Apple Trashes Aperture

[Spearhead]

<p>As some of us have been pointing out for a while, Aperture was not going to live forever. Apple is even working on transition plans to Lightroom for users.</p>

<p><a href="http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/27/apple-to-cease-development-of-aperture-and-transition-users-to-photos-for-os-x/?utm_campaign=fb&ncid=fb">Link</a>.</p>

[Craig_Cooper11664875449]

<p>I'm surprised it's lasted this long. Apple's strategy has been almost totally on mobility for quite some time and Aperture is certainly not a mobility fit.</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>If Corel is smart, they'd step up their game with AfterShot now and glean some Aperture users.</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>When I attempted to access your link, my anti-virus program, Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2014 with the latest updates and virus signature files blocked it as "Phishing URL". I do not know if it is the site itself or a banner ad displayed by the site that triggered the block.</p><div></div>

[JDMvW]

<blockquote>

<p>Apple is even working on transition plans to Lightroom for users.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>what the linked to site actually says is</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em><strong>Adobe</strong></em> says that it will ‘double down’ on Lightroom support and offer Apple users a way to migrate.</p>

</blockquote>

[Spearhead]

<p>"A way to migrate" is a transition plan. </p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Brooks, no idea why that is happening, the article is at techcrunch.com, a well-known site owned by AOL. </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Jeff- it's <strong>Adobe</strong> that is offering the "way to migrate" not Apple, as you imply.</p>

[JosvanEekelen]

<p>Anyway, Lightroom rules. Not good that there is hardly any competition when it comes to organizing photos.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Jeff- it's <strong>Adobe</strong> that is offering the "way to migrate" not Apple, as you imply.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Sorry it was in <a href="http://arstechnica.com/apple/2014/06/apple-to-cease-development-support-of-pro-photo-app-aperture/">another article:</a></p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Apple didn't take today as an opportunity to announce more Aperture-like features coming to Photos; rather, it told TechCrunch that its developers are "working with Adobe to work on a transitionary workflow for users moving to Lightroom," which may be indicative of the impending app's lack of robust, professional-grade options.</p>

</blockquote>

[ellis_vener_photography]

It will be interesting to see what PhaseOne can do to resuscitate what once was iView Media Pro after Microsoft trashed it.

[Brad_]

Up until about 5-6 years ago I used iView Media Pro extensively - that was pre-Microsoft. It was an

excellent program that I could depend on for organizing my photos and then letting me edit in PS

via a single click. I would love to see PhaseOne step up and create a LR-like program that would

handle all aspects of the processing chain, from import to organization to non-destructive editing to

rendering for output. That will be a big chunk of work, handling all of the RAW formats and lens corrections most rely on. They're probably best suited to that task though.

 

Having one player in that game is not good.

[bgelfand]

<p>Jeff Spirer wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Brooks, no idea why that is happening, the article is at techcrunch.com, a well-known site owned by AOL.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Just because the site is well known and owned by AOL does not make it immune from infection by malware. Photo.net has been infected, at least the banner advertisements have been infected, as has Tom's Hardware. I reported the photo.net infestation to Josh Root and posted here: <a href="/site-help-forum/00Yc20">http://www.photo.net/site-help-forum/00Yc20</a> . That may have been in 2011, but advertisements are still being compromised as are web pages. Last year certain pages on the BBC were compromised. The BBC is also a "well known" site.</p>

<p>Of course it could be a false positive. I am just suggesting people exercise care.</p>

<p> </p>

[peterbcarter]

<blockquote>

<p>Having one player in that game is not good.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Apple has not been in the game for quite a while. The difference was that apple were willing to sell software and not confess their intent to never support it. You could wait a couple of years before a new camera got supported.</p>

<p>I switched when buying a new laptop. I asked them if it would support Aperture and they said yes. A month after I actually bought my laptop they announced the release of version 3 and my laptop would not run it. I say "would not run" because it was programmed to not start up on my machine. Lucky me, Lightroom was out in beta. I've been there ever since. </p>

<p>All my macs are gone for much of the same Apple antics. Just an Ipod classic left....</p>

[andylynn]

<p>Brooks, I think you've got a false positive. That site has some analytics and tracking nonsense that my browser blocked, but nothing out of the ordinary and nothing that looks dangerous.</p>

[owen_omeara]

<p>This is what my Daddy warned me about many years ago. Limit the number of players and the game will be whatever they want it to be.</p>

<p>-O</p>

[marc_rochkind]

<p>Of course, much info isn't yet available, but one question that I can't find being raised (not even on Thom Hogan's site) is about Aperture's parametrized (a.k.a. non-destructive) edits. Will those move to the new Photos database, along with the processing engine that interprets them? Will an Aperture user have to move over only fully-baked images? I don't use Aperture (although I have a copy), but if I lost my Lightroom parameterized edits, I'd consider that a disaster.</p>

<p>I suppose it's possible that Adobe could come up with an inexact, but workable way to convert Aperture parameterized edits to ones that worked with LR, which might be better than losing them entirely.</p>

<p>Are any Aperrture users wondering about this?</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>PhaseOne kept the ex-iView around, I tried the trial once but it was on my system a bit lacking in speed and not superstable at that point; feature-wise and UI-wise however, it was a solid system.<br>

However, it has seen very little updates since they added the catalog-functions into CaptureOne. And while I think the catalog functions in LR are integrated better and in a more logical way, the catalog in CO7 does work, and as a raw-converter it is very serious competition for Lightroom. I wouldn't say Lightroom hardly has competition; Lightroom has very good competition everybody ignores instead. Lightroom is, in my opinion, the best jack of all trades. Most certainly not the only option out there, nor the best at everything or for everyone. Hopefully others manage indeed to use this "new gap" Apple leaves to put themselves more into the spotlight as well.</p>

 

[peterbcarter]

<p>But Adobe does not have much incentive to put any R&D $$ into the migration. They will probably get all the customers anyway. All the backlash will probably be towards Apple. I think Apple needs to appear to be making the effort.</p>

<p>However, Apple has done some boneheaded moves before. Apple customers tend to be more emotionally connected to their products (than PC users) and will likely suck it up and end the day in total forgiveness and empty their wallet yet again.</p>

[stevenseelig]

<p>As an Aperture user with over 301,000 picture spanning 13 years and 20 TB of drives, this announcement is causing me much anguish. BUT, I should not be surprised as Apple has bailed on several other ventures (remember MobileMe, for example). In their defense, other companies transition/bail on all sorts of things, but to me pictures are a special class of things vs toilet replacement pieces.<br>

I am reminded, though, by this announcement as to how fragile our digital images are even with backups and archives and etc. In the past, if I printed an image to film, and I was diligent about what film and how I stored them, I could be confident those images could last a very long time. Not so with digital files, it seems.<br>

This brings me to my question: How are other photographers thinking about the legacy issues of their pictures? What are they doing and why are they using their approach? <br>

Thanks.</p>

[Glenn McCreery]

<p>According to The Aperture Blog at http://theapertureblog.com/2014/06/27/its-official-aperture-to-be-discontinued/<br>

http://theapertureblog.com/2014/06/27/its-official-aperture-to-be-discontinued/<br>

"Apple has officially announced that it will cease development of both Aperture and iPhoto next year when the previously announced Photos app for Yosemite ships. Apple told <a href="http://www.macworld.com/article/2375212/apple-retires-aperture-and-iphoto-to-be-replaced-with-photos-for-os-x.html">Macworld</a> that “When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X”</p>

 

[EricM]

<blockquote>

<p>This brings me to my question: How are other photographers thinking about the legacy issues of their pictures? What are they doing and why are they using their approach?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Steven, I keep it safe by being able to work outside of the Adobe ecosystem...I don't save as psd or convert to dng.</p>

[digitaldog]

<p>The only thing fragile is the <strong>proprietary</strong> processing every company has. Raw is raw (DNG is raw), edits are proprietary. There's nothing Adobe can do to migrate Apple's proprietary metadata edits to LR. The same would be true going the other way. Some of the data will move (metadata that isn't proprietary like keywords). IF you have Aperture instructions but not a rendered image, now might be the time to save off a TIFF, but the original raw will be just fine in LR or C1, you'll get to start the parametric edits all over again. <br>

Nothing new here really. It's a shame some people who rely on the software will have to migrate. Maybe Apple's got a newer replacement in the wings. <br>

History repeating itself again. Color Studio, Xrex, Live Picture, College and now add Aperture to the list of solutions that went up against a Photoshop product and ended up in the waste heap of software solutions. The market speaks again. </p>

[Glenn McCreery]

<p>As a long time Aperture user, with over 20,000 images stored, I am concerned about how to transition to the new reality. Aperture has always satisfied my needs, since I perform my serious editing in Photoshop CS5 with Nik, Topaz, PT lens, etc. plug-ins and then store the images in files external to Aperture. So my initial thought is to leave well enough alone and continue to use Aperture for accessing all of my legacy images, but buy a copy of Lightroom for, at some future date, storing and editing new images. I want all my images stored and backed up on my hard drives, not somewhere in the ether. I have not thought this through carefully, so what difficulties, other than the obvious ones of a new learning curve and being consistent with file names in both programs, might I anticipate?</p>

[bgelfand]

<p>This article in PC World suggests that Apple is simply replacing Aperture with Photos for OS X:</p>

<p>http://www.pcworld.com/article/2375212/apple-retires-aperture-and-iphoto-to-be-replaced-with-photos-for-os-x.html</p>

<p>The sky may not be falling <grin>.</p>