Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces Aperture 1.5
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Aperture 1.1.2 runs just fine on my 2 year old 17" Powerbook G4 (1.5Ghz / 1.5GB ram).
I have heard that the graphics hardware on this laptop helps a lot.
It is not as fast doing edits as my my former PhotoMechanic/Bridge/ACR/iView workflow but good enough and has the advantages of a faster workflow when all is said and done.
I've ported 5500 of my D2X raw images into the library. I use a second 23" Cinema Display.
I have heard that the graphics hardware on this laptop helps a lot.
It is not as fast doing edits as my my former PhotoMechanic/Bridge/ACR/iView workflow but good enough and has the advantages of a faster workflow when all is said and done.
I've ported 5500 of my D2X raw images into the library. I use a second 23" Cinema Display.
iMeowbot said:
Well, it's funny that you make a comparison between the "development" of one and the "release" of another...as if Apple started Aperture some days ago as well...
iMeowbot said:
Do you really believe Lightroom has been in active development since 2002? I'm thinking it was a proof of concept in 2002.
I mean, if it's really been in development since 2002, why isn't it finished yet? Why is it so far behind Aperture?
That claim by Adobe is just ludicrous.
Object-X said:
No, Adobe is claiming Lightroom will be released in late 2006, early 2007, a good 3 months before PS CS3.
I think with this rebranding, they're positioning Lightroom between PS Elements and PS CS, hence PS Lightroom.
donlphi said:
I wouldn't get too excited about Aperture running on 'lighter' hardware such as MacBooks or Mac minis. I think the idea is that, rather than doing hardcore raw file processing on these lightweight hardware products, you'd just have your JPEG-preview-only Aperture library on these machines. So the really speedy functionality on this lightweight hardware would be limited to organizing, sorting, searching, slideshows, etc. of pre-generated JPEG previews.
I doubt we'll be doing hardcore bulk raw processing on a Mac mini, even with Aperture 1.5. But I wouldn't mind if we could.
New features
I still have some questions about the new features:
I still have some questions about the new features:
- OK, we can reference files archived to DVD+R discs; but will Aperture itself generate those archived discs?
- We can have presets for exposure and white balance; but is it limited to those two panels?
- We can run Aperture with just JPEG previews on Mac minis and MacBooks; but will Aperture sync those libraries automatically?
- Aperture can export XMP: but is it truly limited to IPTC data rather than exposure settings, etc.?
It still is pretty poor with compatibility when it comes to RAW. For example, it still can't read white balance from the meta data on RAW files off Canon cameras. Great!displaced said:
Aperture's development also is going slow. Apple pulling out the software?
Perhaps all the developers are spending too much time on Leopard and Logic 8 at the moment.
Huh? 1.5 is a huge update. It's interesting that most of the new features in the version 1.x's of Aperture deal with core functionality (raw conversion in 1.1, and file location with 1.5). This is core stuff that Aperture has to have nailed down before it does fancier stuff like layered editing.SimonTheSoundMa said:
Apple is absolutely going in the right direction with this. And at a very rapid pace. It's not even a year old!
Uh, I doubt the Aperture development team has anything to do with Leopard or Logic at all. Not sure what hat you pulled that out of.SimonTheSoundMa said:
Um, really? I use a Canon camera and Aperture seems to preserve the camera WB setting fine...SimonTheSoundMa said:
They've updated it twice, and I'm pretty sure its only been out a year. Not too shabby....SimonTheSoundMa said:
Perhaps you don't have all the facts?SimonTheSoundMa said:
gauchogolfer said:
As long as you had enough RAM, the right processor, and the right version of Mac OS X, it was supported. It hasn't changed in the low level requirements.
My machine didn't have enough RAM, so it was immediately rejected. However, they were doing me a favour because the dual and dual core G5s still had performance issues with it.
SimonTheSoundMa said:
You're kidding, right? Besides the fact that all are different teams, Logic has had FAR less development than Aperture as well as most other apple apps (with the obvious exception of Soundtrack Pro, which hasn't had a single improvement in over a year, and has always run like crap). I'd kill to see Logic development moving at the speed of Aperture.
BRLawyer said:Sorry, but Apple released Aperture BEFORE Adobe did the same with its app...so it's easier to have a clone of Apple's app, not the opposite...
Do you realize that Adobe released their product as a beta only a little while after Aperture was released? Do you honestly think Adobe worked on Lightroom for like a few months before making it beta? It'd be impossible. They had the same idea at around the same time, but Adobe started development and never finished it. They just didn't put much into it. However, once Aperture was released, they started things up with Lightroom again and are now taking it seriously.
And in many ways, Adobe Lightroom has more features than Aperture, particularly (useful) editing tools so that you don't always have to go into Photoshop. The DEVELOP mode in Lightroom is rather brilliant.
And they may have lowered the requirements of Aperture, but that doesn't mean it'll run faster than before. Aperture could be hacked to work on MacBooks before, for example. Apple may have just did it themselves and took the minimum resolution requirements out. So really, while it may now work on lesser systems, it may not run "well" at all.
Whiteapple said:
aftk2 said:
No. A number of people have complained about the speed of Aperture, even on Dual G5s and yes, even Quad G5s. Even Apple wasn't all that happy with the app before, hence the overhaul of the Aperture team.
I'll take another look at Aperture, but for now I'm using Lightroom.
JoeG4 said:*yawn* This is like as if MS made a press event only to announce a .1 update to IE.
WTF is so damn important about a .5 update of Aperture? If it's anything like iPhoto that's one program I wouldn't be spending $500 or whataever on.
All except for a few itsy bitsy tiny details.
A: Apple didn't create the event, It is a photography event put on by someone else.
B: Do we know that all they did was get on stage and say "hey, we updated, this is what it does new! bye!". I'm betting more on the fact that they showed of Aperature to a bunch of Photographers at a Photography event and mentioned that they just updated it with all this new stuff. Announcing the fact that you update software if you're trying to sell/promote a product, is a good idea.
C: If you didn't pay the money to go to this event, and you aren't a professional Photographer, and if you think it's anything like iPhoto, than this product is NOT FOR YOU. Apple doesn't make products that everyone and their dog will use. They do happen to make a few that only a select group of professionals will use :\
This is like people whining about Apple getting up on stage and talking about updates to xCode at WWDC, it's a freaking developers conference!
zeppiecr said:
It will run great. My MBP is almost the same spec, runs wonderfully.
Eric
http://www.essersinchina.com/
SimonTheSoundMa said:
Huh? Reads white balance fine from my 20d and 10d raw files.
I'm surprised at how responsive Apple has been with updates to Aperture. When the product first came out, there was huge scrutiny of the RAW conversion quality and long list of other critical image processing things (like RGB value reporting) - within a very short time, they updated it and solved the vast majority of those issues. The other big knock was file handling - now they've fixed that. The file handling in particular had to be a pretty significant rework of the code. Furthermore, they've updated the app to universal. I'd say that's a pretty blazing pace of development.
Eric
http://www.essersinchina.com/
I have an experiment for those that say "It runs fine on my <insert computer here>."
Open up (in full screen mode) a landscape oriented RAW image and:
1. Use the straightening tool.
2. Try to rotate it 180.
3. Use the patch tool.
Let us know what you find.
Thanks!
Open up (in full screen mode) a landscape oriented RAW image and:
1. Use the straightening tool.
2. Try to rotate it 180.
3. Use the patch tool.
Let us know what you find.
Thanks!
Whiteapple said:
NOTICE THE OPERATIVE WORDS "I'm SURE" meaning... you don't know for sure. I'm telling you... I've tried it. I've asked YOU to try it. You will not be pleased with the results, just as I was not.
Sure kids may have been "mucking around" with the machine, but if a couple of kids messing with a computer is going to slow down the system, I assure you there will be problems in the future. If it's that slow on the current machine, what happens when 2.0 comes out? Do I choose not to upgrade or do I go through the whole upgrading of machines and software again?
As for another "RANDOM" thought... what does that mean, "responsible users who take care of their machine"? Unless you are tossing the machine around like a nerf soccer ball, spilling a can of Coke (not to be confused with Coke II) on it, jamming a 5 1/4" floppy in to the CD slot, or stuffing the USB ports with raisins, these things are pretty tough to break.
I love the software Apple makes. It looks great. The user interface is always top notch. It all makes sense. It just doesn't run very fast on their machines, at least not nearly as fast as the demos always show when Steve Jobs is giving us a sneak peek while dancing on stage in his turtle neck. It would be nice to have multiple versions of these apps so we could have the basic functions that actually perform at a speed that doesn't make the spinning rainbow come on after every click.
hmm I might consider to give it a try afterall...
when it came out my G5 was rejected (only because of the stock graphics card) there was a testing app to see if you could run it before you buy the actual program... and since a new card would set me back some extra and aperture was at that time at the high price... I passed... now it supports my system, so maybe I'll ge it (first I'll do a testrun at my local shop where I buy my camera's... they told me not to buy V1... and said the latest was very much improved, and now there is another new version ;-))
when it came out my G5 was rejected (only because of the stock graphics card) there was a testing app to see if you could run it before you buy the actual program... and since a new card would set me back some extra and aperture was at that time at the high price... I passed... now it supports my system, so maybe I'll ge it (first I'll do a testrun at my local shop where I buy my camera's... they told me not to buy V1... and said the latest was very much improved, and now there is another new version ;-))
phytonix said:
Why would Apple logically develop a piece of software that uses the graphics card when I have four processors - many others have two - begging to be worked. I guess I never understood the logic of using Core Image to power this thing.
donlphi said:
Amen.