Aperture 3 from Apple - Released

[DiploStrat]

Yet ANOTHER Post

Trevor,

If you have a long night or day ahead of you, read this post and the post linked in it: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1017&message=34906844

Bottom line, I suspect that your AP library, like lots of others, is REALLY trashed from all of the updates, etc.

-- Splurge for iDefrag and run the "Quick - Online" setting on the disk that holds your Aperture Library.

-- Or at least copy it out to another disk, rename the original to something like "APSafety" and then copy it back. Assuming that you have reasonable free space on the disk, that should help a lot. (You can, of course, delete the "Safety" copy once you are sure that there is nothing wrong. Doing the same thing for the Aperture Application won't hurt either, but generally, the application only really reads on start up and then mostly runs inside RAM.)

Went to a party last night and shot some 80 images - they imported into Aperture in seconds, thumbnails were created at about a second per thumb and all chugs along quite smoothly.

Hope this helps!

 

[DiploStrat]

As the Computer says: "Let's Play a Game!"

Two versions of the same photo taken last night. Original is:

-- Nikon D200
-- ISO 400
-- Nikon 24-70mm lens
-- Flash
-- Cropped to 5.1 MP (AP metadata now even tells you the pixel count AFTER cropping!)

Both images adjusted: One starting with Rob Boyer's Nikon D300 Portrait (which includes his color shifts) and the other starting with Aperture defaults, no color shift, and simply using my Mark One Eyeball.)

Both then exported as JPEG, quality 6, sRGB, limited to 1024x1024, 96 DPI, around 150k each.

Enjoy!

 

[Lost Canadian]

New start

Bottom line, I suspect that your AP library, like lots of others, is REALLY trashed from all of the updates, etc.

-- Splurge for iDefrag and run the "Quick - Online" setting on the disk that holds your Aperture Library.

OK, so not willing to purchase a second program to make the first free trail work I decided to start over with AP. I deleted the program and the library, then reinstalled the program and created a new small library of 20 or so images with the original RAWs that I keep on a seperate HD. We'll see how this goes.

That said I think it may simply be an excercise in futility for at this point I am leaning towards LR3. This is not a knock on AP, it simply boils down to what features I use most often and what works best for me. I'm not a big people shooter so not having faces and places in LR would not be a huge loss. What I may actually do once I figure out a solid workflow with the Mac is export my converted jpgs into iPhoto and use the same organizing features there.

As a mostly nature and outdoor shooter if I were to go with AP I think I may really miss some of some tools in LR like the gradient and certain brush adjustments like exposure for instance. And while I appreciate all that AP has to offer on the raw development side of things it doesn't really offer much more than say LR2, certain things yes certain things no, but on a whole it's about par for the course. With LR3 beta however Adobe has shown that there will be new tools and even more flexibility built into its develop panel so I think AP could be left playing catch up again with respect to the conversion process.


Regarding softproofing, if I printed from home softproofing wouldn't be much an issue as I'd simply run a test prints, but considering all my printing is currently done outside of the home, at least for the moment, not having the ability to softproof is a real kick in the you know whats. Here's to hoping that Adobe gets their thumb out of their butts and actually listens to it's customers here.

Of course we all know none of these products are perfect, Bibble 5, Capture One 5,DXO Optics 6 and so on all do certain things better or offer things that LR and AP simply can't do. Optical corrections ssure would be nice.

I really appreciate all the help and input by the way, it's certainly opened my eyes to a few things I was missing. Now it's time for me to go meet up with a few friends for some beers!!

 

[DiploStrat]

OK, so not willing to purchase a second program to make the first free trail work I decided to start over with AP. I deleted the program and the library, then reinstalled the program and created a new small library of 20 or so images with the original RAWs that I keep on a seperate HD. We'll see how this goes.

I would suspect that all will go well - just remember to delete the cache files so you don't carry over any trash.

That said I think it may simply be an excercise in futility for at this point I am leaning towards LR3. This is not a knock on AP, it simply boils down to what features I use most often and what works best for me. I'm not a big people shooter so not having faces and places in LR would not be a huge loss. What I may actually do once I figure out a solid workflow with the Mac is export my converted jpgs into iPhoto and use the same organizing features there.

Not futility if it gets you software you like. I would urge you to rethink ever deleting your RAW files; think of them as negatives and RAW development only gets better and better. Don't ever delete those puppies.

As a mostly nature and outdoor shooter if I were to go with AP I think I may really miss some of some tools in LR like the gradient and certain brush adjustments like exposure for instance. And while I appreciate all that AP has to offer on the raw development side of things it doesn't really offer much more than say LR2, certain things yes certain things no, but on a whole it's about par for the course. With LR3 beta however Adobe has shown that there will be new tools and even more flexibility built into its develop panel so I think AP could be left playing catch up again with respect to the conversion process.

After years of Aperture having the smaller toolset and the "poorer" RAW developer, I actually find it funny that people are apologizing for Lightroom. This is silly both ways; both programs have more tools than we could ever use.

Regarding softproofing, if I printed from home softproofing wouldn't be much an issue as I'd simply run a test prints, but considering all my printing is currently done outside of the home, at least for the moment, not having the ability to softproof is a real kick in the you know whats. Here's to hoping that Adobe gets their thumb out of their butts and actually listens to it's customers here.

Funny, I value softproof more because I print at home. I'm just annoyed that AP3 locks out the "Color Options" which I used to preset for the last bit of color match with third party (Costco) paper.

And, by the way, your pictures of people are fine. If you remember, I first noticed your work because of your photos of cholas in Bolivia. Don't sell yourself short.

Enjoy the beer; time for me to snooze - the party took it out of me!

 

[Lost Canadian]

I would urge you to rethink ever deleting your RAW files; think of them as negatives and RAW development only gets better and better. Don't ever delete those puppies.

Oh I never delete he original, in fact I make two copies on import.

... both programs have more tools than we could ever use.

I actually use them all, and still lust for a few more. Now CS, there is a program that is more than I would ever use, but this new feature in the upcoming CS5, I could use that for when my dog walks into one of my shots.

Don't sell yourself short.

Oh I'm not, I just shoot nature more than people. I find nature to be more engaging than most people.:Wow1:

 

[DiploStrat]

It's Hard to Compare

Most comparisons of Aperture and Lightroom are fairly worthless as the person comparing already has their mind made up and, more importantly, is much more familiar with one or the other. When they can't find a feature where they want it, they crow "X is trash, it can't do Y." (And I've been caught on this myself.) It is a real bear to compare two very deep programs. Do you download the trials at the same time or is it better to do them one after the other?

Anyway, Bob Rockefeller has posted some interesting stuff on this subject: http://www.bobrockefeller.com/blog/lightroom-to-aperture-translation-series.html

I would think that this sort of translation is an essential first step. And even if you don't want to compare, one of these tip lists may help you with the software you have already chosen.

 

[Ryanmb21]

DiploStrat - cool link, thanks for sharing.

 

[nwoods]

So Trevor, how's the migration going? Any new thoughts or observations you'd like to share?

 

[Lost Canadian]

With Aperture, no, I abandoned it in favour of Lightroom. I thought why drag out the inevitable. Once Adobe released news that they are including in LR a lens correction applet with presets for Canon, Nikon, and Sigma lenses I knew without question Lightroom would be the way that I'd go. As for the migration to Apple, couldn't be happier, although getting my Epson 3800 and the iMac to play nice proved to be a bit of a headache, but all is well now.

I am using iPhoto in conjunction with Lightroom. My wife doesn't touch LR, but she loves iPhoto, specifically Faces, it really is a great feature. Setting it up however was a daunting task, but only because of the shear numbers of photos I have saved. Up until that point I never realized how many family and friends pictures I had taken until I was knee deep into getting everyone organized. Once done though it's easy. I also found the more faces you tagged the smarter the program got. Pretty cool.

 

[DiploStrat]

Not that I'm prejudiced, but any serious photog who isn't using Aperture or Lightroom is simply doing too much work.

I have over thirty years of photos in Aperture and simply love Faces. It was roundly dismissed as a "toy" feature, but is surpisingly useful. Won't do animals, bummer!

 

[nwoods]

Not that I'm prejudiced, but any serious photog who isn't using Aperture or Lightroom is simply doing too much work.

Hmmm...I am not by any stretch a serious photographer, but I do take a LOT of images. It is my dream someday to sell a photo and pay for my equipment costs....

Anyway, I tried using Lightroom 3.0 beta, but found it cumbersome and non-user friendly, with a poorly designed interface and seemingly randomly arranged pallets and tools, requiring you to click on features squireled away in every corner, top and bottom of the screen in a non-sequential manner. I am signed up for a class this weekend to see if a bit of professional guidance will help me like it better. I am cautiously optimistic.

 

[DiploStrat]

Anyway, I tried using Lightroom 3.0 beta, but found it cumbersome and non-user friendly, with a poorly designed interface and seemingly randomly arranged pallets and tools, requiring you to click on features squireled away in every corner, top and bottom of the screen in a non-sequential manner.

Exactly why I prefer Aperture. But as you can see from my back and forth with Trevor - different folks come to different conclusions.

Take the course; Lightroom is very powerful, and once you get the concept of its library, coupled with "all RAW, all the Time" you are unlikely to ever go back.

Happy shooting!