Chris Dennehy
Leading Member
Oops,
That should be don't forget Hasselblad's free offering Phocus
That should be don't forget Hasselblad's free offering Phocus
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New Photos app - fail
- Thread starter bohdanz
- Start date
CallMeAlan
Leading Member
Are you saying Aperture was their only pro product? Or did you mean to say 'one of ....'? FCPX, Logic Pro, Motion, all in use professionally and industry-respectedly. There may be others but I'm sound&vision. Major feature films are being edited in FCPX.
But really, Apple is, when you think about it, an odd beast in terms of its software. Take, on the one hand, the superb products I mentioned above, and then take, on the other hand, the utter rubbish that is Pages and Numbers and, yes, Photos. Weird.
Mark Alan Thomas
Leading Member
I meant to say that Aperture was Apple’s major pro photography product. Photos will never be one.
Andy Hewitt
Veteran Member
Yeah, I'm afraid I have to agree.
I know that Aperture got a lot of flack over the years, as has iPhoto, but when first released they were both cutting edge, and ahead of any contemporary competition (Aperture was fully released months before Lightroom). But, as is their way with software, Apple never really kept up with the competition, and don't seem to listen to what the users want, and it's now of course become a dinosaur.
iPhoto is similar, although even more so, and they seemed to fix a lot of things that weren't broken.
Photos is pretty hopeless really. It seems OK at first, and I think it's probably bang on for iPhone shooters who just want some basic organising and practically no editing.
My biggest issue though, is that it doesn't seem to work at all with Raw images (yet the blurb states that it works according to the standard Apple Raw support list). I get previews showing, and they can be edited as a JPEG, but none of the Raw options are working (on any of the cameras I have shot Raw images with).
So far, it's a non-starter for me.
--
Andy Hewitt
Last edited:
Mark Alan Thomas
Leading Member
I tried four types of raw files in Photos — Canon 10D DNGs (converted from CRWs), two different NEFs (Nikon D700 and Nikon Df), and native DNGs from a Leica M. Photos was able to edit all of them. I ran into a few weird error messages, one about something called "cloudd" quitting unexpectedly (iCloud, I guess?), and another involving something called "XPCKeychainSandboxCheck which also quit unexpectedly. Photos kept running through all of this, but it seems like a half-baked app to me.
There weren't with Aperture either. Nor were they with iPhoto. So what is new here?
Except that they didn't. Photos started its life as iPhoto X, it was never meant to replace Aperture. The release of Photos was just a convenient moment to announce that Apple has definitely given up on Aperture.
Yes your right it weren't on Aperture/iPhoto too. For me this was one big point to not use the software. Yes I bought Aperture but I never used it intensively. Given away the base filestructure is not a good idea for things like photos. It's too important because it could cover your hole life.
So what's new? It is the organizing of the photos based on time and place. It is a way for "Shoot and forget" users like the most people on smatphones are. They are not interested in organizing there photos and the new PHOTOS help them in this way.
So the laziness of the users brings the need of the organization away from a manuel searchable filestructure.
I know most people of the mainstream need a way like that but for people investigation some more time in there photos and the knowing of what will happen to your files this would be a big compromise. For me to big.
M
Mouser
Guest
The only real difference is that the White Balance brick is shown by default when you first install Aperture, but not when you first install Photos. The way the bricks work and the fact that you can hide and show individual bricks is otherwise just the same as Aperture.
M
Mouser
Guest
You can continue to run Aperture with your existing library and play with Photos with a completely new library and a few test images (which is what I'm doing at the moment).
M
Mouser
Guest
You can still create a hierarchical structure with albums and folders, and you can search using the search field (top right-hand corner) or smart folders. Not as powerful as Aperture, but the basic functionality is there in Photos 1.0.
Hint: Select 'Show sidebar' from the 'View' menu.
I think the important thing being overlooked is the integration into the iCloud. This is seamless. There seem to be a lot of people posting how they hate it and miss aperture. I am surely not the only one on here that has multiple raw editing software packages? I mean I have aperture, capture one (for sony) and lightroom. What I like about the Photos app is the possibility for endless integration options.
Here is how I ( a "papa"razzi) have been using it for my daughters shows. I think I am the use case apple is after.
1. Shoot show in Raw / JPG.
2. At home read photos into MAC using the flavor of the day, currently Capture One Pro (For Sony).
3. Edit in flavor of the day editing tool, again currently Capture One.
4. Export them to a folder on the desktop.
5. Import them into Photos and Lightroom (still use lightroom as the system of record)
6. Share in Photos / upload to iCloud
7. In Photos app on iDevice open again and play with photos in tool of choice.
8. Save / Share from Photos on iDevice.
For me personally. This is the workflow , if you could call it that, I have been wanting since I signed up for smugmug 9 years ago. Google tried and failed with Picasa. DropBox bought Loom. Flickr has no good syncing. This way I can have my photos anywhere easily.
With the addition of the WIFI cameras and the Sony A6000's synching in the background, i have photos constantly coming from the camera to the Icould library.
Here is how I ( a "papa"razzi) have been using it for my daughters shows. I think I am the use case apple is after.
1. Shoot show in Raw / JPG.
2. At home read photos into MAC using the flavor of the day, currently Capture One Pro (For Sony).
3. Edit in flavor of the day editing tool, again currently Capture One.
4. Export them to a folder on the desktop.
5. Import them into Photos and Lightroom (still use lightroom as the system of record)
6. Share in Photos / upload to iCloud
7. In Photos app on iDevice open again and play with photos in tool of choice.
8. Save / Share from Photos on iDevice.
For me personally. This is the workflow , if you could call it that, I have been wanting since I signed up for smugmug 9 years ago. Google tried and failed with Picasa. DropBox bought Loom. Flickr has no good syncing. This way I can have my photos anywhere easily.
With the addition of the WIFI cameras and the Sony A6000's synching in the background, i have photos constantly coming from the camera to the Icould library.
Last edited:
Mark Alan Thomas
Leading Member
You didn’t know that — and nobody outside of Apple had even heard of “iPhoto X” — until about a month ago, so spare me the revisionist history.
Originally, Apple described the Mac version of Photos as a replacement for both iPhoto and Aperture, and many of the Aperture users around here naively took that to mean that Photos would be able to neatly replace both apps with new, modern functionality. I knew all along that it was BS, and people around here got upset at me for repeatedly saying so. Now that I’ve been proven right, you’re trying to spin it to sound like I’m the one who misunderstood Apple’s intentions? Really?
Guys like you make me embarrassed to be a Mac user.
Quoting Apple (from ArsTechnica)
"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."
Loading…
arstechnica.com
The problem is that the app took too long to get to market and developers have yet to tap into the extensibility. If you look at the power and extensibility of the IOS Photos app, you will what the future possibly holds
christom
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 3,518
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,354
That is true. You took a lot of flak over what you thought Photos would turn out to be. As far as I recall you were entirely correct.
christom
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 3,518
- Solutions
- 2
- Reaction score
- 1,354
The iOS Photos app is junk. Photoshop Express is much better in effectiveness and usability. The difference is ridiculous. It's like the iOS Photos design team were told to design an app as unintuitive as possible, that takes many steps to do the obvious, and with tools that are awful at what they are supposed to do. It's actually quite embarrassing. The previous iOS iPhotos was also junk. Apple should simply buy Adobe and give it a rest already.
Jim in Hudson
Veteran Member
Question on #4... in what format are you exporting to the Desktop prior to importing to Photos or Lightroom?
Preface by saying - I don't shoot raw too often and I have only recently started using C1, so this is more for the JPEGS
Depends... so far the majority have been the variants. I found a preset ICC profile that someone built for the FUJI XT-1 Classic Chrome (better than JPEG Neutral) and I like the way they look so I am using that.
Once they are exported I use the import tools. I wish the app did include an "automatically added to photos" directory like iTunes.
For example... this past Sunday we took some Easter pictures. When we got home i loaded them to C1 and applied the profile. I exported them to a folder called Easter. The folder was then imported into Lightroom with the COPY and not Move option. I then imported the same photos into Photos. Once imported I created a shared album with my wife for her to use on her phone and upload to Facebook. In case you have not tried yet, the Photos app on the phone can pull shared streams. She wanted one in B/W. I pulled up the image on my phone. Edited it with enlighten and save a new one back to the shared gallery. The new one is now in the "cloud". She was able to pull it down and upload to FB.
Last edited:
gaussian blur
Veteran Member
He's not the one revising history. Photos, aka iPhoto X, was demoed last June at WWDC, nearly a year ago, not a month ago.
Hmm... Seems you might be comparing to completely different beasts here. IOS Photos is the app to store all the photos on your IOS device. It does have some interesting challenges sometimes I guess, but with the new capabilities to use whatever editor you want directly in the app not sure why I would use Photoshop. To me the app is clunky and kills performance of my 6. Oh well agree to disagree.
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum