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

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 146
    Looks awesome; nice update indeed!





    Regarding Adobe and Photoshop: Apple should purchase:



    Pixelmator -- http://www.pixelmator.com



    and take off with it, like they did with Final Cut and Logic.
  • Reply 82 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red John View Post


    Yes, Im running SL, but it states SL 'AND' core2 for 64bit. No mention of Xeon...



    Ah - Xeon is 64 bit compatible. Would be a little crazy for the iMac to be able to boot 64bit and the Mac Pro no? Then again with Apple I can understand your desire for clarification



    The good news is you are covered.



    Here:



    http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html
  • Reply 83 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tardis View Post


    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.



    Nope, Aperture doesn't have layers, for example. But if all you do is image adjustments and not heavy photo editing, than Aperture - esp. the new version - may indeed be all you need. Confirmation is a trial download away (Well, if you ever get the trial download email but that's another thread).
  • Reply 84 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post


    Has anyone had success downloading the Aperture 3 trial? I have tried several times to get it yet I never receive the email.



    They are probably a little backed up from people requesting the trial multiple times
  • Reply 85 of 146
    I can definitely be described as amateur when it comes to photo management & editing, but one of the top reasons that I purchased my new mac to better manage our photos. When I started playing around with iPhoto, I quickly became frustrated that it would not manage my photos with how I am accustomed to viewing them. I am hoping that with Aperature 3, there will be some more flexibility in how they are stored. Does anyone know if the photos could be organized the following way:



    2009

    APRIL

    - Disney

    - John's 1st Birthday



    iPhoto does not seem to allow this type of organization, but I could be wrong. Please help!
  • Reply 86 of 146
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kjkelley View Post


    I can definitely be described as amateur when it comes to photo management & editing, but one of the top reasons that I purchased my new mac to better manage our photos. When I started playing around with iPhoto, I quickly became frustrated that it would not manage my photos with how I am accustomed to viewing them. I am hoping that with Aperature 3, there will be some more flexibility in how they are stored. Does anyone know if the photos could be organized the following way:



    2009

    APRIL

    - Disney

    - John's 1st Birthday



    iPhoto does not seem to allow this type of organization, but I could be wrong. Please help!



    Easy.



    Go to the Aperature Help Menu. It describes how to create an event. Exactly as you tabled above. In fact it is better than your tagging.



    Better yet, take DocNo42 link.



    You should perhaps look at iPhoto's page too at http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/#organize. Obvious Apple was well prepared for the feature.
  • Reply 87 of 146
    jetlawjetlaw Posts: 156member
    Quote:

    Has anyone had success downloading the Aperture 3 trial? I have tried several times to get it yet I never receive the email.



    Quote:

    They are probably a little backed up from people requesting the trial multiple times



    Touche'
  • Reply 88 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kjkelley View Post


    Does anyone know if the photos could be organized the following way:



    Short answer - yes! Watch the Importing video:



    http://www.apple.com/aperture/what-is.html#organize



    If you look off to the library pane on the left as he is working, you can see some of the possible structures yourself. The biggest boon of Aperture is the plethora of ways to organize your folders.



    I'm looking forward to the seamless multiple library support and the new vault backup options!
  • Reply 89 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jetlaw View Post


    Touche'



    Ok, they seem to have definitely been having problems with the trial request earlier - I just requested another serial number and the email came instantly. Try now!
  • Reply 90 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mario View Post


    Basically it's quite useless since it wants to be an image database first and image editing program (and not a good one at it) second.



    You can't do anything to an image until you first "import" it, into stupid proprietary DB. Thanks, but no thanks. I like keeping my images on the filesystem, organized in folders with perhaps spotlight comments if I really care. With OS X it's so trivial to get to an image you want to edit anyway.



    And when it comes to actual image editing, Lightroom and Photoshop combo is better, but for Nikon dSLRs, CaptureNX still produces the best RAW conversion of any of them.



    You should read before you write something so ignorant. Aperture allows you to keep your photos wherever you want. Even in iPhoto if you want. They give you choice moron.
  • Reply 91 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ideas4living View Post


    Actually, with the new version Aperture now (finally) supports RAW from the Lumix DMC-LX3!



    Also from the Lumix DMC-GH1 & Lumix DMC-G1, so the Lumix DMC-GF1 can't be far behind



    Reason enough to upgrade



    That's good to know, I have a Nikon D300 and Canon G10 currently supported. It was just the GF1 that wasn't.
  • Reply 92 of 146
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Red John View Post


    Yes, Im running SL, but it states SL 'AND' core2 for 64bit. No mention of Xeon...



    Then you have the 2 requirements: a CPU capable of 64-bit and and OS that allows for 64-bit apps.
  • Reply 93 of 146
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    Ah - Xeon is 64 bit compatible. Would be a little crazy for the iMac to be able to boot 64bit and the Mac Pro no?



    There are reasons for this. All the drivers have to be 64-bit capable and any decent company won't flip the switch just to do it if it makes the system perform worse.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post


    They are probably a little backed up from people requesting the trial multiple times



    My first one didn't come through, but my 2nd attempt came through immediately. I'd suggest for people to try again.
  • Reply 94 of 146
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    Can't get a better recommendation from the likes of National Geographic photographer, Jim Richardson.*



    And Bill Frakes, Sports Illustrated staff photographer. is no slouch either.



    *http://photography.nationalgeographi...im-richardson/



    I would imagine that it will be available when the store gets back on. That and I'll bet a couple of other major upgrades coming.



    They had big names hawk the 1.0 version too. I wonder if any of those people regretted it. I recall Apple offered a 50% refund.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mario View Post


    Basically it's quite useless since it wants to be an image database first and image editing program (and not a good one at it) second.



    You can't do anything to an image until you first "import" it, into stupid proprietary DB. Thanks, but no thanks. I like keeping my images on the filesystem, organized in folders with perhaps spotlight comments if I really care. With OS X it's so trivial to get to an image you want to edit anyway



    That's outdated info, you can use your own directory system if you want.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RichyS View Post


    Thanks.



    Unless something has gone horribly wrong, I generally stick with the JPEGs. I have the camera set up to store the RAW and the JPEG just in case I do something stupid with the settings!



    It's not just going wrong, you usually have an extra stop of highlight and shadow detail, as well as more color information and resolution. Even with the best settings, lot of cameras mush out detail too, even in the highest JPEG setting.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by emig647 View Post


    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.



    Did they change that from 1.5? I use 1.5 to import directly from a camera or its card in a reader.
  • Reply 95 of 146
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,710member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    There are reasons for this. All the drivers have to be 64-bit capable and any decent company won't flip the switch just to do it if it makes the system perform worse.



    No, he (and others) was confused because Apple didn't also specify the Xeon's in the Mac Pro as well. It may make sense to some that the Xeon's exceed the Core 2's, but it's not always obvious to everyone.



    Quote:

    My first one didn't come through, but my 2nd attempt came through immediately. I'd suggest for people to try again.



    We already covered that - your a little behind
  • Reply 96 of 146
    anyone know where i can find the awesome shot of the lake that is used on the apple website?
  • Reply 97 of 146
    Unless I missed it somewhere, A3 still doesn't seem to do CMYK conversion, which is an absolute must for those involved in magazine photos. (Does Lightroom?) If A3 had CMYK I could dispense with Photoshop to a very great extent. The way it is now, all my photo work eventually has to take a detour through PS no matter what I use to catalog or edit.
  • Reply 98 of 146
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stumbleone View Post


    Unless I missed it somewhere, A3 still doesn't seem to do CMYK conversion, which is an absolute must for those involved in magazine photos. (Does Lightroom?) If A3 had CMYK I could dispense with Photoshop to a very great extent. The way it is now, all my photo work eventually has to take a detour through PS no matter what I use to catalog or edit.



    Do you have to do the CMYK conversion on every photo in the photo shoot, or just the ones they actually publish?
  • Reply 99 of 146
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,448member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Did they change that from 1.5? I use 1.5 to import directly from a camera or its card in a reader.



    I only used 2.x, not sure about 1.5. I haven't found a clean way to do my own filesystem straight from the camera. Might be an oversight, but it definitely isn't intuitive like Lightroom's import.
  • Reply 100 of 146
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Here is a way to setup Automator to ease the transfer from Aperture to Photoshop and conversion to CMYK. Not a fix, but perhaps a workaround some of you haven't considered yet.
Sign In or Register to comment.