You are here

Aperture is Dead. Long Live Photos!

PhotoJoseph's picture
June 27, 2014 - 9:00pm

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 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 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 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 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. 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

Well, a name change at minimum :-) Any suggestions? I'm serious… I looked at 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.


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 YosemiteOfficial Apple image of Photos on OS X Yosemite
Apple Aperture Apple Photos for macOS

to Aristophanes


What you said would make sense for an Apple roadmap. I only wish it was that way.  There is one small problem: That is NOT the path Apple has been following. Simply look at all the software Apple has released in the last three years, including the iterations of OSX since Snow Leopard. Apple has consistently been making OSX MORE like iOS and disregarding the needs of power users in favor of the great huddled iOS masses.   

I disagree that OSX has picked up many features from iOS. Other way around.

Widgets were apps before there were apps. iChat was around before FaceTime. iTunes is….iTunes, now getting very long in the tooth as the jack-of-all-trade app.

Apple has moved a number of interface elements towards a communications platform meme and away from a processing meme. Keep in mind almost half of Apple’s user base rely on laptops, with a very large chunk of those MacBook Airs recently. The new Mac Pro has dealt with ventilation, heat, and dust issues by shrinking and externalizing energy and design wasteful buses. Merging the OS user experience between platforms is a good idea i part because we’d criticize them constantly for NOT doing so. Let’s not forget that swipe appeared on PowerBooks long before it appeared on an iOS screen.

Critical is the move away from Finder-level organization towards easier navigation by design, metadata, and core search functions. You need these on small devices because most of your access will be online to servers. Well, the same holds true of Mac now.

Setting standards for 2 OSs is a good thing, especially since it’s something Microsoft has not been able to do and Google having no power desktop in any case.

I jus want Aperture’s replacement to have stacks. I’d be lost without them, especially on a library transfer.

I find it curious how easily the terms “pro” and “power user” get tossed around and how OS X is suffering because it is being “dumbed down” to iOS. (not just in this discussion but elsewhere as well.)

Could someone point out at least one “power user” function, feature or capability that has been removed from OS X because iOS exists?

While you are searching … also try and find one “pro” capability, feature or task that has been removed from OS X because Apple is “making it more like iOS”?

I’m going to go have a beer and a burger while I wait for a response because I think I’ll have plenty of time …

Eh? Look at the Apple apps (e.g. iWork) that have had their features pulled so they match the iOS versions.

On a broader (non-iOS) note, If you want to see a classic example of dumbed down, look at OSX Server.

I actually don’t mind the convergence of the 2 OSs. It bothers me more when they do stupid stuff like changing long standing workflows e.g. The removal of the ’Save As’ command

Save as has always been there even if it was not in the menu = Shift + option + command + ‘S’

I still haven’t seen any pro power user items that were eliminated …

You can also use “Save as” by holding down the option key while in the file menu.

Scott Stuart

Response To butch: How about the full screen fiasco that lasted almost 2 years, for starters? You are obviously not a power user or you wouldn’t post such silly responses. But it’s good to see that Apple is attracting new fans! Welcome! To the light side! I too have faith. Just be aware that critique is a tradition that makes us all stronger.

You are trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

The full screen fiasco or the length of time taken to correct it, was not the result of the existence of iOS or that Apple removed something from OS X to match up a feature in iOS.

You can label me as you wish … I may not be a power user in your eyes … but I recognize an inaccurate critique when I see one … I’ve only owned and used Apple computers since March 1993. I may not know it all … but I’m not easily fooled either.

To Butch:  I offer you an apology. I sincerely hope your vision is correct. 

Please lets stay friendly. :) We are all sitting in the same boat. There is no reason to call people being “obviously no power user” just because they do not use a feature you’ve grown to like.

I’m not concerned about the practicalities of moving from A to LR, I just don’t like LR and I don’t like Adobe and their subscription model even more. Money isn’t the issue for me, I’m reasonably well off, I just hate the subscription model for software - any software.

Kim you are just blind to it :)  Apple has you in a hardware subscription model.  In order to run their latest OS you have to have a computer, tablet, or phone that is just a few years old.  We pay monthly for car insurance and many other things.  We stop paying, we don’t get to partake anymore.  There really isn’t a difference.  I hate it as well, but guess it is the natural maturation of the industry.  I actually hate cloud computing even more than these software subscriptions!  

Yes, but you get to keep your hardware. You do not rent it, and wen done with it, it has resale value.

A subscription? No.

Yes but you keep buying newer stuff right?  If you don’t then it won’t run new software.  They have you either way (my point).  

Subscriptions to file formats are an issue. Hardware is a platform.

One can be agnostic with the latter, but never the former.

If we weren’t talking about Apple I agree.  However Apple’s model is to give you the software but force you to buy their hardware.  

That’s a very weak analogy … I have a 2007 MBP loaded with Mavericks that will also run Yosemite (according to current data) … but I can’t technically use CC apps one day past the expiration of a subscription.

One company is applying far greater “force” in my estimation.

I can honestly say I’ve never bought a new machine just to run newer software. I buy new machines because I want to - same reason I buy new golf clubs, a new camera, a new surfboard or a new car. I don’t have to buy any of them and nobody ‘has me’.

Sorry but you couldn’t be more incorrect. It’s not a hardware subscription offer - you buy a machine - a requirement to use ANY software, be it Mac, Windows of Linux. We have 8 year old machines here still happily running along with current software. I don’t have to pay a cent to keep using it - that’s not the way software  subscriptions work.

Joseph You might want to check out TLDs such as .photography  You could get (maybe) or something of this nature. 

You’d get a UDRP in 30 seconds if you even tried for Apple is listed with the TMCH to prevent such trade mark infringements. Reflecting on my own suggestion of from yesterday, the same rules may apply as there is no existing business trading under the Photos Expert banner.

Hi Joseph

I entirely agree with your positive slant on the situation that is unfolding.

Change equals opportunity and other software vendors will respond to the situation with their own improved offerings.

In addition to Aperture I already use OnOne Perfect Photo Suite 8 and it is an excellent product. Aperture provides me with asset management and PP that meets the majority of my needs. After all, I am always striving to get the picture right in camera with minimal PP.
I also use DxO Optics Pro 9, PT Lens, Catapult and Photomatix.

Corel’s Aftershot Pro 2 product shows that, even today, there are extremely good alternatives to Lightroom on the market. By the time one has to make a decision to replace Aperture I anticipate there will be an even greater list of applications available to choose from.

Meanwhile there is still a lot of life left in Aperture with Apple’s commitment to provide an upgrade for the upcoming release of OSX Yosemite.

During the remaining life of Aperture the new Photos application from Apple will be launched and I expect that Apple engineers will craft a feature rich product that is useable seamlessly across both OSX and IOS platforms. That is an exciting prospect that is certainly worth waiting to see before making any decision to replace Aperture.


How can I turn off the constant barrage of notifications that a new comment has been posted? Beyond tedious!

How can I turn off the constant barrage of notifications that a new comment has been posted? Beyond tedious!

Just set up a filter in your email app. But why do you want to send us to trash. We’re hilarious!

Is anyone else seeing an increase in Adobe Lightroom ads online and in gmail (free and biz)? Or am I being more paranoid than usual? 

Joseph. I want to mute this thread. I want to stop notifications on new comments. I did not ask to be notified of new comments. How can I STOP notifications being received from this site and in particular this thread?

Do I simply have to De-Register?


In every notification mail, you have a link to unregister.

If not like this, just come on this website, login, then menu Me > My Subscriptions. You can then remove subscription to this thread.

I was looking for the same as it is the first time I see so many comments on a topic :)



Aaah! Many thanks J, missed that!

Just too many coming in every second or so!

All the best.

Also - if you look at the very bottom of Joseph’s original post - you will find an “Unsubscribe” button. Easy Peasy! ;-)

Not so Easy Peasy it seems. I’ve I unsubscribed and I’m still getting notices. :(

Scott Stuart

Well, I thought that link worked but now it looks like its a no go. Sorry!

How could Apple make such a mess of this?

Apple tell us that Aperture will not be updated after Yosemite.

They don’t tell us much about the Photos app and how it would  better serve any enthusiast or pro photographer with large image libraries.

Joseph, I appreciate your writing and positive attitude but regardless of that  Apple are really letting the existing Aperture community down.

Apple is now is calling web site editors, journalists and others for damage control but it is a big time failure from Apples part  to not have benefits (if any) for the present Aperture users to migrate.





Tuning in @ page 6 in the comments is suicidal to say the least, but, whatever.

Joseph, I wish to be more specific than 99.9% of the comments seen here. I have my doubts regarding this whole thing and I would like to see what you think about a couple of points.

  1. First thing, you mention FCPX as an example of “how Apple rolls” in terms of scrapping old software in order to make space for the new. You don’t take into account the fact that FCPX replaced FCP, while Photos is replacing both Aperture and iPhoto. I think this is why most people here are freaking out: they see Aperture going towards iPhoto and not vice versa. There is a major difference going on here. That’s why we feel it’s going to be “dumbed down”: because it has to be usable for all iPhoto users. As others have pointed out, most of the “pro” controls could be just “a click away” with an advanced interface buried under the simpler one. That’s still a big inversion on who is the target audience. We don’t know if this means that the more serious stuff (curves, brushes, etc.) will get axed. 
  2. Extensibility is great, yes. But the way I see it, it should be great for letting devs build on top of a great software, not building a great software on top of a decent backbone. 3rd party plugins can break, can be acquired by Google (*ahem*), or the developer can just, you know, stop developing. If you have a strong foundation, this matters less, as only the add ons fail you. But if they are meant to be the actual program, that changes everything. 
  3. I think we’ve all seen the great improvements shown in the WWDC sessions. Serious stuff. But is it going to be enough of an upgrade? Aperture has been stuck in version 3 (versioning hardly means anything, I know, but I think you get the point) since 2010, so we’re in for totaling 5 years for the next major release. In all honesty, I don’t know anything about LR, but I guess that in 5 years it got better and better. We only have a year as the release date for Photos. So five years can become almost six. And then you maybe get a software that has holes in the functionalities or maybe not. See the point here? As a professional I can perfectly stand long delivery times as the software still works and gets updates. But it gets way worse when I have to endure long times and not knowing what I’ll get in the end (see point 1 here). I was hoping for NIK style corrections in AP4. I just don’t see “new” stuff arriving anytime soon.
  4. You actually managed to compare users who don’t care about cloud features to analog shooters. As long as I would like to remind you of all the immense advantages film still has on even some of the most advanced digital cameras (and I almost only shoot digital, lol), I’ll just focus on the cloud part. Others have pointed out, the connectivity just isn’t there for cloud being part of any professional workflow. Not now, not in 7 years. I’m serious. Apple is an innovating company and skates where the puck will be, ok, but it’s not what they’re doing here. It’s a different game. For as much as clients can be needy, I honestly don’t see “cloud” being a solution to any problem. Everyone here knows it: Apple makes the most used and sold camera in the world and its photos fit perfectly in this cloud scenario. Any ~30MB RAW spitting camera doesn’t. For every inch the Photos app will lean towards “cloud”, I see resources being drained from proper DAM and everything, stuff that matters to the guys with the big cameras and RAW files.  
  5. As much as I couldn’t care less about key wording (I find it a crappy endeavor to begin with) and tagging and stuff like that, I can feel the fear of losing all or part of that work when transitioning to Photos. Remember that keywords was one of the things that made Aperture special and got plenty of UI space EVERYWHERE. I don’t see that transitioning 1:1 to Photos.
  6. DAM is a pain to get right and Aperture got it mostly right. Sorry iPhoto but moments, years, places and crap like that never fit the bill for anyone who does this for a living: we need projects, masters, versions, albums, folders, exporting, importing, metadata, batch processing, libraries and stuff like that. I don’t see that transitioning 1:1 to Photos. Other stuff that will have to be added (maybe) later, while we were waiting for new features. 

I don’t have anything against iPhone photography. It’s great and it has brought a lot of attention to the world of photography, bringing great photos and new great photographers. But we have to acknowledge the fact that processing iPhone JPGs for Instagram or sharing to an iCloud album for your grandma has a completely different workflow and needs from managing tons of 22mpx 14bit RAW files.

There’s no point in *****ing ourselves and thinking “hey, we only give this “pro” label because we want to feel like that when using software X or hardware Y”.  That’s not what it’s happening here. 

Why is a compromise something we don’t want when it comes to keeping PCs and tablets two distinct things (see all the W8/WRT discussion) and when it comes to this we have to see how this pans out? Smells like compromise to me, with good intentions but not fitting the bill for most of us here for a long time. 

One last thing: this whole mess is based on the fact that transitioning libraries between softwares is a major PITA. You lose edits, rating,s metadata and, most of all, A LOT OF TIME. Otherwise we would be just switching around without making so much noise. Transitioning video projects is NOTHING compared to this! So I say, let’s quit this FCP/FCPX comparison because it doesn’t translate at all!



What you say makes quite some sense to me. Expressing the intent to replace two products with different target audiences is confusing to say the least and a dumb way to manage expectation.

You don’t agree with the comparison with FCP7/FCPX, but the noise that this announcement starts to look similar to what happened when FCPX was launched though. It could be what Apple was looking for: testing the market to see its reaction… Or maybe their communication department is turning clumsy (don’t forget that their head of comm just left).

Now if we take the theoretical side of things, if you had to build a compelling DAM you’d start need to work the fundamentals. Aperture and LR are too monolithic apps: one big monster of an apps that manages a centralised database (even if some of the photos can be offline) with a non-destructive editor, plugins are there but as a second thought and without deep integration. Building an apps which is based strategically on a non central database (i.e. with all or part of the database on the cloud or on a different machine) and with extensibility as a foundation is quite a good strategy. People might not want to use the cloud but they could, people might have (most pro have) one laptop and a desktop and seamlessly transfer (today’s situation is not that bad but could be much better), etc. It is not necessarily about forcing users to use the cloud but to have the ability to do so. Building something fundamentally extensible wouldn’t prevent Apple from bringing Pro functionality to it but it would allow strong alternative as well. In the extensibility area this would be a quite different ball game than with Adobe: Apple couldn’t care less that you prefer DxO as RAW engine, or any other for that matter. Adobe on the other end would prefer to make you use LR and PS when LR is not enough, there is a greater conflict of interest. Developers are going out of business everyday (I was one too) but that’s also part of the game but other will stay; incidentally there was a rumour that the developer of LightZone had rejoined Apple to work on a Photo project…; so far Google has kept Nik available and continued to improve on it, so nothing to worry too much about. So, in my opinion, all good things in theory.

In practice: the leap of faith Apple is asking us to make is simply too much. There is not even a beta product to test, not more than ONE screenshot shared (which a few have already scrutinised to the pixel). And I simply don’t get why a secretive company, which has (had?) a perfect marketing choreography, to just drop on web bloggers the news that Aperture and iPhoto are done at a time where they have literally nothing else to show (except for the above mentioned screenshot). Again, I agree with you the appearance are not good and we might be fooling ourselves to continue trusting when they have shown so little…

I don’t like it, but again, I’m getting ready to move to LR

Christian C. Berclaz

There's a great series of questions in here. I converted your list from bullets to numbers so I could respond in kind.

  1. The model of a simple slider that is actually adjusting several other sliders simultaneously is, IMHO, brilliant. It appeals to ALL users. For anyone who says that simple sliders are stupid, or for non serious photographers, my reply can only be “you must not be a busy working pro”. Time is everything. Why on earth wouldn't I want to have a single slider that does  in just a moment what I'd do manually over several minutes, or at least get me 90% there? The tool set of what a pro video editor vs a family movie maker are totally different. Not so for photographers. We all need the same basic adjustments to adjust color and luminance values. As advanced users we'll use more of them, and go deeper into them, but this isn't rocket science. Why not let the iPhoto users of the world have access to the same sliders, if they care to explore them?
  2. I don't understand this argument. Anyone can stop development, from a single engineer in his garage to a multi billion dollar corporation. Size doesn't matter. Providing the backbone, as you say it, to more developers, just opens the options to them.
  3. I know and agree 100% that this is the most frustrating part. Apple is notoriously secretive. This is the first time we've seen them really open up and tell us what's happening. I can't pretend to know what features will hit and when. All I can say is “we know it's coming” and remember that the tools we have today still work just fine.
  4. I've been trying to clear up this biggest piece of misinformation that's spreading. The cloud will not be required. It's an option, but Apple has never said anything to make anyone believe that it's required. We all focus on it because it's so cool, but sure, it won't work for everyone. I do disagree though with your assessment in seven years… by then we'll probably be able to keep our multi TB libraries in sync over the cellular network ;-)
  5. Why would you make assumptions of what will and won't transfer to Photos? Metadata is frankly the easiest part of this. I can retain all standard metadata moving to Lightroom even. Keywords are an IPTC standard. That's the easiest part.
  6. All the DAM features like projects, albums, etc. have to translate to Photos or Apple wouldn't be able to claim that you can migrate your library. That's the most basic part of this, and the foundation of everything. Advanced importing options like multi-card import I'd suspect are lower on the priority list, but that's why you'll be able to continue using Aperture if Photos v1 isn't up to snuff for you.

Hope that helps.

— Have you signed up for the mailing list?

Thank you a lot for taking your time answering my points one by one! You’re great! (:

I’ll avoid wasting more of your time and try to answer super concisely :D 

  1. You’re so right, but I will still fear that the one-slider-fits-it-all will make cookie cutter adjustments that will smell like that one thousand mile away (a la standard type effects in iMovie) and thus rendering it useless. 
  2. I guess I’m overthinking. I still see plugins without retina interface after 2 years, so I don’t like the idea to rely on them for what I feel like core functions. 
  3. [emoji thumb up] <- Actual emojis break your comments LOL
  4. I never thought even for a second that Apple would force cloud to anybody. It’s just that given everything, I would be surprised to see it as an even mildly serious part of a pro workflow, so I found bringing it up in your original post out of place. That’s it (: (and btw, lest pCell or similar tech will redefine the way we connect, I stand behind my 7 years minimum (: )
  5. It’s true, metadata is easy but also on the bottom of the list if  this app is mainly focused on the iPhoto part than on the Aperture part. Stuff will be axed, for sure. Some of it will take years to return. Do you see metadata editing, sorting, searching, tagging and UI (not the IPTC standard stuff not being ported, duh (; )  being ported? I reinstate: I don’t see all the attention brought to key wording (ever) translating 1:1 in Photos → people will lose their minds. Maybe it’s me, but it’s just too pro of a feature. Serious disrupting stuff for some.
  6. I wish I could be that sure that while they will be migrated (never doubted that), they will work as smoothly as they do now. Clash of interests: iPhoto style organizing is great for iPhone photography (like, with proper geotagging on each and every photo), Aperture style DAM is mostly for, well, other purposes.  Apple letting choose what interface you want? Eh, sorry but I don’t see that happening. They’re just not like that. 

Ok, I can still use Aperture, but I can also use Paint Shop Pro 1 on a virtual machine if I wanted. Kinda misses the point imho. Reinstating point three, which found us on the same page, we can all afford a little setback if this means epic stuff coming, but we all feel that what is coming will be quite more that that.

BTW the more I read the comments, the more I feel like everyone is trying to speculate wether Photos will be up to our standards (in the near future) or not because if we have to transition our gigantic libraries, we have to start ASAP (: or is it only me that I feel like that? Otherwise I would have waited Aperture 4 six-twelve more months like pretty much everybody else here I think :D

(and gosh, I’m trying to use Lightroom right now… gosh…. goooossh…  )):  )

Thank you again so much for taking your time reading through all of this!

@Marco We all know, that there is just not so much known so far. It’s helpful though to get those little known things right. There is no “one slider fits it all’ attitude visible. To the contrary where formerly where N sliders there seem to be now N+1 sliders. Most of the shown sliders are known from Aperture. Those “Smart Sliders” are additional tools and they could actually be quite useful. The interesting thing is, that this is a smart tool similar to “smart enhance” but with a manual dimension to vary its effect. Even if not - one is free to use the well known sliders to adjust more finegrained. I find it quite unusual how your argument about plugins is a try to make this great news look like a bad thing. It is your own interpretation, that one would need foreign plugins for core functions - why should that be the case?

Don’t get me wrong – I, too, feel that low level access for plugins will make Photos potentially extraordinary in the future. That said, if developers catch on. I just wish I won’t have to rely on them for stuff I think is a core function. I don’t say it will happen. I just wish it won’t.

If making a low level access plugin infrastructure were easy, somebody would already have implemented it. It will be hard to pull it off, even for Apple, and I just wish they won’t break stuff. 

Whops, your plugin that covered that missing vibrancy slider is buggy. Whops, the entire app crashes now, because it’s part of the low level infrastructure. See what I mean? Would you prefer a buggy vibrancy or no vibrancy?

Anyway, it’s all related to the fact that we don’t know the timeframes involved in this whole thing. If Aperture weren’t a couple of years late for a major update, if Photos were to came out with Yosemite and if we actually could trust Apple giving out timeframes, we wouldn’t be here evaluating even the slightest of the possibilities.

I know, I should look at the fact that FCP got into a 3 month update cycle and re evaluate everything from scratch once again (:

On the sliders: I guess I have to shut up q: 


OK, briefly…

  1. Cookie-cutter for regular users, not for advanced. Once you start moving the sliders on your own, you're exactly where you are today.
  2. Fair enough
  3. Yay
  4. I'm a pro photographer, and I love cloud based features. Not every photo I take is for a client, and I love sharing personal, travel, etc. photos online. But regardless, even client work has to get delivered, and I always deliver online. Can't remember the last time a client actually wanted a CD/DVD. I'm not saying that iCloud will be a perfect client delivery system (and it likely won't be, at least at first), but there's no reason it couldn't grow to it. Or, if the API is open, allow me to use a service like Smugmug or whatever and access my already-in-the-cloud photos to build a gallery there? Why not… sky's the limit.
  5. Metadata is NOT on the bottom of the list. I can assure you of this. Even iPhoto has keywords. 
  6. iPhoto DAM is the same as Aperture's, things are just named differently and look a little different. But at the core it's the same, or else you wouldn't be able to seamlessly open an iPhoto library in Aperture, and vice-versa, which you 100% can do today. I don't expect multiple UIs in Photos, but I do expect one easy enough for everyone and flexible enough for pros.

— Have you signed up for the mailing list?

If you have built a library of some 30k+ pictures and in general like Aperture, you want to know how this new product compares with todays product. Until we see a detailed list of feature comparison, Apple causes unrest with its loyal user base, and this will lead to experimenting with competitive products. Bad marketing strategy Apple!!


Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools?

Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps?

Thank you.

Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools? Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps? Thank you.

Will we lose our workflow and organisation tools? Will I finally have access to the MTS files Aperture cannot access because they were captured at 50fps? Thank you.

Here’s an interesting take on this issue. Also, some thoughtful comments can be found here too:

Phil in Midland

That zdnet perspective is spot-on.

My God. This so infuriates me its impossible to describe. Apple is making a huge mistake  (which they have over and over again - why didn’t I see this coming ) by alienating professionals by taking all of their creation software ( remember iWeb ? ) and dumbing it down for Twittering housewives and pushing everyone into the cloud ; whether they want/need it or not.
I have used Aperture for 8+ years - have purchased $$thousands of dollars of plug-ins and spent numerous hours learning some of the awkward work-arounds for clients.
Aperture is a professional program and has always been separate for a reason. You are telling me, a professional photographer that I’m going to be using the same software as my mother. Screw you Apple.
Move over Lightroom you just another visitor ; and if they provide an easy migration and  - solve the destructive editing - I’m in.

Wombat // Photography

iWeb was never professional. It was part of the iLife series for consumers.

There has been no indication that the cloud is required. LR for Adobe does not require the cloud either, unless you want it to.

Move to LR, by all means. I suspect all this huffing and puffing is premature. We simply do not know what is and how featured and extensible it will be.

So somebody’s nose is out of joint because a pro has to use the same software as his mother? Awwww…poor baby. If the new ‘Photos’ works who cares? It’s far too early to be jumping to conclusions unless you’re the kind of person who doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Try and have some perspective. If it hurts your feels to be using software that the PTA Moms are using I feels sorry for you.

Relax. You can always jump to LR once the facts are known.

Remarkable how short sighted some people are being on this issue.

As I said before, I’ll wait. 

So somebody’s nose is out of joint because a pro has to use the same software as his mother? Awwww…poor baby. If the new ‘Photos’ works who cares? It’s far too early to be jumping to conclusions unless you’re the kind of person who doesn’t want to be confused by the facts. Try and have some perspective. If it hurts your feels to be using software that the PTA Moms are using I feels sorry for you.

Relax. You can always jump to LR once the facts are known.

Remarkable how short sighted some people are being on this issue.

As I said before, I’ll wait. 


You may login with either your assigned username or your e-mail address.
Passwords are case-sensitive - Forgot your password?