Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Aperture Review by Luminous-Landscape  (Read 10872 times)
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2006, 04:10:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Missed this, sorry.

Quote
3. Quote: "One of the major complaints against Aperture, which I resoundingly echo, is that it is a unitary database program. By this I mean that it keeps all of its files and data in one huge database. This has several implications. The first is that your entire collection of raw files, completed files, versions etc, can not be larger than a single hard drive. This is simply unacceptable for a professional application."

Answer: The same exact hard drive which keeps and has been keeping your Photoshop files can be used. In fact if you want to Aperture will duplicate your work on a separate hard drive called the Vault and you can have multiple Vaults or Libraries if you want to. In fact by using Aperture instead of Photoshop your hard drive space will increase because all versions are only 12k in size, Photoshop cannot do this.

The Vault works by creating a mirror image of your Library on an external device, such as a FireWire drive. You can connect as many Vaults as necessary

4. Quote: "Yes, I know that you can change to a different database, but what if you want to search for, compare and re-catalog files that reside on different disks? Can't do it. Bad. Really bad. Can you say "dumb design"?"

Answer: A very small sampling of what you can do with Aperture. You can view filename, keywords, version number, caption text, and file size. You can also view and enter industry-standard metadata like EXIF (Exchangeable Image File), and IPTC (International Press Telecommunications Council) information. This is all searchable, editable and indexed with a Query HUD or Search input box in the Viewer.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=56441\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

You are missing the point.  It's not about making copies of vaults or whatever, its the fact that you can not span multiple drives with one Library.  IE, I use a 100 gig internal drive and a 250 gig external drive.  But both drives can not be the same library.

Also, the "Answer" to point 4 has nothing to do with the quote.  He's not talking about metadata and all that, he's talking about being able to do all that with files on seperate disks.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2006, 04:11:45 PM by macgyver » Logged
victor maldonado
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


WWW
« Reply #21 on: January 20, 2006, 04:18:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello, ronnynil

Quote: "If I read things rigth Aperture let you edit files in PS, but when they come back to A you can not edit layerd files within A, but will have to send them out to PS again. So any editing you will do in A must be done before exporting to PS, even if you can take them back to A for later export to PS."

No one ever said Aperture could edit Photoshop layers by using the Aperture interface. BUT, you can edit the Photoshop layers if you used the Open With External Editor (Shift Command O) feature (and this external editor is Photoshop) and continue to edit the layers anytime in Photoshop. Aperture does this really fast. The nice thing about doing it this way is that Aperture will save all your edits and preserve the Photoshop edits, you can not do this in Photoshop at RAW level and depending what features you use within Photoshop like say Sharpen or Contrast you are destroying pixels something Aperture does not do and one more thing... Aperture is doing this at RAW level.

love 7 peace,
victor
Logged
victor maldonado
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 11


WWW
« Reply #22 on: January 20, 2006, 04:30:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello, macgyver

Quote: "First off, there is a huge difference between what the manual says and what is reality."

The photographers who are using Aperture including myself are impressed with it's speed.

Quote: "While Aperature may work on all of the above computers that doesn't mean it works well or fast."

You're right it doesn't necessarily mean this but in this case it does. It works as fast and does not crash. Aperture has crashed only once since I installed it and it was when I had 2 browsers open, iTunes going, Photoshop, GoLive, going all at once and this only happened once but not since the update.


Quote: "Perhaps I can not read well, but no where in that quoted text did Mr. Reichman compare it to Photoshop."

I never said he did. But I am comparing it to Photoshop since Photoshop has been the defacto application of choice for photographers and it is an application we can all relate to and have some commonality.


Quote: "but in Aperature they have been flattened, which partially negates the usefullness of having layers."

You are incorrect Photoshop layers are not flatten in Aperture if you use the Open With External Editor (Shift Command O) feature the layers are preserved and you can edit them any time.

love & peace,
victor
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #23 on: January 22, 2006, 10:58:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hello, jani
Hi, Victor.

Do you think you could use the built-in quote function and quote tags next time, with proper attributions, so it's easy to see exactly whose text you're quoting and responding to, please?

Quote
Quote: " you have a typical 2004 / 2005 generation Mac you will find running Aperture to be an exercise in waiting."

Apple makes 3 models, always has. This is typical. Here are the requirements one of the following Macintosh computers:
– Power Mac G5 with 1.8GHz or faster PowerPC G5 processor
– 17- or 20-inch iMac G5 with 1.8GHz or faster PowerPC G5 processor
– 15- or 17-inch PowerBook G4 with 1.25GHz or faster PowerPC G4 processor
– Dual 2GHz Power Mac G5 or faster recommended

It will not be "an exercise in waiting" if you use an 1.8GHz computer. Go to a any computer store that sell Apple computers and play with Aperture (if they have it loaded) on the slowest model. Aperture works on versions of the RAW files unlike Photoshop so the speed is over the top fast.
This does not correspond well with the experiences other sources have.

Apparently, there is a lot of variation here.

Perhaps the speed depends on the number of images in the library, or something like that?

Quote
Quote: "If you go on reading, you will see that his complaint is directed at the lack of adjustments for the fonts; Aperture does not respect the system font settings."

The font sizes are the same between Aperture and Photoshop, some of Photoshop window might have a little bit larger font than Aperture while some palettes fonts are smaller than Aperture.
You are not addressing the point: is there a way to adjust the font size, yes or no?

Quote
Quote: "From what I understand, Aperture "imports" all files into a single database, which cannot span more than one filesystem." "Another problem with this approach -- again, from what I understand -- is that there are no individual files as such anymore; you can't access the data without Aperture."

It may appear to be as such but click on the Aperture icon by Command clicking on it and choose Open Packages to see what is truly under the hood (not recommended unless you know what you are doing). What appears to be one single database isn't. You can find any of your images by searching with the Finder if you want to. Not only are your original RAW files still there but every Version is also and they are individual files.
If you can't see or access them in Finder or a Unix shell, they're not individual files.

Quote
Quote: "Will it catalogue images without importing them and deleting the source files?"

Yes. All data whether it is metadata or edits, adjustments, crops etc. are archived for future use. Never is the original RAW file altered it does all this non-destructively.
I think you're dodging my question.

If I have a file called "IMG_8485.CR2" in my "Pictures" folder, will or won't that image be there afterwards?

Quote
Quote: "Look at other reviews, such as the one at Ars Technica, clearly displaying the quality issues."

Yes, unfortunately there are other sites with misleading statements whether they are intentional because of product loyalty to other applications or systems or user errors or just mistaken. If you have an url that I can go to I would be happy to see it.

Original review
Followup review

Quote
Quote: "I'd be tempted to disbelieve you just on past merits. But since you're probably right, it doesn't make what Michael wrote a lie. It's an erroneous statement, yes, but not necessarily deliberately so."

History will show. Let's meet next year at this time. I bet we'll know.
History will not show whether whatever mistakes in the review were deliberate or not, you will just have to take Michael's word for it.

History might show whether he's correct about his predictions regarding Aperture, but that's a separate issue
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad