10503 Views 1 2 3 Previous Next 36 Replies Latest reply: Mar 2, 2008 1:21 PM by aeschbi99 Go to original post
I am working on editing a project now for a possible book publication. I have about 15,000 master image files.
4,500 from 2006
6,500 from 2007
4,000 from 2008
I don't want to be using:
iView (Expression) Media for the 2006 images
Aperture for the 2007 images
Lightroom for the 2008 images
Also if I could get any productive work done in Aperture I wouldn't be shifting to Lightroom. I know that Aperture is working great for many of you but I can't use the program for more than a short time without getting a application slow-down or hang that requires me to reboot. I have wasted days-weeks-months on software trouble-shooting/tech support and $$$$$ on hardware upgrades trying to get Aperture to run well on my system.
Why would I want to keep doing that for any of my images?
Message was edited by: thomas80205
Don't know if this would help - a plugin that exports as DNG. Pretty sure it contains the metadata.
Also you made a comment about iView not reading sidecars for file types which normally have embedded metadata. Are you sure about this? Certainly it is true for Adobe products but when I checked, iView could read these files.
Along the lines of exit strategies... iPhoto & Aperture both internally support photo printing. Something that the competition doesn't appear to have.
Does anyone have suggestions on alternatives for getting photos printed via Aperture's main competition application?
Any highly recommended photo printing service companies - that have easy image file upload via FTP or possibly an application plug-in?
MPIX, using MPIX Roes FTP has worked very well for me. I have managed colors using their ICC profiles. As far as exit to the other option, I am almost done my trial version of LR. So far very pleased BUT one of the biggest omissions with that program is the inability to soft proof! This is the only thing keeping in the Aperture camp. I will continue to suffer through the painfully slow processing until either AP 2.0 comes out with improved performance, or LR 2.0 comes out with soft proofing option.
Time will tell, the race is on (or is it?)
Ironically, version 2 is actually making it easier to "exit" Aperture, by allowing exported RAW files to include the IPTC metadata. Normally that data is stored in the sidecar files, so there's no simple way to get it into another app. Now, with the option of creating exported RAW masters that include that data within the RAW file, it's easier to make the transition.
So...my recommendation is to spend the $99 and try Aperture 2 for a while. If you still decide to migrate, the time you'll save is going to be well worth the $99.
Or, just get the 30-day trial, export all your masters before the trial period ends, and be done with it without spending a penny.
But version 2 is showing a lot of fresh potential (image-editing plugins! 16-bit printing! etc.) so I'd give it a good spin around the dancefloor first if it were me.
Jon Roemer wrote:
Jeremy Henderson wrote:> One interesting idea seems to be to use iView as a go-between, especially as iView has (or had, at least) the ability to write metadata back to a NEF file.
As already mentioned iView is now Expressions Media and it's not clear that iView/MS/Expressions has any plans to support newly released raw camera prior to their next major release. Somewhere I had a seen a quote purported to be from iView/MS/Expressions saying as much.
Additionally, never, ever, I repeat never ever have iView/Expressions do anything to a raw file other than changing the file name. It's asking for trouble.
Yes, and that's because you pay all that money for iView/EM and you don't even get a professional raw converter like you do in Aperture or Lightroom. They only have an entry-level image edit module. iView/EM is only good for cataloging, and even then has its deep flaws.
If you drop by the iView/EM forums, you'll see an interesting question: "WHERE is the support for the newest cameras?" So don't go there trying to escape the camera support issues seen with Aperture.
If you're fed up with Aperture, migrating to iView/EM will only result in you digging a deeper hole for yourself courtesy of Microsoft. That does not seem like a worthwhile fate.
I am bewildered by this thread. As a consultant to the corporate communications departments of a couple to multinational corporations. I can't imagine migrating AWAY from Aperture! We used to need a Filemaker database, Bridge, iView, and/or Extensis Portfolio, and Photoshop to do what we do much better now with just Aperture and Photoshop. And this latest version really put some polish on an application that already was a fundamentally superior design for professional photographers. You do need a modern Mac and you do have to have a certain level of commitment to take advantage of the power of Aperture, but that should be a given for professionals.
James Pittman1 wrote:
. I can't imagine migrating AWAY from Aperture!
As of early this morning I agree. However as a early contributor to this thread (which predates v2.0 by a week) I can only say that even with my modern Mac and lots of effort I couldn't make Aperture work in a dependable way for my library.
Working with v1.5.6 it took me two full days to copy my master files (aprox 32,000/400GB) from one drive to another on the same system. Numerous program freezes and slow downs. I had to force-quit the program several times. The library kept getting corrupted and needing tedious manual work to fix it up. If your system was doing that you'd probably start checking out the alternatives too!
I have met many users for whom Aperture was running fine; I wasn't one of them--before today.
Looking back I can see where some of my efforts to make Aperture run faster probably contributed to the problems I was having. However the first cause was that Aperture wasn't performing acceptably well before the upgrade.
There are still a few things that have me shaking my head about v2. For example why is Adobe RGB the only option for opening a file in Photoshop? (sRGB or ProPhoto RGB too please?) But if v2 runs as fast as it seems after my first day then these are limits I can easily work around.
I am sympathetic. I support about twenty photographers who used Aperture 1.5, (as well as myself on three computers) and some of them did have difficulties. One even had to reinstall after we tried everything Apple recommended for trouble shooting. 1.5 was too slow and needed quite a bit of refinement, but is was a version 1.5 application after all. However, compared to using other applications with their own problems and limitations, Aperture was still the best option and as of today it remedies those shortcomings.
I have been a commercial photographer for nineteen years now and a consultant for five and Aperture comes closer to offering a complete solution for professional photographers than anything else. iView, Portfolio, Lightroom are all good at what they do, but they don't do as much as Aperture or offer the kind of flexibility a photographer (especially if he is in a workgroup) needs to solve everyday problems.
I think the main issue with changing from Aperture to Lightroom (or the other way around) is not so much IPTC data but that none of the RAW adjustments are compatible. Any tweaking, correcting or special settings must be redone in the new app. (even if you are using DNG). Adobe Camera RAW settings (for Bridge & Photoshop) are compatible with Lightroom though newer tools like Clarity, Vibrance are not backward compatible. If you've fine tuned thousands of images, this would be a real hurtle to switching between Aperture, Lightroom, Capture One or any other RAW processor.
Though, with adjustments, often "starting again from scratch" with a new tool is a great opportunity to try again with new knowledge, to see if you can do better than you did the last time
One thing that WILL transfer from Aperture to Lightroom is keywords. If you export masters, for RAW files at least, Aperture will export XMP metadata files which Lightroom will read and use. The converse is not true -- Aperture will not read and use XMP sidecar files. This hasn't changed with 2.0, as far as I can tell, which is unfortunate .
Reworking image adjustments isn't a big chore to me. If I have adjustments done well 6-months ago and I need those images for a new use I regularly go back and tweak them. I don't output that big a percentage of my total.
Metadata is crucial. Otherwise how will I find the 20 images for a show that I want to readjust out of the tens of thousands laying around on the drives?
Message was edited by: thomas80205