Aperture 2

It is amazing. Huge improvement. In features, editing options, and overall performance.

I love the new preview mode. (Press P) Instead of rendering the full raw, it uses either the built in previews that some RAW files save (depends on your camera) or either its own that it can generate upon import. When you want to get back to editing the RAW, just press P again.

All that, plus combined with the actually useful Inspector so you can easily browse through your library or make image adjustments right on the spot.

Full screen mode + Loupe is indispensable as well.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

yah, after playing with it some more, I really like it - maybe even more than LR. too bad it would be a huge PITA to migrate everything from LR to aperture. hopefully LR 2.0 will come soon and be a huge improvement over 1.3.1.

Not holding my breath for LR 2.0 anytime soon.

Aperture had a full extra year of 1.0 release before going 2.0.
Plus, Adobe's been talking about the LR sdk since 1.0 was released, and its still not here yet. My guess is they will release that first, let 3rd party developers add some functionality, while they continue working on their own features and working out the kinks for the 2.0 of LR.

4g63photo wrote in post #4904143
I dont know if it convinces me to buy it. I would have loved to see a performance improvement under the features list. I may have missed it. When I use Aperture, it really takes up a lot of power from my MBP to run it.

Speed is one of the first and primary things they mention on the site. It was a key area of improvement.

mij wrote in post #4904181
Having checked in the manual on the Apple site, it sounds as though Aperture still gives you no choice over colour space when using an external editor. You only chose whether it uses a TIFF or PSD file format, otherwise it will be a 16-bit Adobe RGB image.

Why would you want to limit yourself to a color space so early in the process? Set your color space later or, if you've set it on your camera, simply maintain that color space for as long as possible. PSD and TIFF files don't have a color space (just the color modes, but not sRGB/Adobe RGB).

Perhaps I'm missing something, but I've never found the "inability to convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB" as a negative... I must be misreading what you're saying, or not understand your workflow.

mij wrote in post #4904181
This was one of the issues I was waiting to see fixed in Aperture 2. The other being better image adjustment options, not being able to change the blank point was a nonsense. Such an obvious feature to have overlooked.

I don't know what the blank point is, but image adjustments were improved quite a bit in 2. Recovery tools and black shadow lightening tools and a good bit more saw some nice, nice improvements.

This is the answer to my prayers. After playing with the new version LIGHTROOM is out the door. I have been fighting with lightroom since i bought it and just never really liked, I tried. I spent 30 minutes with Aperture2 lastnight and am in love...

mij wrote in post #4904722
Although nothing has been said on the Apple site, I was just reading an article on AUPN which claims it does support editing plugins:

Oh for the one small ability to chose the external editor colourspace. I really hope I have overlooked something.

Michael.

I can choose external editor in current version so I don't see why they would take it away.

iacas wrote in post #4909779
Why would you want to limit yourself to a color space so early in the process? Set your color space later or, if you've set it on your camera, simply maintain that color space for as long as possible. PSD and TIFF files don't have a color space (just the color modes, but not sRGB/Adobe RGB).

Aperture works with raw files using its own internal large gamut working space, so colour space is not a concern until exporting. But when you want to edit something in an external editor, like Photoshop, it first has to export the raw file to either a PSD or TIFF file, and so a colour space needs to be assigned for the image at this point.

What I want to do is to maintain a large gamut working space, by using ProPhoto RGB in Photoshop. But this is not an option as the files produced for editing always use Adobe RGB. You can of course always change the colour space in Photoshop, but this will not bring back anything that was lost in the raw conversion because it was outside the Adobe gamut.

The only way around it is so export files you wan to edit to full resolution ProPhoto files, then import that file into the Library. But this is a lot of unnecessary hassle and loses the master-version link (at least it did in v1.56, it is too cumbersome a way of working to be worth testing in the v2 trial).

I have seen a lot of other complaints about this specific issue in the past which is why I expected it to be changed. In a pro application it should be up to the user to decide what they want to use, not Apple's engineers. And all it needs is for them to replace the current hardcoded PSD/TIFF option and instead let the user select an export preset. It would only be a sixty second change for their coders!

iacas wrote in post #4909779
I don't know what the blank point is, but image adjustments were improved quite a bit in 2. Recovery tools and black shadow lightening tools and a good bit more saw some nice, nice improvements.

It is basically the opposite of the Exposure slider, which sets the white point, which is why it was always an odd omission. In the same way that you can pull the exposure slider in when you have clipping in the highlights, you can pull the Blacks/Black Point slider out to recover clipping in the shadows.

I think it might be what you are referring to as the black shadow, but it the third slider in the Exposure section of Aperture 2.

Michael.

hannaxt wrote in post #4909957
I can choose external editor in current version so I don't see why they would take it away.

They have not taken it away, in fact it works exactly the same was as in your version which is my complaint!

I wanted them to allow you to specify a colour space in the preferences as well as selecting between PSD/TIFF and entering a DPI. In fact it would be nice if they had allowed you to specify multiple external editors too, but it still only allows you to pick one.

Michael.

I downloaded the trial. I agree with sadatk. I like the interface. It feels nicer to edit photos with. The performance is a bit better.

I took a short look at Aperture 2's new features last night and it looks like there are some huge improvements! I can't wait until I can sit down and play with the trial version.

This is perfect timing -- I was getting ready to buy either LR or Aperture. And with the military/government discount on Apple's website, I can pick up Aperture 2 for $165. It's going to be hard to beat that!

Please keep your thoughts on Aperture 2 coming -- I'm soaking up as much as possible...

Bryan

The big wow is that there is an image editing API. Imagine software like Noise Ninja built into Aperture, no need to round trip to the external editor of your choice.

I am playing aroung the trial and I really like the interface. I got a free version of LR in that I used RSP prioir to converting to mac so no financial loss for me. The LR interface just feels clunky to me. I really dislike the modular layout. Assuming I can get comfortable with Aperture over the next 30 days, it will be lights out for LR.

col4bin wrote in post #4911655
I am playing aroung the trial and I really like the interface. I got a free version of LR in that I used RSP prioir to converting to mac so no financial loss for me. The LR interface just feels clunky to me. I really dislike the modular layout. Assuming I can get comfortable with Aperture over the next 30 days, it will be lights out for LR.

Clunky LR interface is precisely what I felt too.

Just to add, there's some good info and feedback on Apple discussions forums for Aperture.


http://discussions.app​le.com/category.jspa?c​ategoryID=184

and
http://docs.info.apple​.com/article.html?artn​um=307260

It's also watching any training tutorials they have , short and sweet.

http://www.apple.com/a​perture/tutorials/

Steve Beck wrote in post #4909923
This is the answer to my prayers. After playing with the new version LIGHTROOM is out the door. I have been fighting with lightroom since i bought it and just never really liked, I tried. I spent 30 minutes with Aperture2 lastnight and am in love...

did you try Aperture 1.5.x at all?

mij wrote in post #4910234
Aperture works with raw files using its own internal large gamut working space, so colour space is not a concern until exporting. But when you want to edit something in an external editor, like Photoshop, it first has to export the raw file to either a PSD or TIFF file, and so a colour space needs to be assigned for the image at this point.

I didn't think Aperture assumed to assign a color space to the TIFF/PSD it exported, but I guess that's silly. It almost has to, I suppose, and you're correct - it assigns mine the Adobe RGB space (presumably because that's what my master image was shot in).

Does your camera shoot ProPhoto RGB? Why would you want to switch? Isn't the 16-bit range going to cover all the gamuts?

What would you be gaining in switching from your camera's color space to one that's a little bit larger? Because once it's a 16-bit TIFF, you can change the color space in Photoshop or whatever other app you want to use, no?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but inquisitive, because I'm not certain why this matters quite so much.

mij wrote in post #4910234
What I want to do is to maintain a large gamut working space, by using ProPhoto RGB in Photoshop. But this is not an option as the files produced for editing always use Adobe RGB. You can of course always change the colour space in Photoshop, but this will not bring back anything that was lost in the raw conversion because it was outside the Adobe gamut.

Right, but doesn't the camera have to support that wider gamut from the get-go?

mij wrote in post #4910234
I have seen a lot of other complaints about this specific issue in the past which is why I expected it to be changed. In a pro application it should be up to the user to decide what they want to use, not Apple's engineers. And all it needs is for them to replace the current hardcoded PSD/TIFF option and instead let the user select an export preset. It would only be a sixty second change for their coders!

Please, let's not assume that implementing a feature takes only xxx seconds. It's highly, highly likely you're at least two orders of magnitude off on that guess, and it tints the rest of your (likely valid) points badly.