Aperture feedback

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Since many people seems to be disapointed by aperture, I think it's start to make an AI review of this software.



Even if aperture is not that great, I do not regret my investissement For me aperture is the easiest and best photo lighting adjustement tool avalaible.



I always had some troubles with photoshop, for the lighting adjustements, and I a m please to see that it's not the case with aperture. With photoshop, you can only do chronological adjustements (one step after an another), but with aperture you can do the way you want, just if you where in a front of a giant audio mixer table with a lot of buttons and cursors. That's lovely.



Sharpening and noise reduction wise, CS2 is better. The sharpening adjustement tool of aperture is not that bad, but there is not level adjustement, something bad, if you don't want to see extra noise in your pics.



The raw files coming from my 20 D are not that bad. I do not see much difference between raw aperture and CS2 converted files.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Apple is testing the water here...There will be a 2.0, it will get a lot more features and quirks will be fixed...Give the devs a shot at 2.0 before casting final judgement on any app.
  • Reply 2 of 12
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,268member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a_greer

    Apple is testing the water here...There will be a 2.0, it will get a lot more features and quirks will be fixed...Give the devs a shot at 2.0 before casting final judgement on any app.





    That's correct A_Greer. I tend to think that Apple's version 1.0 apps tend to look really good but often will not have optimized features. Aperture seems to be vintage Apple. Nail the design and workflow down. Get the features in it. By version 2.0 you have more mature functionality and a few more interface tweaks. 3.0 and on is the sweet spot where you can really get stuff done.



    Looking at Motion's progress seems to be following this path as well. Perhaps Motion 3 ships at NAB and really begins to come into its own. Not trying to get off topic but Aperture 2.0 is when things begin to really get fun.
  • Reply 3 of 12
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    That's correct A_Greer. I tend to think that Apple's version 1.0 apps tend to look really good but often will not have optimized features. Aperture seems to be vintage Apple. Nail the design and workflow down. Get the features in it. By version 2.0 you have more mature functionality and a few more interface tweaks. 3.0 and on is the sweet spot where you can really get stuff done.



    Looking at Motion's progress seems to be following this path as well. Perhaps Motion 3 ships at NAB and really begins to come into its own. Not trying to get off topic but Aperture 2.0 is when things begin to really get fun.






    The problem is that for 500 bucks it really isn't all that good. And it fragged my powerbook!!



    It is only designed for internal drives. = Weak



    They shouldn't have put it out like that. It looks great from what I could see but give me a break!! Why can't it just work? Version 2 can't be soon enough.



    Oh, and With Aperture, Apple could have released some more system support for more .raw formats.



    Cool Aid asside, the developers at Apple could have done better.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    ebbyebby Posts: 3,110member
    That's one thing I can't stand about Apple's apps. Apple is making all sorts of applications that only run on the boot drive. I think Final Cut Pro does that too. Why? Perhaps there really is a reason that I don't get, but I have almost a terabyte of cheap external space and a whopping 100+GB Users folder hogging the 160GB primary drive. Forcing an installation on a already-cramped drive is not a very nice thing to do.
  • Reply 5 of 12
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ebby

    That's one thing I can't stand about Apple's apps. Apple is making all sorts of applications that only run on the boot drive. I think Final Cut Pro does that too. Why? Perhaps there really is a reason that I don't get, but I have almost a terabyte of cheap external space and a whopping 100+GB Users folder hogging the 160GB primary drive. Forcing an installation on a already-cramped drive is not a very nice thing to do.



    You misunderstand. Even the library must reside internally. That is totallly weak. Most of the Photographers that I know have their libraries on external drives.
  • Reply 6 of 12
    ebbyebby Posts: 3,110member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    ... Most of the Photographers that I know have their libraries on external drives.



    Now you know one more...



  • Reply 7 of 12
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ebby

    Now you know one more...







    yup, and all of the "pro" photographers have shelved aperture untill at least version 2.0.



    If Apple really needed the $$ that bad couldn't they have just dipped into that 6 Billion that they have in the bank?



    I hope that the 1.xx versions address the glaring concerns.
  • Reply 8 of 12
    I LOVE Aperture. I am not a professional, but I have to manage about 40,000 pictures for the school I work at, and this has allowed me to put them all in one library happily, and to not have to worry about versions anymore.



    I have read the big reviews. The current problems are not a problem for me.



    I have my library on an external drive. It works great! What are you people talking about???



    I have a Dual 1.8 G5 that runs the app smoothly. My 1.5 GHz Powerbook does not do the trick. Usable, but takes a long time to load photos.
  • Reply 9 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Toadie

    I LOVE Aperture. I am not a professional, but I have to manage about 40,000 pictures for the school I work at, and this has allowed me to put them all in one library happily, and to not have to worry about versions anymore.



    I have read the big reviews. The current problems are not a problem for me.



    I have my library on an external drive. It works great! What are you people talking about???



    I have a Dual 1.8 G5 that runs the app smoothly. My 1.5 GHz Powerbook does not do the trick. Usable, but takes a long time to load photos.




    You must not be using very high quality files... or rather.. no RAW files...



    I'm sure it runs just fine manipulating JPEG images... Today I stopped in the Apple store smack dab in the middle of the states, in Des Moines, IA and used Aperture... I was scanning through a ton of RAW images and the machine was dying. Even simple things like using the loupe seemed WAY too slow. Keep in mind, I was on the new Dual Core G5...



    Currently unimpressed.
  • Reply 10 of 12
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matthew Yohe

    You must not be using very high quality files... or rather.. no RAW files...



    I'm sure it runs just fine manipulating JPEG images... Today I stopped in the Apple store smack dab in the middle of the states, in Des Moines, IA and used Aperture... I was scanning through a ton of RAW images and the machine was dying. Even simple things like using the loupe seemed WAY too slow. Keep in mind, I was on the new Dual Core G5...



    Currently unimpressed.




    If it isnt fixed in 1.x releases, I would be shocked, it has been in the wild for about a month or so, and Apple is getting ready to throw the last round of updates before the break, so with any luck theere will be a .1 update that fixes any rendering glitches that may have surfaced.



    Also, how much ram did the demo unit have, I have seen many apple retailers demo big apps like FCP with the stock ram in the power mac, even apple stores. If the system has less than 2 gigs of ram, the choaking isnt shocking...have you read the specs?



    about the specs, I find it sad that it takes 4x the machine to manage pictures that it does to use FCP FOR VIDEO...
  • Reply 11 of 12
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matthew Yohe

    You must not be using very high quality files... or rather.. no RAW files...



    I'm sure it runs just fine manipulating JPEG images... Today I stopped in the Apple store smack dab in the middle of the states, in Des Moines, IA and used Aperture... I was scanning through a ton of RAW images and the machine was dying. Even simple things like using the loupe seemed WAY too slow. Keep in mind, I was on the new Dual Core G5...



    Currently unimpressed.




    Yes, most are JPEG images, but I do have a good number of folders that are all RAW (upwards of 1000 RAW images). They take about 1 second to load the ones from the D70, and 1.5-2 seconds to load the ones from the Rebel XT. I forgot to mention that I have 3 GB of RAM. I'm sure that helps.



    In Photoshop CS2 It takes a solid 3 seconds from the time I press Open in camera raw, until it appears on the screen. Why are people so impatient?



    Just trying to offer a positive review from a regular dude who will use this happily, even in its 1.0 version.
  • Reply 12 of 12
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Perhaps they listen....



    Perhaps I will now not get japanese text when I order a print....



    Perhaps my powerbook will not crash and lock....



    Perhaps....



    +++++++++++



    Apple releases Aperture v1.0.1

    Wednesday, December 21, 2005 | by Rob Galbraith





    Apple today has released an updater for Aperture that brings the program to v1.0.1. The download page on Apple's web site notes that the following areas of the program have been addressed:



    White balance adjustment accuracy and performance

    Image export quality

    Book and print ordering reliability

    Auto-stacking performance

    Custom paper size handling

    The Aperture 1.0.1 update is also available through the Software Update mechanism of OS X.
Sign In or Register to comment.