Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Aperture 3.3 Released June 11. 2012  (Read 33042 times)
msbc
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 83


« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2012, 06:41:25 AM »
ReplyReply

The thing you need to understand about John is that he likes to dump on Aperture. He goes out of his way to make negative posts about Aperture whenever he can - just check his blog or other posts in this forum. He never contributes anything to the Aperture discussion so I really don't know what his agenda is.

Mark Connell - no anonymity so debate away :-)
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #21 on: June 13, 2012, 06:58:18 AM »
ReplyReply

Agenda? Simply correcting a ludicrous point about Lightroom in this thread.... I don't think any of my comments have been dumping on Aperture, not here anyway.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158



WWW
« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2012, 08:59:55 AM »
ReplyReply

This is not true. Aperture allows both forms of image filing - you can let Aperture decide where the images are stored (managed) or you can decide (referenced). Plus you get the virtual organization of albums, books, light tables, etc.

If you pick managed, Aperture puts the images inside its own hidden folder systems (called a package) and moves them around in there as you move them around inside Aperture. You can open the package in the Finder if you want to dig around in there and see the images yourself. They are not locked away, just filed differently.

When you pick referenced, the images are kept in folders in the Finder in the obvious way.

In either case, if you go to the Finder and move files around, Aperture may lose them and you have to tell it where they are.

The nice thing about Aperture is you can mix the virtual organization with the physical. The aperture project holds the images and inside that project you can create albums, books, light tables, etc. I find that to be a much more powerful way to organize than Lightroom's separate folders and collections.

Bob
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #23 on: June 13, 2012, 09:11:17 AM »
ReplyReply

You're arguing a point I didn't even make....
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158



WWW
« Reply #24 on: June 13, 2012, 09:36:14 AM »
ReplyReply

"Nonsense. Its UI provides you both control over Finder, and virtual folders, while Aperture only provides the latter."

John, I was responding to this point.

Bob
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #25 on: June 13, 2012, 10:32:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks, then I stand by it in its context. Lightroom offers direct control of file and folder locations through its UI, unlike Aperture, and both offer virtual folders, Lightroom's being optional and Aperture's compulsory. With heavy irony, wouldn't it be great if Lightroom users were forced to jump through hoops like File > Relocate / Consolidate Originals just to control where their files are? If the guy had identified other aspects - Aperture's better smart albums, list view, preview mode, slideshows, books, perhaps AppleScript too - he might have been on firm ground.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158



WWW
« Reply #26 on: June 13, 2012, 12:07:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Lightroom offers direct control of file and folder locations through its UI, unlike Aperture, and both offer virtual folders, Lightroom's being optional and Aperture's compulsory.

OK, I see where you're coming from.

And yes, Aperture (stemming from it's inception) has assumed that you don't care where, exactly, the original image files are stored on your drive. For lots of folks, like me, that works fine - let the computer keep track of such things as long as I can find any output (JPGs) I might produce. After all, I can create books, order prints, create slideshows, make prints and even email JPGs without having to touch those files. Others want the ability to "see" their files out there on the hard drive; and they really hate Aperture's managed system.

But that managed system allows for Aperture's ability to save vaults as all inclusive backups. Lightroom users depend on other backup systems.

The "consolidate masters" command is for moving originals back into Aperture's package. But if you do want to move referenced files around on the drive, you need the "relocate masters" command.

In the end, as I've often said, the Aperture vs. Lightroom discussion has a lot in common with the Nikon vs. Canon discussion. Both are powerful and effective tools about which intelligent people can disagree on which is "best," because a lot comes down to personal taste.

Bob
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
ario
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 124


« Reply #27 on: June 13, 2012, 12:15:46 PM »
ReplyReply

My SW of choice is the one I know better.
Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #28 on: June 13, 2012, 12:31:39 PM »
ReplyReply

"the Nikon vs. Canon discussion"

Isn't that just a way to evade a judgement? YMMV, Different Strokes etc. There are plenty of times when you can say A does something in a better way than B.
Logged

Bob Rockefeller
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 158



WWW
« Reply #29 on: June 13, 2012, 12:39:40 PM »
ReplyReply

"the Nikon vs. Canon discussion"

Isn't that just a way to evade a judgement? YMMV, Different Strokes etc. There are plenty of times when you can say A does something in a better way than B.

There ARE times that A does a specific task better than B. For example, Lightroom has better noise reduction abilities than Aperture and Aperture has better Slideshow abilities than Lightroom (not to start a feature-by-feature count).

But there are also times that A does a specific task differently than B. "Better" then depends a lot on the user.

And, since powerful programs such as Aperture and Lightroom do so very many specific tasks, its hard to callout an overall "winner" when some of those tasks are done better by one and some better by the other.

This is why I say it's a bit like Nikon vs. Canon.

I use Aperture (as my primary choice, since I own Lightroom 4.1, too), because the "better" features outweigh the "worse" features for the way I work and the things I do.

Bob
Logged

Bob
-----------------
Robert J. Rockefeller
Richmond Hill, GA
www.bobrockefeller.com
marcoborghesi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


Marco Borghesi | The Italian Photographer


WWW
« Reply #30 on: June 13, 2012, 01:58:51 PM »
ReplyReply

In my opinion with my English from Italy about the match aperture vs lightroom can stop just saying I think the best software is that one suite perfectly on you and in my opinion there isn't nothing you can get from these kind of discussion. As the Nikon vs Canon long debate doesn't get you nothing good for yor work. Nikon user will go on to work with as Canon users to. The same Aperture's users and lightroom to.
So in my opinion that's the fact.
Logged

Pentax K-5 | 16-50 DA* | 50-135 DA* | D-BG4 | AF 540 FGZ | Lee System Filters | Aperture 3 Apple Certified PRO

http://www.theitalianphotographer.com
http://www.marcoborghesi.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcoborghesi/
KirbyKrieger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


WWW
« Reply #31 on: June 13, 2012, 02:52:59 PM »
ReplyReply

This is not true. Aperture allows both forms of image filing - you can let Aperture decide where the images are stored (managed) or you can decide (referenced). Plus you get the virtual organization of albums, books, light tables, etc.

If you pick managed, Aperture puts the images inside its own hidden folder systems (called a package) and moves them around in there as you move them around inside Aperture. You can open the package in the Finder if you want to dig around in there and see the images yourself. They are not locked away, just filed differently.

When you pick referenced, the images are kept in folders in the Finder in the obvious way.

In either case, if you go to the Finder and move files around, Aperture may lose them and you have to tell it where they are.

The nice thing about Aperture is you can mix the virtual organization with the physical. The aperture project holds the images and inside that project you can create albums, books, light tables, etc. I find that to be a much more powerful way to organize than Lightroom's separate folders and collections.

Bob

Very well said, imho.  On point, specific, clear, true, personal, and free of put-downs and posturing.
Logged

john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #32 on: June 13, 2012, 03:24:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Must be the first thing that's happened in this forum for a long time!
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 02:24:05 AM by johnbeardy » Logged

KirbyKrieger
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 418


WWW
« Reply #33 on: June 13, 2012, 06:13:38 PM »
ReplyReply

The old one is not lost.  Here's how you get it back :

Find an image that you've used H&S on previously and you will see the old H&S adjustment brick still there.
Make a copy version of your image
trash the other bricks
set H&S to zero and apply to the entire image (in case you had previously brushed it)
Save as preset
(Optionally apply a keyboard shortcut to your preset)

You can now apply the old H&S adjustment to any of your new images if you wish.

(FWIW ... IMO the old H&S adjustment was/is the most interesting tool in Aperture.  I hope they bring it back as an alternative.  File Aperture Feedback if you feel the same.)


_Very_ welcome news.  Thanks!  I use H&S on almost every adjusted Image.

For those who want complete step-by-step instructions, I have posted some on the Apple Aperture Discussion forum, here.

Works great.

I don't know of a way within Aperture to apply a keyboard shortcut to a Preset (now called an Effect) -- do you?  I set it to one using Keyboard Maestro.  I selected a keyboard shortcut very similar to the ones I use for all the Quick Brushes.
Logged

gfsymon
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« Reply #34 on: June 14, 2012, 06:10:49 AM »
ReplyReply

_Very_ welcome news.  Thanks!  I use H&S on almost every adjusted Image.

You're welcome. Smiley

Quote
I don't know of a way within Aperture to apply a keyboard shortcut to a Preset (now called an Effect) -- do you? 

OK ... using the 'new' terminology :

Make your new 'Effect' ( I called mine Highlights & Shadows + )
Go to Aperture Menu / Commands / Customize /
The Search field will already be active ... just type 'high'
Add your Keyboard Command.  I use Ctrl-Optn-Cmd for everything personalised, because virtually no software ever uses it itself. So mine is Ctrl-Optn-Cmd-H  (A Sal Soghoian tip! Smiley )

FWIW, Aperture lets you personalise and add keyboard commands for virtually every part of its entire UI.  You can also have more than one 'personalised keyboard', so if you really wanted to, you could get a couple of keyboards, put stickers on them and work very fast that way.


Logged
JohnNewman
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 34


« Reply #35 on: June 14, 2012, 06:55:35 AM »
ReplyReply

The old one is not lost.  Here's how you get it back :

Find an image that you've used H&S on previously and you will see the old H&S adjustment brick still there.
Make a copy version of your image
trash the other bricks
set H&S to zero and apply to the entire image (in case you had previously brushed it)
Save as preset
(Optionally apply a keyboard shortcut to your preset)

You can now apply the old H&S adjustment to any of your new images if you wish.

(FWIW ... IMO the old H&S adjustment was/is the most interesting tool in Aperture.  I hope they bring it back as an alternative.  File Aperture Feedback if you feel the same.)



This also works if you want to preserve the 'old' Edge Sharpen brick.  I previously decided I preferred Edge Sharpen to Sharpen but see that Aperture 3.3 only has Sharpen.  I don't know if this is an improved version but don't want to take the risk of not having Edge Sharpen available if I wanted it so followed the same idea of duplicating an old image, removing all other adjustments and saving as an effect.

Regards

John
Logged
StuartOnline
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


WWW
« Reply #36 on: June 14, 2012, 07:26:35 AM »
ReplyReply

This also works if you want to preserve the 'old' Edge Sharpen brick.  I previously decided I preferred Edge Sharpen to Sharpen but see that Aperture 3.3 only has Sharpen.  I don't know if this is an improved version but don't want to take the risk of not having Edge Sharpen available if I wanted it so followed the same idea of duplicating an old image, removing all other adjustments and saving as an effect.

Regards

John

Hi John,

I just checked and Edge Sharpening is still within Aperture 3.3. I found it under Add Adjustment.

On another note Joseph Linaschke of ApertureExpert.com has posted his review of Aperture 3.3:
http://www.apertureexpert.com/tips/2012/6/14/aperture-33-the-apertureexpert-review.html

Personally I go back and forth between LR4 and Aperture 3.3.
Have a new MacBook Pro with the Retina Display on order and was just notified from Apple it will arrive on Monday, June 18th.
Since Aperture 3.3 has be optimized to work with the Retina Display it is going to be interesting on how viewing improves.
I am sure Adobe will be upgrading their software to take advantage of the Retina Display.


Stu
Logged
CatOne
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 385


WWW
« Reply #37 on: June 14, 2012, 12:19:00 PM »
ReplyReply

This also works if you want to preserve the 'old' Edge Sharpen brick.  I previously decided I preferred Edge Sharpen to Sharpen but see that Aperture 3.3 only has Sharpen.

Hmmm.  No, Edge Sharpen is still there in Aperture 3.3.  It's the preferred adjustment, and what you get by default when you hit control-S to add a sharpen adjustment.

"Sharpen" is purely a legacy adjustment.  Unless you used Aperture in 1.0 and have photos you sharpened and haven't upgrade, you should never use it.
Logged

Daniel Salazar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 28


« Reply #38 on: June 14, 2012, 02:21:10 PM »
ReplyReply

a question John, if you like Lightroom so much, why are you posting on this Aperture forum?, what does it brings you?, what are you trying to get?, this behaviour makes no sence. Daniel
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 02:27:24 PM by Daniel Salazar » Logged
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2829



WWW
« Reply #39 on: June 14, 2012, 02:38:10 PM »
ReplyReply

I might say mind your own xxxxxxx business, Daniel, but I was reading the thread (am I allowed to do that?) because I was curious (is that OK too?) to figure out the change to previews as I couldn't see it from looking at Aperture on my own computer (OK with you?), and corrected a remarkably misleading point about Lightroom. To be honest, as the thread had moved on I was going to let sleeping dogs lie, but as you ask....
« Last Edit: June 14, 2012, 02:40:10 PM by johnbeardy » Logged

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad