6 Months Since Aperture (& iPhotos) Death

[jms969]

The only thing that makes sense is that they are going to try to make Photos the app to push traffic to iCloud -- which they eventually hope will be a huge cash cow.

100% spot on!!!

The only thing I use iCloud for is syncing calendar, contacts, and reminders...

My photos (now north of 1TB) are stored locally on a hard drive (backed up on other hard drives) in a nicely organized folder system.

Yes, I store quite a lot of information in the cloud (all of it utilizing dropbox)...

makes the box, a fairly nice box. They make the OS, riddled with bugs. They are wholly unreliable when it comes software.

You have to go external to when it comes to software, why do you think that Adobe commands more than 70% of the photo editing market? Because that is what they do!!!

Apple is a hardware company with 69% of its sales coming from the iPhone. Everything from will be iOS centric

is a mobile company pure and simple...

 

[maflynn]

The only thing that makes sense is that they are going to try to make Photos the app to push traffic to iCloud -- which they eventually hope will be a huge cash cow. Aperture was profitable, but sacrificed in hopes of bigger profits.... greed will get Apple again I fear, as it has several times in its history. Don't learn from history, relive it.

In a sense this is what I was expecting. I've been beating the drum, of apple releasing an app that is a shell aperture and if that does turn out to be the case, that's sad but not surprising.

I'd go so far as to say that apple is not looking to cater to the Hobbyist, serious enthusiast, prosumer, never mind the professional. They're after the casual consumer who's looking to upload images to facebook. Perhaps this is an unfair opinion but that seems to be what's going on.

It only re-affirms my decision to switch to LR last year.

 

[skaeight]

In a sense this is what I was expecting. I've been beating the drum, of apple releasing an app that is a shell aperture and if that does turn out to be the case, that's sad but not surprising.

I'd go so far as to say that apple is not looking to cater to the Hobbyist, serious enthusiast, prosumer, never mind the professional. They're after the casual consumer who's looking to upload images to facebook. Perhaps this is an unfair opinion but that seems to be what's going on.

It only re-affirms my decision to switch to LR last year.

Sadly I think you're right. Their focus is the people buying iPhones now, which are now mostly the casual consumer, simply because of how many they're selling.

I've slept on it and I'm going to be moving ahead fully with my Lightroom conversion.

 

[maflynn]

I've slept on it and I'm going to be moving ahead fully with my Lightroom conversion.

I'm going to give Photos a fair shake, I'm backing up my bootcamp partition in preparation to its removal. I need the space to hold my Aperture library and soon to be converted Photos library.

I have an SP3, so I have no need to run windows on my rMBP.

 

[jtrainor56]

I just saw this on Yahoo Tech, personally I am not impressed.


https://www.yahoo.com/tech/photos-for-the-mac-is-clean-fast-connected-and-110170322774.html

 

[maflynn]

I just saw this on Yahoo Tech, personally I am not impressed.


https://www.yahoo.com/tech/photos-for-the-mac-is-clean-fast-connected-and-110170322774.html

There's definitely some things that are pretty cool about Photos. I like the syncing across devices, but there's a huge caveat. You need to purchase sufficient storage to handle your library. I think it may get expensive for me if I choose to hold my entire library up on iCloud. I'm looking spending 120 bucks a year - kind of pricey for a hobbyist such as myself.

I wonder how it will handle multiple libraries, create annual libraries due to my rMBP storage constraint. How will that work, when I'm working on my 2015 library and then in 12 months move on to my 2016 library.

 

[skaeight]

There's definitely some things that are pretty cool about Photos. I like the syncing across devices, but there's a huge caveat. You need to purchase sufficient storage to handle your library. I think it may get expensive for me if I choose to hold my entire library up on iCloud. I'm looking spending 120 bucks a year - kind of pricey for a hobbyist such as myself.

I wonder how it will handle multiple libraries, create annual libraries due to my rMBP storage constraint. How will that work, when I'm working on my 2015 library and then in 12 months move on to my 2016 library.

Just curious, are you considering moving from LR to Photos or are u just looking at using Photos for certain things?

One thing someone mentioned on thephotosexpert.com is that Federiggi demoed a Lens Correction extension in the WWDC Keybote. I don't remember that and just scrubbed through the video and don't see it. Has any one seen that?

The only thing I can figure is that they're meshing the WWDC keynote with the session where they demo a barebones app that has a lens correction checkbox to show off the capabilities of Photokit.

If a lens correction extension would exist that does peak my interest a little bit.

 

[maflynn]

Just curious, are you considering moving from LR to Photos or are u just looking at using Photos for certain things?

I'm just looking at it. I was documenting some of the issues that I'd face, if I were to embrace photos and abandon LR.

I think there's too many downsides for me to use photos, and too many upsides with LR.

No product is perfect but I wanted to my due diligence and try out photos.

 

[Razeus]

100% spot on!!!

The only thing I use iCloud for is syncing calendar, contacts, and reminders...

My photos (now north of 1TB) are stored locally on a hard drive (backed up on other hard drives) in a nicely organized folder system.

Yes, I store quite a lot of information in the cloud (all of it utilizing dropbox)...

makes the box, a fairly nice box. They make the OS, riddled with bugs. They are wholly unreliable when it comes software.

You have to go external to when it comes to software, why do you think that Adobe commands more than 70% of the photo editing market? Because that is what they do!!!

Apple is a hardware company with 69% of its sales coming from the iPhone. Everything from will be iOS centric

is a mobile company pure and simple...

How do you have 1TB of photos? This includes RAW?

 

[OreoCookie]

The only thing that makes sense is that they are going to try to make Photos the app to push traffic to iCloud -- which they eventually hope will be a huge cash cow. Aperture was profitable, but sacrificed in hopes of bigger profits.... greed will get Apple again I fear, as it has several times in its history. Don't learn from history, relive it.

I think that's utter non-sense, syncing of photos is something that customers want, and just reflects the iCloud vision laid out by Steve Jobs in 2011: the truth is in the cloud, and you're not even forced to use it. If you want, you can use Photo Stream with its current limitations for free. While I don't agree with the tiers for paid iCloud storage (I find them a little too expensive, and by default Apple is way too stingy), Dropbox et al are doing exactly the same. You can even push smaller versions of photos (e. g. full-res jpgs instead of RAW files) to your iPhone or iPad.

There are plenty of reasons why Apple made Photos, (1) they wanted to bring photo management into the iCloud age, (2) rewrite an aging app that has received little love recently (iPhoto), and (3) they are dog fooding the new UXKit API which reimagines AppKit. Making money by subscription revenue isn't even on the radar -- especially if you're so convinced that all that counts is revenue from iOS devices where revenue from iCloud storage subscriptions is not even a rounding error.

But the two things I really, really want are third party extensions (i.e. the zenfolio uploading extension) and round trip editing with plugins (NIK!!!).

I'm not sure these things will come though as I think Apple wants a unified experience across all the devices. So that may drive a more homogenous (generic) set of capabilities that are common across both OS and IOS.

I think there will be two ways to replace round tripping with this new paradigm: (1) Extensions and (2) by giving access to all photo libraries via the Open/Save dialog. If I understand correctly, on iOS apps can interface with the photo library. In principle, it seems to me that you can write your own app which uses the same library as, say, Photos, but with much more advanced features. Both ideas seem very interesting to me, especially if the guys from Pixelmator get to work and factor some of their image processing routines into an Extension or bring a Photomator tool to market which is more of a DAM-focused tool.

 

[jms969]

How do you have 1TB of photos? This includes RAW?

I shoot everything in raw...

When I switched to LR a couple of years ago it was north of 350 GB and I thought I had about 800 GB now, but it is north of 1 TB.

And yes Photos might be nice for cataloging that many images but they are now catalogued in LR in a detailed folder structure that I would lose all control of in Photos.

So if you are a casual user Photos will be great if you are an established photographer with a large catalog of images and thousands of edits on your photos it is a non starter...

 

[skaeight]

I'm just looking at it. I was documenting some of the issues that I'd face, if I were to embrace photos and abandon LR.

I think there's too many downsides for me to use photos, and too many upsides with LR.

No product is perfect but I wanted to my due diligence and try out photos.

Fair enough. I'm going to look at it and do plan on using the iCloud sharing and photo books / cards features. I may even use it as a way to store my edited "good" photos so I get OS DAM integration.

 

[maflynn]

Fair enough. I'm going to look at it and do plan on using the iCloud sharing and photo books / cards features. I may even use it as a way to store my edited "good" photos so I get OS DAM integration.

The iCloud stuff is interesting to be sure, but its not something I'd really look to use - even with Adobe's cloud based services.

 

[OreoCookie]

The iCloud stuff is interesting to be sure, but its not something I'd really look to use - even with Adobe's cloud based services.

There are a few things that I consider crucial when it comes to cloud services:
(1) I want to know where my files are.
(2) I want to have a complete copy of these files on at least one of my devices and have these backed up. I don't trust any single service or device.
(3) I want at least some flexibility to react to edge cases (e. g. when my storage needs exceed a storage tier that I pay for).
(4) I want to automate as much as possible.

Adobe's answer seems to be manual file management only -- that's not good enough, and bites them in the rear end when they try to automate things. Right now I'm in between a rock and a hard place: to me using Lightroom is akin to using Windows, I've tried every version of it, and I just don't like the UI. I could get used to the manual file management. None of the alternatives to Aperture are convincing, and Photos does not seem to be it either. Maybe in the future, maybe with an extension or an app that builds on top of the Photos library, but not now. Ugh.

 

[maflynn]

None of the alternatives to Aperture are convincing

Capture One appears to be closest to Aperture in terms of functionality. I'd say take a loo at that. I played with this for quite some time, but while the RAW processing to be the best, the rest of the app didn't fit my work flow. It can't hurt to take a look since they offer a free trial.

 

[skaeight]

Scott Bourne of Photofocus (& old MacBreak Weekly episodes) called what happened with Photos 2.5 years ago:

http://photofocus.com/2012/06/13/ww...m-a-professional-photographers-point-of-view/

Here’s the writing on the wall. Aperture’s library now fully integrates with iPhoto’s library. Does that ring a bell with anyone but me? iPhoto is a purely consumer product. Aperture was originally touted, marketed and sold as a professional application and was managed by Apple’s pro apps team. Does anyone really think there’s a place for integration between a free consumer photo app that kids use in grade school and a pro app like Aperture?

This is like the Final Cut Pro debacle. Apple essentially has decided that the broader consumer market is more profitable so pro apps are history. I can’t and don’t blame them from a purely business point of view. If I were an Apple stockholder (and I am not) I would applaud these moves. As a professional photographer – I can’t say I am happy.

Apple is and probably will be for some time a great company for its shareholders. I think they may even innovate once in a while when it comes to mobile. But it’s clear to me that the loss of Steve Jobs meant the loss of Apple as we knew it.

I've been thinking about the fact that they consolidated the formats of the Aperture and iPhoto Libraries for a while. It would appear they've been working towards this transition to Photos since mid 2012.

Here is another earlier article from him where he talks about how he was strongly considering switching to LR:

http://photofocus.com/2012/05/29/he...dering-a-permanent-switch-to-adobe-lightroom/

He used to be one of Apertures biggest supporters, he gives a little backstory on how he'd been involved with Aperture:

You might not know my history, but if I do switch it’s a pretty big deal. My history with Aperture is as almost as deep as you can get. I taught (alongside Derrick Story) the first live Aperture class taught anywhere at Macworld the year the product debuted. I also taught it there the following two years. I have been the technical editor on almost every Aperture book ever written (I worked on nine of them.) I was in the first Apple Train The Trainer (T3) class and was one of the first Apple-Certified T3 trainers. I’ve taught thousands of people how to use Aperture in seminars and workshops. I’ve also recorded training titles for lynda.com (total three video training series) and I founded the first Aperture blog and podcast (Aperture Tricks) later sold to a third party. If Apple can’t hang on to someone like me, what does that say about their prospects for hanging on to the rest of the market?

He was a smart man moving on from Aperture when he did, he saw the writing on the wall.

I've been working in Lightroom a little bit tonight. I like working with it to edit photos a lot actually. Having native lens correction is great. The perspective control is also amazing. The noise correction and sharpening are also out of this world. So working in the app isn't a problem for me, I'm mostly used to the interface. The only thing that will bring some pain is getting at the photos once I edit them from other program. I guess I just need to explore the publish services more. Does anyone have any tips on better utilizing publish services so that edited photos are more readily available to other apps?

 

[v3rlon]

http://www.idimager.com/WP/?page_id=20 IDimagaer photo Supreme may be of interest to people in this thread.

I am still looking, but it seems to be a decent DAM. No sidecar files. Good round trip to editor of choice. It doesn't seem to have any editing inside it, so if that is what you want then never mind. If you do all your edits in Nik anyway, then perhaps this one is for you.

Geo tagging, face recognition, good keywords.

$99 and you get to keep your soul.

 

[maflynn]

I've been working in Lightroom a little bit tonight. I like working with it to edit photos a lot actually.

No app is perfect but I think LR is the best all around package available. Strong editing tools, decent UI (some will agree, others will disagree). I've gotten used to the UI, but I will say its not the best. Strong DAM tools/capabilities. Good seamless plugin support especially with PS.

Its hard for me to consider another tool now, that I'm used to LR, though I'll be the first to admit I'm only scratching the surface of what it can do.

I like some of what the new photos.app brings, but I don't like a lot of it. The editing tools are meager, but what's there seems ok. The organizational tools all but absent - one would hope that in later betas they'll appear.

The thing with LR is, you know Adobe is going to continue to improve it, because its a source of income. For apple, they may tire of the supporting this and kill it off in a couple of years or slow the pace of updates/development. You just don't know. If the whims of the consumer change at all, apple will drop this.

 

[v3rlon]

No app is perfect but I think LR is the best all around package available. Strong editing tools, decent UI (some will agree, others will disagree). I've gotten used to the UI, but I will say its not the best. Strong DAM tools/capabilities. Good seamless plugin support especially with PS.

Don't take this too harshly please...

A lot of the arguments for why I should be using Lightroom sound like the arguments for why I should be using Windows instead of Mac.

"Everyone's doing it. Have you seen their market share? There's a reason for that."
"Compatibility"
"You know its going to be around for a long time because it is the major focus of the company."
"Sure they are an evil, soul sucking, menace, and they have crappy licensing that is a headache when you have to deal with them, but you can get software that works with them from Wal-Mart."

 

[skaeight]

Don't take this too harshly please...

A lot of the arguments for why I should be using Lightroom sound like the arguments for why I should be using Windows instead of Mac.

"Everyone's doing it. Have you seen their market share? There's a reason for that."
"Compatibility"
"You know its going to be around for a long time because it is the major focus of the company."
"Sure they are an evil, soul sucking, menace, and they have crappy licensing that is a headache when you have to deal with them, but you can get software that works with them from Wal-Mart."

I do think one of the strongest arguments for using LR is that it will be around, Adobe needs customers for their CC or they will go out of business. In my limited relationship of the company, they do actually appear to give a crap and frequently update their products. They also seem to give some indication of their roadmap. Really the complete opposite of Apple. They obviously don't need the enthusiast / pro market, and they release software when they feel like it - it has no effect on their bottom line.

I'm saying this as someone who is reluctantly going towards LR. I'm going to wait until my demo expires in a few weeks before actually signing up and committing to a year in hopes the Photos beta is out and maybe they add a few missing features (or maybe some 3rd party extensions are released to fill in the gaps), or I determine it will work for me somehow. I'm still torn, LR is great for editing, but the simplicity and integration with the OS are very appealing.

One thing I really don't have a problem with though is paying $10 / month for CC. It makes sure I'll alway have the latest version and it is actually cheaper than it used to be to get LR + PS.

 

[skaeight]

I was just playing around with Pixelmator's iOS extension, and if they come out with something like this for Mac, that might fill in the gap of losing round tripping - for more advanced stuff the photo could just be opened in Pixelmator directly. I'm sure other companies will have similar things.

Presets are the only thing I wouldn't have, hopefully that's something they would add soon.

I just hope the beta of Photos comes out to the public beta test program before my CC demo expires. I may be willing to give this some time and see where it goes. The prospect of extensions is intriguing and could be something entirely new in the way we edit photos. I'm kind of realizing I don't want to miss out on at least seeing where it goes.

 

[robgendreau]

Don't take this too harshly please...

A lot of the arguments for why I should be using Lightroom sound like the arguments for why I should be using Windows instead of Mac.

"Everyone's doing it. Have you seen their market share? There's a reason for that."
"Compatibility"
"You know its going to be around for a long time because it is the major focus of the company."
"Sure they are an evil, soul sucking, menace, and they have crappy licensing that is a headache when you have to deal with them, but you can get software that works with them from Wal-Mart."

Oh...I thought the quotes above referred to Apple....

I don't get the antipathy toward Adobe. How someone could be in the bag for any of these companies is beyond me; if you want software heroes check out the open source alternatives. Or hard core developers like Lemke Software (Graphic Converter).

WalMart, Apple, Adobe, MS. Not much diffence except in relative worth.

At least Adobe has reps on their forums. And releases info about future releases, to an extent. And doesn't do stuff like axe LR and beef up Elements as an alternative. And has always offered far more generous academic versions than Apple or MS.

You can certainly hate LR's interface. Or refuse to do subscription. Or not like the price. Or like some other product better. Or whatever. I have found it to be the best for me of all that I've used, and I actually like that I am not stuck to a Mac with it, that I can use it on Windows (and they license you for both, which is cool).

They are just companies with tools, not tribes we join.

 

[irishv]

I was just playing around with Pixelmator's iOS extension, and if they come out with something like this for Mac, that might fill in the gap of losing round tripping - for more advanced stuff the photo could just be opened in Pixelmator directly. I'm sure other companies will have similar things.

Presets are the only thing I wouldn't have, hopefully that's something they would add soon.

I just hope the beta of Photos comes out to the public beta test program before my CC demo expires. I may be willing to give this some time and see where it goes. The prospect of extensions is intriguing and could be something entirely new in the way we edit photos. I'm kind of realizing I don't want to miss out on at least seeing where it goes.

I'm in a similar boat. I tried the CC demo and just can't get into LR. I don't need the advanced editing features, just a solid DAM. From a cost perspective, it's going to be a subscription for either CC or for iCloud storage space.

Photos actually looks to meet most of my needs. Things that appear to be missing should be easy to add back in (geotagging/map view, keyword hierarchy), and extensions look like they will meet all my editing needs. A single library for Photos and Pixelmator syncing to both my Macs, iPad, and iPhone sounds pretty sweet.

 

[skaeight]

I'm in a similar boat. I tried the CC demo and just can't get into LR. I don't need the advanced editing features, just a solid DAM. From a cost perspective, it's going to be a subscription for either CC or for iCloud storage space.

Photos actually looks to meet most of my needs. Things that appear to be missing should be easy to add back in (geotagging/map view, keyword hierarchy), and extensions look like they will meet all my editing needs. A single library for Photos and Pixelmator syncing to both my Macs, iPad, and iPhone sounds pretty sweet.

I'm looking at it the same way cost wise. It's one or the other for me.

 

[robgendreau]

I'm looking at it the same way cost wise. It's one or the other for me.

Yeah, try gps4cam for geotagging; it can do anything that Aperture/LR can do if you use a gps to log photos. And only a few bucks for the app. HoudahGeo can also geolocate, reverse geolocate, and map. It's not too expensive.

If you took say the $120US cost of just a one year sub to LR/PS, and then spent that on say Graphic Converter, a few excellent iOS apps like Photogene or Snapseed, and maybe Pixelmator, you'd be set if you used Photos just to find your photos and send them to say your iPad for editing or geotagging. It's already possible even if you don't have the Photos beta to do a lot of that.

A lot of folks probably don't need much more than that.