5 ms·

As a multiple-times-a-day Aperture user for the last several years - I'm really glad to hear this. Apple has made it abundantly clear, that they were longer go

As a multiple-times-a-day Aperture user for the last several years - I'm really glad to hear this. Apple has made it abundantly clear, that they were longer going to invest any effort into Aperture, and so we're going to get the best of all worlds. The application is absolutely rock solid for me - most of the database crashes, and corruptions have stopped occurring for over a year - so in the interim, I have a product that works for me and will keep me satisfied for the next couple years. Meanwhile, Apple is going to put all their energy into a single photo system, instead of trying to do some schizophrenic split between iPhoto/Aperture - I expect to see a pretty excellent system out of it. Perhaps it's because I don't work commercial or event photography, but the reality is that most of what I use Aperture for these days could probably be done with a slightly beefier iPhoto - which is pretty much what Photos is going to become. Photostream, as of about 3-4 months ago, has also gotten reliable enough that I never have to worry about any picture that I've taken being on my Laptop. Unlike the early days (months, year?) when it was pretty much a crapshoot as to whether your pictures would move from your iPhone to PhotoStream and then to your laptop - It Just Works now. So, good news all around.

nnnnni 12y ago
Yeah, I'm really hoping that "Photos" will have all of the features of Aperture. It sounds like that's what they're doing. If it does, that will be great.
- lostlogin 12y ago
  I would bet that it won't initially but will long term. Apple has a track record of releasing things with key features missing, but putting them in down the track. The most recent example being iWork.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- robterrell 12y ago
  As long as they continue to allow plugins, whatever they do will be fine.
- arrrg 12y ago
  Doesn’t look like it. The screenshot in the linked article is quite high res (no idea where they got that one, though). You can see what’s in there: http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosforosx.jpg?w=1360&h=1170 http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosfo... So, that’s quite extensive (definitely compared to iPhoto), but it doesn’t seem like they are going for Aperture levels of possible adjustments. But maybe they are, that interface could be hiding things.
  - tcskeptic 12y ago
    Interestingly, in the top right hand side of the Adjustments panel, there appears to be an "Add" button.
caycep 12y ago
The one worry, and this is more of an ancillary one, is that now without the Aperture competition, Adobe will let lightroom development slack off. Lightroom is (was) one of the adobe apps that don't totally suck, and I always credited this w/ them getting taken off guard by Aperture (competitions is a great thing, etc etc). That being said, I suppose the writing is on the wall and whatever changes in direction were in store for lightroom is probably already in motion.
- nicholassmith 12y ago
  I don't think Adobe will slack off too much, they know it's a massively popular product but that most photographers are geeks and won't put up with them taking their foot off the gas, they'll look elsewhere (although elsewhere is mostly nothing at the moment).
- binaryorganic 12y ago
  This seems like all the more reason for Adobe to double down on Lightroom if you ask me. They stand to gain a lot of displaced users from this. I'm certainly going to have to make a choice now.
- mortenjorck 12y ago
  I'm not even so worried about Adobe letting Lightroom languish as I am about them using their newfound monopoly position to at last move Lightroom into the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model that ate the Creative Suite last year. As an enthusiast photographer and avid Lightroom user, there's no way I'm paying a recurring subscription for the same app when I'm not using it to make an income. That said, there's a potential twist here. Apple's upcoming Photos app can go one of two directions: Apple could, as everyone seems to be assuming, go the consumer-focused route and stay out of Lightroom's market. On the other hand, Photos could pack all of Aperture's pro features and more behind an "advanced mode" UI. Suddenly, Lightroom isn't just competing with an Apple product, they're competing with free.
  - iSnow 12y ago
    Apple never does simple/advanced mode UIs
abruzzi 12y ago
My only hope is this doesn't turn into a FinalCut-type fiasco where what they consider the new "pro" isn't all that useful for pro. (Yes, I know more pros are on adobe lightroom, but I really hate renting software so I'm not going in that direction.)
- archagon 12y ago
  I think Lightroom is one of the few Adobe products you can buy without a subscription, unless they changed that recently.
  - rifleman 12y ago
    This is still true
    - alexqgb 12y ago
      Seems foolish to change. Unlike every other app Adobe offers, LR is also a library. Renting access to your own assets is categorically different from renting access to software which is already somebody else's IP and is also getting (more or less) continually updated. Letting people buy LR makes them feel comfortable about never losing access to their own raw material. The savvy approach is to let them have this much, charge them to do interesting things with it, and let them keep the final output in a place that remains entirely theirs.
  - abruzzi 12y ago
    Good to know. I haven't used it, since I like Aperture, but I'll keep that in mind if Apple delivers something that doesn't do what I need/want. (FinalCut is still useless for my workflow.)
- modfodder 12y ago
  As a professional editor and technical director, I hope Apple continues to innovate, trying to push their software into the future. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of NLEs that really don't offer much of a difference (which is where we were with FCP7, Avid, and Premiere several years ago). I want my tools to become better, faster and more efficient and sometimes that will mean I have a bit of a learning curve to adjust to the new tool. Regularly bouncing between the four major NLEs (really 3 major plus FCPX), FCPX has become the fastest and most efficient NLE for my workflow. You mileage may vary in your desire to see your tools evolve, but I much prefer radical evolution, otherwise we'd still be cutting film on slightly upgraded Steenbecks and Moviolas.
reefab 12y ago
> The application is absolutely rock solid for me There has been some bugs since Mavericks came out that still hasn't been fixed, mostly related to multiple monitors. That was an indication that it was going to be dropped. It's fairly reliable but it's showing it's age right now.

nnnnni 12y ago

Yeah, I'm really hoping that "Photos" will have all of the features of Aperture. It sounds like that's what they're doing. If it does, that will be great.

lostlogin 12y ago
I would bet that it won't initially but will long term. Apple has a track record of releasing things with key features missing, but putting them in down the track. The most recent example being iWork.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
robterrell 12y ago
As long as they continue to allow plugins, whatever they do will be fine.
arrrg 12y ago
Doesn’t look like it. The screenshot in the linked article is quite high res (no idea where they got that one, though). You can see what’s in there: http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosforosx.jpg?w=1360&h=1170 http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosfo... So, that’s quite extensive (definitely compared to iPhoto), but it doesn’t seem like they are going for Aperture levels of possible adjustments. But maybe they are, that interface could be hiding things.
- tcskeptic 12y ago
  Interestingly, in the top right hand side of the Adjustments panel, there appears to be an "Add" button.

caycep 12y ago

The one worry, and this is more of an ancillary one, is that now without the Aperture competition, Adobe will let lightroom development slack off. Lightroom is (was) one of the adobe apps that don't totally suck, and I always credited this w/ them getting taken off guard by Aperture (competitions is a great thing, etc etc). That being said, I suppose the writing is on the wall and whatever changes in direction were in store for lightroom is probably already in motion.

nicholassmith 12y ago
I don't think Adobe will slack off too much, they know it's a massively popular product but that most photographers are geeks and won't put up with them taking their foot off the gas, they'll look elsewhere (although elsewhere is mostly nothing at the moment).
binaryorganic 12y ago
This seems like all the more reason for Adobe to double down on Lightroom if you ask me. They stand to gain a lot of displaced users from this. I'm certainly going to have to make a choice now.
mortenjorck 12y ago
I'm not even so worried about Adobe letting Lightroom languish as I am about them using their newfound monopoly position to at last move Lightroom into the mandatory Creative Cloud subscription model that ate the Creative Suite last year. As an enthusiast photographer and avid Lightroom user, there's no way I'm paying a recurring subscription for the same app when I'm not using it to make an income. That said, there's a potential twist here. Apple's upcoming Photos app can go one of two directions: Apple could, as everyone seems to be assuming, go the consumer-focused route and stay out of Lightroom's market. On the other hand, Photos could pack all of Aperture's pro features and more behind an "advanced mode" UI. Suddenly, Lightroom isn't just competing with an Apple product, they're competing with free.
- iSnow 12y ago
  Apple never does simple/advanced mode UIs

abruzzi 12y ago

My only hope is this doesn't turn into a FinalCut-type fiasco where what they consider the new "pro" isn't all that useful for pro. (Yes, I know more pros are on adobe lightroom, but I really hate renting software so I'm not going in that direction.)

archagon 12y ago
I think Lightroom is one of the few Adobe products you can buy without a subscription, unless they changed that recently.
- rifleman 12y ago
  This is still true
  - alexqgb 12y ago
    Seems foolish to change. Unlike every other app Adobe offers, LR is also a library. Renting access to your own assets is categorically different from renting access to software which is already somebody else's IP and is also getting (more or less) continually updated. Letting people buy LR makes them feel comfortable about never losing access to their own raw material. The savvy approach is to let them have this much, charge them to do interesting things with it, and let them keep the final output in a place that remains entirely theirs.
- abruzzi 12y ago
  Good to know. I haven't used it, since I like Aperture, but I'll keep that in mind if Apple delivers something that doesn't do what I need/want. (FinalCut is still useless for my workflow.)
modfodder 12y ago
As a professional editor and technical director, I hope Apple continues to innovate, trying to push their software into the future. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of NLEs that really don't offer much of a difference (which is where we were with FCP7, Avid, and Premiere several years ago). I want my tools to become better, faster and more efficient and sometimes that will mean I have a bit of a learning curve to adjust to the new tool. Regularly bouncing between the four major NLEs (really 3 major plus FCPX), FCPX has become the fastest and most efficient NLE for my workflow. You mileage may vary in your desire to see your tools evolve, but I much prefer radical evolution, otherwise we'd still be cutting film on slightly upgraded Steenbecks and Moviolas.

reefab 12y ago

> The application is absolutely rock solid for me There has been some bugs since Mavericks came out that still hasn't been fixed, mostly related to multiple monitors. That was an indication that it was going to be dropped. It's fairly reliable but it's showing it's age right now.