This is just more proof that Apple is a tablet and phone company not a computer company. In time when all of the big software vendors let their programs run in browsers in the cloud, there will be no need for powerful computers. As long as the graphics chip can handle the data streaming across the internet everything will be fine. It also means that any OS will be able to function with those services. This means that OS X or any future versions of it will be obsolete for all but the scientists and professional movie makers. Before that even comes to pass I think Apple will drop OS X or let it wither on the vine until nobody is buying it.
The iWork suite hasn't been made better than the Office suite. Apple just doesn't care to make a better one. That was clear to me many years ago. They did improve it a little here and there but they never went all out and tried to beat Microsux.
One of the reasons people justified the purchase of a Mac over a Windoz machine was all of the awesome included software. If Apple doesn't get on the ball and continue to improve all of its included software they will lose another reason for people to spend that extra money for an Apple computer. I really don't think Apple will ever improve their included software for the computer side of the business. They will make passable programs that look pretty while they turn the computers into devices that mimic iOS.
I'm really glad that there are a couple of USA manufactures that are improving their machines and selling them with GNU/Linux. I do believe that in time the professionals in movie making and engineering will be forced to abandon Apple. Now that professional movie making programs are on GNU/Linux it is possible for them to switch now.
With publishing moving more to the internet the need for specialized publishing tools is diminishing. Already there are great WYSIWYG web site tools for Wordpress and others. One doesn't need too much knowledge to make a really good web site. With a bit of study anybody could design and publish a great web site. Macs aren't needed for that stuff anymore.
All of these reasons add up to Apple not really producing awesome Macs anymore. If they don't switch to all tablets they will eventually have lightweight iOS Air touch screen laptops that do all of their work in the cloud. They'll use Airport to screen cast their data to a smart TV for the people who want to use a big screen with their laptop keyboard.
It's also the case, though Adoberather hide it, that you can still buy the product outright rather than pay monthly for CC (at least in the UK, I just checked and it's £102 for the current version).
True.
But I'd wager it's only a matter of months before Adobe kill this off and stop supporting it. Your only upgrade path to later versions will then be through CC.
I'm coming back from reading every single blog, comment and bitch-fest regarding Aperture being discontinued. As always with these things, people just go ahead and lash out because they hate change... drastic change even more so... even though it is necessary going forward and a common complaint regarding "the other guys" and "legacy baggage".
1) How many of the naysayers here and on any of the forums I've visited, are a developer or an insider as to what is being worked on at Apple and Photos?
2) How many of those know of PhotoKit and native RAW processing built into OSX and iOS?
3) How many KNOW what goes on behind the scenes of their favorite photo catalog/RAW processing app?
I wrote a post here eons ago regarding catalog, rating, and edit synchronization of iOS photo and iPhoto... and it is this that Apple is doing with the new Photos app. In the above writeup from an expert, he forgot to mention or consider one major point that many people don't even know about: when you are editing a RAW photo, you are NEVER touching that photo. You are ALWAYS working on a "preview image" also known as a proxy. It is for that reason that it's even considered "non-destructive editing".
So with that in mind, what IS LR or Aperture really doing? It's building a list of edits, ratings and meta data, that uses the proxy so that you can visually preview what you are doing. The catalog or library if you prefer, references a) the proxy and b) makes sure that the original is somewhere it knows about. That by NO MEANS says that the original has to be in the cloud, on your desktop... or even on a mounted server or external volume. Technically, the only thing the library needs, is the appropriate optimized proxy for the device at hand, and of course the synced text-based DATABASE i.e. library or catalog. (Edit: naturally except at export or printing time where the RAW file must be available and retrieved. Also in italics = optimized also means taking up less space on devices. Think optimized rendered preview sizes for the device your working on, whether OSX, iPhone, iPad.)
This is exactly how Adobe is able to offer LR for iPad and have it synced to LR on the Mac. It is not optimized though, and I'm absolutely positive that Apple will have a far better and efficient solution.
Some highlights to the post referenced above::
1) Extensions (plug-ins) for iOS and OSX that facilitate sharing, filters, editing, special FX and assorted cloud services. Apple is opening up for iOS devs to get more involved with OSX = GOOD!
2) No more photos scattered all over the place; a photo is a photo with NO proprietary catalog or library. Real world: 5 stars is always 5 stars, as well as a "Red label" is Red label... everywhere including SPOTLIGHT(!)
Another major advantage with a rewrite... which I know nobody uses or even knows about... is Automator workflows and Apple scripting. Those that do, also know why creating automated workflows is not only a time-saver, but gives that little extra edge to efficiently optimize a studio with multiple users. Having specific actions for both Aperture and iPhoto is unnecessary going forward.
Anyway IMHO... it is already 2 years late, so I'm hoping Apple gives the team more than enough resources so that the new Apple Photos will be a major hit from day one and bypass the FCPX baby-stepping into becoming a premier creative and cataloging management tool. I seriously believe that will be the case, because there is no other company... including Canon, Nikon or Adobe themselves... where photos are so huge and associated for who and what they are as a company and how they market themselves. It is also why I'm surprised with this late development when the writing and ideas were on the wall ages ago.
I'm also a happy Adobe Cloud user and train/assist photographers every day in LR and PS across Macs and Windows. Stupid response above #1: Lightroom is difficult and the "module-based" workflow is unintuitive and clunky. What? I get most people up to speed importing, culling, organizing, editing, exporting and printing within a day. Admittedly, the web gallery stuff is crap, so just don't go there. PRO TIP: learn your keyboard shortcuts immediately(!)
The hardest thing I have to explain is what a RAW file is, where does it live (preferably on 2 backups; one not local!) and why and how you can edit to your hearts content and you will NEVER break or ruin the RAW file, unlike a flattened PS TIF or JPG. RAWs and/or the library itself can become corrupt, but that's a hard drive glitch or failure... that's why you have the backups, or else its YOUR failure
*** I also come across bitching and moaning about being "forced to use" either PS/Bridge or Lightroom, but not together: BS! Adobe as well as other management programs use "sidecar" files. Activate that in Bridge and LR and you can "single" edit a RAW file in PS/Bridge and the edits show up in your LR library as well as vice-verse. Apple has the same kind of "sidecar/database" behind the scenes with iPhoto and Aperture now, and of course it will be even tighter with the new Photos app. Writing a database parser for the Aperture catalog -> Lightroom catalog... or even the new Photos app... technically should be child's play for a small team to accomplish either at Adobe or Apple.
Last note: meta data MUST be set free from any and all controlling software companies. It needs to be universal and travel between platforms and cloud services. I sincerely hope that Apple, Google, MS and Adobe can some day agree on that small little detail to making ALL of our lives easier in being able to CATALOG and FIND OUR SH*T!
If it was only about cloud synchronization, Apple could have modified the back end of both iPhoto and Aperture to use PhotoKit. Having two separate programs on one computer using the same photo library in the cloud would be no different (from the cloud's point of view) as two completely separate devices accessing the cloud at the same time.
If it was about the cloud *and* about making iOS and OS X more consistent, they could have done the above (given both apps a cloud backend) and then renamed iPhoto to Photos and included it free in the OS, while leaving Aperture on the App Store as a separate purchase for pros.
Neither of these goals necessitates discontinuing Aperture, therefore they must have another reason. Maybe it's just not that profitable?
If it was only about cloud synchronization, Apple could have modified the back end of both iPhoto and Aperture to use PhotoKit. Having two separate programs on one computer using the same photo library in the cloud would be no different (from the cloud's point of view) as two completely separate devices accessing the cloud at the same time.
If it was about the cloud *and* about making iOS and OS X more consistent, they could have done the above (given both apps a cloud backend) and then renamed iPhoto to Photos and included it free in the OS, while leaving Aperture on the App Store as a separate purchase for pros.
Neither of these goals necessitates discontinuing Aperture, therefore they must have another reason. Maybe it's just not that profitable?
I suspect a few things are happening:
Aperture isn't profitable. Seems to be the case when they don't update an app for years.
Not enough people are updating iPhoto on their Mac despite the low cost so, just like with Mac OS X, it behooves Apple to make it part of the OS, and with iCloud syncing everything having more people using the same version of the Photos app makes support easier.
One issue I have with iPhoto is that I have to open it to sync photos to my Mac and yet they are on my iPad and Apple TV minutes after I take them on my iPhone. I'd like their Photos app to automatically DL and save these photos for me on my Mac. I also like John Gruber's idea of opening up the app to extensions.
Great link Phil, I think I feel a little calmer now ...
My only comment is Apple themselves should be saying all this to us photographers not depending on such articles which may or may not pan out ... .. I was about to buy Lightroom! Now I may wait it out. I love Photoshop but hate Adobe's whole eco system and they way it takes over your Mac like octopus tentacles.
Aperture isn't profitable. Seems to be the case when they don't update an app for years.
Not enough people are updating iPhoto on their Mac despite the low cost so, just like with Mac OS X, it behooves Apple to make it part of the OS, and with iCloud syncing everything having more people using the same version of the Photos app makes support easier.
One issue I have with iPhoto is that I have to open it to sync photos to my Mac and yet they are on my iPad and Apple TV minutes after I take them on my iPhone. I'd like their Photos app to automatically DL and save these photos for me on my Mac. I also like John Gruber's idea of opening up the app to extensions.
Yes there are some weird funky issues like that and now I bet they won't be fixed, too close to moving to the new Yosemite system. BTW, Isn't iPhoto still doing destructive edits? I might be wrong but it used to and that was one of the biggest reasons to avoid it for me. The major worry for me is the database like system in Aperture going away. I love that. Of course, it isn't really database, it's more akin to iWeb's blogging system, a complex filing set up, hidden within the app's wrapper.
I wonder how long before the Yosemite betas get access to Photos and its Cloud system? I just flipped back to Mavericks to do some real work and really miss some of the Yosemite features! That Cloud Drive is astonishingly easy to use and fast (OK I do have 75/75 MB/s which helps) ... I'd love that to be given sharing controls like OS X Server has, Webdav done right! The ability to set up password protected client folders ... or shared Logic Pro X folders for collaboration.
I don't know if that was a bug of "feature" introduced later on but many, many years ago when it was still fairly new and under the iLife label with iTunes I recall it having no-destrcutive edits.
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'.
I just hope the new Photo app is better than iPhoto. I know it's blasphemous to say here, but I still prefer Windows for managing photos - just put it in the pictures folder and make some subfolders and you're done. Windows preview works much better (and also plays well with gifs) and doesn't require some weird folder with cryptically named files like iPhoto does.
I just hope the new Photo app is better than iPhoto. I know it's blasphemous to say here, but I still prefer Windows for managing photos - just put it in the pictures folder and make some subfolders and you're done. Windows preview works much better (and also plays well with gifs) and doesn't require some weird folder with cryptically named files like iPhoto does.
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.
It is quite disturbing to see how many people are oblivious on this forum. Some think there will be a replacement for Aperture, and no one knows what it will be. Read the article. Photos for OS X (Yosemite) replaces both iPhoto and Aperture. Apple is merging the two apps into one. It is crystal clear what Apple is doing with both iPhoto and Aperture. They are killing off those apps for a new inferior app, dumbed down to look and function like iOS counterparts.
Some people get it, and anticipate the new replacement Photo app will be crippled, just as Apple has done with every other software product they have created. It started with iMovie. iMovie HD 6 was replaced with iMovie 7, and the replacement app was a crippled mess with the majority of features removed. Final Cut Pro 7 replaced with Final Cut X was such an embarrassment for Apple, they offered refunds. Later, they slowly added features, but many users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7. Next comes iWork '09 replaced with the Mavericks-only crippled versions of Pages, Numbers, and Keynote. Apple releases an embarrassing statement announcing they will slowly replace the features they stripped from the apps. Haven't they learned? People want an app that improves functionality, not one that is stripped of features they used to get their work done. That is what Photos will be. It will be a dumbed down version of iPhoto/Aperture, and when enough people protest, Apple will again admit their error and slowly restore missing features. The screenshots and demonstration from WWDC already point in that direction.
Photos in the cloud? Are they serious? Many have a library that exceeds 100GB of Photos. iPhones take small sized photos, but DSLRs take photos 4x as large. No one has the time to upload hundreds of gigabytes. So what is Apple going to do, heavily compress photos for the cloud? What good would that do? I am sure cloud storage would be an option, but most with large libraries will opt out of that feature as they do not have the time or bandwidth to upload their library. I disabled the cloud storage feature because photos taken with the iPhone would be displayed in iPhoto, but no indication if they were only in the cloud or stored locally. So I did not want to risk losing photos not knowing where they were actually being stored.
Eventually iPhoto and Aperture will stop working with later versions of OS X, and that will be unfortunate. Once OS X Yosemite arrives, you can almost guarantee that iPhoto (and Aperture) will be removed from the App store and your only option will be Photos. Hopefully a Yosemite install won't remove iPhoto in favor of Photos, forcing people to switch to an inferior app.
You can still get Aperture for free by finding the Aperture 3 Trial version and using Mavericks' Software Update feature to download the full version, unlocking the trial version as a full version purchased app. Once that is done, you can also download the Mountain Lion version from the App Store purchased page as well under your AppleID, from any Mac running Mountain Lion or Snow Leopard. Same is true with the iWork trial version. At least I did not have to send $80 for a program that is about to be killed off.
A smart thing to do would be to clone your drive to an external and test Yosemite and Photos on an external drive, keeping your original data intact on an internal drive. You know that once the iPhoto/Aperture library is "updated" for use with Photos, it will not be accessible to either iPhoto or Aperture, causing irreparable damage to your library. So make sure you back up the library before you test the new software.
Can you also give me the winning lotto numbers for Friday? Or maybe you have a direct line to TC. I's like you to forward some of my thoughts, please.
On a serious note, some reviewers are trying to play this down. Their reasoning is that Apple would never destroy a good product that holds some sort of competitive edge without leveraging it. I disagree. Post Jobs Apple has lost the creativity edge so all they have to play with is the direction that was plotted before Jobs' departure. That line is to converge all platforms and make it universally easy for most of the users on this planet to do most of what they need. Everyone else is acceptable collateral damage, as long as they are not too many. Unfortunately, photo enthusiasts and pros are merely a blip on the screen, so TC will cut them because he doesn't have the imagination to figure something out. Simple as that. Photographers and photography are absolutely irrelevant to Apple's current strategy. It is the ability to share everything with everyone across all platforms and devices with a uniform UI. This is the mantra. Apple couldn't care less for photography. (remember Maps??!!)
My main library since 2011 has over 100K images and uses over 1TB of storage (backup not included). I am waiting full of excitement to see that price tag for storing all my photos in the cloud. Oh, almost forgot: let's factor in those RAW files from the 36MP D810! My workflow is relying on having the RAW files accessible at a file system level. Good luck to me doing that with iCloud, TimCloud or any other cloud out there. Good luck to me doing that with Lightroom.
I have no clue what I am going to do, but I know one thing: I am NOT waiting for the Photos Miracle!
I think Apple is concentrating on developing the eco system. Software makers will then be able to produce for Apple. I think Apple's eco system will be a revolution, moving faster and faster. They will produce their own products, hardware and software, to keep this revolution going, but not more. Photos will be part of that eco system, but it will not be 'professional' the way Lightroom and the other Adobe products are and will be, more so in the future! We will have a lot of stuff to look forward to, from various directions, Apple being the hub. This is my personal vision!
This kind of makes me wonder what's going to happen to iTunes. I didn't see an iTunes icon in the Yosemite video shown at WWDC. The icon I saw was the same style as the music app from iOS. Maybe this discontinuation of iPhoto and Aperture is part of a larger continuity strategy by Apple. Will there be a movies app for OS X? Just like there is on iOS? It doesn't make sense to tell someone to rent or buy a movie in the app they use to listen to their tunes, does it? Maybe there'll be one Apple Store where you can buy apps, music, movies, Macs, iPhones, and iPads, just like the Google Play store, that run in the respective apps that are branded the same on both iOS and OS X? I think we need to examine the bigger picture here, no punn intended!
Will there be a movies app for OS X? Just like there is on iOS?
Maybe. Maybe not.
It doesn't make sense to tell someone to rent or buy a movie in the app they use to listen to their tunes, does it?
It's where I keep my media and has been working well for many, many years. I used to keep my DVDs and CDs in the same entertainment center with my TV and stereo components so I don't see anything wrong with having iTunes as the digital media center.
I'm coming back from reading every single blog, comment and bitch-fest regarding Aperture being discontinued. As always with these things, people just go ahead and lash out because they hate change... drastic change even more so... even though it is necessary going forward and a common complaint regarding "the other guys" and "legacy baggage".
1) How many of the naysayers here and on any of the forums I've visited, are a developer or an insider as to what is being worked on at Apple and Photos?
2) How many of those know of PhotoKit and native RAW processing built into OSX and iOS?
3) How many KNOW what goes on behind the scenes of their favorite photo catalog/RAW processing app?
I wrote a post here eons ago regarding catalog, rating, and edit synchronization of iOS photo and iPhoto... and it is this that Apple is doing with the new Photos app. In the above writeup from an expert, he forgot to mention or consider one major point that many people don't even know about: when you are editing a RAW photo, you are NEVER touching that photo. You are ALWAYS working on a "preview image" also known as a proxy. It is for that reason that it's even considered "non-destructive editing".
So with that in mind, what IS LR or Aperture really doing? It's building a list of edits, ratings and meta data, that uses the proxy so that you can visually preview what you are doing. The catalog or library if you prefer, references a) the proxy and b) makes sure that the original is somewhere it knows about. That by NO MEANS says that the original has to be in the cloud, on your desktop... or even on a mounted server or external volume. Technically, the only thing the library needs, is the appropriate optimized proxy for the device at hand, and of course the synced text-based DATABASE i.e. library or catalog. (Edit: naturally except at export or printing time where the RAW file must be available and retrieved. Also in italics = optimized also means taking up less space on devices. Think optimized rendered preview sizes for the device your working on, whether OSX, iPhone, iPad.)
This is exactly how Adobe is able to offer LR for iPad and have it synced to LR on the Mac. It is not optimized though, and I'm absolutely positive that Apple will have a far better and efficient solution.
Some highlights to the post referenced above::
1) Extensions (plug-ins) for iOS and OSX that facilitate sharing, filters, editing, special FX and assorted cloud services. Apple is opening up for iOS devs to get more involved with OSX = GOOD!
2) No more photos scattered all over the place; a photo is a photo with NO proprietary catalog or library. Real world: 5 stars is always 5 stars, as well as a "Red label" is Red label... everywhere including SPOTLIGHT(!)
Another major advantage with a rewrite... which I know nobody uses or even knows about... is Automator workflows and Apple scripting. Those that do, also know why creating automated workflows is not only a time-saver, but gives that little extra edge to efficiently optimize a studio with multiple users. Having specific actions for both Aperture and iPhoto is unnecessary going forward.
Anyway IMHO... it is already 2 years late, so I'm hoping Apple gives the team more than enough resources so that the new Apple Photos will be a major hit from day one and bypass the FCPX baby-stepping into becoming a premier creative and cataloging management tool. I seriously believe that will be the case, because there is no other company... including Canon, Nikon or Adobe themselves... where photos are so huge and associated for who and what they are as a company and how they market themselves. It is also why I'm surprised with this late development when the writing and ideas were on the wall ages ago.
I'm also a happy Adobe Cloud user and train/assist photographers every day in LR and PS across Macs and Windows. Stupid response above #1: Lightroom is difficult and the "module-based" workflow is unintuitive and clunky. What? I get most people up to speed importing, culling, organizing, editing, exporting and printing within a day. Admittedly, the web gallery stuff is crap, so just don't go there. PRO TIP: learn your keyboard shortcuts immediately(!)
The hardest thing I have to explain is what a RAW file is, where does it live (preferably on 2 backups; one not local!) and why and how you can edit to your hearts content and you will NEVER break or ruin the RAW file, unlike a flattened PS TIF or JPG. RAWs and/or the library itself can become corrupt, but that's a hard drive glitch or failure... that's why you have the backups, or else its YOUR failure
*** I also come across bitching and moaning about being "forced to use" either PS/Bridge or Lightroom, but not together: BS! Adobe as well as other management programs use "sidecar" files. Activate that in Bridge and LR and you can "single" edit a RAW file in PS/Bridge and the edits show up in your LR library as well as vice-verse. Apple has the same kind of "sidecar/database" behind the scenes with iPhoto and Aperture now, and of course it will be even tighter with the new Photos app. Writing a database parser for the Aperture catalog -> Lightroom catalog... or even the new Photos app... technically should be child's play for a small team to accomplish either at Adobe or Apple.
Last note: meta data MUST be set free from any and all controlling software companies. It needs to be universal and travel between platforms and cloud services. I sincerely hope that Apple, Google, MS and Adobe can some day agree on that small little detail to making ALL of our lives easier in being able to CATALOG and FIND OUR SH*T!
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:
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.
Comments
Total nonsense!
http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos#.U66B5toaySM
This is just more proof that Apple is a tablet and phone company not a computer company. In time when all of the big software vendors let their programs run in browsers in the cloud, there will be no need for powerful computers. As long as the graphics chip can handle the data streaming across the internet everything will be fine. It also means that any OS will be able to function with those services. This means that OS X or any future versions of it will be obsolete for all but the scientists and professional movie makers. Before that even comes to pass I think Apple will drop OS X or let it wither on the vine until nobody is buying it.
The iWork suite hasn't been made better than the Office suite. Apple just doesn't care to make a better one. That was clear to me many years ago. They did improve it a little here and there but they never went all out and tried to beat Microsux.
One of the reasons people justified the purchase of a Mac over a Windoz machine was all of the awesome included software. If Apple doesn't get on the ball and continue to improve all of its included software they will lose another reason for people to spend that extra money for an Apple computer. I really don't think Apple will ever improve their included software for the computer side of the business. They will make passable programs that look pretty while they turn the computers into devices that mimic iOS.
I'm really glad that there are a couple of USA manufactures that are improving their machines and selling them with GNU/Linux. I do believe that in time the professionals in movie making and engineering will be forced to abandon Apple. Now that professional movie making programs are on GNU/Linux it is possible for them to switch now.
With publishing moving more to the internet the need for specialized publishing tools is diminishing. Already there are great WYSIWYG web site tools for Wordpress and others. One doesn't need too much knowledge to make a really good web site. With a bit of study anybody could design and publish a great web site. Macs aren't needed for that stuff anymore.
All of these reasons add up to Apple not really producing awesome Macs anymore. If they don't switch to all tablets they will eventually have lightweight iOS Air touch screen laptops that do all of their work in the cloud. They'll use Airport to screen cast their data to a smart TV for the people who want to use a big screen with their laptop keyboard.
True.
But I'd wager it's only a matter of months before Adobe kill this off and stop supporting it. Your only upgrade path to later versions will then be through CC.
Exactly!
I'm coming back from reading every single blog, comment and bitch-fest regarding Aperture being discontinued. As always with these things, people just go ahead and lash out because they hate change... drastic change even more so... even though it is necessary going forward and a common complaint regarding "the other guys" and "legacy baggage".
1) How many of the naysayers here and on any of the forums I've visited, are a developer or an insider as to what is being worked on at Apple and Photos?
2) How many of those know of PhotoKit and native RAW processing built into OSX and iOS?
3) How many KNOW what goes on behind the scenes of their favorite photo catalog/RAW processing app?
I wrote a post here eons ago regarding catalog, rating, and edit synchronization of iOS photo and iPhoto... and it is this that Apple is doing with the new Photos app. In the above writeup from an expert, he forgot to mention or consider one major point that many people don't even know about: when you are editing a RAW photo, you are NEVER touching that photo. You are ALWAYS working on a "preview image" also known as a proxy. It is for that reason that it's even considered "non-destructive editing".
So with that in mind, what IS LR or Aperture really doing? It's building a list of edits, ratings and meta data, that uses the proxy so that you can visually preview what you are doing. The catalog or library if you prefer, references a) the proxy and b) makes sure that the original is somewhere it knows about. That by NO MEANS says that the original has to be in the cloud, on your desktop... or even on a mounted server or external volume. Technically, the only thing the library needs, is the appropriate optimized proxy for the device at hand, and of course the synced text-based DATABASE i.e. library or catalog. (Edit: naturally except at export or printing time where the RAW file must be available and retrieved. Also in italics = optimized also means taking up less space on devices. Think optimized rendered preview sizes for the device your working on, whether OSX, iPhone, iPad.)
This is exactly how Adobe is able to offer LR for iPad and have it synced to LR on the Mac. It is not optimized though, and I'm absolutely positive that Apple will have a far better and efficient solution.
Some highlights to the post referenced above::
1) Extensions (plug-ins) for iOS and OSX that facilitate sharing, filters, editing, special FX and assorted cloud services. Apple is opening up for iOS devs to get more involved with OSX = GOOD!
2) No more photos scattered all over the place; a photo is a photo with NO proprietary catalog or library. Real world: 5 stars is always 5 stars, as well as a "Red label" is Red label... everywhere including SPOTLIGHT(!)
Another major advantage with a rewrite... which I know nobody uses or even knows about... is Automator workflows and Apple scripting. Those that do, also know why creating automated workflows is not only a time-saver, but gives that little extra edge to efficiently optimize a studio with multiple users. Having specific actions for both Aperture and iPhoto is unnecessary going forward.
Anyway IMHO... it is already 2 years late, so I'm hoping Apple gives the team more than enough resources so that the new Apple Photos will be a major hit from day one and bypass the FCPX baby-stepping into becoming a premier creative and cataloging management tool. I seriously believe that will be the case, because there is no other company... including Canon, Nikon or Adobe themselves... where photos are so huge and associated for who and what they are as a company and how they market themselves. It is also why I'm surprised with this late development when the writing and ideas were on the wall ages ago.
I'm also a happy Adobe Cloud user and train/assist photographers every day in LR and PS across Macs and Windows. Stupid response above #1: Lightroom is difficult and the "module-based" workflow is unintuitive and clunky. What? I get most people up to speed importing, culling, organizing, editing, exporting and printing within a day. Admittedly, the web gallery stuff is crap, so just don't go there. PRO TIP: learn your keyboard shortcuts immediately(!)
The hardest thing I have to explain is what a RAW file is, where does it live (preferably on 2 backups; one not local!) and why and how you can edit to your hearts content and you will NEVER break or ruin the RAW file, unlike a flattened PS TIF or JPG. RAWs and/or the library itself can become corrupt, but that's a hard drive glitch or failure... that's why you have the backups, or else its YOUR failure
*** I also come across bitching and moaning about being "forced to use" either PS/Bridge or Lightroom, but not together: BS! Adobe as well as other management programs use "sidecar" files. Activate that in Bridge and LR and you can "single" edit a RAW file in PS/Bridge and the edits show up in your LR library as well as vice-verse. Apple has the same kind of "sidecar/database" behind the scenes with iPhoto and Aperture now, and of course it will be even tighter with the new Photos app. Writing a database parser for the Aperture catalog -> Lightroom catalog... or even the new Photos app... technically should be child's play for a small team to accomplish either at Adobe or Apple.
Last note: meta data MUST be set free from any and all controlling software companies. It needs to be universal and travel between platforms and cloud services. I sincerely hope that Apple, Google, MS and Adobe can some day agree on that small little detail to making ALL of our lives easier in being able to CATALOG and FIND OUR SH*T!
Here is a great piece related to this announcement and the future...
http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2014/6/27/aperture-dead-long-live-photos#.U66B5toaySM
If it was only about cloud synchronization, Apple could have modified the back end of both iPhoto and Aperture to use PhotoKit. Having two separate programs on one computer using the same photo library in the cloud would be no different (from the cloud's point of view) as two completely separate devices accessing the cloud at the same time.
If it was about the cloud *and* about making iOS and OS X more consistent, they could have done the above (given both apps a cloud backend) and then renamed iPhoto to Photos and included it free in the OS, while leaving Aperture on the App Store as a separate purchase for pros.
Neither of these goals necessitates discontinuing Aperture, therefore they must have another reason. Maybe it's just not that profitable?
I suspect a few things are happening:
One issue I have with iPhoto is that I have to open it to sync photos to my Mac and yet they are on my iPad and Apple TV minutes after I take them on my iPhone. I'd like their Photos app to automatically DL and save these photos for me on my Mac. I also like John Gruber's idea of opening up the app to extensions.
Great link Phil, I think I feel a little calmer now ...
My only comment is Apple themselves should be saying all this to us photographers not depending on such articles which may or may not pan out ... .. I was about to buy Lightroom! Now I may wait it out. I love Photoshop but hate Adobe's whole eco system and they way it takes over your Mac like octopus tentacles.
Yes there are some weird funky issues like that and now I bet they won't be fixed, too close to moving to the new Yosemite system. BTW, Isn't iPhoto still doing destructive edits? I might be wrong but it used to and that was one of the biggest reasons to avoid it for me. The major worry for me is the database like system in Aperture going away. I love that. Of course, it isn't really database, it's more akin to iWeb's blogging system, a complex filing set up, hidden within the app's wrapper.
I wonder how long before the Yosemite betas get access to Photos and its Cloud system? I just flipped back to Mavericks to do some real work and really miss some of the Yosemite features! That Cloud Drive is astonishingly easy to use and fast (OK I do have 75/75 MB/s which helps) ... I'd love that to be given sharing controls like OS X Server has, Webdav done right! The ability to set up password protected client folders ... or shared Logic Pro X folders for collaboration.
I don't know if that was a bug of "feature" introduced later on but many, many years ago when it was still fairly new and under the iLife label with iTunes I recall it having no-destrcutive edits.
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'.
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.
It is quite disturbing to see how many people are oblivious on this forum. Some think there will be a replacement for Aperture, and no one knows what it will be. Read the article. Photos for OS X (Yosemite) replaces both iPhoto and Aperture. Apple is merging the two apps into one. It is crystal clear what Apple is doing with both iPhoto and Aperture. They are killing off those apps for a new inferior app, dumbed down to look and function like iOS counterparts.
Some people get it, and anticipate the new replacement Photo app will be crippled, just as Apple has done with every other software product they have created. It started with iMovie. iMovie HD 6 was replaced with iMovie 7, and the replacement app was a crippled mess with the majority of features removed. Final Cut Pro 7 replaced with Final Cut X was such an embarrassment for Apple, they offered refunds. Later, they slowly added features, but many users continue to use Final Cut Pro 7. Next comes iWork '09 replaced with the Mavericks-only crippled versions of Pages, Numbers, and Keynote. Apple releases an embarrassing statement announcing they will slowly replace the features they stripped from the apps. Haven't they learned? People want an app that improves functionality, not one that is stripped of features they used to get their work done. That is what Photos will be. It will be a dumbed down version of iPhoto/Aperture, and when enough people protest, Apple will again admit their error and slowly restore missing features. The screenshots and demonstration from WWDC already point in that direction.
Photos in the cloud? Are they serious? Many have a library that exceeds 100GB of Photos. iPhones take small sized photos, but DSLRs take photos 4x as large. No one has the time to upload hundreds of gigabytes. So what is Apple going to do, heavily compress photos for the cloud? What good would that do? I am sure cloud storage would be an option, but most with large libraries will opt out of that feature as they do not have the time or bandwidth to upload their library. I disabled the cloud storage feature because photos taken with the iPhone would be displayed in iPhoto, but no indication if they were only in the cloud or stored locally. So I did not want to risk losing photos not knowing where they were actually being stored.
Eventually iPhoto and Aperture will stop working with later versions of OS X, and that will be unfortunate. Once OS X Yosemite arrives, you can almost guarantee that iPhoto (and Aperture) will be removed from the App store and your only option will be Photos. Hopefully a Yosemite install won't remove iPhoto in favor of Photos, forcing people to switch to an inferior app.
You can still get Aperture for free by finding the Aperture 3 Trial version and using Mavericks' Software Update feature to download the full version, unlocking the trial version as a full version purchased app. Once that is done, you can also download the Mountain Lion version from the App Store purchased page as well under your AppleID, from any Mac running Mountain Lion or Snow Leopard. Same is true with the iWork trial version. At least I did not have to send $80 for a program that is about to be killed off.
A smart thing to do would be to clone your drive to an external and test Yosemite and Photos on an external drive, keeping your original data intact on an internal drive. You know that once the iPhoto/Aperture library is "updated" for use with Photos, it will not be accessible to either iPhoto or Aperture, causing irreparable damage to your library. So make sure you back up the library before you test the new software.
Can you also give me the winning lotto numbers for Friday? Or maybe you have a direct line to TC. I's like you to forward some of my thoughts, please.
On a serious note, some reviewers are trying to play this down. Their reasoning is that Apple would never destroy a good product that holds some sort of competitive edge without leveraging it. I disagree. Post Jobs Apple has lost the creativity edge so all they have to play with is the direction that was plotted before Jobs' departure. That line is to converge all platforms and make it universally easy for most of the users on this planet to do most of what they need. Everyone else is acceptable collateral damage, as long as they are not too many. Unfortunately, photo enthusiasts and pros are merely a blip on the screen, so TC will cut them because he doesn't have the imagination to figure something out. Simple as that. Photographers and photography are absolutely irrelevant to Apple's current strategy. It is the ability to share everything with everyone across all platforms and devices with a uniform UI. This is the mantra. Apple couldn't care less for photography. (remember Maps??!!)
My main library since 2011 has over 100K images and uses over 1TB of storage (backup not included). I am waiting full of excitement to see that price tag for storing all my photos in the cloud. Oh, almost forgot: let's factor in those RAW files from the 36MP D810! My workflow is relying on having the RAW files accessible at a file system level. Good luck to me doing that with iCloud, TimCloud or any other cloud out there. Good luck to me doing that with Lightroom.
I have no clue what I am going to do, but I know one thing: I am NOT waiting for the Photos Miracle!
This kind of makes me wonder what's going to happen to iTunes. I didn't see an iTunes icon in the Yosemite video shown at WWDC. The icon I saw was the same style as the music app from iOS. Maybe this discontinuation of iPhoto and Aperture is part of a larger continuity strategy by Apple. Will there be a movies app for OS X? Just like there is on iOS? It doesn't make sense to tell someone to rent or buy a movie in the app they use to listen to their tunes, does it? Maybe there'll be one Apple Store where you can buy apps, music, movies, Macs, iPhones, and iPads, just like the Google Play store, that run in the respective apps that are branded the same on both iOS and OS X? I think we need to examine the bigger picture here, no punn intended!
It's there. It's now red.
Maybe. Maybe not.
It's where I keep my media and has been working well for many, many years. I used to keep my DVDs and CDs in the same entertainment center with my TV and stereo components so I don't see anything wrong with having iTunes as the digital media center.
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 ...
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.
http://lightroomsolutions.com/articles/migrating-from-aperture-to-lightroom-where-do-i-begin/