Apple's Aperture 3 brings 200 new features, including Faces, Places

124678

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bokap View Post


    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



    Yes, check my update just below yours. This seems like the first opportunity for me to manage without PS in the most of my work - if the effects and curves etc are state of the art, of course (and not as the medium good Aperture 1.0 - 1.5 RAW-converter)



    As for the direct import of raw-files, I guess everybody has their favorite. Suggest you test the trial and see what difference your DPP and Aperture produces
  • Reply 62 of 146
    Hi All,



    I hope Apple provides support for Olympus Pen camera, since I bought this at christmas and really annoyed, I had to use Olympus shitty software.

    Looks like a great update, but update the camera compatibility please!!
  • Reply 63 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vulcan1 View Post


    How do you guys geotag? Thanks!



    Garmin Etrex - the cheapest one that will data log. Benefit - I don't have to think about it, has much better reception than dedicated devices designed to hang off camera's and battery life that lasts for DAYS. I just turn it on into track mode, make sure it's near the top of my backpack and head out.



    With the way Aperture imports track logs, it's bar-none the easiest way to geotag - other than it being built into the cameras I wouldn't mess with any finicky GPS units that fit in the hot-shoe - there is absolutely no need, esp. now.



    http://gpstracklog.com/2007/08/venture-hc-revi.html



    You should be able to get a good rugged weatherproof (very important!) GPS for under $200. Personally I think Garmin is the best, especially now that the Mac is no longer a second class citizen for them.
  • Reply 64 of 146
    richysrichys Posts: 160member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vulcan1 View Post


    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.



    How do you guys geotag? Thanks!



    You know you can get those already, don't you?



    e.g.: http://www.jobo.com/web/photoGPS.447.0.html
  • Reply 65 of 146
    Should I wait with upgrading till the plugins are updated or won't Aperture3 break them?
  • Reply 66 of 146
    Does Apperture offer the ability to sync photo files with a network drive and grant simultanious multi-user access or is it single user only?
  • Reply 67 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by emig647 View Post


    There was an obvious underlying issue with 2.x.



    Being 64 bit native should help - that and in the process of moving to 64 bit I'm sure they cleaned up other issues as well.



    Quote:

    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.



    Importing has been dramatically improved in version 3 - you can even write out a duplicate backup copy on import to a separate hard drive - woot! Not sure why you would want to tie up your camera importing directly from it when a card reader is not only much faster but free's your camera up for shooting, and saves the battery.



    Quote:

    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.



    I barely touch photoshop now, and with the enhancements in Aperture 3, I see the last few things I would travel to Photoshop to do as being able to be done in Aperture.



    Remember the big advantage for editing in Aperture is the non-destructive edits. Edit's are recorded as instructions instead of completely new files (unlike edits in Phtotoshop) so you get basically unlimited undo with very little space consumed.



    It may not be important to you - depends on your style, but I find it very liberating - it allows me to be creative and try many different versions of a file without overruning my hard drive.



    Quote:

    Eitherway, as I said I like both programs. They are very similar. I just hope Aperture can fix/fixed the performance issues.



    Download the trial and see. I would except my trial download email hasn't arrived yet



    Apparently there is some sort of pent up demand or something
  • Reply 68 of 146
    richysrichys Posts: 160member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Garmin Etrex - the cheapest one that will data log. Benefit - I don't have to think about it, has much better reception than dedicated devices designed to hang off camera's and battery life that lasts for DAYS. I just turn it on into track mode, make sure it's near the top of my backpack and head out.



    With the way Aperture imports track logs, it's bar-none the easiest way to geotag - other than it being built into the cameras I wouldn't mess with any finicky GPS units that fit in the hot-shoe - there is absolutely no need, esp. now.



    http://gpstracklog.com/2007/08/venture-hc-revi.html



    You should be able to get a good rugged weatherproof (very important!) GPS for under $200. Personally I think Garmin is the best, especially now that the Mac is no longer a second class citizen for them.



    Just Googled to see what I had. It's a cheap dedicated GPS logger called a GlobalSat BT-335. Cost me about £35 from a random supplier in Honkers (via eBay, of course). Bargain. Lasts for days and uses Bluetooth to transfer the tracks (in GPX format) to my MBP.



    The only downside is that it seems to append tracks together so that you end up with one huge track! Not a problem for geotagging, but looks a bit weird if you track your progress on Google Earth. Having said that, the GPX files (or is it the KML -- can't remember) are easy to split in a plain text editor.



    You can also buy GPS logging apps in the App Store (though probably ruins your battery life) too.
  • Reply 69 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichyS View Post


    You know you can get those already, don't you?



    e.g.: http://www.jobo.com/web/photoGPS.447.0.html



    Definitely NOT worth the money now. With the tracklog import features demoed in the video, a quality GPS that can write out track logs is a far better deal.



    I'm jazzed about this update - now if the @^&!$ trial download email will just arrive!
  • Reply 70 of 146
    So on a Mac Pro I'd still be running 32bit?
  • Reply 71 of 146
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by bikertwin View Post


    A knowledgebase article says:



    "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!



    You could sort of do that manually before, but a pain in the arse. I'm hoping this will lead to an iAperture for the iPad where I can load photos from my camera while in the field, do some initial sorting, tagging and edits, and then import the whole works to Aperture when I get home.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Shooting .jpg is going horribly wrong!



    Generally, I'd agree. But recent DSLRs have so much in-camera processing to correct for lens characteristics (vignetting, etc), lighting/contrast optimization, etc; and you lose all that by shooting RAW. I could use Canon's software which can also apply many of the corrections to RAW files that my 7D can because it has Canon's lens characteristics database; but I prefer Aperture. I still shoot RAW, but I sometimes think that in some situations when I expect little to no need for much post processing that I should just shoot JPEG and let the camera apply those changes for me.
  • Reply 72 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichyS View Post


    Just Googled to see what I had. It's a cheap dedicated GPS logger called a GlobalSat BT-335. Cost me about £35 from a random supplier in Honkers (via eBay, of course). Bargain. Lasts for days and uses Bluetooth to transfer the tracks (in GPX format) to my MBP.



    Cool - I forgot about those. I focused on the Garmin's because when I hike the optional topo maps are very handy, so it does double duty. That and I like the weatherproof nature of it. It's good to know there is a cheap data logger that is mac compatible - mac software to pull off the track logs is always the "gotcha" item.
  • Reply 73 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post


    I sometimes think that in some situations when I expect little to no need for much post processing that I should just shoot JPEG and let the camera apply those changes for me.



    As long as you are happy with being locked into what the camera did for you in JPEG then yes, that can be a viable solution. Sports photographers will often shoot JPEG so they can get more buffer space.



    Me, I don't trust myself that much and I like the extra flexibility that RAW provides - that little extra safety net is very nice. If you aren't shooting rapid fire so you need the buffer space, and have the cards you can also do RAW plus JPEG.
  • Reply 74 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,712member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red John View Post


    So on a Mac Pro I'd still be running 32bit?



    Do you have SL? If not, then yes.
  • Reply 75 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Do you have SL? If not, then yes.



    Yes, Im running SL, but it states SL 'AND' core2 for 64bit. No mention of Xeon...
  • Reply 76 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichyS View Post


    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.



    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.



    So, what benefit would Aperture 3 give me as a fairly new and inexperienced hobbyist photographer?



    Unless you're really serious about photography and have, or expect to have, a library with 10,000+ photos, I'd generally recommend sticking with iPhoto until you decide you really need Aperture. I have a DSLR, and a fairly large library, but I honestly don't use Aperture that much. The place where Aperture shines is not in tweaking photos, though it does that very well, but in organization and workflow. For example, comparing 5 similar shots from a portrait session to find the best one, etc.



    A good clue as to whether you're ready for Aperture, I'd say, is whether or not you concern yourself with composition when you shoot. If you worry about stuff like the rule of thirds, lighting, depth of field, etc, then I'd say at least go to the Apple store and give it a spin. If you're more like my dad, who simply shoots hundreds of photos for the keepsake value, and isn't concerned with making them artistic, then iPhoto will almost certainly be wonderful for you.



    Basically, if you find yourself fantasizing about being a professional photographer, check it out. Otherwise, it will likely end up being an expensive and confusing to use photo library.



    C
  • Reply 77 of 146
    wigginwiggin Posts: 2,265member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Vulcan1 View Post


    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.



    How do you guys geotag? Thanks!



    GPS in phones is easier because the phones can use cell towers to dramatically speed getting a location fix from the satellites. Without that, you can be waiting 20-40 seconds for your GPS receiver to get a fix if it's been turned off for an hour or so (because the satellite data it has will be out of date by then). So depending on the situation, you could turn on your camara and have to wait before you can shoot a picture if you want the geotag added.



    I use the Amod ALG3080. It's very basic, but it's relatively cheap and very small. I just keep it clipped to the outside of my backpack. The best thing is it has huge amounts of memory. Enough to store 24x7 datapoints for a full month. And it mounts on your Mac as a flash drive. So you just drag-and-drop the track logs (which are just text files) onto your computer. No software required.
  • Reply 78 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    if you go to the Aperture page it is v3, the store will likely be up shortly.



    Ah, looks like it was right in the middle of being updated when I was checking it (it was still Aperture 2 on the aperture page at the time).



    C
  • Reply 79 of 146
    If I was a professional working with PhotoShop on a daily basis, my company would not question the cost of the software.



    However, as an amateur who only needed to retouch or create images occasionally, investing in PhotoShop 7.0 was a huge expenditure for me personally. Adobe's later versions of Photoshop didn't seem to offer much more functionality, so I didn't upgrade to the CS versions.



    Even so, I was rather surprised when I installed Mac OS X 10.5 and found that PhotoShop didn't work. Not, "needed to be upgraded" or "needed a converter", it simply didn't work and was "not supported'. This was less than 5 years old software, and the maker Adobe simply walked away.



    I know you do not "own" software you merely "license" it, but finding that what I thought I had "bought" from Adobe looked more like a four-year rental was rather shocking. From what I understand, it would not have been too hard for Adobe to maintain compatibility.



    Did I "upgrade", which basically meant buying CS again? Of course not. For my limited use, I can live with having to re-start using an older Mac, or running Gimp on Ubuntu. But I would prefer to have the pixel-basher available without a re-start, so I have been looking out for a replacement.



    I must say I have been impressed by the image-editing capabilities of iPhoto so far, but they are no substitute for PhotoShop. If Apple's Aperture can deliver the results I need at an affordable price, I will no longer need to be blackmailed by Adobe.



    If Apple is pitching Aperture to provide the functionality of PhotoShop at a fraction of the price, and simultaneously compensate for the problems Mac users have with Adobe products, I wish them the best of luck and I will probably buy it.
  • Reply 80 of 146
    jetlawjetlaw Posts: 156member
    Has anyone had success downloading the Aperture 3 trial? I have tried several times to get it yet I never receive the email. I haven't seen anything on Apple's site indicating that the trial i not yet available, so I am not sure what the delay is all about.



    Thanks
Sign In or Register to comment.