopefully Apple progressively update it to include those key features - if they do, then I can see great value in Apple maintaining a powerful photo editing tool as part of their OS (rather than having to spend $200 on a separate application).
I personally don't see why the new Photos app can't be even more powerful than Aperture. There's countless desktop apps as well as iOS apps at the moment that do a stellar job of RAW editing (created by small teams of developers)... there's even one already exclusively "in the cloud" so to speak: Online RAW Editor - http://raw.pics.io/
Catalog/Picture Management/Meta data editing
Simplistically speaking nothing more than a spreadsheet/database that needs to be editable and synced across platforms... and the data written into the files themselves for "transport". EXIF and IPTC has been around for a very long time, it's just that the companies making the software and online reservoirs like Flickr, iCloud, etc. need to be able to read and parse the data for it to be usable.
Face recognition seems to be the most used extra functionality that Apple users have come to love. That takes some serious processing power, so I'm unsure how that's going to work out on iCloud or iOS for feature compatibility across devices.
NOTE: Apple going 64-bit early on iOS processors have a HUGE impact on bringing the power of cross-platform compatibility to future apps like Photos... and Movies. :smokey:
Another new wrinkle in the development to Photos, is the appearance of the sRAW format coming to new cameras. The new Nikon D810 (Sony sensor) comes to mind and I believe it's a Sony initiative since some of their new cameras have it as well. sRAW is a compressed RAW format, and I or no one else has been able to compare it yet to shooting in "pure" RAW. Interesting enough though to think that new iOS devices will conceivably also support it since Apple uses a Sony chip for their cameras.
Something techy that a lot of photographers often don't quite understand, is that a JPEG while it saves hard disk space, also consumes a far larger amount in RAM than it's stated size in the finder when editing in say Photoshop or even iPhoto. A JPEG needs to be decompressed to facilitate edits, and then re-compressed at save time. Because it is a lossy compression, it is why it shouldn't be used for much more than an initial edit and never opened and saved over multiple editing sessions. To confuse the matter, Nikon has offered TIF format shooting, which is nothing more than in-camera processing just like the JPEG, but without the compression. Technically and to the naked eye, no use whatsoever over shooting JPEG Fine and then converting/saving the JPEGs to TIFs and/or after import, or after initial editing. The negligible quality loss from in-camera JPEG compression vs. TIF is not even a footnote if you shoot JPEG Fine and RAW, and a TIF takes up far more space than a RAW file... in most cases 2x or more.
sRAW format brings a whole new flexible format for both quality and saving disk/cloud space, as well as exporting to the common (and optimized) JPEG format only at sharing time such as Twitter, FB, web-posting, and email.
NOTE: with a 21 megapixel CR2 file from a Canon 6d: RAW = 22.7 mb JPEG = 2.7 mb TIF = 59.9 mb = working RAM space for editing the JPEG (or RAW)
* interesting to also note that a RAW file and a TIF file retain meta data, while a JPEG many times does not. Facebook is notorious for stripping meta data from photos that you post($%^&**!) :grumble:
If anyone is interested, this is what an XMP, or so called "side car" file looks like from a RAW edit using Adobe Camera RAW, which is also the same RAW processor in Lightroom.
Pretty readable straight forward stuff for just about anyone to make sense of. Not too much different than reading and writing PPDs in the day
Anyone brave enough to dig into their Aperture library to find a similar file(s) to do a comparison? I'd like to see how Apple creates their DB (I assume sqlite) and to "line up" the edits and see what exactly will need to take place for a library converter.
I like to be ahead of the game, rather than be surprised by the end result... :smokey:
Woah! Big project. Sincerely happy to hear your workflow is working for you. I have photogs on my list that get scared with anything over 500(!) pics.
Question, since I haven't looked at Aperture as an alternative since version 2: do you still have to export your final photo edits in Aperture first to a folder, or can FCPX pull photos out of your library on the fly? I thoroughly agree that would be a huge time-saver and win for Aperture.
Again, the hardest concept to get through most people's heads are what are RAWs and how to actually use them. Meaning, how to upload to FB, send an email, or put together a preview gallery/USB stick. That you have to export the edits first causes much consternation and aggressive resistance to using RAWs in the first place rather than the JPEGs.
I personally don't see why the new Photos app can't be even more powerful than Aperture. There's countless desktop apps as well as iOS apps at the moment that do a stellar job of RAW editing (created by small teams of developers)... there's even one already exclusively "in the cloud" so to speak: Online RAW Editor - http://raw.pics.io/
Catalog/Picture Management/Meta data editing
Simplistically speaking nothing more than a spreadsheet/database that needs to be editable and synced across platforms... and the data written into the files themselves for "transport". EXIF and IPTC has been around for a very long time, it's just that the companies making the software and online reservoirs like Flickr, iCloud, etc. need to be able to read and parse the data for it to be usable.
Face recognition seems to be the most used extra functionality that Apple users have come to love. That takes some serious processing power, so I'm unsure how that's going to work out on iCloud or iOS for feature compatibility across devices.
NOTE: Apple going 64-bit early on iOS processors have a HUGE impact on bringing the power of cross-platform compatibility to future apps like Photos... and Movies. :smokey:
Work flow:
1. In Aperture create an Album of desired images and order as desired. All mine are RAW.
2. In Final Cut Pro X create a 4K time line, I used ProRez 422 and default audio, and select the icon for Aperture's Library on the right side of FCProX (near transitions etc). Select the Album and drag to time line. Select all in time line and double click cross fade icon. All presets are great. Add music as desired.
3. Select Share to YouTube using 4K option.
4. There is no step 4.
I use iPhoto A LOT. They'd better not remove functionality in yet another stupid software dumbing down exercise. Also I don't want my photos in the cloud.
Can't wait to have features removed then have to wait ages for them to be re-added.. Like Pages. Except iWork for Mac is still missing things from iWork 09'.
Going by your sig, looks like you absolutely love to use ancient tech, and dont appreciate or even make sure of new hardware or software, so I dont think you're the barometer for what Apple should and shouldn't do. It has absolutely nothing to do with "dumbing down", but extending more functionality to more people, and enhancing their ecosystem. And guess what- most people DO want their photos in the cloud, and personally I'd rather keep them with Apple as opposed to Google. As for iWork, if you cant see that its infinitely better now than what it was before (iWork09), then really there's no hope. Maybe you don't care about collaboration features, speed, stability, usability, or 100% compatibility between OSX, web, and iOS version- but alot of people do.
You're one of those people that has probably called every move Apple has made in the last 10 years "stupid"- you cant see the forest for the trees. Sad. Step back and try to look at the big picture- which is what Apple always does, to their benefit. Photos wont have EVERY single last feature of Aperture, but it will probably have 90%, and Apple would rather have 100% of its OSX userbase have 90% of aperture features instead of a very tiny percentage.
Going by your sig, looks like you absolutely love to use ancient tech, and dont appreciate or even make sure of new hardware or software, so I dont think you're the barometer for what Apple should and shouldn't do. It has absolutely nothing to do with "dumbing down", but extending more functionality to more people, and enhancing their ecosystem. And guess what- most people DO want their photos in the cloud, and personally I'd rather keep them with Apple as opposed to Google. As for iWork, if you cant see that its infinitely better now than what it was before (iWork09), then really there's no hope. Maybe you don't care about collaboration features, speed, stability, usability, or 100% compatibility between OSX, web, and iOS version- but alot of people do.
Yep I agree and that attitude is the reason for the approaching death of Microsoft as most of its user base has the same 'don't change anything' attitude. Apple users, by enlarge, embrace change for the better and thrive on it. I also suspect the massive numbers of those coming new to Apple do so as they want to embrace the future. It is hard for us oldies to keep up but it's a great hobby for me now, keeping up with Apple! Beta testing new stuff well in advance of release is how i manage it.
1. In Aperture create an Album of desired images and order as desired. All mine are RAW.
2. In Final Cut Pro X create a 4K time line, I used ProRez 422 and default audio, and select the icon for Aperture's Library on the right side of FCProX (near transitions etc). Select the Album and drag to time line. Select all in time line and double click cross fade icon. All presets are great. Add music as desired.
3. Select Share to YouTube using 4K option.
4. There is no step 4.
OK. Well Lightroom has a similar capability if all you want is all of the slides to play with the same duration and transition. I thought you were maybe going back in and adding different transitions, audio dubs, maybe some motion effects ala Ken Burns, etc. In that case your workflow is a far better start because then you have the power of FCPX at your hands. I don't use Adobe Premier so can't say if anything is similar in that regard. FCPX is the FAR better program for our usage.
Yep I agree and that attitude is the reason for the approaching death of Microsoft as most of its user base has the same 'don't change anything' attitude. Apple users, by enlarge, embrace change for the better and thrive on it. I also suspect the massive numbers of those coming new to Apple do so as they want to embrace the future. It is hard for us oldies to keep up but it's a great hobby for me now, keeping up with Apple! Beta testing new stuff well in advance of release is how i manage it.
I've been saying this about Microsofties for ages. Amazing though the number of people that I've helped switch to Mac that simply can't believe how much more elegant and efficient our system and software works, from system-wide drag and drop, to copy and paste almost anything anywhere... to the killer feature that everyone absolute falls in love with: QuickView! Downright hilarious watching them move back to a WinBox and hitting the space-bar... and then remembering, "Nope. Gotta go back to my Mac ASAP for thaet"... among other nasty groans and moans mixed with NSFW cursing... I eat it up... :smokey:
Going by your sig, looks like you absolutely love to use ancient tech, and dont appreciate or even make sure of new hardware or software, so I dont think you're the barometer for what Apple should and shouldn't do. It has absolutely nothing to do with "dumbing down", but extending more functionality to more people, and enhancing their ecosystem. And guess what- most people DO want their photos in the cloud, and personally I'd rather keep them with Apple as opposed to Google. As for iWork, if you cant see that its infinitely better now than what it was before (iWork09), then really there's no hope. Maybe you don't care about collaboration features, speed, stability, usability, or 100% compatibility between OSX, web, and iOS version- but alot of people do.
You're one of those people that has probably called every move Apple has made in the last 10 years "stupid"- you cant see the forest for the trees. Sad. Step back and try to look at the big picture- which is what Apple always does, to their benefit. Photos wont have EVERY single last feature of Aperture, but it will probably have 90%, and Apple would rather have 100% of its OSX userbase have 90% of aperture features instead of a very tiny percentage.
Great post as always, telling it like it is
Only thing I don't agree with is the 90%. I think some things can be left out never to return, in favor of 20% new useful features for today and tomorrow. Some may take a while to get used to, and others may need to be fleshed out at a later date... but I think a 110% feature-laden and future-driven rewrite is better than a "100% All-In, Same-As-It-Ever-Was" compromise and carrying legacy code, just because so many people are childish in their, "don't wanna!... you can't make me!.... you're a big bad corporate bully" ... resistance to change.
OK. Well Lightroom has a similar capability if all you want is all of the slides to play with the same duration and transition. I thought you were maybe going back in and adding different transitions, audio dubs, maybe some motion effects ala Ken Burns, etc. In that case your workflow is a far better start because then you have the power of FCPX at your hands. I don't use Adobe Premier so can't say if anything is similar in that regard. FCPX is the FAR better program for our usage.
I've been saying this about Microsofties for ages. Amazing though the number of people that I've helped switch to Mac that simply can't believe how much more elegant and efficient our system and software works, from system-wide drag and drop, to copy and paste almost anything anywhere... to the killer feature that everyone absolute falls in love with: QuickView! Downright hilarious watching them move back to a WinBox and hitting the space-bar... and then remembering, "Nope. Gotta go back to my Mac ASAP for thaet"... among other nasty groans and moans mixed with NSFW cursing... I eat it up... :smokey:
Oh yes you can do anything you want once in FCProX I was giving the quick and dirty only. In fact it just occurred to me I could include my iPhone panos and make them pan over time from one side to the other at full 4k resolution.
2. Send feedback to apple.com/feedback once Photos is out, telling them which missing Aperture features (if any) are important to you.
3. Keep using Aperture until Photos can meet your needs. Aperture still exists.
4. I hear good things about Lightroom. Which is surreal to me, since everything I have personally experienced from Adobe in recent years has been negative! But it's nice to have options.
My head is still spinning from this, so thanks for your calm words of wisdom. For me though Adobe is not an option. I'm expecting Photos to serve 90% of my Aperture needs and for the plugins I use to be updated in time...otherwise I'll cling to Aperture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa
This is disgusting. Apple sells its loyal pro customers to notoriously greedy, subscriptions-only, buggy, non-OSX-compliant Adobe.
Even with upgraded iCloud storage up to 1TB would my photo library not fit on iCloud and the nerve it takes for Apple to suggest that anything but throwaway pictures be "secured" in the cloud in the post-Snowden era is just an outright insult to our intelligence.
I highly doubt there won't be a local storage option. Apple simply seems to be enhancing/improving its cloud services to allow you to sync your library to the Cloud if you wish, a bit like iTunes match except it's not matching anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grblade
Apple is planning on making Photos the solution for both consumers and pros. Photography is becoming increasingly important to Apple every year as they improve the quality of their cameras and the software that supports them. The Photos app will incorporate the same type of technology seen in iOS 8 where there is an easy way to make automatic adjustments to photos but also give you access to the finer controls if you want to use them. I don't think we'll lose functionality from Aperture. It'll just be in a new package.
I agree. I'm shocked if Apple are making a deliberate attempt to abandon pro(sumer) photographers. Digital photography has never been more popular and it's getting bigger all the time. It's also been a huge part of Apple's market for a long time. Never before can you buy a digital camera that can take such good pictures so cheaply. I hope that Photos will be able to meet my needs but I'm very nervous. I like Aperture's editing tools which offer pretty much everything I need, though its file organisation and workflow features are very bad.
1) Based on what you write in the second half of your comment it won't be "better" to you because it won't go back to that archaic system.
2) You have the ability to store your photos manually in Finder just as you do in Windows Explorer with as many subfolders as you wish.
You forgot the part where I said that Windows preview works much better than Apple's. For whatever reason, Apple only let's gifs work in text messages and emails but not within preview. Same for iOS. Gifs won't even play in your photo album but stick em in a text message and they work.
You forgot the part where I said that Windows preview works much better than Apple's. For whatever reason, Apple only let's gifs work in text messages and emails but not within preview. Same for iOS. Gifs won't even play in your photo album but stick em in a text message and they work.
They're fine in QuickLook. I'm sure Preview has a reason for showing them by frame.
Comments
Great write up, thanks
I was always stumped about Apple passing up the opportunity to buy NIK. I guess now I know why.
I will still use Aperture for a while yet, but then again, I don't use all of its features and I'm not a professional photographer - but I do love Aperture.
Having said that, Aperture does need to be updated. The new Photos app might be a welcome improvement, although I can't imagine that it will have all of the professional features of Aperture. Hopefully Apple progressively update it to include those key features - if they do, then I can see great value in Apple maintaining a powerful photo editing tool as part of their OS (rather than having to spend $200 on a separate application).
I think I'll just stay with Aperture and see what Photos is like when it surfaces. Hopefully we'll get a developer version in the not too distant future with a beta Yosemite release. Yes I love the HDR plug in, I use Photomatix HDR from within Aperture and Photoshop, have for many years.
I agree. The only minor updates it will probably need and hopefully will get, will be 100% Yosemite compatible. It already works fine in Yosemite betas but I mean with future things not yet in the betas, like Yosemite's Photos and future FCPX's built in transfer ability. Just file handling tweaks that's all really. Surely that's not too much to ask is it ...? You listening Apple?
I bet Bono is behind that!
Woah! Big project. Sincerely happy to hear your workflow is working for you. I have photogs on my list that get scared with anything over 500(!) pics.
Question, since I haven't looked at Aperture as an alternative since version 2: do you still have to export your final photo edits in Aperture first to a folder, or can FCPX pull photos out of your library on the fly? I thoroughly agree that would be a huge time-saver and win for Aperture.
Again, the hardest concept to get through most people's heads are what are RAWs and how to actually use them. Meaning, how to upload to FB, send an email, or put together a preview gallery/USB stick. That you have to export the edits first causes much consternation and aggressive resistance to using RAWs in the first place rather than the JPEGs.
I personally don't see why the new Photos app can't be even more powerful than Aperture. There's countless desktop apps as well as iOS apps at the moment that do a stellar job of RAW editing (created by small teams of developers)... there's even one already exclusively "in the cloud" so to speak: Online RAW Editor - http://raw.pics.io/
Catalog/Picture Management/Meta data editing
Simplistically speaking nothing more than a spreadsheet/database that needs to be editable and synced across platforms... and the data written into the files themselves for "transport". EXIF and IPTC has been around for a very long time, it's just that the companies making the software and online reservoirs like Flickr, iCloud, etc. need to be able to read and parse the data for it to be usable.
Face recognition seems to be the most used extra functionality that Apple users have come to love. That takes some serious processing power, so I'm unsure how that's going to work out on iCloud or iOS for feature compatibility across devices.
NOTE: Apple going 64-bit early on iOS processors have a HUGE impact on bringing the power of cross-platform compatibility to future apps like Photos... and Movies. :smokey:
Something techy that a lot of photographers often don't quite understand, is that a JPEG while it saves hard disk space, also consumes a far larger amount in RAM than it's stated size in the finder when editing in say Photoshop or even iPhoto. A JPEG needs to be decompressed to facilitate edits, and then re-compressed at save time. Because it is a lossy compression, it is why it shouldn't be used for much more than an initial edit and never opened and saved over multiple editing sessions. To confuse the matter, Nikon has offered TIF format shooting, which is nothing more than in-camera processing just like the JPEG, but without the compression. Technically and to the naked eye, no use whatsoever over shooting JPEG Fine and then converting/saving the JPEGs to TIFs and/or after import, or after initial editing. The negligible quality loss from in-camera JPEG compression vs. TIF is not even a footnote if you shoot JPEG Fine and RAW, and a TIF takes up far more space than a RAW file... in most cases 2x or more.
sRAW format brings a whole new flexible format for both quality and saving disk/cloud space, as well as exporting to the common (and optimized) JPEG format only at sharing time such as Twitter, FB, web-posting, and email.
NOTE: with a 21 megapixel CR2 file from a Canon 6d:
RAW = 22.7 mb
JPEG = 2.7 mb
TIF = 59.9 mb = working RAM space for editing the JPEG (or RAW)
* interesting to also note that a RAW file and a TIF file retain meta data, while a JPEG many times does not. Facebook is notorious for stripping meta data from photos that you post($%^&**!) :grumble:
[URL=https://www.dropbox.com/s/8w7ilrzqwie4bff/IMG_1052 copy.txt]XMP file converted to TXT[/URL]
Pretty readable straight forward stuff for just about anyone to make sense of. Not too much different than reading and writing PPDs in the day
Anyone brave enough to dig into their Aperture library to find a similar file(s) to do a comparison? I'd like to see how Apple creates their DB (I assume sqlite) and to "line up" the edits and see what exactly will need to take place for a library converter.
I like to be ahead of the game, rather than be surprised by the end result... :smokey:
Work flow:
1. In Aperture create an Album of desired images and order as desired. All mine are RAW.
2. In Final Cut Pro X create a 4K time line, I used ProRez 422 and default audio, and select the icon for Aperture's Library on the right side of FCProX (near transitions etc). Select the Album and drag to time line. Select all in time line and double click cross fade icon. All presets are great. Add music as desired.
3. Select Share to YouTube using 4K option.
4. There is no step 4.
Boooo
I use iPhoto A LOT. They'd better not remove functionality in yet another stupid software dumbing down exercise. Also I don't want my photos in the cloud.
Can't wait to have features removed then have to wait ages for them to be re-added.. Like Pages. Except iWork for Mac is still missing things from iWork 09'.
Going by your sig, looks like you absolutely love to use ancient tech, and dont appreciate or even make sure of new hardware or software, so I dont think you're the barometer for what Apple should and shouldn't do. It has absolutely nothing to do with "dumbing down", but extending more functionality to more people, and enhancing their ecosystem. And guess what- most people DO want their photos in the cloud, and personally I'd rather keep them with Apple as opposed to Google. As for iWork, if you cant see that its infinitely better now than what it was before (iWork09), then really there's no hope. Maybe you don't care about collaboration features, speed, stability, usability, or 100% compatibility between OSX, web, and iOS version- but alot of people do.
You're one of those people that has probably called every move Apple has made in the last 10 years "stupid"- you cant see the forest for the trees. Sad. Step back and try to look at the big picture- which is what Apple always does, to their benefit. Photos wont have EVERY single last feature of Aperture, but it will probably have 90%, and Apple would rather have 100% of its OSX userbase have 90% of aperture features instead of a very tiny percentage.
Yep I agree and that attitude is the reason for the approaching death of Microsoft as most of its user base has the same 'don't change anything' attitude. Apple users, by enlarge, embrace change for the better and thrive on it. I also suspect the massive numbers of those coming new to Apple do so as they want to embrace the future. It is hard for us oldies to keep up but it's a great hobby for me now, keeping up with Apple! Beta testing new stuff well in advance of release is how i manage it.
OK. Well Lightroom has a similar capability if all you want is all of the slides to play with the same duration and transition. I thought you were maybe going back in and adding different transitions, audio dubs, maybe some motion effects ala Ken Burns, etc. In that case your workflow is a far better start because then you have the power of FCPX at your hands. I don't use Adobe Premier so can't say if anything is similar in that regard. FCPX is the FAR better program for our usage.
I've been saying this about Microsofties for ages. Amazing though the number of people that I've helped switch to Mac that simply can't believe how much more elegant and efficient our system and software works, from system-wide drag and drop, to copy and paste almost anything anywhere... to the killer feature that everyone absolute falls in love with: QuickView! Downright hilarious watching them move back to a WinBox and hitting the space-bar... and then remembering, "Nope. Gotta go back to my Mac ASAP for thaet"... among other nasty groans and moans mixed with NSFW cursing...
Great post as always, telling it like it is
Only thing I don't agree with is the 90%. I think some things can be left out never to return, in favor of 20% new useful features for today and tomorrow. Some may take a while to get used to, and others may need to be fleshed out at a later date... but I think a 110% feature-laden and future-driven rewrite is better than a "100% All-In, Same-As-It-Ever-Was" compromise and carrying legacy code, just because so many people are childish in their, "don't wanna!... you can't make me!.... you're a big bad corporate bully" ... resistance to change.
Oh yes you can do anything you want once in FCProX I was giving the quick and dirty only. In fact it just occurred to me I could include my iPhone panos and make them pan over time from one side to the other at full 4k resolution.
Advice to Aperture users:
1. Take a deep breath.
2. Send feedback to apple.com/feedback once Photos is out, telling them which missing Aperture features (if any) are important to you.
3. Keep using Aperture until Photos can meet your needs. Aperture still exists.
4. I hear good things about Lightroom. Which is surreal to me, since everything I have personally experienced from Adobe in recent years has been negative! But it's nice to have options.
My head is still spinning from this, so thanks for your calm words of wisdom. For me though Adobe is not an option. I'm expecting Photos to serve 90% of my Aperture needs and for the plugins I use to be updated in time...otherwise I'll cling to Aperture.
This is disgusting. Apple sells its loyal pro customers to notoriously greedy, subscriptions-only, buggy, non-OSX-compliant Adobe.
Even with upgraded iCloud storage up to 1TB would my photo library not fit on iCloud and the nerve it takes for Apple to suggest that anything but throwaway pictures be "secured" in the cloud in the post-Snowden era is just an outright insult to our intelligence.
I highly doubt there won't be a local storage option. Apple simply seems to be enhancing/improving its cloud services to allow you to sync your library to the Cloud if you wish, a bit like iTunes match except it's not matching anything.
Apple is planning on making Photos the solution for both consumers and pros. Photography is becoming increasingly important to Apple every year as they improve the quality of their cameras and the software that supports them. The Photos app will incorporate the same type of technology seen in iOS 8 where there is an easy way to make automatic adjustments to photos but also give you access to the finer controls if you want to use them. I don't think we'll lose functionality from Aperture. It'll just be in a new package.
I agree. I'm shocked if Apple are making a deliberate attempt to abandon pro(sumer) photographers. Digital photography has never been more popular and it's getting bigger all the time. It's also been a huge part of Apple's market for a long time. Never before can you buy a digital camera that can take such good pictures so cheaply. I hope that Photos will be able to meet my needs but I'm very nervous. I like Aperture's editing tools which offer pretty much everything I need, though its file organisation and workflow features are very bad.
You forgot the part where I said that Windows preview works much better than Apple's. For whatever reason, Apple only let's gifs work in text messages and emails but not within preview. Same for iOS. Gifs won't even play in your photo album but stick em in a text message and they work.
They're fine in QuickLook. I'm sure Preview has a reason for showing them by frame.
Of course there is a reason. Otherwise we wouldn't be able to read the TextEdit.app icon
I really don't like Yosemite's change to it, both because the message is gone and because the design doesn't do much for me.
I've been using this, myself, simply for higher visibility. It's not the best (anyone use anything better?), and you lose the message, but...