Apple's 'Photos' for OS X to come with pro-level image search, editing, plugins, more

Posted:
in Mac Software edited February 2015
Less than a week after Apple announced plans to ditch both its pro-level Aperture and consumer-minded iPhoto photography tools for OS X, a report on Tuesday offers additional details on the upcoming replacement app, Photos for OS X.


Source: Apple


Last Friday, Apple revealed it has ceased development of Aperture and iPhoto in favor of "Photos for OS X," which is set to debut in 2015 as an accompaniment to the next-generation OS X 10.10 Yosemite operating system.

At the time, little was known about Photos aside from a brief onstage mention at WWDC and a screenshot that shows a user interface and toolset befitting of a "prosumer" title.

On Tuesday, Apple revealed a bit more background on the upcoming app, telling Ars Technica that Aperture-level features will be built into the title at launch, including image search, editing, effects and third-party extensibility, or plugins.

As seen in the above screenshot provided by Apple, Photos for OS X will be an in-between product, blurring the line between consumer and professional-grade image editing and management software. For example, while image adjustments like saturation, temperature and contrast exist in iPhoto, the upcoming Photos app appears to have a higher level of control ala Aperture.

The most enticing promise, however, is third-party extensibility, which could potentially bring advanced customization options that users can apply to tailor Photos to their specific needs. If developers take to Apple's software, the app may one day offer an image editing framework robust and powerful enough to rival true pro-level tools. That being said, it looks as though out-of-the-box functionality will be somewhere between iPhoto and Aperture, as Apple alluded to in its previous statement.

As for current Aperture users, Apple said it will roll out a final update to bring compatibility with OS X Yosemite, but there are no plans to continue software development beyond that point. To ease the transition, the company is working on a solution to streamline image transfers from Aperture to Photos for OS X, which will likely to built into the forthcoming title.

Interestingly, Apple also mentioned it is concurrently working on a transitionary workflow from Aperture to Adobe's Lightroom, suggesting Photos may not fit the needs of photography professionals.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 92
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,755member
    I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud
  • Reply 2 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

    I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

     

    Here’s what I want from iCloud:

     

    Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.

    It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.

    When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

     

    New document created on my Mac Pro.

    That new document is created automatically on my MacBook Pro and my iPad.

    Identical folder trees on each, within my local account. Meaning that if I create a new folder in Documents, name it something, and drag existing files there from elsewhere, I want that all to happen on my other devices at the same time.



    No storage. Screw keeping MY content in someone else’s hands. iCloud as a conduit for syncing local content across all my devices. But I am still in possession of the files.

     

    Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.

  • Reply 3 of 92
    poochpooch Posts: 768member
    At the time, little was known about Photos aside from a brief onstage mention at WWDC and a screenshot that shows a user interface and toolset befitting of a "prosumer" title.
    . . . have a higher level of control ala Aperture.

    befitting of. ala. too bad there's no-one around to proofread your writing. but, as mikey campbell says, "I can't."
  • Reply 4 of 92
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post





    The most enticing promise, however, is third-party extensibility, which could potentially bring advanced customization options to tailor [application] to the specific needs of users. If developers take to Apple's software, the app may one day offer a [productive task] framework robust and powerful enough to rival true pro-level tools.

     

     

    An extensible ecosystem tied to a managed, curated core has always been key. 

  • Reply 5 of 92
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post



    I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

    Very likely it will be like My Photo Stream/Shared Photo Streams now.

    You can have none/some/all pix in the cloud and use/edit them in one place/everywhere.

    It's pretty unrealistic to think that Apple will make it mandatory that all photos will be in iCloud only.

  • Reply 6 of 92
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,755member
    Here’s what I want from iCloud:

    Document on my Mac Pro. Document on my MacBook Pro. Document on my iPad.
    It’s the same document. Three files, three locations. Not stored in the cloud.
    When I make a change on one, the change is made on the other two.

    I mostly agree with you. I wouldn't mind having the option NOT to store the files on one device (say if my iPad doesn't have storage capacity for my entire photo library). In that situation, having access to the photos in the cloud would be useful. But I agree, my ideal would be having the cloud synching (and backing up) my photos/doccuments and not being the main repository.
  • Reply 7 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by Bageljoey View Post

    I mostly agree with you. I wouldn't mind having the option NOT to store the files on one device (say if my iPad doesn't have storage capacity for my entire photo library). In that situation, having access to the photos in the cloud would be useful. But I agree, my ideal would be having the cloud synching (and backing up) my photos/doccuments and not being the main repository.

     

    Oh, and that would be quite simple, too.

     

    Have a panel in iCloud Preferences similar to the one that lets you tick boxes for features of the account, except the tickboxes would be a grid for the products you own. Choose what syncs where.

  • Reply 8 of 92
    feynmanfeynman Posts: 1,087member
    Hope I'll still be able to order physical photos/books/calendars/etc.
  • Reply 9 of 92
    blazarblazar Posts: 270member
    I foresee the new photo app as being a much better way to take pictures and have them synchronize in a more seamless way.

    If pro-cameras also can be synced to your cloud, even better...
  • Reply 10 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,228member
    An extensible ecosystem tied to a managed, curated core has always been key. 

    I never head the word 'curated' used as often as it is now. Jimmy certainly started something ...:D
  • Reply 11 of 92
    sunwukongsunwukong Posts: 20member
    I just hope to alleviate frequent iPhoto hangs, crashes, and sometimes near unusable slow performance. This is on last year's Mac Pro, dedicated internal 2 TB SATA drive, 16GM RAM, Mavericks, and all sw up to date.
  • Reply 12 of 92

    I just hope that it won't look like that picture above.  The user has obviously set the preferences to the "light" look of 10.10, but the application shows a "dark" look.  I'm sick of developers that just do everything in black and think they have created a "pro" app as a result.  

     

    I think it could be a very *good* thing if it isn't a pro app as well.  Catering to the arcane, strange and mostly marginal requirements of so-called pros just twists the app around to a point where regular folks can't use it.  Extensibility through the use of optional plugins by all means but not all of us want every spanner in the toolbox in front of our faces at all times.  

  • Reply 13 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,228member

    Interestingly, Apple also mentioned it is concurrently working on a transitionary workflow from Aperture to Adobe's Lightroom, suggesting Photos may not fit the needs of photography professionals.

    That last sentence really troubles me ... So Apple is telling us to migrate if we are pros ... or is this one person's opinion? If it is official then Apple is saying Photos won't cut it for those of us now using Aperture in a pro environment and that's horrible to learn. I would like to see this spelled out officially though. If true, so be it I guess, we will have no choice. Also if true, this is nothing like the FCPro 7 to X situation where in fact X turned out to be very professional after a few updates, OK a lot.
  • Reply 14 of 92
    thewhitefalconthewhitefalcon Posts: 4,453member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

    Unfortunately, iCloud seems to be trending toward Steve’s reality (at NeXT)/dream (for everyone) of “dumb terminal/server stores account/login anywhere and see your things”.


     

    The thing is, that's not really some wild new concept. That's how it was originally, you had dumb terminals that all shared time on a main computer. Then the pendulum swung toward individual computers that did everything locally. Now we're headed back in the other direction. And everyone is heading that way, not just Apple with iCloud. In Windows 8.x you log in with your account on any PC and you have access to your apps, your SkyDrive files (I refuse to call it OneDrive), etc. From a privacy standpoint it's a problem, but from a convenience standpoint it's great. You don't have to worry about your hard drive failing and taking everything with it, nor worry about getting your computer stolen, etc.

  • Reply 15 of 92
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Chris_CA View Post

     

    Very likely it will be like My Photo Stream/Shared Photo Streams now.

    You can have none/some/all pix in the cloud and use/edit them in one place/everywhere.

    It's pretty unrealistic to think that Apple will make it mandatory that all photos will be in iCloud only.


     

    Exactly.  It will replace two products that Apple already makes, neither of which currently require you to have your photos in the cloud, so would that be different on a new, third app?  

     

    I've seen this fear expressed on multiple articles about the new app, but it appears to be based on nothing at all.  

  • Reply 16 of 92
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,228member
    sunwukong wrote: »
    I just hope to alleviate frequent iPhoto hangs, crashes, and sometimes near unusable slow performance. This is on last year's Mac Pro, dedicated internal 2 TB SATA drive, 16GM RAM, Mavericks, and all sw up to date.

    I would have suggested moving to Aperture ... but I guess I won't now ... :\

    But it sounds like damaged data to me or a hard drive directory issue maybe. I can open an Aperture library in iPhoto on a new Mac Pro that is several hundred GIGs and it is quite fast. That said I do use a RAID 0 on Thunderbolt. I'd try running Disk Warrior on your drive.
  • Reply 17 of 92

    Apple Cedes Pro Photography Market - another example of Cookie Monster's failed leadership.  Cut prices, and incremental upgrades do NOT an Apple Make.  Pathetic.

  • Reply 18 of 92
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Originally Posted by photoshop59 View Post

    Apple Cedes Pro Photography Market - another example of Cookie Monster's failed leadership.  Cut prices, and incremental upgrades do NOT an Apple Make.  Pathetic.

     

    So do we have an official AI reason this guy hasn’t been banned? We don’t want to become MacRumors here.

  • Reply 19 of 92
    kkerstkkerst Posts: 330member
    bageljoey wrote: »
    I'm still confused about the "photo libraries in the cloud" idea. Will I still have my own physical storage of them, or are they asking me to go all cloud

    Think Photos for iWork on iCloud. I doubt there would be a web interface, but the idea would be the same - doc in the cloud, edits pushed to all devices currently also logged into the same account.
  • Reply 20 of 92
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,240member
    I think we are going to start hearing a lot more about third party extensibility.

    There are lots of advantages to offering a single app with additional pro functionality being offered (at a price) in a compartmentalised, but structured, way.
Sign In or Register to comment.