new camera raw support in 10.5.7

But unfortunately still no Leica D-LUX4 or Panasonic LX3.

macs, iphone, Mac OS X (10.5.6)

Posted on May 12, 2009 1:29 PM

Reply
47 replies

May 13, 2009 2:29 PM in response to igrok-mac

For the first time I'm actually considering giving Lightroom a try.


Tried both (version 2). Aperture is much more in align with how I work with images. Much easier work flow. By contrast, Lightroom is well, Lightroom - IMO Adobe is clueless about creating "simplicity" in their work products, including registration methods, image organization and storage, work flow and menu simplicity.

May 13, 2009 2:37 PM in response to igrok-mac

... letting apart other "dislikes"... I still can't believe a Pro application, as Aperture is supposed to be, handles it's library in the same way iPhoto (not a Pro app at all) does.

I don't care how and where my pictures are stored in iPhoto (I don't even want to know) but... I do care, and need, to move my pictures as freely and easily as possible in a Pro app (Apple... are you aware that most, if not all, pro photographers are using a laptop? ๐Ÿ˜‰

May 13, 2009 2:42 PM in response to pl_svn

What's your specific need? Aperture makes it pretty easy to move images around.

Yes, most Pro photographers use a laptop. The often use a desktop as well, often attached to a RAID with a lot of storage. So a common workflow is to shoot and edit while mobile (for days, weeks, or sometimes months), and then when you're back in the studio, to transfer everything (images and edits and metadata), to the desktop. So great, managed libraries on the laptop work great for this. Do everything as managed libraries and projects on the laptop, and when you're back, just export all the projects, and import them to your desktop system. Once you've done this, if you want to move to referenced images, just relocate the masters. This is quite easy, and I've been doing since Aperture first shipped (I still use managed libraries on the desktop; my library is only 250 GB).

This is simpler than Lightroom (unless you elect to save everything as XMP sidecars and import those, but be aware that using XMP sidecars to transfer the info loses some information, in particular your history).

May 13, 2009 2:54 PM in response to William Lloyd

... I do understand that working and organizing by projects is the most common way but... it's not my way! ๐Ÿ˜‰

wasn't Apple the "Think Different" company, once? ;-p :-p :-p

also... the first time I tried Aperture... I had to fight half an hour (If I were into RTFM I wouldn't be on Macs ๐Ÿ˜‰ ) to get those "icons" out of the way in my "large" view. They're ok on thumbnails but, then, I want to see my pics as clean as possible so... that should be the default, not... the Microsoft way ๐Ÿ˜‰

anyway... everyone is happy with his own choice. in this thread, though... ๐Ÿ˜‰

Message was edited by: pl_svn

May 13, 2009 2:56 PM in response to pl_svn

There are many ways to organize within Aperture. The only given is that projects are what hold photos. That part isn't really negotiable... it is what it is ๐Ÿ™‚ You can view things by project, or by album or smart album it's flexible there, but the photos live in projects so no use fighting that.

Aperture is more complicated than iPhoto. It's a Pro App (heck, look at Final Cut Pro or Logic Pro for complicated interfaces!). There's a bit of a learning curve. But it is very powerful. If you really want to get more than 30% of the power out of it, reading the Aperture book by Harrington, Luna, and Long is really a prerequisite. highly recommended.

May 13, 2009 3:04 PM in response to William Lloyd

William Lloyd wrote:
...Do everything as managed libraries and projects on the laptop, and when you're back, just export all the projects, and import them to your desktop system. Once you've done this, if you want to move to referenced images, just relocate the masters. This is quite easy, and I've been doing since Aperture first shipped (I still use managed libraries on the desktop; my library is only 250 GB).

This is simpler than Lightroom (unless you elect to save everything as XMP sidecars and import those, but be aware that using XMP sidecars to transfer the info loses some information, in particular your history).


Your answer is more complex than the way Lightroom works, actually. Why do you need to relocate the managed images at all? In Lightroom, all you do is work on the laptop, export any section of that to a separate catalog with the option of including the masters, then when you get to your desktop you just network the machines and either open that catalog or import it into your main catalog, and when the Lightroom catalog import is done, you have your images, your metadata, your history, and your originals copied over too and perfectly linked up.

Your description of the limitations of the XMP method is true, but using XMP sidecars is not the recommended method for laptop/desktop transfer, and sounds like it's based on not knowing the current version of the software since the catalog export in the current version is a much better way.

May 13, 2009 4:22 PM in response to igrok-mac

... as far as I remember... only if you have set, since the beginning, your masters to be just referenced in Aperture library! (haven't really investigated that part, though: I was still "quite" upset by *being forced* to organize into projects, then importing/exporting them in order to move my masters ๐Ÿ˜‰ )

love Aperture's interface much, much more than LR's, thought.
... I said... the interface ๐Ÿ˜‰ :-p

Message was edited by: pl_svn

May 13, 2009 5:42 PM in response to pl_svn

Whether referenced (masters stored outside the aperture library) or managed (masters stored in the library), previews are retained at whatever size you've selected. They're updated when you make adjustments (that's why if you make a bunch of adjustments and try to quit, it'll tell you it's busy updating previews). So they're always available, unless you tell aperture not to make previews at all.

The previews, in fact, are what are used for access via the iLife media browser. That's another reason I have them set sufficiently large to be useful in other apps.

I'm not sure what you mean by being forced to organize in projects. You can have just one project if you want, with lots of albums underneath, or whatever you like. I use referenced masters but only because I can then see where all of them are, not that I ever do anything with them anyway. Whenever I need a jpeg, or a tiff, of whatever size, I just export what I need. If I'm sending photos via email, I don't even bother, I just drag them right out of aperture to the email or desktop, and it's the previews that appear there. No need to export/import, etc.

May 13, 2009 6:24 PM in response to igrok-mac

... ok... "maybe" it's me, but I can't see, in Aperture, an easy way to manage (move, re-arrange, organize) my masters in accordance to how and where those files are on my hd ๐Ÿ˜Ÿ

in LR it's as easy as dragging a folder, a subfolder, one (or as many as I need) selected pictures to a location that totally corresponds to how files actually are organized on my hd(s)
the organization I see in LR is exactly what actually is on my hd.: whatever, wherever I drag *from within LR* to a different location is actually moved correspondingly on my hd!!!

I was fully using LR in minutes (without touching it's manual), I can't say the same of Aperture: after trying one full hour and, in despair, taking a (quick ๐Ÿ˜‰ ) look at it's manual I couldn' come to a solution (but I could, at least, remove all those ****** "status icons" from my full view ๐Ÿ˜‰ )

btw: my pleasure lays in being out taking pictures, not spending my time organizing them on a computer and figuring out how to make it work the way I want! ๐Ÿ˜‰

Message was edited by: pl_svn

Message was edited by: pl_svn

May 13, 2009 8:23 PM in response to pl_svn

Hmmm. In Aperture, if you want to relocate your masters you choose the menu item called "Relocate Masters".

But, like you, my joy is found in taking pictures. But that's why I like Aperture -- I don't have to care at all where on my HD my masters are. Why do you care where they are physically? One of my favorite things about Aperture is that it simply doesn't matter where they are. Using projects, and smart folders, and tags, and so on is a much more sensible, and dynamically useful, way to organize data. It's a paradigm shift. And it's only an illogical attachment to the old ways of thinking that we cling to that makes us need to know where on the HD a file is. Of course, even that is an abstraction, since the HD itself stores files not "in" folders but simply by allocation block. The operating system keeps track of where things actually are.

Anyway, I kind of think of it as a dresser drawer. In the old way of thinking, you'd put your socks in one drawer, t shirts in another, etc. In Aperture, though, I can create new drawers at will, say a drawer with only blue socks, or only all cotton clothing, or all shirts bought in 2007, or all my favorites. What drawer they are actually "in" is not, in many ways, a valid question.

May 13, 2009 8:55 PM in response to igrok-mac

... when Aperture and LR came to light I already had 10+ years of digital photographs organized... "the old way" ;-p
"File/Import to Catalog" and... all my "old" organization was there without not even a second of *being forced* to think "the new way" ๐Ÿ˜‰

from there on... I can, now, do all the mess :-p that I want. If/when I want! ๐Ÿ˜‰ :-p :-p :-p

again... I'm maybe atypical (and possibly dumb ๐Ÿ˜‰ ) but A) I don't do commercial photography so "project" is a meaningless concept to start from: it's, instead, the just the final step of "my way" and B) sorry... I like to choose what, where and when. it's an old habit! ๐Ÿ˜‰ :-p

May 13, 2009 9:18 PM in response to pl_svn

.. btw... LR has also tags, collection, smart collection and so on ๐Ÿ˜‰ and, btw2: it's really funny having this "Mac vs Pc" discussion where, this time, Apple plays the Pc :-p

oh... btw3 (and back IT ๐Ÿ˜‰ ): it's months, now, *I'm delighted* by this little jewel's raws ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚ ๐Ÿ™‚

Message was edited by: pl_svn

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

new camera raw support in 10.5.7

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.