Is Apple going to de-professionalize Aperture 4, the way they did Final Cut Pro? That would be a disaster for those of us who have put hundreds of hours, and tens of thousands of pictures in A2-3.
We are just users here. I suggest FCP rants be left on the FCP forum.
Wow only took a week for the conspiracy theorists to migrate across forums.
It's a good idea you're setting your expectations so low. "No expectations, no disappointments".
I can't speculate about A4, but IMHO they started down that road with A3 by bloating the app with iPhoto features.
DLS
1. This is a troll dropping, which I try not to track around the paths in our little Aperture village.
2. I never used Ap2, and so can't comment on any speculative trajectory extrapolated from the data points "Ap2" and "Ap3".
3. But once DLScreative has planted a flag, I figure it's OK to add my mark. So: I think it is clear as a bell on a cloudless day that Apple will continue to maximize profits. There is far more money to be made shoveling coal into the belly of the beast than building a crystalline city for it to eventually inhabit. Put simply, Apple's product strategy is to develop and sell software that is aimed to be purchased (and even partially used) by the huge bulge of users at the middle and upper-middle of the market. The marketing of Aperture 3 to iPhoto users as an iPhoto "upgrade" signals this. In the case of Aperture, I fully expect future upgrades to follow this marketing strategy -- dumbing down Aperture in favor of "usability" (by the untrained), at the expense of power. That saddens me, but I have not the soul of a businessperson.
4. That is not, however, a "disaster". Aperture 3 continues to amaze me, and meets far more needs than I identified at the time I purchased it for $200 US.
Message was edited by: Kirby Krieger
I hope the troll reference wasn't aimed at me, and I don't think it was. One doesn't reach 1500 points by trolling.
After investing six years, 80k images and untold training (both as student and teacher) into Aperture, no one is more saddened by this trajectory than I, but, sadly, I think Kirby's assessment is spot on.
I've always kept other DAM apps around so that I could offer support for them, but I may find myself using them more in the future of my own workflow. Of course, I'll always support Aperture, but I haven't seen a studio seeking an Aperture editor or listing Aperture as part of their desired skill set in a really long time.
DLS
DLScreative wrote:
I hope the troll reference wasn't aimed at me, and I don't think it was. One doesn't reach 1500 points by trolling.
No -- of course not. Thought, be banished. I'm very pleased to see you posting again after some months of only occasional surfacing.
The "troll" is the OP, who posted a hot winge in the guise of a question. You turned that into a useful discussion.
Fwiw, "What do you think Aperture's future should be -- and what do you think Aperture's future will be?" is an excellent topic, imho.
DLScreative wrote:
After investing six years, 80k images and untold training (both as student and teacher) into Aperture, no one is more saddened by this trajectory than I, but, sadly, I think Kirby's assessment is spot on.
I've always kept other DAM apps around so that I could offer support for them, but I may find myself using them more in the future of my own workflow. Of course, I'll always support Aperture, but I haven't seen a studio seeking an Aperture editor or listing Aperture as part of their desired skill set in a really long time.
DLS
I have only about a year of solid work experience w. Aperture, but I do have directly and indirectly about half a million images under management. When Apple lowered the price of Aperture, and began marketing it as an iPhoto upgrade, I greatly lowered my expectations for both Ap4 and for long-term use of Aperture. I haven't yet acted on those expectations, and don't see a need to for 6 mo. to a year.
I too am deeply saddened. Aperture, to me, is a bit like a teen-ager: almost mature, full of promise, mostly mis-understood, and with far more ahead of it than behind. But Apple is not trying to make its apps all they can be -- it's trying to make its apps bring in as much money as possible.
Message was edited by: Kirby Krieger -- added two additional paragraphs.
We have to be careful because we're not supposed to speculate about future Apple products in the Apple forums.
I would like to see them concentrate on features that pros use and leave off the bells and whistles. However, the prosumer market is where they turned their efforts with A3, and it makes sense I guess. High quality digital cameras have become affordable and ubiquitous. It's a huge market, but I did expect them to continue competing for the pro market too. A1.1 exploded onto the scene and showed promise of shaking up still photography the way Final Cut Pro shook up video. (Adobe actually stopped writing Premier on the MacOS platform for a few years because FCP was killing Premier) I guess I was hoping for a Final Cut Pro/Final Cut Express model for Aperture, but all that was before iOS.
Who knows where it's all going? Some guy just invented a camera that one doesn't even have to worry about focusing until later.
[I've been gone from the forum because I got bogged down one wedding: the bride had a busted blood vessel in her eye, and I had to Photoshop retouch it about 100 times. That and two weeks on vacation threw me behind in my all my editing.]
DLS
Just had to comment on the reason for your absence... busted blood vessel. Too funny, although I'm sure not for you. 🙂
Sounds like a great feature request - the busted blood vessel auto touch up tool!
Actually the what I discovered as the best method in Photoshop would have worked in Aperture: I desaturated the red then dodged the grey spot left behind back to white. I still liked having masking capabilities.
DLS
Wasn't going to post to this thread but seeing so many of the heavy hitters bemoaning the direction of Aperture I am truly curious as to what you see as the lack of pro features or the rise of consumerism in the application?
As DLS wrote
I would like to see them concentrate on features that pros use and leave off the bells and whistles.
So given that Aperture was never going to be a PS replacement, that that type of image manipulation was always going to be left to an external editor what is missing from a pro standpoint? And what consumer bells and whistles should have been left off/removed?
And again this is an honest attempt to understand this position.
regards
Frank,
Bells and whistles:
Big silly icons on the toolbar
Corkboard behind faces
Faces
Missing features:
Noise reduction
Lens distortion correction
Gradient filters
Bob
Corkboard behind faces
Faces
you can switch those 'off' if you don't like them 🙂
Frank Caggiano wrote:
Wasn't going to post to this thread but seeing so many of the heavy hitters bemoaning the direction of Aperture I am truly curious as to what you see as the lack of pro features or the rise of consumerism in the application?
As DLS wrote
I would like to see them concentrate on features that pros use and leave off the bells and whistles.
So given that Aperture was never going to be a PS replacement, that that type of image manipulation was always going to be left to an external editor what is missing from a pro standpoint? And what consumer bells and whistles should have been left off/removed?
And again this is an honest attempt to understand this position.
regards
I started typing a response that began to become an essay that I can't finish tonight. I'll post it tomorrow or perhaps post a link.
I could go on about unnecessary features and needed features, but for now all I can say is:
What I really want from Aperture from a pro stand point is for it to Seriously. Compete. With. LR. For. The. Pro. Market. That way I won't be compelled to switch to an application that I hate to keep up with the industry.
DLS
Aperture 4
