Skip navigation
This discussion is archived

A word from Apple...

20736 Views 261 Replies Latest reply: Apr 19, 2008 9:48 AM by gbeberman RSS
  • SpeedyBob Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 8, 2008 8:17 PM (in response to Jon Roemer)
    Since Joe posted his "teaser" on the 30th January there have bee 209 replies posted here many of which ask for clarification. The number does not surprise me and shouldn't surprise Joe f he is really close to the users on this issue. There has been no response as far as I am aware. I for one have made my decision based on this and the time I have been awaiting support since buying the D300 and I am moving on.

    I posted a question on the Adobe site regarding LR and received a response inside 6 hours. There are alternatives as Jon has pointed out. Review them and move on.
    24" iMac, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • Sasparilla256 Level 1 Level 1 (45 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 8, 2008 8:27 PM (in response to DonLand)
    I found this and thought it helpful just to know....

    It's from this thread (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1293740&start=25&tstart=0)

    Joe says a few more things that shed a little (emphasis on little) light on the situation with the RAW defs... The text from his post is below:

    As I'm sure many of you know, it's not Apple's policy to provide a public "ETA" on future releases, so I can't post anything like a timetable for when support for the newest RAW camera formats will become available.

    But I can tell you this. We at Apple are ACUTELY aware of the pressing need to get support for the newest round of camera into your hands as soon as possible. This is a top priority. We have members of our own team using these cameras, so you can imagine how interested we are in seeing this support integrated into the Mac OS and our photo applications!

    We fully intent to give our customers what they need in this regard.

    Thanks!

    Joe Schorr
    Sr. Product Line Manager, Photo Applications
    Apple

    Message was edited by: Sasparilla256
    Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.4.11)
  • SpeedyBob Level 1 Level 1 (5 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 8, 2008 8:34 PM (in response to Sasparilla256)
    "We at Apple are ACUTELY aware of the pressing need to get support for the newest round of camera into your hands as soon as possible."

    The newest round of cameras (D300 and D3 specifically in my case) came out months ago!! Abode had support for these almost immediately
    24" iMac, Mac OS X (10.4.8)
  • astirusty Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 8, 2008 10:12 PM (in response to Sasparilla256)
    (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1293740&start=25&tstart=0)
    "As I'm sure many of you know, it's not Apple's policy to provide a public "ETA" on future releases, ..."

    A policy Apple needs to re-think, given it is causing them ill-will and losing them customers. Every day that goes by, is another day that Aperture users have time to learn, become accustom too, and migrate too another vendor's solution.
    Macbook Pro, Mac OS X (10.4.8)
  • Jeremy Henderson Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 9, 2008 12:30 AM (in response to Jon Roemer)
    Jon Roemer wrote:


    Yes, Lightroom/ACR has much better raw support, you will get that but... the quality of the files output will also be different. The feel of the file will be different, the skin tones the program creates will be different. For me that's an important factor to keep in mind, it may be the most important factor, and it is one to weigh in your decision of which raw conversion program to use.

    Each raw conversion program will give a different look to the same file because they each have different color engines, use different internal profiles, etc.


    What you say is true. In fact if it was just a case of selecting based on the RAW conversion I'd use only Capture NX, but at a certain point I decided that the convenience of being able to use one programme for all my workflow for all but a handful of critical images made up for a conversion that was slightly less good, so I migrated to Aperture. Now if Aperture does not provide that workflow advantage, I may as well move to LR, or, indeed, stick with Finder and CaptureNX
  • MAWA Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 9, 2008 1:01 AM (in response to DonLand)
    Hi,

    I was frustrated at this behavior of LR as well. Then I looked at the Video podcasts explaining this behavior. It makes sence. These are the official podcasts from Adobe where the engineers from Adobe tell you what matters.

    You will find these podcasts under the name Adobe ® Photoshop® Lightroom ™ The podcast 'Podcast #45: Tutorial - The Lightroom Catalog - Part 1' explains this behavior.

    Hope this helps. Getting into lR I realized very fast I need build my software expertise from scratch. I left the best practice and most of the workflow from aperture behind me. I am now embracing LR.

    And yes LR is the hottest competitor to AP as it really matches many functions of AP. Each package has its own specialized field but there is about 80% common ground!

    Good light to you!

    Matthias
    MACPro 2x 2.66Ghz 9 GB ram 2,25 TB HDD, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • t.t. Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 9, 2008 3:18 AM (in response to Joe Schorr)
    Do we really have to wait much longer for the update, which I know is ready to go, Joe?

    Why is this being dragged out for so long and why is iPhoto, that's I-PHOTO!, able to read raw files from the latest cameras leaving Aperture in the dust.

    We REALLY need faster, more professional service, here, Joe.
    mac pro, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • jpgrove Level 1 Level 1 (60 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 9, 2008 3:32 AM (in response to t.t.)
    t.t. wrote:
    Why is this being dragged out for so long and why is iPhoto, that's I-PHOTO!, able to read raw files from the latest cameras leaving Aperture in the dust.


    *That statement is incorrect*, *iPhoto does NOT support cameras that Aperture doesn't*. This statement was incorrectly posted on a Mac site and later changed.

    Message was edited by: jpgrove

    Message was edited by: jpgrove
    MacPro 2.66 6Gb RAM, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • LTrain Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 10, 2008 7:07 PM (in response to jpgrove)
    Well I have 7 days left on my lightroom trial. I guess like many other people I'll be leaving Aperture behind. I'm very disappointed in apple.

    Message was edited by: LTrain
    Mac Pro & Mac Book Pro, Mac OS X (10.4.4), (empty wallet)
  • Complete Newbie Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 10, 2008 10:59 PM (in response to Narvon)
    Aperture has supported every graphics card released since then. Perhaps Joe saw that as self-evident and it didn't need a new post (not that he actually promised to deliver any news anyway, just to investigate it).

    The reason 2 graphics cards running a monitor each is a slower setup is simply a function of the computer architecture - the PCI (or PCI Express for that matter) bus lacks the broadcast-request facility. To send an image to two cards on the bus, the data must be sent twice - once to each card. This is a hard-and-fast limitation of the hardware, and not something that can be worked around in software; I imagine Joe was told the same thing when he asked.

    Since the time taken to deliver the data over the bus is a significant fraction of the processing time, having to do it twice will slow down the perceived response of the application. You're far better-off sending it once and allowing the card to split that over two monitors. In this instance, then, the solution is to upgrade to a better graphics card, eg: (in modern times) a 1900XT or 8800.

    Hope that helps.

    -=C=-
    Mac Pro, Mac OS X (10.4.8)
  • Narvon Level 1 Level 1 (105 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 10, 2008 11:54 PM (in response to Complete Newbie)
    Complete Newbie wrote:
    Aperture has supported every graphics card released since then. Perhaps Joe saw that as self-evident and it didn't need a new post (not that he actually promised to deliver any news anyway, just to investigate it).

    The reason 2 graphics cards running a monitor each is a slower setup is simply a function of the computer architecture - the PCI (or PCI Express for that matter) bus lacks the broadcast-request facility. To send an image to two cards on the bus, the data must be sent twice - once to each card. This is a hard-and-fast limitation of the hardware, and not something that can be worked around in software; I imagine Joe was told the same thing when he asked.

    Since the time taken to deliver the data over the bus is a significant fraction of the processing time, having to do it twice will slow down the perceived response of the application. You're far better-off sending it once and allowing the card to split that over two monitors. In this instance, then, the solution is to upgrade to a better graphics card, eg: (in modern times) a 1900XT or 8800.

    Hope that helps.

    -=C=-

    CN,

    The G5 (November '05) would not except the X1900XT. It might now, but I got my G5 over 2 years ago. Is that SOON??

    http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=3209941#3209941
    *This topic was started May 12, 2006. Some clips from it:*
    -------------
    +There has been word previously that at some point people will be able to buy PCIe G5 versions of the ATI1900 cards the MacPro can use... not sure when those will be out though.+
    *This was over 6 months since I got my G5 and still no available video card upgrade.*
    -------------
    +Here i go again, quoting the mighty Joe:+

    +11th March 2006 "Be assured I am investigating to find out what options there are (or will be) for users who would like to upgrade their existing graphics cards. Given Aperture's reliance on the GPU, a better card makes a world of difference."+

    +21st April "I have been pursuing this discussion through various channels at Apple, but don't have anything to report back yet.+

    +For what it's worth, I am pretty passionate on this point and am still pursuing this as aggressively as possible. Obviously I can make no promises, nor reveal any future plans. But believe me, your cries for help are being heard.+

    +Joe Schorr+
    +Product Manager, Aperture+
    Apple"

    +Its clear he sensed the total dissatisfaction of many like me with:+
    +a) the useless 6600 card in Aperture+
    +b) Apple's lack of video upgrades - the so-called Video Card Trap+

    +and decided to "investigate". In my book its worth nothing if nothing changes. So far nothing has, but i credit Joe for at least listening and picking-up on this.+

    +If he'd only reply then we could all judge if he was successful or not - Joe ?+
    ------------
    *Same thread on July 20th*

    +Re: no update can improve speed on Quad 6600?..+
    +Posted: Jul 20, 2006 7:26 AM in response to: Jeyell +

    +This has been a front-burner issue for me (yes, it's that important) and is receiving attention.+

    +You know, of course, that I am not at liberty to diclose future plans, so it's not possible for me to map out what I think will happen next. I wish I could share more, but I LOVE my job -- and I really want to keep it : )+

    +For now, I can only tell you that we consider this an important issue that needs to be addressed in some manner in the near future.+

    +If and when there is news on this front, believe me, you'll hear about it!+

    +Joe Schorr+
    +Sr. Product Manager, Aperture+
    Apple
    --------------
    The point is we were given false hope for some help with our 6600 cards - nothing ever materialized. So when I hear Joe say that something is coming SOON, what does SOON mean. Hopefully it is further along than the 'Front Burner'. Everything is starting to look like a Carrot.

    Narvon
    Quad 2.5, 7800, 4GB ram, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • Beremour Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 11, 2008 11:53 AM (in response to Joe Schorr)
    oh, new hardware requrements ? 4Gb memory minnimum ? better 8 ? ... 8 cores would be sweet ? "we on the half way to the .... store.."
    MacPro 2xXeon, Mac OS X (10.5.1), Cinema HD 23"
  • 153957 Level 2 Level 2 (485 points)
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 11, 2008 1:38 PM (in response to LTrain)
    Well, 10.5.2 is here, and it brings RAW support for:

    Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III
    Canon Powershot G9
    Hasselblad CF-22
    Hasselblad CF-39
    Leaf Aptus 75s
    Nikon D3
    Nikon D300
    Sony Alpha DSLR-A700
    PowerMac G5+PowerBook G4, Nikon D80+Canon S60, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • meestersmeeeth Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 11, 2008 1:46 PM (in response to 153957)
    No Olympus E-3! Grrr.
    iMac, Mac OS X (10.5.1)
  • Andy de_Groot Calculating status...
    Currently Being Moderated
    Feb 11, 2008 2:12 PM (in response to meestersmeeeth)
    I agree, double GRRRR!!

    I'm too disgusted to say more.
    Mac Pro, iMac, Powermac, MacBook, never enough...., Mac OS X (10.5)

Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Legend

  • This solved my question - 10 points
  • This helped me - 5 points
This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. Apple disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions and conduct of any third parties in connection with or related to your use of the site. All postings and use of the content on this site are subject to the Apple Support Communities Terms of Use.