End of the road for Aperture?

In article , Sandman
wrote:

I doubt the new Photos App is going to be a replacement for the
features found in Aperture as that seems to be targeting the iPhone
wielding consumer.

Yeah, which is weird, since iPhoto is already a user-friendly application.
Why not just dump "Photos" on the iPhone and have iPhoto available for both
platforms, cloud-enabled and non-destructive synced edits?

iphoto doesn't do much of anything and they needed to rewrite both, so
they decided to combine the two and include extendability which will
let third parties turn it into something more aperture-like.

everyone is focused (pun intended) on the end of aperture rather than
the beginning of what may turn out to be a *much* better app that could
leave lightroom in the dust.

even adobe knows it and they're scared. why do you think they're
'doubling down' when their only competitor on the mac just called it
quits??

In article , Sandman
wrote:

That is my situation, and I can think of several folks with a similar SW
load. I would imagine that most of those will only use the new Photos App
to manage and tweak their iDevice shots.

Yeah, but with Aperture you had everything. It supported the iPhoto
library, Photo Streams and you had all that professional-level editing and
plugins and library management. It's a pity.

it's about time they nixed it. it wasn't selling particularly well.

aperture lacked seamless integration with photoshop, its raw converter
and noise reduction was nowhere near as good as camera raw, nor was
aperture as fast or as well designed as lightroom and it didn't get
updated for new cameras as promptly as camera raw did either.

the only advantage aperture had was faces and being able to sync to
idevices, both of which could be obtained by exporting from lightroom
to iphoto, which is free.

Lightroom is professional all right, but cut off and seperate from that
sphere.

yet it outsold aperture on the mac, and by a *huge* margin.

pros voted for lightroom.

In short, if you were a photographer and used Aperture, you didn't need any
other photo-management app for your computer. It linked in to everything.

oh yes you did, and round-tripping to one of them involved interim
files, something not needed with lightroom/photoshop.

On 2014-06-30 16:30:10 +0000, Savageduck said:

On 2014-06-30 14:47:10 +0000, Sandman said:

In article 20140630001955625-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Savageduck:
Then carry on using Aperture. Just be aware that development
wise it is in a state of stasis, and has been since 2010, and
will still function under Yosemite.

I doubt the new Photos App is going to be a replacement for the
features found in Aperture as that seems to be targeting the
iPhone wielding consumer.

Sandman:
Yeah, which is weird, since iPhoto is already a user-friendly
application. Why not just dump "Photos" on the iPhone and have
iPhoto available for both platforms, cloud-enabled and
non-destructive synced edits?

I have a feeling Apple isn't even going to try to contest the
"Pro/Prosumer" photo editing software arena, and leave that to
Adobe.

Yeah, that much seems obvious. And if it weren't for the fact that Aperture
was a stellar application in this arena, I wouldn't mind it at all.

I can't say since I have no Aperture experience.

If they were, they would have done more to polish Aperture
over the last 4 years. They are letting it die on the vine. They are
obviously going for a consumer targeted app which will have features
which will wow the iPhone crowd, and give most vacation & hobby
shooters enough.

Indeed.

I would imagine there is going to be more of a blending of the Photos app
for iOS & OSX to provide what appears to be a slick and UI transparent.
Obviously they are going to push cloud storage for image files and social
media sharing.

Yeah, but the trend with apps for Apple has been that those apps that are
made iOS-first and then brought to OSX (Reminders, Notes, Facetime etc) are
too simplistic in their desktop version, while the apps that are OSX-first
and then brought to iOS (iPhoto, iMovie, Mail, Safari, etc) remains strong
featurefull applications on the Mac. By removing iPhoto, the trend tells us
it will be replaced by something inferior feature-wise, unfortunately.

I think Apple has given the Jon Ive philosophy too much weight based on
the success of the iPhone. Sometimes minimalism. clean, flat looks, and
catering to the lowest common denominator don't work.

I wouldn't know the percentages, but excepting for you, I have a
feeling that iDevice and Mac users who are in the serious
photography camp already have a version of PS CS & LR installed, or
are subscribers to the CC, or both.

And has no more than two computers to use it on.

That is my situation, and I can think of several folks with a similar SW
load. I would imagine that most of those will only use the new Photos App
to manage and tweak their iDevice shots.

Yeah, but with Aperture you had everything. It supported the iPhoto
library, Photo Streams and you had all that professional-level editing and
plugins and library management. It's a pity.

I gave up using iPhoto and its convoluted library system years ago and
I don't regret that one bit. I have all the library management I could
ever need with LR. That and all the editing flexibility I could want
with plug-ins and PS integration.

Lightroom is professional all right, but cut off and seperate from that
sphere.

Given Adobe's recent remarks regarding Lightroom, I suspect they have
some interesting developments in the wings.

In short, if you were a photographer and used Aperture, you didn't need any
other photo-management app for your computer. It linked in to everything.

I think that way about LR. The big difference is I don't have my entire
photo library in an Apple-like Photo stream. However, I have little
problem, exporting from LR to any sharing service, to my desktop, or a
cloud service such as Dropbox, or even my CC folder.

I have been working with LR Mobile, which is an interesting tool,
not quite what one might expect. Also, PS Touch on the iPad is a
surprisingly powerful tool which also integrates very nicely with
the CC file system.

Yeah, both seperately. CC files can't access LR Mobile and vice versa. It's
really a matter of not going all the way with a somewhat decent idea.

The first thing is to understand that LR Mobile is not an iPad
implementation of LR5, it is a tool to supplement LR5, especially given
that you are not working on actual files, but *Smart Previews* in
specific LR collections.

If Adobe were to give me 1TB of online cloud storage for photos and make them
available seemlessly via CC files and LR Mobile, then we'd have a
contender.

Well they give you 20GB for starters, compared to iCloud and its
initial 5GB. They have very good handling of RAW files, and
collaborative work. I find their sharing of RAW files and layered PSDs
to be done better than Dropbox which only sees files such as NEFs as
files, and layered files are problematic with DB.
Here is a CC PSD and that could also be published via Behance directly
from CC storage.
http://adobe.ly/TJFa8Y

They still have some other things to learn from Dropbox with regard to
sharing, but it is early in the life of CC. If they are going to
fulfill the potential of what they have I am sure they will end up will
competitive pricing for additional storage.

I think that Apple selling 200GB of iCloud space for $49/year with the
release of iOS8 & Yosemite is going to provoke a cloud storage price
war. As it is, I have my free 2.25GB of DB space along with my CC 20GB.
Then back in March Box had a promotional 50GB give-away (it is back to
the standard 10GB free, but I have my 50GB.). So there are going to be
things happening on that front.

Anyway, I guess we will have to see what September brings with the
iOS8 version of the Photos App, and just how well that translates to
*Yosemite* next year.

Yeah...

BTW: This might be of interest to you. From the July/August edition of
Photoshop User magazine.
Lightroom Mobile:

“Let’s dispense with what Lightroom Mobile is not and what it cannot do
(at the time of this writing anyway) so we may focus on what is
possible with clear expectations. you cannot tether your camera to your
iPad using Lightroom Mobile, Lightroom Mobile isn’t color managed
because it is not currently possible to color manage the iPad at iOS
level. You cannot apply keywords, color labels, ratings, captions, or
titles to your photos in the app. There’s a limited set of Develop
tools available. Finally, you need to have a minimum of an iPad 2
running iOS7, Lightroom 5.4, and you need to be subscribed to any one
of the Creative Cloud (CC) programs.
It’s important to remember that this is a fluid environment where
upgrades and new features are released on a rolling basis. The
Lightroom Mobile app we have today is not the Lightroom Mobile we will
have a year from now…..�

“Now we know what Lightroom mobile is not, so let’s focus on what it
can do. In its current state, Lightroom mobile provides access to your
Lightroom catalog, including RAW files, on your iPad through the use of
synchronized collections, and offers a limited suite of editing,
organizing, and display tools in a mobile environment. The
synchronization between the Lightroom catalog on your desktop and
Lightroom mobile requires an Internet connection, where the data is
passed up into the cloud and then back to your devices.
When Lightroom 5 was released it ushered in a new type of preview file
called smart previews. Smart previews are essentially lossy DNG
versions of your imported photos that allow you to continue to use the
Develop module even when the original source photos are offline. Adobe
has leveraged this smart preview technology in Lightroom mobile as way
to facilitate the synchronization of Develop module settings between
the app and your main catalog, as well as overcome the bandwidth and
storage limitations that currently exist in the mobile arena. Let’s
dive into the app and take a closer look at what it has to offer.�

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 6/30/2014 3:19 AM, Savageduck wrote:


snip

I have been working with LR Mobile, which is an interesting tool, not
quite what one might expect. Also, PS Touch on the iPad is a
surprisingly powerful tool which also integrates very nicely with the CC
file system.

Anyway, I guess we will have to see what September brings with the iOS8
version of the Photos App, and just how well that translates to
*Yosemite* next year.



Could be.
Corel has entered into a joint marketing agreement with Topaz. I
received an email today offering PSP to Topaz owners for the upgrade price.
That is a powerful low caost alternative to PS

--
PeterN

On 6/30/2014 12:33 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

even adobe knows it and they're scared. why do you think they're
'doubling down' when their only competitor on the mac just called it
quits??


I didn't know that neither Corel, nor Capture, didn't run on a Mac.

--
PeterN

On 2014-06-30 21:36:45 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/30/2014 3:19 AM, Savageduck wrote:


snip

I have been working with LR Mobile, which is an interesting tool, not
quite what one might expect. Also, PS Touch on the iPad is a
surprisingly powerful tool which also integrates very nicely with the CC
file system.

Anyway, I guess we will have to see what September brings with the iOS8
version of the Photos App, and just how well that translates to
*Yosemite* next year.



Could be.
Corel has entered into a joint marketing agreement with Topaz. I
received an email today offering PSP to Topaz owners for the upgrade
price.
That is a powerful low caost alternative to PS

....not if you already own CS6 or subscribe to CC at any level.
For those entering the arena possibly, but certainly not for those
running a Mac as PSP is not a cross platform application. Though if you
want to jump through the hoops of running it in a Boot Camp Win
partition, or under emulation with Parallels, or VMWare Fusion it can
be done, but that is an inconvenient PIA at best.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2014-06-30 21:42:05 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/30/2014 12:33 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

even adobe knows it and they're scared. why do you think they're
'doubling down' when their only competitor on the mac just called it
quits??


I didn't know that neither Corel, nor Capture, didn't run on a Mac.

Corel dropped Mac support back with PSP X3.

As far as "Capture" goes, what exactly are you referring to?
If you are referring to PhaseOne's Capture One Pro 7, that is available
in a Mac edition.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article 2014063009301056598-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom, Savageduck wrote:

Savageduck:
I would imagine there is going to be more of a blending of the
Photos app for iOS & OSX to provide what appears to be a slick
and UI transparent. Obviously they are going to push cloud
storage for image files and social media sharing.

Sandman:
Yeah, but the trend with apps for Apple has been that those apps
that are made iOS-first and then brought to OSX (Reminders, Notes,
Facetime etc) are too simplistic in their desktop version, while
the apps that are OSX-first and then brought to iOS (iPhoto,
iMovie, Mail, Safari, etc) remains strong featurefull applications
on the Mac. By removing iPhoto, the trend tells us it will be
replaced by something inferior feature-wise, unfortunately.

I think Apple has given the Jon Ive philosophy too much weight based
on the success of the iPhone. Sometimes minimalism. clean, flat
looks, and catering to the lowest common denominator don't work.

Indeed!

Savageduck:
That is my situation, and I can think of several folks with a
similar SW load. I would imagine that most of those will only
use the new Photos App to manage and tweak their iDevice shots.

Sandman:
Yeah, but with Aperture you had everything. It supported the
iPhoto library, Photo Streams and you had all that
professional-level editing and plugins and library management.
It's a pity.

I gave up using iPhoto and its convoluted library system years ago
and I don't regret that one bit. I have all the library management I
could ever need with LR. That and all the editing flexibility I
could want with plug-ins and PS integration.

Uh, we're not comparing iPhoto to Lightroom here, though. Not sure what is
"convoluted" by the iPhoto library though.

Sandman:
Lightroom is professional all right, but cut off and seperate from
that sphere.

Given Adobe's recent remarks regarding Lightroom, I suspect they
have some interesting developments in the wings.

Mayhaps.

Sandman:
In short, if you were a photographer and used Aperture, you didn't
need any other photo-management app for your computer. It linked
in to everything.

I think that way about LR. The big difference is I don't have my
entire photo library in an Apple-like Photo stream. However, I have
little problem, exporting from LR to any sharing service, to my
desktop, or a cloud service such as Dropbox, or even my CC folder.

All manual. Photo Stream had its problems, but the fact that it was all
automatic and in the background made all the difference.

Savageduck:
I have been working with LR Mobile, which is an interesting
tool, not quite what one might expect. Also, PS Touch on the
iPad is a surprisingly powerful tool which also integrates very
nicely with the CC file system.

Sandman:
Yeah, both seperately. CC files can't access LR Mobile and vice
versa. It's really a matter of not going all the way with a
somewhat decent idea.

The first thing is to understand that LR Mobile is not an iPad
implementation of LR5, it is a tool to supplement LR5, especially
given that you are not working on actual files, but *Smart Previews*
in specific LR collections.

Indeed, as opposed to iPhoto on an iPad, where you can work directly with
your original photo files as shared to the photo stream, and then republish
the edits to it and use it on your desktop. Really nice and really fluid.

Does LR Mobile even import images from camera/memory card? Doubtful.

Sandman:
If Adobe were to give me 1TB of online cloud storage for photos
and make them available seemlessly via CC files and LR Mobile,
then we'd have a contender.

Well they give you 20GB for starters, compared to iCloud and its
initial 5GB. They have very good handling of RAW files, and
collaborative work. I find their sharing of RAW files and layered
PSDs to be done better than Dropbox which only sees files such as
NEFs as files, and layered files are problematic with DB. Here is a
CC PSD and that could also be published via Behance directly from CC
storage. http://adobe.ly/TJFa8Y

They still have some other things to learn from Dropbox with regard
to sharing, but it is early in the life of CC. If they are going to
fulfill the potential of what they have I am sure they will end up
will competitive pricing for additional storage.

Hopefully. Well, I would hope they include it in the CC price I'm already
paying of course.

I think that Apple selling 200GB of iCloud space for $49/year with
the release of iOS8 & Yosemite is going to provoke a cloud storage
price war. As it is, I have my free 2.25GB of DB space along with my
CC 20GB. Then back in March Box had a promotional 50GB give-away (it
is back to the standard 10GB free, but I have my 50GB.). So there
are going to be things happening on that front.

I have a 1TB dropbox



--
Sandman[.net]

On 6/30/2014 6:04 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-06-30 21:42:05 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/30/2014 12:33 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

even adobe knows it and they're scared. why do you think they're
'doubling down' when their only competitor on the mac just called it
quits??


I didn't know that neither Corel, nor Capture, didn't run on a Mac.

Corel dropped Mac support back with PSP X3.

I am more familiar with Painter. I was not aware that PSP was no longer
compatible with Mac.

http://www.corel.com/corel/category.jsp?cat=cat4650220&rootCat=cat3610091&sto reKey=us&languageCode=en


As far as "Capture" goes, what exactly are you referring to?
If you are referring to PhaseOne's Capture One Pro 7, that is available
in a Mac edition.


http://www.capturenx.com/en/index.html

--
PeterN

On 6/30/2014 5:54 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-06-30 21:36:45 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/30/2014 3:19 AM, Savageduck wrote:


snip

I have been working with LR Mobile, which is an interesting tool, not
quite what one might expect. Also, PS Touch on the iPad is a
surprisingly powerful tool which also integrates very nicely with the CC
file system.

Anyway, I guess we will have to see what September brings with the iOS8
version of the Photos App, and just how well that translates to
*Yosemite* next year.



Could be.
Corel has entered into a joint marketing agreement with Topaz. I
received an email today offering PSP to Topaz owners for the upgrade
price.
That is a powerful low caost alternative to PS

...not if you already own CS6 or subscribe to CC at any level.
For those entering the arena possibly, but certainly not for those
running a Mac as PSP is not a cross platform application. Though if you
want to jump through the hoops of running it in a Boot Camp Win
partition, or under emulation with Parallels, or VMWare Fusion it can be
done, but that is an inconvenient PIA at best.


Get a PC. [run and dock for cover] ;-p

--
PeterN