Aperture is Dead. Long Live Photos!
I received an official call from Apple PR this morning about the future of Aperture. My phone, twitter and Messages have been ringing off the hook since the announcement was publicly made. But I wanted to take some time to really think this through before shouting from the rooftops. So here we go.
On the surface, it doesn't seem like good news, but there's a lot more to this than a few lines of text. First, the official words.
“With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture. When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X.” — Apple, Inc.
In short, Aperture as we know it is dead. So let's take a step back and figure out what this really means, because obviously photography is far from unimportant to Apple. There are more questions than answers now than ever before, and I'll try to come up with all the right questions and all my best answers. Call this interpretation, speculation, or clairvoyance — but here's how I'm reading into this.
Why? Why Photos 1 and not Aperture 4?
Before we can look to the future, let's look at the past. Aperture itself has been around since 2005; nearly a decade. And of course it started being written well before that, so we are talking about 10+ year old code. The cloud, the iPhone, and pocket sized digital cameras that surpass the quality of film not only didn't exist, but were barely a twinkle in Steve Jobs' or any technologist's eye. Aperture is a photo editing and management tool written for users used to an old school workflow. Go on a shoot. Sit down to edit. Share when you're done. But that's not the world we live in anymore. Today we want to shoot, share immediately with a cool effect, edit on an iPad, sit down at your 4k display and get serious, pick up the iPad and show off what you've done, mix, repeat. We want our devices, our libraries, our experience integrated and seamless. This simply can not happen with Aperture as it is today.
This is a case of evolution vs revolution. Apple could continue to evolve Aperture, and to be honest I wish they had—in 2011, 2012, 2013. But now it's too late. Now it's time to focus on the future. The next generation of photos architecture. The revolution. We saw this in the WWDC 2014 keynote. We saw Photos in iCloud. We saw seamless integration between an iOS device and the desktop. We saw a glimpse of features that clearly couldn't exist in Aperture. We saw the future.
Everything could be based on PhotoKit. It is now for iOS, but that same thing could happen in OS X. That would mean seamless integration between iOS and OS X, and unheard of third party developer access. We saw the new raw processing engine with lens correction and phenomenal noise reduction, for example, in WWDC sessions. All the groundwork is in place for an amazing experience.
For those of you who edit video, you'll remember the transition from Final Cut Pro to Final Cut Pro X. It sucked. Big time. And frankly, Apple handled the PR of that poorly. Major features were missing, the software was buggy as hell, and yet Apple told the Pro market that it was time to move. After some serious backlash they relented, and re-relesed Final Cut Pro 7 for the existing users, so they could wait for FCP X to mature. And mature it has. Today, Final Cut Pro X is an amazing piece of software. Apple isn't making that mistake with Aperture. But it doesn't change the fact that it's time to move on.
For a happier look at the migration path, look at iWork — Pages, Keynote and Numbers. Great apps that were developed long before iOS, and once iOS came out, new versions of those apps showed up there. Lots of feature parity, lots of feature disparity. The more the iOS versions advanced, the more inferior the OS X versions felt. Until finally, Apple threw away the old apps, and released all new versions that were based on the same new code. At first, all the features of the old iWork weren't there. But Apple worked relentlessly and continued to update the software (free updates, by the way) and today those apps are fantastic. And more to the point, they are virtually identical across platforms (except for font support. Don't get me started on font support).
Now, it's the third time for this to happen. To your photos. And it has begun.
Will Photos.app version 1 have all the features of Aperture 3?
Very unlikely. Apple has stated that users will be able to migrate their existing libraries. They have also stated that there will be at least one maintenance release to ensure that Aperture is fully compatible with OS X Yosemite. Put those together, and it tell us that just because you can migrate, doesn't necessarily mean that you should. Since they say that you can however, that has to mean that any existing effects and metadata will be intact. I just wouldn't necessarily expect to be able to edit them in version 1. As Photos.app evolves however, at some point you should have all the same features — and of course a ton of new ones.
When should I migrate to Photos?
It's too soon to tell that now, but I'd wager that iPhoto and beginner Aperture users will be able to migrate immediately, while more advanced Aperture users may want to wait for another version or two. Since Aperture will continue to be supported at minimum for OS X Yosemite, personally I think version 1 will be fun to play with, and probably start a new library with. Maybe not for pro work, but I'll use it where I can. The integration between iOS and OS X will be too sweet to ignore. And as long as it has the “open in editor” feature, I can always use Photoshop and plug-ins for anything Photos can't do. Then as Photos.app progresses, once the legacy Aperture is no longer needed, I'd migrate my entire library. It'll take time, but it won't stop me from doing my job. And I think it'll be worth the wait.
I'm a pro—I don't need iOS iCloud iPad iShare
No? That's OK, I still enjoy shooting film, too. But for the rest of the world that has gone digital, this is happening. You may not be posting your client shoots to Instagram, but your clients are getting more demanding. Wanting on-site reviews. Remote reviews! Fast turnaround to their never-ending change requests. High resolution images delivered to prepress and small ones for their Facebook page. All these iFeatures will come in handy.
What if OS X was more like iOS from a developer standpoint?
OK, now let's have some fun. Think about your iPhone or iPad for a minute. You shoot or import or download a photo, and where does it go? To the Photos app. That' a super simple app today, but we already know that's changing. OK.
Now, think about all the other third party photo apps on your iPhone. Where do they get their photos from? Photos app. Where do they put them when you're done editing them? Photos app. Some have their own storage as well, but thats only for one reason — to maintain non-destructive edit-ability. Even iPhoto for iOS works that way.
Now, look at iOS 8. We already know that iOS 8 elevates third party apps to the same level as Apple apps. They can access the same library in the same way that native apps can. So that whole “store it in your own app” issue should go away.
What does that mean? Simply put, that Photos is a single storage location for all your pictures, regardless of what app you choose to edit them with. Pretty cool, right?
Now for the big reveal.
Consider the possibilities
Extrapolate that to OS X. What if OS X worked the same way? What if Photos for OS X was built on PhotoKit, and what if PhotoKit was integrated into the OS itself. What if third party apps on OS X could access your Photos.app photo library the same way that iOS apps can (and will be able to in iOS 8)?
Suddenly you have an ecosystem where the library is the hub. No more one-time, stuck-with-it-forever decision if you should use Aperture or Lightroom or Bridge or anything else. Photos.app stores your photos and allows some level of editing. Future Nik plugins apps access that same library. Future Lightroom accesses the same Library (!!). Future Photo Mechanic. MacPhun, onOne, Alien Skin… name your app, name your plugin. In this utopian future, all apps have the same access to all photos. PhotoKit could make that possible.
Now that's cool. All this on a photo library based in the cloud.
1TB isn't enough for me
We saw in WWDC that Apple will have pricing plans for iCloud up to 1TB, which we've already observed isn't enough. But that's an easy problem to solve. So don't worry about that. I think by the time you're ready to move your entire 5TB Aperture library to Photos, there will be an iCloud option available to you.
Sounds great, but eff this, I'm outta here!
Undoubtedly Apple will lose some users to Lightroom. That's inevitable, and I'm not going to say “they'll be back!”. But they probably will :-) As before, for most of us diehard Aperture users, we've added plugins or other apps to enhance the Aperture experience to do everything Lightroom does, and more. There's no reason for that to change. At least now, finally, we can see the future, and we don't need a crystal ball to do it.
What does this mean for ApertureExpert.com?
Well, a name change at minimum :-) Any suggestions? I'm serious… I looked at PhotosExpert.com but it's owned and is being held anonymously. I'm open to suggestions, because the future of this site will be awesome. I will be able to write about not only a single app and it's plugins, but any OS X or iOS app that connects to the Photos architecture. I smell growth.
Now, go make some photos
We can chat and comment and speculate and pontificate endlessly about this, but at the end of the day, if you're not out shooting, none of this matters. So stop reading, and go make some pretty pictures. And dream big about the future. Because it's coming, and it'll be awesome.
UPDATE
I've responded to the many comments here in a new post, “Comment Follow-up on the Demise of Aperture”. Please read that before commenting here. Thanks!
Official Apple image of Photos on OS X Yosemite
Comments
on June 27, 2014 - 9:53pm
Joseph, very exciting times indeed. My problem is the fact that I am forced to use the cloud for my storage of photos. I shoot sporting events for 3 colleges, a minor league baseball team and, several festivals that occur where I live. With the number of games, and events, my library easily approaches & has surpassed 2 terabytes per year. I don’t see cloud storage pricing being a good financial option for me anytime soon. In addition - I am under tight timelines, so what happens when I can’t get access to my photos in the cloud (for whatever reason)? If my images are on my device/hard drive that is in my possession then I don’t have to be on-line to do my selection, and edits. Work can still progress.
I know I need to wait and see what this means &b it looks as if Apple is letting me buy some time, by making Aperture compatible with Yosemite, but someone has just moved my cheese, and I’m not happy. Apertures speed, workflow & edit capabilities (along with plug-ins) were 99.9+% of what I needed for my business. I recall the adage my Grandfather told me - if it isn’t broke, then don’t fix it.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Mark
on June 27, 2014 - 10:32pm
I agree precisely — and I, too, don’t appreciate to have to spend all my time trying to relocate my cheese.
TC
Tom Carroll
www.tomcarrollphotography.com
on June 27, 2014 - 10:01pm
How ‘bout PhotosforMacExpert.com?
on June 27, 2014 - 10:04pm
Joseph …great sum up of the situation… I am with you on all points
we live in interesting times
Kevin
on June 27, 2014 - 10:08pm
Mark, I don’t think they will be exclusively storing the image files in icloud. Access would be too slow and unreliable. More likely they only sync with icloud in the background and your Mac keeps a local copy. That’s how photo stream currently works. What happens if you have less cloud space than photos on your Mac is certainly a question that needs to be answered. They already explained for iOS 8 devices that they will only keep a limited amount of photos on the device. The rest will download as needed.
Thomas
on June 28, 2014 - 3:56am
You have the option with Page/Numbers/Keynote to locally or cloud storage.
Same for iMovie.
It will be the same for Photos.
I suspect there will be a sync structure between iOS and OS X, and a sharing option with different options as to how to cloud publish. I think we will see the iOS Photo Journals be at the centre of it.
on June 27, 2014 - 10:09pm
I enjoyed this positive outlook, Joseph, because I’m not feeling particularly positive. But you draw me along with you and I’ll wait with more interest to see what Photos does for us.
Chris
~~~>--} threeshoes photography
on July 1, 2014 - 6:43am
From what I’ve gathered on this website and others, I’m feeling incredibly upbeat about the future. So the lens correction and raw file handling will be baked into the OS (Yosemite). Photokit will not only make a single place for all photo editors to access photos, but will allow photo editors to observe changes made to photos, and then resume editing of those photos seamlessly.
These are unparalleled advances to the world of the digital darkroom. Never, has lens correction and raw file handling been baked into the core of an Operating system. This effectively makes the entirety of Yosemite a photo editing “ecosystem” and will increase the power of every photo editing software currently available on OSX (and iOS).
Imagine editing a photo with the new “Photos” App and using Camerabag 2 to add some filters, then resuming editing with the “Photos” App, quickly and seamlessly, without having to export the photo, and open it up in another program.
Also, the use of Custom CI Filters, as described on this website offers the ability for 3rd party filters to be added to the raw process, before the image is drawn. This will allow filters to be applied with an absolute minimal loss of detail in the photo. A look at the new noise reduction and lens correction features also show a great deal of promise.
I don’t have all the details, but from what little Apple gave us at WWDC, it looks to me like Apple has stumbled onto something potentially revolutionary. It looks to me, as if the new “Photos” App will allow us to edit photos at a level never before seen, which will allow minimal loss of image quality.
Anyone who thinks Apple has abandoned the “Pro” photographer has to be completely off his rocker given the details announced at WWDC. Nothing could be further from the truth, that much is very clear.
Upon reflection, it appears to me, that Apple was forced to abandon Aperture in it’s present incarnation. While Aperture did gain the ability to import pictures directly from iPhotos, the file system likely went against the completely open one they are trying to employ.
The only thing I’m wondering, is if “Handoff” will apply to photo editing. I’d love to be able to edit a photo on my 27” iMac with the “Photos” app, then handoff to my iPad and continue editing whilst I drink my coffee on my porch. Ah, just the thought of this blows my mind.
I’d be able to use my “Over” app to add some nice text or captions and then continue editing on my iMac. Sweetness!
On the subject of handoff, I wonder if it works with multiple devices? I’d be talking to someone on my iPhone and editing on my iPad. Would I be able to handoff both to my iMac and continue my call and my editing simultaneously?
on August 1, 2014 - 7:24am
This is exactly how I’m feeling. Anywhere from despondent to panicked about the whole thing, depending on the minute…
Elizabeth
on June 27, 2014 - 10:22pm
All valid points, Joseph. My opinion is similar. Don't run off half-cocked into a migration. At least wait to see what Photos will offer.
For the site name – tongue firmly implanted in cheek – JoeKnowPhoto.com. I know, I know, a little too close to that Fro guy :)
Scott
http://scottdavenportphoto.com/
on June 27, 2014 - 10:25pm
What also needs to be noted is that in Apple’s announcement, they also noted they were working with Adobe to help users transition Lr.
I shoot mostly for fun. I’ve been using both Aperture and Lr (I have a CC Photography subscription). My workflow has been to import the images to Lr, cull through them and toss the crappy ones, and them import what’s left into Aperture. Yeah…I do post process the images in both Aperture and Lr.
Unfortunately, with today’s announcement, Aperture will be going dormant for me.
I’ll continue to follow this blog as I have great respect for Joseph and his photography insights.
on June 28, 2014 - 5:16pm
“in Apple’s announcement, they also noted they were working with Adobe to help users transition Lr” – not so, you might want to re-read the announcement.
Apple stated they’d help Aperture users to Photos (once it’s available), and Adobe stated they’d do what they could to transition Aperture users to Lightroom (can’t blame them for trying).
Eric Seale
Seldom Scene Photography
http://www.seldomscenephotography.com
on June 27, 2014 - 10:29pm
Very nice and welcome summary. The only thing that gives me major heartburn is the potential (or suggested) Apple REQUIREMENT to store photos in the iCloud to use the forthcoming Photos app. I don’t like the idea of being forced to use the iCloud but that is the way Apple now seems to be moving. For example, contacts can on longer be update directly from desktop but have to be shipped to iCloud first where they reside in perpetuity. I work off line in many instances and need my photos to be stored locally. I could live with the option BUT NOT THE REQUIREMENT!
For your new web site, consider PhotosXpert.com
www.tomcarrollphotography.com
TC
Tom Carroll
www.tomcarrollphotography.com
on June 28, 2014 - 3:09am
Good one. I like
PhotosXpert.com, or actually PhotoXpert.com.
Also
PhotoEcoSystemXpert.com
PhotoHubXpert.com
PhotoAppleXpert.com
Steve
on June 29, 2014 - 7:31pm
I vote for “PhotoXpert.com”
Although, if you kept the name the same it would be ok. I don’t understand the feel to change the name. As if “aperture” was totally irrelevant to photography. I hope you realize that all the proposed names you have up there sound generic because the word: “photo” is as generic as they come.
I realize you are trying to make your website sound relevant to the corresponding app, but if you follow through on this, you will not accomplish your mission. You would just sound like any other photo website out there because “photo” is a very generic term.
If I were the head of the website I would take my sweet time in changing the name. Aperture might even turn out to be a cool retro name. I think too many people are having a knee jerk reaction to Apple’s annoucement. I am not planning to change a thing until I see exactly what happens.
on June 27, 2014 - 10:46pm
Part of me is actually looking forward to this. From a DAM pov, I’m assuming my Keywording will migrate. Perhaps it will take a 3rd party developer but I can wait for it.
From an editing pov, Aperture already needs some work and perhaps I’ll see an improvement. If not, editing modules are readily available.
For me, the cloud component will be as useful as it is today - zero. Better tools are readily available outside Apple’s apps.
on June 29, 2014 - 7:36pm
I’m also excited to see what will happen. I also do not use the cloud and don’t plan to. Most of the folks in my neck of the woods want their work shared on Dropbox anyways.
on June 27, 2014 - 10:56pm
I’m not sanguine: the color of the day is dark brown, not bright red.
Everything you hail as exciting is … very difficult to track. Pros require tight control of assets, and versioning. Apple has yet to get Photo Stream workable — I don’t see them, by October, having a usable, robust, secure, cloud-based, DAM. (I don’t see them ever having one.) Which of those are you willing to go without: utility? reliability? security?
I do see Apple continuing to make gobs of money. I just don’t see them meeting the needs of professional photographers. I don’t see them trying to.
—Kirby.
www.kirbykrieger.com
on June 29, 2014 - 9:58am
I expect that Apple is further with the development of Photo than you think.
If you need to have the app ready early 2015 and considering that an extensive period of program, system and integration testing is needed, I expect them to be in that phase. Remember the advert for testers of photo-apps last year?
Also, because the Cloud is the key performer in the new Apple philosophy that part has to function for than 100%. therefor the DAM must be real good as well.
I do however share your concern about security and availibity.
Greetz, Martin
on June 27, 2014 - 11:03pm
Very good writeup of the situation!
I think it is still hard for many people to realize how groundbreaking the changes with PhotoKit were on this WWDC. This actually is Apple as we know it. For the bad and for the good: This is the Apple that threw out Floppy-Disks, DVD-Drives and any other new “old style” stuff without blinking an eye.
Photos are more important then ever and they are important to even more people. The most common used cameras today are our smart phones. The PC and Mac is losing its place as the digital media hub to what? The internet. We do not need a stationary computer to pick up photos from our cameras and quickly share them with those who are interested. We still will need our Macs to do fine grained editing on high quality level. On a machine with the perfomance and display quality of a photo editing workstation - but this is not the center anymore but just one place of many.
If I think about the last years of my photo organizing workflow - it is a repeating pattern of finding ways to make my photos collection more accessible to the devices I use all day. Managing files between Macs, iOS devices and Internet sites didn't really get better. When I saw what Apple plans to solve this, I really got thrilled - this is the future.
http://neonsqua.re
on June 29, 2014 - 7:48pm
I share your enthusiasm. To hear that lens correction and raw photo management will be baked in at the OS level is pretty sweet. My big concern however, is a watered down version of Aperture. I want to be able to do the same things in the new Photos App that I can do in Aperture. If Apple can deliver on this I could care less what they call the app. I just want the functionality because I think Aperture is a great piece of kit.
on June 27, 2014 - 11:15pm
With all due respect, Joseph, I think you’re trying to put lipstick on a pig. I don’t see anything positive in this. No, I don’t want to edit my photos on my iPad or iPhone.
I’ve spent the last 4 days going through 1000 photos I took in Barcelona. Using HDR, ColorEfex Pro, etc. But most importantly, using the amazing Aperture DAM to label the processed photos, change sorting, keyword and rate.
My response is to stay on Mountain Lion until a critical piece of other software forces me off. If I have to keep my Mac Pro early 2008 with it’s beefed-up RAM and video card as a legacy photo machine, I’ll do so as long as I can. And in the meantime, it’s off to lynda.com to start learning LR (shudder) for the inevitable.
on June 27, 2014 - 11:35pm
I’m afraid I’m with Don, but not ready to jump to LR. I find Adobe’s rental policies despicable, so I’m not willing to go there. I find the use of the Cloud for my purposes utterly useless. I’m for local storage in almost all cases. Who has time to waste uploading Terabytes of photos? I would spend more time uploading than shooting or editing. Sure, background, but why? Who cares? Love my iPhone 5S, but really, I have no need of iOS for anything other than showing my work on an iPad occasionally and answering phone calls. Maybe some Yelp, FB and Maps. Taking an occasional crummy picture on my iPhone is convenient but basically useless compared to my Nikons. This is a terrible development. Apple takes another step backward from pros. Unless they actually make this new Photos app do what I can do with Aperture now and eliminate the need for Cloud storage and make it optional, they have made a huge mistake, at least for me. Glad I got that new 2012 Mac Pro and the new Late 2013. I should be able to run Aperture for a long time. We’ll see in a few years where Photos is, then I might be forced to migrate, but I’m not optimistic.
JimW
on June 27, 2014 - 11:42pm
Joseph, what a breath of fresh air. I actually found myself chuckling after reading your post about the new Photos App we all may be migrating to. Prior to this post I was seriously down in the dumper. I have to agree with you on FCPX, Pages, Keynote etc. You make a tone of sense and much of it is due to your experience. Your analogy to the other apps gives me hope for the first time since I read Aperture was dead. Thanks for the uplifting post. I’m on my way to Alaska for a ten day shoot. I’ll be using Aperture trying not to think about what may or may not come. Thanks again for your positive outlook on what we may all be overlooking. Very nicely done.
Daniel J. Cox
on June 27, 2014 - 11:42pm
Joseph I too think you are trying to hard to put “lipstick” on this pig. What about all our edits and keywords. I have spend MONTHS editing and key wording my 25,000 family pictures. One of the items I love about Aperature is that all these edits are NON DESTRUCTIVE. How many of those edits will I lose in Photos.app? If I move to Lightroom will all my work be lost? Do I have to export the latest “versions”. Can I export and import the highly customized keyword library YOU taught me how to make into Photos.App or Lightroom. I’m sick to my stomach and really pissed at Apple right now.
on June 27, 2014 - 11:58pm
Whoa! I find myself thinking about the famous Apple commercial of yesteryear showing legions of mindless PC drones marching in synch while the enlightened Apple corps was all about peace, love and individuality. I guess they'll now support any individuality you choose as long as it meets the latest, greatest Cupertino specs.
Fortunately for them, Adobe pissed me off so badly when I tried to download and install Lightroom that I won't be darkening their door anytime soon.
For now … I'll taste the new Apple product and go from there. If I don't like it, I can always use Option 3. Remind me … what's Option 3?
Steve Thorpe
on June 28, 2014 - 12:02am
Be interesting tom see if other developers come up with conversions to their programs. Like Capture One. Don’t like the fact that Apple thinks Lightroom is the only alternative. Capture One and Iridient are looking better and better. I’m not jumping ship, but my life vest is close by.
www.markrosenphotography.com
on June 28, 2014 - 12:23am
Be interesting tom see if other developers come up with conversions to their programs. Like Capture One and Photo Mechanic. Don’t like the fact that Apple thinks (is pandering to ) Lightroom as the only alternative. Capture One, Iridient and Photo Mechanic as a DAM are looking better and better. I’m not jumping ship, but my life vest is close by.
www.markrosenphotography.com
on June 28, 2014 - 1:40am
Where did you get that Apple thinks of Lightroom as alternative? Because of the thing they already corrected on TechCrunch?
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 2:29am
That’s the problem with news in the Digital Age … inaccurate reporting, errors, etc. get copied and dispersed as statements of fact almost immediately and ad infinitum …
on June 28, 2014 - 12:08am
Over the past few years Apple has shown that the needs of pro photographers are of no concern to them. In my opinion, this announcement is equivalent to them signing the divorce papers. time to move on.
on June 28, 2014 - 12:17am
Steve Jobs lives!…or at least his attitude towards photographers. Apple has been very cavalier with the way it’s introducing change. Where’s the consultation with photographers about what they need or want? They’re treating us not like clients but supplicants. They will tell us what we need and how to post process and store our files. I’m sure they are catering to millennial masses who have come to photography through smart phones and social media. Most of these photos are of poor IQ but the content has immediacy. This is not how most photography enthusiasts work. Shame on you Apple. You used to be able to understand our needs and communicate better.
Ken Sky
on June 28, 2014 - 12:19am
Sorry for the double post
Ken Sky
on June 28, 2014 - 12:20am
Thank you, I was trying to hope for the best in this announcement and your thoughts helped. As far as requiring Photo’s in the Cloud I noticed on the apple.com description of the iOS Photos app the phrase “Once you’ve enabled it on your iOS devices, iCloud Photo Library automatically keeps all your photos” which implies, at least for iOS, that the cloud is optional. I’ve got my hopes up, although I do not look forward to telling the DW that she has to learn another app, sigh…
As for a site name: ixPhotoExpert.com maybe
Bill
Bill
on June 28, 2014 - 12:33am
Been using Aperture since v1.0. Lots of mixed feelings about this. This is not the first time Apple’s has discontinued software that has a large user base.
And it’s not always better at first. Recall the .mac fiasco? And Lion dual screen fiasco? The Final Cut Pro fiasco? It seems Apple dones’t really care if installed base of users is upset. If they did they wouldn’t keep doing it.
On the bright side Apple does have a habit of dragging their customers into the future regardless of if the customers want to be dragged into the future or not. Many don’t. But in the long run it’s usually better for us.
So we either have to wait and see what Photos brings or suffer the pain of a transition of the existing database to a company that is dedicated to supporting photographers.
As to the new site name, how about ”the web site formerly known as ApertureExpert”. Just kidding. ”ApplePhotosExpert” might be a thought, or maybe “LR Expert” ?
on June 28, 2014 - 12:50am
The only reason I can think of Apple endorsing migration path to Lightroom is that plugins work with both programs - especially if yo have a fair investment in plugins. Of course there could be money involved from Adobe, No that would never happen in this industry. Beside the fact that Adobe has bought up/killed many Apps along the way – oh yeah Apple is notorious for that to.
www.markrosenphotography.com
on June 28, 2014 - 12:51am
The only reason I can think of Apple endorsing migration path to Lightroom is that plugins work with both programs - especially if you have a fair investment in plugins. Of course there could be money involved from Adobe, No that would never happen in this industry. Beside the fact that Adobe has bought up/killed many Apps along the way – oh yeah Apple is notorious for that to.
www.markrosenphotography.com
on June 28, 2014 - 5:25pm
When I read the comment about Lightroom I thought it meant that Apple was working with Adobe to enable people who are using Lightroom would be able to transition their libraries to the new Photos app to take advantage of the photo syncing capabilities of the new app. Similar to how they will support the movement of Aperture libraries to the new app.
on June 28, 2014 - 5:51pm
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 12:52am
What do you think will happen to RAW referenced files? I can’t imagine that the RAW files will be on iCloud. Would be cool if the Photos App allowed the use of Reference Files and the items on the iCloud were the Library thumbnails (or better jpg quality). But then that might not be non-destructive. Thoughts?
on June 28, 2014 - 4:32am
According to http://www.apple.com/ios/ios8/photos/
“Once you’ve enabled it on your iOS devices, iCloud Photo Library automatically keeps all your photos and videos in iCloud, at full resolution in their original formats, including RAW files”
Bill
on June 28, 2014 - 4:49am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 12:54am
Please tell me, where was it said that Apple was endorsing Aperture users migration to LR?
Adobe is endorsing said move, not Apple.
on June 28, 2014 - 1:08am
When the news broke and the blogosphere exploded, I quickly realized that as much as I wanted to know right this instant what I was going to do, that I knew exactly what I was going to do. I was going to keep working in Aperture and wait until early 2015 and see what the new Photos app would offer and not rush to move my present library. I would wait a good 3-6 months and see what shakes out with the new system and what it exactly has to offer. My only worry is that I was planning on upgrading my old MBP to a newer retina one when the next generation comes out and switch to Yosemite. Aperture seems more quirky and slower at times (too many spinning beach balls) which I am blaming on the fact that I might have to reload Mavericks fresh and I am reluctant to do so. I just hope Apple’s promise to make Aperture and Yosemite play nice is fulfilled. So I will just take a wait and see approach and not rush off. I do have Lr on my computer and tried playing with it replicating my import metadata/filename format and it seemed like a nightmare. But I am not ready to sign up for Lr classes just yet.
As for a new sight name, I like the already suggested PhotosXpert.com (if that site name hasn’t already been taken). Other possibilities are MacPhotosExpert.com or MacPhotosXpert.com, or ahem..FotosExpert.com. :)
I’ll definitely stay tuned
Florian Cortese
www.fotosbyflorian.com
on June 28, 2014 - 2:15am
Joseph … I’m with you on all but one item … you make it sound as though the Cloud storage is mandatory for implementing the Photos OS X app and invoking all it’s sweetness to replace Aperture.
If that is indeed the case … I’ll be forced to seek other options. My current libraries/archives for just the past 8 years are in excess of 16TB (I have an additional 6TB of images on CD/DVD storage I am slowly migrating back to HD) … plus I have a full 12 years of images come my pre-digital film and chromes I am slowly scanning …
First and foremost, I’m not going to invest in more cloud rental space … due to the months upon months of upload time it would take to get there …
Secondly, I think that we will be able to pick and choose what images may or may not be included for cross-device access (think current Photo Stream or how we can currently choose which iWork files we can store in iCloud) … I don’t NEED all my images available on the cloud so I can access them on my iPad … I just need select albums, collections or projects of my discretion. In my estimation, mandating all images used by the Photos app be stored in the cloud is a bit excessive …
It all does sound interesting … even in a bitter-sweet manner.
on June 28, 2014 - 2:17am
I have only seen the mention of Apple helping users move to Lightroom reported by Adobe. Although some sites are listing Apple having said that. I guess I would be surprised.
Well I don’t know how to feel about this announcement. I look around programs and don’t see much that I like:
However I’m just not up for a change right not so I’m thinking I might just sit tight and continue to use Aperture and see what the landscape looks like after the Photos app starts to mature.
I will admit I’m a little depressed, but that may be because I’m just getting back from a 7 hour drive. :)
on June 28, 2014 - 2:17am
I have only seen the mention of Apple helping users move to Lightroom reported by Adobe. Although some sites are listing Apple having said that. I guess I would be surprised.
Well I don’t know how to feel about this announcement. I look around programs and don’t see much that I like:
However I’m just not up for a change right not so I’m thinking I might just sit tight and continue to use Aperture and see what the landscape looks like after the Photos app starts to mature.
I will admit I’m a little depressed, but that may be because I’m just getting back from a 7 hour drive. :)
on June 28, 2014 - 2:22am
http://neonsqua.re
on June 28, 2014 - 2:21am
Ok Joseph next training is obviously…Moving your Aperture Library to LightRoom…yes please! That crap is confusing. There is a Lightroom5 for sale on Amazon, but on the Adobe website they want you to sign up to a subscription to “Creative Cloud”. I have no idea what to do. And all that crap is EXPENSIVE!
Oh would also love to hear if their is any other rational options to LightRoom.
DAMN YOU APPLE (shakes fist at sky)…
on June 28, 2014 - 6:35am
I would agree Tom…especially for those of us that have managed libraries!
Pages