I go on vacation and come back to great news.

[Razeus]

So how are you newbies enjoying Lightroom? It was inevitable.

But you can continue to use your Aperture workflow until you buy your next camera.

Like I've said, never entrust your workflow to a company how gets their money from something other than your main priority - there's just no incentive for them to do it. Logic and Final Cut users should be on notice. (Adobe for visual creatives, Microsoft for Office).

For the record, I'm exciting for the new Photos.app. It won't be my editing workflow (that will remain with Adobe), but it'll be where the final images go if I decided to leave the Google Drive/Google+ photos domain.

I feel sorry for the blogs that were dedicated to Aperture though.

 

[flynz4]

I feel sorry for the blogs that were dedicated to Aperture though.

Nothing to feel sorry about. It is still the worlds greatest DAM... and it will fully integrate into Photos.

/Jim

 

[Phrasikleia]

C'mon, Razeus, you have been waiting years for this news to validate your thoughts on the matter, and this is best gloating that you can do??!!

(Kidding, of course!)

 

[The Bad Guy]

Nothing to feel sorry about. It is still the worlds greatest DAM... and it will fully integrate into Photos.

/Jim

No. No it's not…sorry, wasn't.

You just didn't know any better.

 

[Edge100]

Nothing to feel sorry about. It is still the worlds greatest DAM... and it will fully integrate into Photos.

/Jim

Never used Photomechanic then, have you?

 

[r.harris1]

Never used Photomechanic then, have you?

Photomechanic is absolutely outstanding. Nothing better at metadata (keywords, captioning) in my mind. Speed is fantastic (ingest, rating, search), I have flexibility in RAW converters, dual target ingest for automated backups, sophisticated file renaming, basic slide shows, uploads, etc.

I look at DAM as a process rather than a specific application (e.g. LR or Aperture) and PM fits very well into the process, at least for how my own stuff works.

 

[MCAsan]

I feel sorry for the blogs that were dedicated to Aperture though.

In some ways I don't. They are still enjoying the most flexible image storage and organization capability. Aperture and a far better UI design after all these years. And the sideshow created is far better.

Aperture users will have a quick learning curve with LR as the concepts of non-destructive editing of raw images is basically the same. Some functions have the same name, some different. But that will be a quick learn. Aperture users will get some pleasant surprises such as nose reduction and radial filter. They will get some disappointments such as LR's slideshow capabilities, and lack of having iTunes seeing Collections to put on iPads and iPhones the way Aperture saw Albums and could synch them to IOS devices. In some ways, LR is a step backwards.

The key is for Aperture users to get the raw files out and a copy of their finished images and put both into a Finder file system set of folders and subfolders that make sense. There is no more managed database package hiding everything.
Aperture users will also have to accept that they lose their edit history. Since Aperture are different programs from different vendors, you can not take a given value of Clarity in Aperture and get the same look using the same value of Clarity in LR. Each company has their own definition of Clarity and their own math formulae behind the scenes.

----------

Photomechanic is absolutely outstanding. Nothing better at metadata (keywords, captioning) in my mind. Speed is fantastic (ingest, rating, search), I have flexibility in RAW converters, dual target ingest for automated backups, sophisticated file renaming, basic slide shows, uploads, etc.

I look at DAM as a process rather than a specific application (e.g. LR or Aperture) and PM fits very well into the process, at least for how my own stuff works.

How does it handle plugins such as Nik, Perfecto Photo, Topaz, Pixelmater, or PS? As I remember those programs only advertise doing plugins for Aperture and LR.

 

[r.harris1]

How does it handle plugins such as Nik, Perfecto Photo, Topaz, Pixelmater, or PS? As I remember those programs only advertise doing plugins for Aperture and LR.

PM doesn't handle plugins at all, other than I can potentially launch into a standalone variant. I tend to use PM for metadata, ingest, backups, renaming, grading, etc and then into a RAW converter of my choice. If I use my Nik plugins, I can get in through Photoshop or standalone.

 

[flynz4]

How does it handle plugins such as Nik, Perfecto Photo, Topaz, Pixelmater, or PS? As I remember those programs only advertise doing plugins for Aperture and LR.

NIK also works natively in Photoshop... in addition to Aperture and LR. It is more full functioned in PS as well... but even still, I mostly use NIK with Aperture.

I see no reason to move quickly of of Aperture at this point... and certainly not before we know with 100% clarity what Photos will bring. Photos is expected to support close to 100% of what Aperture supports... and at its core... might just blow Aperture, and then, almost by definition LR, out of the water. It very well may be the first DAM that supports round trip non-destructive editing by 3rd parties. We also know that it is fundamentally built on an architecture based on the concept of sharing. Both of those are core capabilities that that no other DAM possess to my knowledge... and probably the two single largest shortfalls of existing DAMs. It is not even clear how other DAMs would accomplish these two things given their inability to be deeply integrated into the OS (except by Microsoft, which has shown no interest in this area).

I'm not worried about moving to LR if it becomes absolutely necessary. I've owned and evaluated every version of LR since v3, and moving to it from Aperture will be trivial. I just think that there is a >50% chance that such a move will be unnecessary. If I am wrong, so be it. However, I certainly hope that I am not wrong, because LR is built on such a clunky architecture. There is just no good reason to move to it today, given that we do not fully know the future of Photos.

/Jim

 

[MCAsan]

I will surprised if Apple has not been working with the various plugin makers to be sure they will have versions ready for Photos in 2015. There is a real possibility that Photos plus the plugins will give you the functions you have today with Aperture and plugins.

As for Photoshop or PSE...personally I never liked either or used them. I deleted them off my rMBP long ago. I can do what I want with LR plus Nik, Perfect Photo Suite and sometimes Pixelmator.

 

[themumu]

But you can continue to use your Aperture workflow until you buy your next camera.

While it's true that people might want to move on to an actively developed app eventually, I don't think the new cameras will be the driving force. Capability to read raw files with Aperture and iPhoto is handled by a system-wide library, and I suspect the upcoming Photos app will do the same. If that's the case, that library will still be updated and Aperture will continue to read files from new cameras released after its last official update.

I'd be more concerned about the next OS release (after Yosemite), at which point it may or may not stop working entirely.

 

[TheDrift-]

NIK also works natively in Photoshop... in addition to Aperture and LR. It is more full functioned in PS as well... but even still, I mostly use NIK with Aperture.

I see no reason to move quickly of of Aperture at this point... and certainly not before we know with 100% clarity what Photos will bring. Photos is expected to support close to 100% of what Aperture supports... and at its core... might just blow Aperture, and then, almost by definition LR, out of the water. It very well may be the first DAM that supports round trip non-destructive editing by 3rd parties. We also know that it is fundamentally built on an architecture based on the concept of sharing. Both of those are core capabilities that that no other DAM possess to my knowledge... and probably the two single largest shortfalls of existing DAMs. It is not even clear how other DAMs would accomplish these two things given their inability to be deeply integrated into the OS (except by Microsoft, which has shown no interest in this area).

I'm not worried about moving to LR if it becomes absolutely necessary. I've owned and evaluated every version of LR since v3, and moving to it from Aperture will be trivial. I just think that there is a >50% chance that such a move will be unnecessary. If I am wrong, so be it. However, I certainly hope that I am not wrong, because LR is built on such a clunky architecture. There is just no good reason to move to it today, given that we do not fully know the future of Photos.

/Jim

I'm sad to say I think the future of most apple apps is to amalgamate the OS's, and even sadder to say for Pro users this means the dumbing down of apps we have come to know and love...

I would love to see photo's as a power app with some awesome features...I think it would be a dumbed down version of aperture to work on iOS and mac's maybe with a few instagram filters thrown in for effect...

I was a heavy pages user...the new pages just isn't sophisticated enough even for my limited use...so I'm stuck on the old version with little choice but to upgrade to Word when the new version finally comes round again for mac..

....All i am seeing is apple giving power users a hard time and dumbing down apps to make them comparable across all devices...I wish it wasn't so

 

[Designer Dale]

I'm beginning to think my editing belongs back where it started in PhotoShop. As for DAM, anything that maintains a sane library that links up to PS with ease will do fine.

Just keep me away from MS/WIN stuff and I'm just fine.

Dale

 

[swordio777]

"...great news"?!?

I'm absolutely astounded that you think Apple canning Aperture is "great news".

We all know you love Lightroom.
We all know you think Adobe can do no wrong.
We all know you think anyone who chooses to use Aperture is stupid.

And that's all fine - you're perfectly entitled to your opinion.

However, the end of Aperture means less competition in the marketplace and that is always bad for the consumer.

Bear in mind, without Aperture there would be no Lightroom. Now some might say that Adobe took the idea and ran with it, improving on Apple's formula. And in some areas that's absolutely true. But the area that matter most to a large number of Aperture users is the variety of options with asset management.

Adobe used to have some of these options and chose to remove them, and without Aperture they never have any reason to bring them back because now the consumer has fewer tools to choose from.

You may feel like you picked the winning team, but the truth is we all lost.

All the best.

 

[Razeus]

There's plenty of competition for Lightroom so don't be silly. Aperture was a Mac only product while others served both platforms. Aperture had a very, very small user base compared to their cross platform competitors. Worst for you is the way Apple refused to tell its users what was going on and just completely canned the product. That's no way to do business or treat your customers.

 

[phrehdd]

There's plenty of competition for Lightroom so don't be silly. Aperture was a Mac only product while others served both platforms. Aperture had a very, very small user base compared to their cross platform competitors. Worst for you is the way Apple refused to tell its users what was going on and just completely canned the product. That's no way to do business or treat your customers.

I do agree with your thoughts on how poorly Apple handled the canning of Aperture. As for user base, it doesn't matter what non-Mac users are using. The application was for Mac users and thus, the only numbers/stat that matters or is relevant is how many Mac users were using Aperture. Evidently, it was enough for third party plug in makers to take it serious enough.

As for me, I just find myself biting my lip as I honestly have no love for Windows yet must have it available for certain apps (via virtual), dislike Adobe intensely (yet use CS6 PS because I own it) and I'll never consider ANY pro app by Apple as a good investment given how they seem to tell us what is what we want and "need." The Final Cut debacle was a great indicator of Apple's arrogance and how long it took them to get the X version to a reasonable level. In the meanwhile, Apple made it easy for people to jump ship. So - what next Apple? Oh wait, we have the nMP that is costwise out of reach of many and only has ATI offered graphics when many would like an NVidia offering. - All I can say is we sure put up with a lot to simply get OSX on a legit piece of hardware.

 

[Razeus]

I do agree with your thoughts on how poorly Apple handled the canning of Aperture. As for user base, it doesn't matter what non-Mac users are using. The application was for Mac users and thus, the only numbers/stat that matters or is relevant is how many Mac users were using Aperture. Evidently, it was enough for third party plug in makers to take it serious enough.

As for me, I just find myself biting my lip as I honestly have no love for Windows yet must have it available for certain apps (via virtual), dislike Adobe intensely (yet use CS6 PS because I own it) and I'll never consider ANY pro app by Apple as a good investment given how they seem to tell us what is what we want and "need." The Final Cut debacle was a great indicator of Apple's arrogance and how long it took them to get the X version to a reasonable level. In the meanwhile, Apple made it easy for people to jump ship. So - what next Apple? Oh wait, we have the nMP that is costwise out of reach of many and only has ATI offered graphics when many would like an NVidia offering. - All I can say is we sure put up with a lot to simply get OSX on a legit piece of hardware.

This might be my last dance with Apple iMacs. I can get more power for much less on Windows. As soon as they fix Windows 8.1 to my liking or just wait until Windows 9. Without Aperture and iPhoto, I really don't have much use for a Mac. iWork is a joke and I prefer MS Office, so again, why do I need to get using Macs when all Apple is going to do is can the software or outright gimp it to pure simplicity? Every other app I use is on Windows so, again, I'm at a loss on why I'd drop another $2k on an iMac. And since Photos.app will be on Windows, I'm leaning more and more towards a Microsoft OS.

I simply can't trust Apple software anymore.

 

[ChrisA]

I'm beginning to think my editing belongs back where it started in PhotoShop. As for DAM, anything that maintains a sane library that links up to PS with ease will do fine.

Just keep me away from MS/WIN stuff and I'm just fine.

Dale

Every editing tool in PS is also in PS Elements and "Elements" comes with an organizer. The simple solution is to buy a copy of PSE.

 

[alphaod]

I'm just glad I promptly returned that copy of Aperture I bought many years ago. I cited I did not agree with the EULA. I instead bought a copy of Lightroom and have been happy since. I considered switching to Aperture when they made some improvement, but never got around to it. I guess it's never happening now.

 

[phrehdd]

This might be my last dance with Apple iMacs. I can get more power for much less on Windows. As soon as they fix Windows 8.1 to my liking or just wait until Windows 9. Without Aperture and iPhoto, I really don't have much use for a Mac. iWork is a joke and I prefer MS Office, so again, why do I need to get using Macs when all Apple is going to do is can the software or outright gimp it to pure simplicity? Every other app I use is on Windows so, again, I'm at a loss on why I'd drop another $2k on an iMac. And since Photos.app will be on Windows, I'm leaning more and more towards a Microsoft OS.

I simply can't trust Apple software anymore.

Absolutely appreciate what you are saying here. I often find myself considering building another PC and putting Win 7 on it (yeah, I don't particularly fancy 8.x). There is little reason to stay in the Apple camp other than the OS itself. This is really a shame that various Apple apps are left to rot and fall off the Apple tree.

 

[Razeus]

Absolutely appreciate what you are saying here. I often find myself considering building another PC and putting Win 7 on it (yeah, I don't particularly fancy 8.x). There is little reason to stay in the Apple camp other than the OS itself. This is really a shame that various Apple apps are left to rot and fall off the Apple tree.

We had a great run. When Apple cared about improving iPhoto, iMovie, the iWork suite and my first dabbles in Aperture when I first started photography. Unfortunately, none of those apps are what they used to be.

 

[pmxperience]

I gotta hand it to Razeus on this one. He did say it was coming months ago(maybe even year(s)). You should try out the stock market with that kind of foresight. *round of applause*

Now let's all help each other have a smooth and amicable transition.

 

[Razeus]

I just want to see how RAW support goes for the new Photos app. Waiting for over 4 months to get RAW support in Aperture for the popular Fuji X-E2 is beyond ridiculous.

Can't wait until we get more information. I hope the Finder itself isn't NOT the iCloud Drive. I sure don't want to be uploading gigs upon gigs of RAW files, delete the bad ones, process the good ones, export a jpeg and have that upload.

 

[Parkin Pig]

Like I've said, never entrust your workflow to a company how gets their money from something other than your main priority - there's just no incentive for them to do it. Logic and Final Cut users should be on notice. (Adobe for visual creatives, Microsoft for Office).

I hadn't realised that there were companies that have my main priorities at heart. That is truly touching.

Absolutely appreciate what you are saying here. I often find myself considering building another PC and putting Win 7 on it (yeah, I don't particularly fancy 8.x). There is little reason to stay in the Apple camp other than the OS itself. This is really a shame that various Apple apps are left to rot and fall off the Apple tree.

Desktops and laptops seem to be a diminishing sector of Apple's profits. I sometimes wonder if they are trying to get users to abandon the Mac so that they can blame lack of user interest as a reason to cease development and drop those product lines. Approximately 12% of their business is still a substantial amount to drop, but if new product lines are in the pipe then maybe they've decided this is the way forward. I just don't understand why they bothered to put all that effort into the latest Mac Pro, when they seem to be moving away from power users. It was power users who kept Apple afloat during the company's dark times, but as with any public company, loyalty is to the shareholders and the mighty dollar.

 

[OreoCookie]

This might be my last dance with Apple iMacs. I can get more power for much less on Windows. As soon as they fix Windows 8.1 to my liking or just wait until Windows 9. Without Aperture and iPhoto, I really don't have much use for a Mac. iWork is a joke and I prefer MS Office, so again, why do I need to get using Macs when all Apple is going to do is can the software or outright gimp it to pure simplicity? Every other app I use is on Windows so, again, I'm at a loss on why I'd drop another $2k on an iMac. And since Photos.app will be on Windows, I'm leaning more and more towards a Microsoft OS.

You should use whatever gets your job done.

I simply can't trust Apple software anymore.

You should not trust any software manufacturer, but objectively judge how much your own interests align with theirs. Have a look at what Microsoft tried to do with Windows 8 to its customers, I don't think forcing a touch-centric UI onto its users generated a lot of good will among the installed user base. Adobe forced subscriptions down the throats of its customers (it's not as if you have a choice if you want a Photoshop-grade photo editing suite). I think the world is a better place with competition, and especially Adobe and Microsoft have too little to be forced to innovate at a quick pace.