Hot Stuff
Weekly Contest - Expression Studio
1 Winner Selected
The Big Picture Magazine - FREE
Real-world solutions to design challenges
Get Creative Videocast
New every week. Watch what's important to you.
Comments
Login
Login to post a comment. Not a member? Sign up here
Forgot your password?
Overall a great review
I've been using Aperture rather heavily for the past two weeks now, and I think the review presents a very acurate picture of what you get if you buy Aperture today.
A few comments though:
1) You can add new templates, you can go into the Aperture pacakge itself (not the library) and copy exisitng templates to create new ones.
2) In the Levels control if you move both top and bottom sliders at the same time it will not affect the image - making further adjustments from those points behave differently than if you had left them where they were. This would be somewhat analogous to being able to move the control point in Curves... still not a true replacement for Curves but it enahnces what you can do with it.
3) If the author finds the 100% more useful than the loupe (as I do), here's a tip to make it even more useful; if you have your mouse over the image when you pres "Z" to zoom to 100%, it will center over where the mouse is. By zooming in and out over a few images (if you have multiple images up for comparison) you can quickly use this to jump to a comparison point across multiple images.
4) I really liked mention of the extra range you can get with sliders, I had not found that in my exploration with the product.
I am one of the bleeding-edge people that am finding the tool very useful today, and currently mostly doing my edits in Aperture itself. Thanks for an accurate review that lets people know both the highlights and the low points of the product as it exists today, I think this review presents enough information a potential buyer could make an informed choice on the purchase of Aperture.
On custom directories and overlays
One thing to consider when thinking about Aperture working over existing directories is to consider the effects of versions and external edits creating new files.
Every time you create a new version, you get a new file - including the times that you open for external editing and is has to create a new version for you. I think that if you were to work with an existing directory you would either find the directory got too crowded rather quickly, or if Aperture placed all of these files into a metadata directory under the directory where you held your image it would become disquieting to have all the metadata so far removed from your master RAW. I really like how Aperture groups things today within the Aperure library, where all versions are held alongside the master file in one directory. It makes it easier to back up or move one master file and all versions.
No other Apple program has to worry about Versions the way Aperture does which is why the storage is different. Over time they may offer other options for storage structure but I don't know if people will like them as much as they think they will right now.
clear and informative review
I'm a prospective buyer and user of Aperture, and I found the review very helpful.
Deal Killers
Aperture only respects one version of an image: the capture, or what it thinks is the capture. Any work you do on any version of that image can be over-written. In fact, MUST be over-written as there is no provision to invoke a Save-As from Photoshop and keep the file in Aperture.
You can, of course, import the image back into Aperture. Wherein you will lose access to all your layers.
Photoshop is the foundation of professional image production and until Aperture can hand-off and receive files from Photoshop without changing them it will be unusable for many of us. Until it allows us to work on a file without over-writing it Aperture will not have a non-destructive workflow.
Frank Pryor
Excellent Review
After a month of using Aperture, I think this review is right on the money. Indeed, it's definitely a fun application to use, but the lack of curves tools and the excess color and detail noise gives it a certain handicap compared to Adobe Camera Raw.
Aperture also has difficulty with some EXIF data. I tested it with a Canon 10D (admittedly an older model) and it recorded any image with a shutter speed over 1s as 1s. Images I shot with slower shutter speeds of 2, 3, and 4s were all recorded in Aperture as 1s. All other data (f-stop, time stamp, etc.) appeared to be correct when compared to the original camera data and Adobe Photo Raw.
One strength of Aperture that surprised me is its integrated book function, which I've used once so far. The print results were outstanding, and the lead time was impressive. I received my book within four days. One drawback is that there is no proofing process, which I'd certainly appreciate if I were ordering a large number of copies.
All in all, I think it's a promising first attempt by Apple. My guess is that version 2 will prove to be a much more serious photographer's application.
Excellent review!
After spending about a week with Aperture, I think this review pretty much summed up my impressions to a T.
It's frustrating because there are some super cool features in Aperture. But the metadata bug is a deal breaker and the amount of sharpening applied (even when set to off) produces pretty unsatisfactory RAW conversions, especially when compared to Adobe Camera RAW. The lack of an info palette is a huge oversight as is the Histogram which can't indicate what you'll end up with when you render the RAW into some color space.
I think Apple needs to now seriously stop developing software in a vacuum. OK, Aperture was a rumor for quite some time and it's now out. So Apple needs a far better beta system (how on earth did the metadata bug get out) and start listening to people who actually use such products in real life. Ben picked up on the sever shortcomings which makes me wonder what the Aperture team was thinking when they designed the product. Again, there are some really brilliant ideas in this product. But it's really hard to even call it a 1.0 version. Lets see how fast an update comes to fix some of the major issues.
Closed working environment creates limitations
Aperture as a concept has some very interesting strong points...non-destructive editing being the major one in my mind. But as a work-flow tool or image editing tool, it only works until you need to do something it can't do or can't do well enough or fast enough to be useful.
I much prefer a more open working environment where I can alter an image in any program or using any plug-in that will do the job. After all, what's so difficult about saving scans and raw files untouched in a separate folder and applying edits to copies of those files? Yes, it uses more disk space, but big deal. Harddrives are cheaper than the hardware needed to make Aperture useful and I back up every job to a CD or DVD and clear it from the drive when it's finished anyway. Since this is an essential part of a backup and archive strategy, it's not an extra step.