End of the road for Aperture?

On 7/2/2014 3:11 PM, nospam wrote:

snip

in aperture there has to be because aperture can't 'send' photoshop the
camera raw settings because it uses a different raw engine. it *must*
make an interim file.

lightroom doesn't always need to.


I ran into an DXO & ACR, where i made changes using DXO that were not
being read in ACR & PS, unless I used an intermediate format such as
tiff. The new version of DXO I can open the changes in PS. It's not
perfect, but better. I imagine the issue with Aperature and LR will
eventuallly be resolved, if there are enough Aperature users who are
switching to LR.


--
PeterN

In article , Sandman
wrote:

No, it looks like a *very* dumbed down iPhoto.

nonsense. it looks a lot like lightroom/aperture.

Not at all. See he

http://sandman.net/files/photos_osx.png

That's the scope of management you have. Moments (which zoom out to
collection and then years, just as on iOS), Shared, Albums and Projects.

that's one view. you're incorrectly assuming that the entire app will
be nothing more than that one view.

here's another view that shows it looks a lot like lightroom/apertu
http://www.apertureexpert.com/sites/...phics/tips/pho
tos-for-os-x_apertureexpert.jpg

And that's all. No Curves, no Levels, no noise reduction, no lens
correction, no star ratings (only the heart for "favorite"), no labels, no
EXIF editing.

http://www.apertureexpert.com/sites/...phics/tips/pho
tos-for-os-x_apertureexpert.jpg

levels is there and the rest probably will be.

There is virtually *nothing* in the UI we've seen that is even remotely
similar to Aperture or Lightroom in terms of functionality.

maybe you haven't, but the rest of the world has.

ios itunes != mac itunes ios safari != mac safari ios mail != mac
mail. etc.

Thanks for making my point. That *was* the point. All the apps you listed
above were Mac-first. I asked you to name one single application that was
iOS-first and was later brought to the Mac and had a Mac-only advanced
feature set.

photos is not an ios-first app, so that is irrelevant.

photos has its roots in iphoto which began life a decade ago.

it's an updated and improved iphoto (which is not hard to do) plus some
of what aperture had and it's probably being developed by some of the
same people who worked on iphoto and aperture.

Safari is a iOS-version of the full Safari, and is thus simpler. But
Reminders is a Mac-version of the iOS app, and is as simple. That's the
entire point.

in other words, photos on the mac will be more sophisticated than
photos on ios.

you've just contradicted yourself. again.

just because the name is the same doesn't mean the app will be the
same. they'll be compatible (obviously) but there will be a *lot* of
differences.

None of which we have seen. On what do you base your claim? As you see, I
have ample of evidence that they will be virtually identical in
functionality.

based on what's been demoed and publicly announced.

Apart from us who saw the sneak peak of it during the keynote,
that is. Apple has exactly no history of changing the
functionality of an application in any significant way between
demo and release.

they didn't demo the entire app.

What didn't they demo? I mean, how do you know they didn't demo the entire
app?

the app is nowhere near done so how could they have demoed it? plus it
was too brief of a demo to demo everything even if it was done.

even iphoto as it stands today would have taken longer to demo
everything.

they couldn't have demoed the entire app since it's *not* *done*.

Please look at the above screen captures and tell me what parts that was
left undemoed that would make Photos a Lightroom contender.

you're assuming those are the only views the app will ever have.

that's a really, really bad assumption.

start looking for crow recipes.

In article , Sandman
wrote:

Sandman:
There are plenty of interrim files in play though. When you open
an original file in Photoshop, it creates a TIFF file when saved,
which is auto-imported into LR. When you open a file with
adjustments, an interrim TIFF file is created. When you edit a
photo as a smart object, the smart object is an interrim TIFF
file.

it *can* but it doesn't always need to do that.

Yes, it always creates an interrim TIFF file when you edit it as a smart
object.

except when it doesn't.

nospam:
when i first used lightroom, all the work i had done in
photoshop before there was a lightroom were automatically
included.

Sandman:
Do you mean in ACR? I mean, if you open a photo in photoshop and
do bitmap-level adjustments to it and save the file, these changes
will obviously be seen in LR. ACR saves edits in an auxilliary
file that LR supports.

exactly, and aperture won't touch it.

thus the integration is much tighter and more seamless.

I've yet to see any examples of how it is more seamless though.

you haven't used it long enough.

nospam:
aperture didn't do that. that's a *major* reason i went with
lightroom.

Sandman:
It's a good enough reason, for sure. As it is, the major problem
I'm having is migrating my projects and smart folders from
Aperture to Lightroom, not the edits.

you will be able to migrate it to photos.

I don't want to migrate it to a dumbed down iPhoto, I want to use a
professional tool.

then continue to use aperture and decide what to do when photos
*actually* *ships*

until then, nobody knows what it will or won't be. certainly not you.

it's up to adobe and apple to work on a migration tool. that might
happen, but it also might not.

Apple couldn't care less. Maybe Adobe will make something though.

adobe is definitely scared and are 'doubling down' to grab ex-aperture
users before apple gets them, likely forever.

In article , nospam wrote:

Sandman:
No, it looks like a *very* dumbed down iPhoto.

nospam:
nonsense. it looks a lot like lightroom/aperture.

Sandman:
Not at all. See he

http://sandman.net/files/photos_osx.png

That's the scope of management you have. Moments (which zoom out
to collection and then years, just as on iOS), Shared, Albums and
Projects.

that's one view. you're incorrectly assuming that the entire app
will be nothing more than that one view.

I am assuming no such thing.

here's another view that shows it looks a lot like
lightroom/apertu
http://www.apertureexpert.com/sites/...phics/tips/pho
tos-for-os-x_apertureexpert.jpg

That doesn't look at all like Lightroom or Aperture. Do you even use these
applications?

Sandman:
And that's all. No Curves, no Levels, no noise reduction, no lens
correction, no star ratings (only the heart for "favorite"), no
labels, no EXIF editing.

http://www.apertureexpert.com/sites/...phics/tips/pho
tos-for-os-x_apertureexpert.jpg

levels is there and the rest probably will be.

Yes, I misspoke about levels, my mistake. And nospam saying the rest
"probably" will be there means exactly... nothing.

Sandman:
There is virtually *nothing* in the UI we've seen that is even
remotely similar to Aperture or Lightroom in terms of
functionality.

maybe you haven't, but the rest of the world has.

Not according to you anything you've shown.

nospam:
ios itunes != mac itunes ios safari != mac safari ios mail !=
mac mail. etc.

Sandman:
Thanks for making my point. That *was* the point. All the apps you
listed above were Mac-first. I asked you to name one single
application that was iOS-first and was later brought to the Mac
and had a Mac-only advanced feature set.

photos is not an ios-first app, so that is irrelevant.

Incorrect.

photos has its roots in iphoto which began life a decade ago.

Cite? Didn't think so. Empty words.

it's an updated and improved iphoto

No cite here either? Gotcha.

(which is not hard to do) plus some of what aperture had and it's
probably being developed by some of the same people who worked on iphoto
and aperture.

Oh, yet another empty uninformed claim. How unexpected!

Sandman:
Safari is a iOS-version of the full Safari, and is thus simpler.
But Reminders is a Mac-version of the iOS app, and is as simple.
That's the entire point.

in other words, photos on the mac will be more sophisticated than
photos on ios.

What your "other words" are is irrelevant to the actual real world,
however.

you've just contradicted yourself. again.

Only if you can't read.

nospam:
just because the name is the same doesn't mean the app will be
the same. they'll be compatible (obviously) but there will be a
*lot* of differences.

Sandman:
None of which we have seen. On what do you base your claim? As you
see, I have ample of evidence that they will be virtually
identical in functionality.

based on what's been demoed and publicly announced.

Incorrect. Try again.

Sandman:
Apart from us who saw the sneak peak of it during the keynote,
that is. Apple has exactly no history of changing the
functionality of an application in any significant way between
demo and release.

nospam:
they didn't demo the entire app.

Sandman:
What didn't they demo? I mean, how do you know they didn't demo
the entire app?

the app is nowhere near done so how could they have demoed it? plus
it was too brief of a demo to demo everything even if it was done.

What didn't they demo? Why won't you answer simple questions. You made the
explicit claim that they didn't demo the entire app, so what parts didn't
they demo? Even I can name a few, why can't you? You made the claim,
remember?

nospam:
they couldn't have demoed the entire app since it's *not*
*done*.

Sandman:
Please look at the above screen captures and tell me what parts
that was left undemoed that would make Photos a Lightroom
contender.

you're assuming those are the only views the app will ever have.

No I'm not. I am asking you to show me facts that you base your assumptions
on about the future of Photos. You know, like I have. Thus far, you have
provided exactly nothing.




--
Sandman[.net]

In article , nospam wrote:

nospam:
it *can* but it doesn't always need to do that.

Sandman:
Yes, it always creates an interrim TIFF file when you edit it as a
smart object.

except when it doesn't.

I.e. never. I'm pretty confident that you never actually use Lightroom.

nospam:
when i first used lightroom, all the work i had done
in photoshop before there was a lightroom were automatically
included.

Sandman:
Do you mean in ACR? I mean, if you open a photo in
photoshop and do bitmap-level adjustments to it and save the
file, these changes will obviously be seen in LR. ACR saves
edits in an auxilliary file that LR supports.

nospam:
exactly, and aperture won't touch it.

thus the integration is much tighter and more seamless.

Sandman:
I've yet to see any examples of how it is more seamless though.

you haven't used it long enough.

How many years more than six is long enough?

nospam:
aperture didn't do that. that's a *major* reason i
went with lightroom.

Sandman:
It's a good enough reason, for sure. As it is, the
major problem I'm having is migrating my projects and smart
folders from Aperture to Lightroom, not the edits.

nospam:
you will be able to migrate it to photos.

Sandman:
I don't want to migrate it to a dumbed down iPhoto, I want to use
a professional tool.

then continue to use aperture and decide what to do when photos
*actually* *ships*

Why?

until then, nobody knows what it will or won't be. certainly not
you.

Yet here you are making a lot of claims about what it will be.

nospam:
it's up to adobe and apple to work on a migration tool. that
might happen, but it also might not.

Sandman:
Apple couldn't care less. Maybe Adobe will make something though.

adobe is definitely scared and are 'doubling down' to grab
ex-aperture users before apple gets them, likely forever.

Keep telling yourself that.


--
Sandman[.net]

In article , nospam wrote:

congratulations. you *completely* missed the satire of my post.

I.e. you failed to support your views in any other way than the most
shallow possible.

I take your lack of comments on the points I raised as silent agreement.


--
Sandman[.net]

In article , nospam wrote:

here's another view that shows it looks a lot like
lightroom/apertu
http://www.apertureexpert.com/sites/...phics/tips/pho
tos-for-os-x_apertureexpert.jpg

Here's a screenshot of Photos compared feature-by-feature to iPhoto:

http://sandman.net/files/photos_vs_iphoto.jpg

As you can see, both have features the other one lacks, but the most part
is available in both applications. Nothing "pro-level" about either.

But wait, there's more. Here's Photos compared to... Preview:

http://sandman.net/files/photos_vs_preview.jpg

Pretty much the same deal. Both have features the other one lacks (but
Photos at least seem to have more features lacking from Preview than the
other way around).

Is Preview a pro-level app as well?

To round it off, here's Photos compared to something we know is a pro-level
app: Apertu

http://sandman.net/files/photos_vs_aperture.jpg

I didn't bother drawing any lines here, because I think the image speaks
for itself.

I hope this makes it clear why I think what we *KNOW* about Photos shows
that it is not currently a pro-level app and there is as of yet nothing
that makes it seem like Photos will grow to the right part of the last
image in the interrim. You are free to hope and wish all you like, but
there are no current facts that supports those wishes, unfortunately.



--
Sandman[.net]

In article , Sandman
wrote:

congratulations. you *completely* missed the satire of my post.

I.e. you failed to support your views in any other way than the most
shallow possible.

I take your lack of comments on the points I raised as silent agreement.

you still don't get it.