Apple is right to let Aperture go

Since I think Mavericks tags were mentioned I wanted to resurrect that part of the thread.

Turns out that DevonThink can make use of a script DevonTechnologies makes to copy an image's keywords TO Mavericks tags. So if your photo has the IPTC keywords "Messi" and "Argentina" those will become the files Mavericks tags "Messi" and "Argentina." Photos can be referenced in DevonThink, so you don't have to dupe your photo files. But rendering the previews of image files is pretty slow. But it's a nice tool if you need for some reason to add the keywords to Mavericks tags (and while it can display the keywords I don't think there's a way to write them).

I'm possibly a little confused by what your meaning by mavericks tags, and saying tags and keywords are the same thing.

If we mean the tags that display on the lefthand side of a finder window which start out as Red, Orange....Work Important and so on, then I DO NOT want that list linked to my Aperture keyword list of 1900+ words, how would they all fit. 😕 Now mavericks tags linked to Apertures metadata labels could be very useful.

It was suggested that every app uses the same Contrast tool, how does that encourage innovation and refinement by 3rd party apps. Your just saying to developers, don't bother, apple have it sorted.

One last point to Rob

"Perhaps the Mac OS will be more iOSified"

That you can bet your bottom dollar on. 😁

One last point to Rob

"Perhaps the Mac OS will be more iOSified"

That you can bet your bottom dollar on.

Lets add that to "Apple are becoming MicroSoft", "Steve Must Be Turning In His Grave" and "You can't right-click on a Mac" as another of the prime indicators of the clueless.

Terence Devlin wrote:

One last point to Rob

"Perhaps the Mac OS will be more iOSified"

That you can bet your bottom dollar on.

Lets add that to "Apple are becoming MicroSoft", "Steve Must Be Turning In His Grave" and "You can't right-click on a Mac" as another of the prime indicators of the clueless.

iOSified can be thought of in different ways, Apple are making Yosemite and iOS work much closer together with all the Handoff, Mac answering your ringing phone and so on, all by the cloud and bluetooth i guess at the moments, and even though not a true pro app, the new iWork package was just a straight port of the iOS version, which they slowly added original features back.

To think Apple don't want more integration between the two OS is naive beyond belief.

pix80

I see were your coming from on the search front, and as Rob showed in post 3, it can be done in finder.

I tried it, and it sort of worked. It found keywords embedded in .jpg but not ones used in Aperture referenced raw files, something I guess would be easy for Apple to implement, the only issue I can think of is you could be inundated with results if your not careful. If the search covered every possible use of a word, without the targeting of just keywords or just text in written documents.

and even though not a true pro app, the new iWork package was just a straight port of the iOS version, which they slowly added original features back.

And that is just not true. That's the same kind of logic that lead to the whole 'No Right-Click on a Mac' claptrap. Someone doesn't make the time to actually look at what is done and comes up with a catchphrase.

Yes the two Oses are going to work more closely together but that does not mean that the OS X version and the iOS version will have the same capabilities. They won't and they don't and they didn't. The new iWork package was not "a straight port of the iOS version". But don't take my word for it. Take this guy's word - and he knows as he wrote the book on it - you know actually looked closely at what is actually happening:

What Apple has done is to ensure document integrity when a Pages document travels from Mac to iOS and back. Providing that integrity is what made the iWork reboot necessary, and something like that is what is behind the transition from Aperture (and iPhoto) to Photos

and then:

Nor do the Mac and iOS apps provide identical capabilities: the Mac Pages app provides a lot more functionality than the iOS app. Take styles, for instance: you can apply paragraph, character, or list styles in either app, but you can create new styles only on the Mac. There are dozens of places in my Pages book where I point out that one feature or another is only available on the Mac.

So much for iOS-ification

Have a read of the whole thing. It doesn't dissolve into a handy catch phrase, but it's actually a good summary of what's going on.

http://tidbits.com/article/14783

pik80, sorry for the confusion but I was just citing an example. It actually is far easier in practice.

Remember that although "tags" and "keywords" are words, they are more than that. Their context adds meaning. For example, the word "wedding" in the body of a Word document, in the caption field of IPTC data, in Mavericks tags, and in IPTC keywords means different things to a searcher. And of course you can go further by limiting the search to the place searched (the PIctures folder, say) or by adding other criteria. So if I just search for tags:wedding I get something different than if I search keywords:wedding. But there are other ways to do that, like just searching "wedding" AND kind:image, or searching "wedding" anywhere in my Pictures folder.

And Acetone, I agree having lots of Mavericks tags can be a pain. If you just use the Finder. It stinks for tags. There are applications out there that make tagging much useful, like Leap. Or Path Finder. Or, as pik80 noted, HoudahSpot. Which, as noted, can search for keywords and Mavericks tags easily. I'm sorta suprised there aren't more utilities for tagging (Tags and Punakea having expired), but I guess it isn't catching on that much.

But here's a reason why Mavericks tags can be useful to the photographer: RAWs. A search for say "wedding" in a folder of JPGs, RAWs, and XMPs will find both the keyword "wedding" in the JPGs and XMPs. But the RAWs won't show in the list of results. Lotsa times I just then select the name of the file minus the extension and search again and I find the RAW. Fine. But awkward and time consuming.

But if I were to add the Mavericks tag "wedding" to the RAWs themselves then I could find all the RAWs, XMPs and JPGs with one search in the photo folder with "wedding." Mavericks tags are added in extended file attributes, so they're not written to the RAW itself. It's been useful, but it's a big pain. I wish there were a way to link sidecars with their RAWs, but I haven't found anything. Or maybe an AppleScript to copy from an XMP to Mavericks tags.

If you use Aperture it's even worse because it doesn't write changes to metadata, even on jpgs (I think), unless you export.

The TidBits article was kinda interesting. Turns out the changes in the OS X version were because it was basically incompatible in part with their own iOS apps. No wonder they changed it. The author speculates that this is what's going on with Photos; the idea is that changes on one Apple platform are the same on another. Fine, sorta iWorks with images. I can see how this encourages use of iCloud and Apple hardware and maybe they'll finally get a worthwhile cloud thing going. Sorta also explains dumping Aperture. He seems to be saying the priority is cross-platform integration with iOS (that's why "iWork Had to Change"). Probably it will be a boon to Apple fans.

And are people really still fighting the PC vs Mac thing? How last century.

I bought aperture on the App Store. i am not really a pro, but i am definitely a camera enthusiast. I have a nice DSLR and i have done a couple of family member weddings. I am good at using the tools, I just don't earn a paycheck doing this. I like aperture, it was full featured enough. I could adjust things pretty easily, I could work with raw files. I just hope that Apple creates a good enough pro level tool with the new photos app. I just needs to be able to store my images on the hard drive. And I just need to be able to work with raw files and do everything that I could with aperture.

I am not interested in buying Adobe light room at all. It is too expensive as a standalone product. I am not going to be paying for a software as a service type of program to manage my photos. So I'll be waiting for the new photos app, and hopefully it will be good enough to replace aperture.

One thing I hope Apple gets right is to make there be a single app for photos on iOS. Right now you have iPhoto and you have the photos app and it it's just weird to have to switch between the two of those to get things done they don't really work well together.

Also the iOS app for Photos could use to be much more powerful. They should be able to do raw files. I should be able to use my SLR camera and import photos and then edit them on an iPad. Upload them to iCloud. And then back them up on my computer's hard drive later on when I am home.

Maybe the next version of the iPhone will be able to take raw photos. And then you would be able to edit them in iOS or on the photos app on the computer. Come on Apple, be the first company to release a phone that takes raw photos.

Well I'd be happy if after over half a year they just had desktop support for 2014 cameras.

And the iPhone does take RAW; every digital camera does. Apple's software does the RAW processing; the issue is whether they'd let an app or their own software directly access the RAW, save it, etc. You can do RAW with a Nokia Lumia, however. I believe the AV Foundation in iOS gives access to some of the data, but I'd think that if you could generate a RAW file like the ones we have in DSLRs it would have been done by now.

All cameras shoot Raw. Raw is the dump from the sensor. But low end cameras don't make the Raw available to the user, only the processed image.