Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Image Processing: Darkroom / Lightroom / Film > Photo Software

Photo Software Discussions of all the photo software - except scanning software which is in the forum with scanners.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 06-27-2014   #41
Lss
Registered User
 
Lss is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,800
Disappointed in Apple. It's no surprise they do this, but I much preferred Aperture to Lightroom and therefore kept using what for me was the better product. Let's see how difficult and time-consuming the transition will be. Sooner or later I need to do it.
__________________
Lasse
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-27-2014   #42
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,102
Maybe they will change their mind if this cuts into their computer sales.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #43
biomed
Registered User
 
biomed's Avatar
 
biomed is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Seattle Area (North)
Posts: 3,400
I am not an Apple user but it is always sad when a company does this. I feel for you aperture users. It just ain't fair!
__________________
biomed
Things are more like they are now than they’ve ever been before.

2019 Photos

rff Gallery

Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #44
user237428934
User deletion pending
 
user237428934 is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,677
Aperture does not store the data in a proprietary database, it's a standard mac filesystem. Use the finder and look for the aperture library file. Right click. Use the third option from above, it's "Paketinhalt zeigen" in german, maybe something like "Show package content" in english. Now you see the filesystem content. The folder "Masters" contains your original images. You can copy the whole folder to a new destination if you want.

It's not really nice to navigate this structure but people don't need to fear that they maybe can't access their images someday.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #45
MaxElmar
Registered User
 
MaxElmar's Avatar
 
MaxElmar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Central New Jersey
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by tom.w.bn View Post
Aperture does not store the data in a proprietary database, it's a standard mac filesystem. Use the finder and look for the aperture library file. Right click. Use the third option from above, it's "Paketinhalt zeigen" in german, maybe something like "Show package content" in english. Now you see the filesystem content. The folder "Masters" contains your original images. You can copy the whole folder to a new destination if you want.

It's not really nice to navigate this structure but people don't need to fear that they maybe can't access their images someday.
Thanks! That's great to know - I have used referenced files with both LR and Aperture, but family and friends have not. Does this work with iPhoto libraries?

Someone needs to come up with a bit of software that can read the adjustments for each file in the database and we're good to go. (That would be fantastic for LR users as well - the ability to export the adjustments - giving them the freedom to move their work to other software.

I can see Apple letting this happen, Adobe, not so much.
__________________
Chris L.

Still Photographically Uncool
https://www.flickr.com/photos/xenotar/


  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #46
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by GaryLH View Post
Where apple is going w/ this is something I am not interested in... It seems more for the Facebook/google crowd and those that want cloud based world.
I find it best not to pre-judge things like this until I see what the actual product is. What it seems like and what it is are often quite different.

Change is coming, that's for sure, as it always has been. It might just be great. Can't know until it gets here.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #47
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
 
Ezzie's Avatar
 
Ezzie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,709
Ess aych 1 Tee. I read about it earlier today. I rather like Aperture, apart from it being a resource hog. Migrating the images with non-destructive adjustments to LR will be interesting to see if they can pull off.
__________________
Eirik

RF: Leica M4-2 | Royal 35-M | Polaroid 110A/600SE hybrid
VF: DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x17 | Voigtländer Vito CL | Foth Derby | Welta Weltix | Smena Symbol | Lomo'Instax
SLR: Canon EF | Pentacon SIX | Pentax SP1000 | Pentax SV
TLR: Rolleiflex 2.8E3 | DUO TLR
CSC: Fuji X-E1
Pinhole: 6x17 Vermeer | ONDU 6x6 | DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x24

My Flickr
Silver Halides - Pictures in B&W
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #48
c.poulton
Registered User
 
c.poulton's Avatar
 
c.poulton is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 758
I really like Aperture's interface, and use a lot of it's functionality so I'm hoping that the new photos app won't be a radical departure. I'm a bit pissed as I only very recently purchased Aperture, and I see that it's still available to buy on the Apple Store?

Let's see what happens early next year - Aperture will continue to work for some time yet and although I really don't want to go down the Adobe route with Lightroom, I guess that's always an option if things don't work out with the new app.
__________________
Christian

My Gallery
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #49
Bruno Gracia
Registered User
 
Bruno Gracia's Avatar
 
Bruno Gracia is offline
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Ronda (Spain)
Age: 35
Posts: 729
I've always found Lightroom more intuitive, interfaz friendly than Aperture, with all those project, folders, albums, etc. At least the folder system.

And the tools? 90% of them, more powerful in LR.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #50
k__43
Registered Film User
 
k__43's Avatar
 
k__43 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 948
It maybe that Lightroom is more capable than Aperture but I can't deal with the subscription scheme. Aperture is 70€ in germany .. Creative Photo is 13€ per months: after half a year I paid already more. I use Aperture mainly as a library tool and for very basic corrections but more then the new App will give me. I can't believe they are going to kill it! Hec I'm even still on Aperture 2: I was waiting for a new version because there was always a rumor that it is coming soon and I did not wanted to pay twice
Now I think I'll pay the f$%"n 70€ and hope it floats me for a couple of years lie V2 did.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #51
Zonan
Registered User
 
Zonan's Avatar
 
Zonan is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tempe, AZ
Posts: 300
Since new cameras are added via OS updates, that should not be a problem, as it is in PS and LR, where you need Adobe to add the cameras. So Aperture could go on and be useable for some time, even with new cameras (unless they change that in the new OS or Photos app).
__________________
Hexar AF, GSW690 III, GW690 II, GA645zi, Autocord, F6, Chamonix 45n-2
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-28-2014   #52
Ronald M
Registered User
 
Ronald M is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy C View Post
No at all surprising. I never used Aperture but always thought it didn't have much change against Lightroom and Adobe. "Photos" isn't going to be a substitute for Aperture so I feel for all the folks who are going to have to make a switch. Especially those with large libraries.
Why I do not want any program that has a library. Whomever came up with that concept should never be allowed to write another line of code.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #53
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
I suspect apple did it to protect the average user from deleting critical meta data since. Aperture is a non-destructive photo editor. The so call 'library' is nothing more then the root directory of the photo file tree managed by aperture. The operating system recognizes this special directory as a library because it has a '.aplibrary' associated with the directory name. It has been a long time since I have explored what was actually inside that file structure. U can do a right click and click on 'show package contents'... This will show u the tree structure. Unless u know what u are doing, I would suggest not doing more than browsing this structure otherwise u can corrupt the library by mistake. Since Mac OS X is based on Unix, they did not have to do this.. They could have create hidden directories and dot files instead.

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #54
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,044
I don't want to waste much thought about all this yet, but I will say that: (1) I feel like Apple's 20-something engineers think I'm a sheep that would LOVE to flock to the cloud, and (2) Adobe thinks I'd LOVE to join their parade to subsciption-based services. Both of these are dead wrong in my case.

Why the hell does Apple think I want to give control of my data to hacker heaven (uh.. I mean The Cloud)?? And I guess Adobe thinks I'm a pro that somehow makes money with my photography, enough to pay them whatever monthly subscription they decide to charge... whenever! Right... I'm an idiot... sign me up.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/

Last edited by Jamie Pillers : 06-29-2014 at 00:36. Reason: correct typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #55
Lss
Registered User
 
Lss is offline
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by k__43 View Post
I can't deal with the subscription scheme.
It certainly quickly gets vastly overpriced for my needs. The stand-alone Lightroom, which is hidden well on Adobe's site, is twice what Aperture costs, but I guess I will buy it now. If Adobe completely goes subscription service, I need to consider again what to do. Sadly, customer is seldom right with these guys.

Quote:
I'm even still on Aperture 2
Well, you have a nice upgrade path. Go Aperture 3 or consider Lightroom, you will get better tools and performance in any case.
__________________
Lasse
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #56
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers View Post
I don't want to waste much thought about all this yet, but I will say that: (1) I feel like Apple's 20-something engineers think I'm a sheep that would LOVE to flock to the cloud, and (2) Adobe thinks I'd LOVE to join their parade to subsciption-based services. Both of these are dead wrong in my case.

Why the hell does Apple think I want to give control of my data to hacker heaven (uh.. I mean The Cloud)?? And I guess Adobe thinks I'm a pro that somehow makes money with my photography, enough to pay them whatever monthly subscription they decide to charge... whenever! Right... I'm an idiot... sign me up.
There is no indication Apple is forcing anyone to use the cloud for OS X.

For iOS almost certainly because devices do not have the storage space.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #57
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronald M View Post
Why I do not want any program that has a library. Whomever came up with that concept should never be allowed to write another line of code.
For backup and sidecar files. The moment users start messing with file structures (and they do) apps stop working. This is likely a decision as much about customer service and complaints as anything, which is why iPhoto was also nixed. Photos have become to computing what fonts have been to computing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #58
dasuess
Nikon Freak
 
dasuess's Avatar
 
dasuess is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Age: 68
Posts: 507
I told myself I was going to stay out of this latest imbroglio; however, I just think all of you who currently rely on Aperture should read the following two articles over on Aperture Expert.

http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2...s#.U7AVLBac5s4

http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2...e#.U7AWlhac5s4

Stay calm and keep on shooting !!!
__________________
"You can't count on others to think or see for you." David Vestal, The Craft of Photography

David A. Suess
Nikon Df: 24/f2.8, 28/f3.5, 35f/2, 43-86/f3.5, 55/f3.5 Micro, 85/f1.8, 105/f2.5, 180/f2.8, 200/f4, 300/f4.5
http://DavidSuessImages.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #59
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
apple, adobe, google, yahoo (flickr), sony, leica.

they have one thing in common: to them we are numbers.

I help people with iphoto all the time.....OMG what a nightmare

look at the history of "Word" or windows for that matter.

People HATE to learn a new interface, and most of the time it's pointless and arbitrary.

What's been goin on at flickr lately is just classic in this same vein.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #60
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansel View Post
Last time I looked M$ had not discontinued Word or Excel or ceased to support old file versions. You can open a 15 year old Word file just fine on the latest Windows PC.

Apple has just stabbed a large part of its customer base in the back.
don't get me started. after 2003 word interface was destroyed. It's awful now. Old versions will not open new word files, without upgrades which confuse general users.

OSX WORD is totally different than Win Word.

bla bla bla. TY god Word is superfluous now.

Back in 2000 it was a nice program. Now it's a bloated monstrosity.

And I'm not even going to bring up "Outlook".

I agree with those here who decry "libraries" in general.

I would not worry much about Apple's bottomline.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #61
craygc
Registered User
 
craygc is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Age: 59
Posts: 1,074
Honestly, Im surprised Aperture lasted even this long. For a number of years now Apple's software focus has been on mobility ...any real desktop apps are non-existent - and market share of Aperture has never been significant and was falling every year. I do wonder where Apple will end up as I certainly prefer their OS-X based platforms but detest the iOS ones...
__________________
Craig Cooper
Australia
Photo Stream
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #62
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansel View Post
Whats new. Word has always been awful. At least M$ haven't abandoned it.
It's a cash cow. When would they abandon it?

What they've done with it is much worse IMHO
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #63
GaryLH
Registered User
 
GaryLH's Avatar
 
GaryLH is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 6,180
Quote:
Originally Posted by craygc View Post
I do wonder where Apple will end up as I certainly prefer their OS-X based platforms but detest the iOS ones...
Though I am very happy w/ iOS based hw.. I don't want to c iOS behavior in osx based machine to the point where they cannot be distinguished.

Gary
__________________
Panasonic LX100, Sigma Foveon, Fuji X and Panasonic CM1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #64
back alley
IMAGES
 
back alley's Avatar
 
back alley is offline
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: true north strong & free
Posts: 49,190
let's all calm down now…we don't need a ms/ios war...
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #65
Herjulfr
Registered User
 
Herjulfr's Avatar
 
Herjulfr is offline
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 151
It is simple, never trust Apple if you're a pro, for it does not make money from the pros. It is a mass market mobile device company and thats it.
I have just bought aperture because I could not reinstall my Photoshop Elements license. Its not too bad, but the interface is old and I do not really like to be forced to add a photo to my library before modifying it. So I guess i'll just keep it until it becomes way too obsolete.

Anyway, I never import my photos directly into my Aperture/iPhoto library, but I store them in a separate file structure before importing them. I do not trust Apple to manage all my photographs into a database/library that can be corrupted.
__________________
My flickr : http://www.flickr.com/photos/herjulfr

My tumblr :
http://nouvelle-france.net
Canonet QL17 GIII, X-Pro1
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #66
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,102
I wonder if Apple reads this thread. Seems to me they are pulling a "Kodak." Do they realize the loyal following they have? For many of us, the whole point of buying Mac was for photography.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #67
sevres_babylone
Registered User
 
sevres_babylone is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,113
I bought a couple of versions of Aperture, but never learned to use it. My workflow is to ingest/rename/tag using Photo Mechanic, and then doing everything else in Photoshop, which I am comfortable using.

That said, I'm disappointed that the most serious alternative to Photoshop is gone, because when there is little or no competition, Adobe can act in its worst ways, especially re pricing (hello Acrobat pro versions for the Mac).

I don't think Apple will lose many computer sales by cancelling Aperture. It is still a great platform for photo processing/editing. That said, if I had invested time in learning and using Aperture, I'd be pissed too.
__________________
Visit me at Pbase
and at Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #68
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
 
Darthfeeble's Avatar
 
Darthfeeble is offline
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Logtown, California, USA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,505
One thing that I did in Aperture was to NOT save my originals in the Aperture Library. Not through any brilliance or foresight on my part, but I have several programs and wanted to be able to access the originals independently of Aperture. I have Bridge and Elements, Capture One, DxO and all the native programs for each of my cameras. I thought it would be a good idea and now it's really looking good. Now to export all the versions I want to keep to a "finished" file and I'll be somewhat secure. I keep remembering that Print Shop program that I bought a year before Lion came out and when I upgraded I was out a print program as "Apple no longer supports Power PC programs....." Why do I feel this is going to happen again?
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #69
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,102
I'll just go back to film. Film is better, anyway.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #70
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
 
Jamie Pillers's Avatar
 
Jamie Pillers is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Oakland, California
Posts: 4,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
There is no indication Apple is forcing anyone to use the cloud for OS X.

For iOS almost certainly because devices do not have the storage space.
But it does seem, given all the annoying cloud-based features I have to turn off after just loading Mavericks, that Apple wants to move in this direction... for all devices, desktop machines included.
__________________
Talk to a stranger today!

Fuji X-H1; X-Pro1; XF10; Polaroid 250 (waiting for an 'art' project)

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-29-2014   #71
mynikonf2
OEM
 
mynikonf2's Avatar
 
mynikonf2 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: ...resident of the Virgo Galactic Supercluster +/-
Age: 68
Posts: 653
It's really sad that photography is no longer our primary concern. I have become fatigued by digital workflow savvy and the constant need to learn the next "endall" program. I feel that I no longer have possession of my images, that if I refuse to be "current" that those images will simply go away...
This is the revelation for me to preserve my work with hard copies. Not hard copies of every image but the select few that I feel best represent me as a photographer. The raw files will vanish as will I someday, I must be realistic about all of this program (money, profit) driven sinkhole that digital photography has become.

I guess I could employ someone to remain current for me (which would free me to concentrate on photography).
__________________
Mike Blache'
N.H.S. member

“Light scratches consistent with age and wear”


  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #72
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,102
Maybe the transition to LR won't work, and they'll have to keep aperture alive.

Say: Maybe if we could get enough of us outraged, abandoned users together, we could file a class action lawsuit against Apple, to force them to support Aperture. Does anyone know how many copies of Aperture are out there? How many Aperture users are being abandoned?
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #73
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamie Pillers View Post
But it does seem, given all the annoying cloud-based features I have to turn off after just loading Mavericks, that Apple wants to move in this direction... for all devices, desktop machines included.
I seriously doubt Apple wants the guy with 6TB of RAW files in their cloud.

Even Adobe probably does not want that customer bringing that much overhead to them.

Apple supports 2 OSs and a huge chunk of their customer base, including many professionals, require persistent connectivity. So Apple pretty much has no choice but to build in similar processes, library structures, and interfaces between the Mac and iOS.

Power users are a cost centre. Some bemoan the lack of certain features in Aperture not realizing that the market for many of these features is minuscule.

Remember: iOS is on devices where Apple and the consumer expect NO desktop computer at all in the mix. None. The general consumer trend is away from any home computer and all towards mobile devices supported for storage, transmission, and presentation on the cloud. The home darkroom PC for power users it turns out is fractionally small market. So Apple looks to be building a platform with the Mac where Photos will be a container with an OS-level library structure (photos have become like fonts). Those small user bases who demand atypical features can source their needs from an app.

This will contrast with Adobe who are tied almost wholly to the desktop and its stalled and even declining sales. Adobe will have lost almost the entire mid- to low-end market to Apple's built-in free app, and they will rely on professional pricing via subscription, monolithic software that needs to phone home every 90 days.

It is Adobe that looks to be in trouble in the long run. I am not sure they can adapt to the mobility, non-desktop, and cloud services in the same way as the company that controls all this at an OS-level.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #74
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
Maybe the transition to LR won't work, and they'll have to keep aperture alive.

Say: Maybe if we could get enough of us outraged, abandoned users together, we could file a class action lawsuit against Apple, to force them to support Aperture. Does anyone know how many copies of Aperture are out there? How many Aperture users are being abandoned?
Apple has about $150 billion dollars at it's disposal. A class action lawsuit would take a long, long time. As we know, the only people who benefit from class action law suits are attorneys. In the end you get maybe $10 (probably as an iTunes gift card). Apple hires a third-party law firm and spends a infinitesimal portion of its cash reserve. Aperture is still six feet under.

A better plan would be to start a company funded by all those who feel like you feel. Then you could buy Aperture from Apple and then sell it yourselves.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #75
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by mynikonf2 View Post
It's really sad that photography is no longer our primary concern. I have become fatigued by digital workflow savvy and the constant need to learn the next "endall" program. I feel that I no longer have possession of my images, that if I refuse to be "current" that those images will simply go away...
This is the revelation for me to preserve my work with hard copies. Not hard copies of every image but the select few that I feel best represent me as a photographer. The raw files will vanish as will I someday, I must be realistic about all of this program (money, profit) driven sinkhole that digital photography has become.

I guess I could employ someone to remain current for me (which would free me to concentrate on photography).
I haven't changed my image processing workflow since 2006. I spend most of my time concentrating on photography. Photography today includes image processing, just like in film days it included choices in film, developer, and processing techniques.

Nothing has really changed other than the implementation details.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #76
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by mynikonf2 View Post
It's really sad that photography is no longer our primary concern. I have become fatigued by digital workflow savvy and the constant need to learn the next "endall" program. I feel that I no longer have possession of my images, that if I refuse to be "current" that those images will simply go away...
This is the revelation for me to preserve my work with hard copies. Not hard copies of every image but the select few that I feel best represent me as a photographer. The raw files will vanish as will I someday, I must be realistic about all of this program (money, profit) driven sinkhole that digital photography has become.

I guess I could employ someone to remain current for me (which would free me to concentrate on photography).
All facets of technology have impacted all aspects of photography greatly during the past decade. The rate of change has been incredible. I think everyone feels fatigued to some degree at some time by this high-speed evolution.

In my case these changes created opportunity. I can take photographs and use post-production software to license images for commercial use. Some clients want Cloud access and some don't. I can conveniently share personal images via the Cloud with friends and family. Of course these features are of no importance to some and.

Your insight about printing is valuable. I started printing more work about a year ago. I found a couple of labs that do excellent work. I didn't even think about buying a printer because of the additional technology I'd have to learn and inevitable technology changes I'd have to to assimilate. So that's where I drew the line.

In terms of raw files I disagree or mis-understand you. You have complete control over your raw data. There is no need whatsoever for them to leave your possession. You rotate multiple copies hard drives in off-site location such a family members homes or even bank safety deposit boxes. Any Cloud involvement for your images, raw or rendered, is entirely voluntary.

In a way raw files are at lower risk than physical negatives.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #77
Aristophanes
Registered User
 
Aristophanes is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
All facets of technology have impacted all aspects of photography greatly during the past decade. The rate of change has been incredible. I think everyone feels fatigued to some degree at some time by this high-speed evolution.

In my case these changes created opportunity. I can take photographs and use post-production software to license images for commercial use. Some clients want Cloud access and some don't. I can conveniently share personal images via the Cloud with friends and family. Of course these features are of no importance to some and.

Your insight about printing is valuable. I started printing more work about a year ago. I found a couple of labs that do excellent work. I didn't even think about buying a printer because of the additional technology I'd have to learn and inevitable technology changes I'd have to to assimilate. So that's where I drew the line.

In terms of raw files I disagree or mis-understand you. You have complete control over your raw data. There is no need whatsoever for them to leave your possession. You rotate multiple copies hard drives in off-site location such a family members homes or even bank safety deposit boxes. Any Cloud involvement for your images, raw or rendered, is entirely voluntary.

In a way raw files are at lower risk than physical negatives.
As it stands right now photo images for iCloud can only de displayed through Photo Sharing, Photo Streams, or iPad iPhoto Journals, the latter of which can, through iTunes, be saved as a website (go figure). You cannot really even view photos on iCloud from the web unless a Photo Sharing or Journal site is made public. So iCloud really has no "pro" facility and even with iWeb and MobileMe Gallery did it ever. I fact, Apple purposefully allowed Flickr and SmugMug direct access.

Apple's print service IMO have been outstanding and I sincerely hope Apple keeps these built into the new photos app.

Take a cue from iOS 8 as to what we can expect from Apple's Photos app for OS X.

1. It will allow RAW
2. It will store natively in the Cloud if enabled
3. It will have non-destructive editing
4. It will integrate with libraries on all devices
5. Third party app access

So the iOS devices will process RAW, edit RAW, store RAW, all non-destructively...if enabled. No one will force you onto the Cloud, but Aplpe makes it pretty clear that iOS devices haven't the storage space.

I expect the new Photos app to have the same dynamic. Cloud is available if you enable. RAW will be stored non-destructively allowing for editing within Photos or via third party apps.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #78
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is online now
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 6,102
How does Apple stand to gain by crippling Aperture? There must be some money in it for them.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #79
Godfrey
somewhat colored
 
Godfrey's Avatar
 
Godfrey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9,173
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob-F View Post
How does Apple stand to gain by crippling Aperture? There must be some money in it for them.
Ceasing the development and maintenance of one product when you have another product under development that will replace it saves a lot of money.

G
  Reply With Quote

Old 06-30-2014   #80
Berth
Registered User
 
Berth is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Waterworld
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ansel View Post
Aperture has been able to publish and access photos on iCloud for some time now, but you main library is on the computer. I would never store my entire library on the internet. No way.
Agree totally. I'm going have to make a change. Not a happy camper.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:56.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.