“It saddens me to say that Aperture’s innovations are only skin deep. If it could deliver on the promise of being both fast and produce flawless results, it would be the dream package. At this point it is an expensive and questionable alternative to Camera Raw, a free extension to Photoshop, and Adobe’s Bridge which can batch produce better quality images in arguably less time. For US$500 (Photoshop itself retails for US$750), there is no excuse not to be aware of professional needs like a high-quality sharpen tool, DNG exporting or more basic things like curves, a sampler tool for RGB pixel readings, or retention of EXIF data on output,” Dave Girard writes for Ars Technica.
“Maybe by 2.0 Apple will have the foundation sorted out. At this stage Aperture is a big, expensive misfire and considering the hefty price tag, I can’t think of a reason to recommend it. Reading this review, you may think I sound jaded, but I am genuinely angry for those who shelled out US$500 for a program that promised professional results and failed to deliver. Thanks for coming out Aperture, now get off the stage,” Girard writes.
Full article here.
Advertisements: The New iMac G5. Built-in camera and remote control. From $1299. Free shipping.
Apple USB Modem. Easily connect to the Internet using your dial-up service. $49.00.
The New iPod with Video. The ultimate music & video experience on the go. From $299. Free shipping.
Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.00.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple’s revolutionary Aperture: will all Mac applications work like this someday? – October 21, 2005
Apple’s Aperture more revolutionary than you might think – October 21, 2005
Apple’s new Aperture signals that Photoshop is no longer invulnerable – October 20, 2005
Pro photographers see Apple’s Aperture as complement to Adobe Photoshop – October 20, 2005
Does Apple’s Aperture threaten Adobe’s Photoshop? – October 20, 2005
Apple’s revolutionary new Aperture software a must have for every professional photographer – October 19, 2005
Apple introduces Aperture, first all-in-one post production tool for photographers – October 19, 2005
Can anyone with experience in this area comment on this? Is this a fair assessment?
I only use Photoshop
<<I only use Photoshop>>
then why comment on Aperture if you havent tried it… here is your 2cents back now blow away…
Ouch.
Betty, Veronia
I want to date both of you!
hands off freak
I was just playing with Aperture this weekend, and the interface is really cool. Performance is fair on a 1.67Ghz PowerBook, using 8MP RAW images from a Canon EOS XT digital SLR. I noticed that the default behavior on high ISO images is to crank the sharpening stupidly high, resulting in horrible looking picture quality. I’m used to using Photoshop CS2 to generate JPEGs which I stick into iPhoto, which definitely gets me better image quality than I’m seeing in Aperture.
I would warn anyone against EVER using Adobe’s DNG format, and I would say that Aperture is far better off without it. I’ve done RAW->JPEG and RAW->DNG->JPEG conversions and seen really weird differences when going through DNG. I have one shot in which the subject’s eyes look bloodshot in the DNG version.
I would say that if Aperture’s poor image quality was fixed, it would be pretty dreamy. Since image quality is the most important thing to a photographer, I hope Apple improves things soon.
Is everybody on his or her period?…
Blow me Girard, when did a 1.0 version ever be perfect?
Adobe have said some bad things about Apple before the G5 came out, like “forget the Mac platform” and “get a PC it’s faster” and things like that.
Apple is laying some ground work just in case Adobe falters.
Just like Appleworks to counter OfficeMac in case that falters.
peesh…
This product Rocks! kudos APPLE!!!!
disregard the stupid article..
Nick … nice to see that someone was nice enough to answer kick ass colonosts’s original question … who knows what the rest are here for … thanks …
Adobe can kiss off. And you can go with them, you ass-kisser paid-off hack, Girard.
Too bad Apple just won’t buy Adobe to shut them the f-ck up! Probably have anti-trust issues, but wouldn’t it be oh-so-cool to see Jobs buy that shitless company, prune the diseased parts, and make the products all OS X-only?!?
Adobe are a buncha f-cking assclown f-ckheads. Shove your Creative Suite and punitive single-app pricing up your asses.
Aperture is pretty sexy but I have only played with it for a few hours…. this article does point out some large shortcomings and oversights in the application… here is hopping there is a quick update to this app… but for a v1 app there is still some kudos deserved here
So when Aperture came out, the question was “Is Aperture supposed to compete with Photoshop?”, i.e. is this a Photoshop Killer™? The answer was NO! This is not suppose to compete with Photoshop.
Not having used Aperture, I can’t tell you my thoughts on it. But I can tell you that if Photoshop costs 50% more than Aperture, it’s possible that the person buying it needs something more powerful than iPhoto but less powerful than Photoshop. The reviewer making the comparisons he is shows that perhaps this difference escapes him.
bob… and you are here for what exactly?
My period was last week. That’s why we sounded so bad during the concert at the sock hop.
I like Aperture. It’s like, really, really, cool ‘n stuff for processing shots of Veronica and that slut Betty when they’ve had one too many margaritas. You know, when they get all drunk at the after-concert party and they’re all sexed up ‘n trying to hump that Scooby Doo dog.
Aperture rocks!
ummmmmm, aperture isn’t a photo EDITING program, stupid (Girald)
(that’s why it has seemless integration with Photoshop… so you can EDIT photos, aperture is for organization, etc.)
By the way, I’m sure that there is a way to override the default RAW image importing settings; there certainly is in Photoshop CS2. When I complained about image quality, I was referring to default behavior – an expert user could surely get it working beautifully.
I think that ARS Technica is kind of wacko to be so hard on Aperture; it is really an incredible piece of software, and it comes with really nice documentation too. The dual display support is really cool – I plugged in an external monitor through my DVI on my PowerBook, and instantly put it to good use with built-in secondary display options accessible from the menu bar.
I’ve also seen lots of articles claiming that Aperture stores its files in a single database file, but it this is totally wrong. If you secondary-click on the file and select “show package contents” (repeatedly once you’re inside), you can go spelunking in there and eventually find your original images.
The article reads more like a blog entry or an extensive forum post than an actual product review.
It a workflow photography application and it’s not even touched upon in the review. The next system update in a few weeks could fix many of these issues immediately, making much of the article irrelevant.
This is simply a tech dude finding some flaws in an insanely deep application.
I’m the real deal. Not some ditz on a fake TV show!
“(that’s why it has seemless integration with Photoshop… so you can EDIT photos, aperture is for organization, etc.)”
Matt – good call. I noticed in the included documentation how to set up Aperture to automatically use Photoshop as the external editor.
Aperture has really nice archiving systems too – you can even backup onto network drives.
My take on Aperture is this:
– It does have problems with RAW processing/output
– It does preserve your RAW file intact and you can access it is NOT like Entourage
– I reckon Apple is aiming foer this product to be perfect by the time we’ve switched to Mac with Intels
– Apple must REALLY pay attention to what pro-photogs are saying and work bloody hard to get it right
– The treat from this kind of review is that Apple is going down the lightweight, consumer route…the world does NOT need another MS thank you.
As a part-time-pro I couldn’t think of trying this on my Apple kit – it just ain’t up to it. But I’m interested to see what others are saying..
I have to say I agree with much of what he says. Very expensive glitzy over rated. Camera Raw handles the image processing and color correction part better.
Aperture gets a thumbs up in the photomanagement area. Easy to sort by metadata and the time scrubber is a quick method to organize shots of the same scene. Stacks are a great way to organize. And I like the versioning method rather than making dupes for every variation of a file.
Integration with a .Mac account for posting photos for clients is easy and pages can be dynamically updated with smart folders.
The question becomes will apple improve the image processing and color correction capabilities down the road? Right now I do not think it was worth the money.
That said you need serious hardware. I tried to install on iMac and it wouldn’t let me because my video card didn’t meet the min reqrmnts. Just an nvidia 5200. I have since installed it on a new Quad G5 which is plenty fast enough.
Oh dear, this has become quite a flamewar it seems.
Crap spelling there guys..sorry. Had a couple of big whiskey-macs! It’s cold here!
Hey now that’s commitment to Apple hey? A “Whiskey-Mac” in case you didn’t know is whiskey and (Stone’s) ginger wine. Recommended!
My copy of Aperture is on order, but from reading and the huge demo I got at Apple yesterday: it totally does what a real pro needs. I don’t know where that writer was coming from… sounded like he has some agenda. Ya, it will improve in time, but Apple totally understood and nailed the pro workflow problem.
Aperture replaces for me (a working pro… http://www.huthphoto.com):
Extensis Portfolio for Catalogging (new version (8) seems rushed out by Extensis… and I was on the Beta team for Portfolio 7, and have logged major bugs they haven’t fixed in 8)
PhotoMechanic for fast editing
MacBibble or Camera Raw for Raw Conversion/batching
And adds…. the ability to whip through hundreds of images and only show clients the best of each series.
A sane backup system so that everything is backed up even before I can get it to DVD’s.
It will allow me to give clients proof prints that look decent without hours of PSP tweaking. Maybe I’ll bag film totally, even when someone only wants tons of giveaway snap prints.
It will keep me out of Photoshop for a large % of my images that only need tweaked and save me gobs of time.
Hope that’s some real info to balance the hysteria and flaming
cheers,
Ken
Betty,
It seems your only contribution is to point out posts that don’t contribute a lot. How are you helping anything?
huthphoto: sounds like you’d better keep going with Bibble. I’ve switched to ACR but I remain a fan of Bibble.
Kassandra, may I have the honor of taking you out on a date!
I think a few assumptions in the article are debatable and for what’s there the article could have either focussed on Bridge more or discussed the added value features of Aperture while making tool comparisons with Photoshop.
Assuming that Apple will go with a 1.5, 2.0, 3.0 version update system for improvement of a new Pro-App is making a very close parallel to the way Adobe released inDesign without considering the significance of Apple point updates. Adobe has taken until a few weeks ago to get rid of the colorspace error in Acrobat with five (5) count them point updates. Many of the Adobe point updates are fixes for crashing bugs or regressions. Aperture is in 1.0 so we won’t see public regressions. If you read the article and scan down the list of cons in the conclusion it should be apparent that the vast majority of the problems are easy to remedy without redesigning large parts of the UI. Many of the issues are exactly the kind of thing that would not come to light without a base of consumer testing and can be changed to fit the market better based on the feedback already presented. I would write of most of the issues to a .1 update, but there are a few glaring issues (histogram, curves, import) that may be taken care of in separate installments. I think Apple is easily capable of remedying all the complaints addressed with a few free point updates, but the underlying algorithms for import and some filtering may prove to be tough in house fixes or require some money spent outside of the Apple fold. I do expect the issues to be cleared for free before the next version of Aperture and the next release should be bringing us new features. This is not to say that Apple did not drop the ball on some things regardless of how much they have on their plate right now.
Bridge…erm…I could shoot of a bigger error list in my choice of areas and it would make the Ars conclusion look like a single point. With all the sorting options and a rotate tool Bridge always assumes that a landscape resolution is a horizontal landscape shot. Ok, that’s one. I’m not making it that long. Graphic converter crashes in its strange browser mode..Database system…erm yeah ok , but what iPhoto does behind the scenes is completely whacked.
If you are looking for a portfolio system or an additional tool/toy to use in your photographic workflow then Aperture presents a promising option. It’s promising and that’s an issue of faith. If you don’t think that Apple can turn a product around then you need not Apply…but then again you’re running it on a Mac so that’s almost a no brainer.
I suppose some of the sort features might wait for Leopard. After all, not being able to sort in column view is not unique to Aperture and providing consistent APIs over the OS makes development a breeze. On being PPC only…by now Apple would have transitioned it to x86 even if they bought the damn thing w/o comments in the code from a russian website. Would you want to hear how many problems there were with speed running Aperture on an intel based ibook in the first few days of the x86 transition? This article doesn’t gloss over that, the floral imac reference and bragging rights graphics card clearly show that the author knows it needs top of the line expensive hardware and that’s not going to change w/ the introduction of x86 macs.
If I was about to go wild w/ my RAW collection I might go out and buy Aperture. This article did nothing to influence my choice regarding the acquisition of this product, but did give Apple a good laundry list for point updates.
Had the ArsTechnica review been of a Microsoft product, would you all be dissing it so much? The reviewer raises some extremely valid points. For a $500 product, with such stiff existing competition, I would expect Apple to do better. We don’t do anyone any favours by religiously defending Apple when it releases a lemon. Aperture is a nice concept executed poorly. Sheesh, even the minimum specs for the program are a total joke compared with what rival products require. Roll on version 2.0.
Bilbo… if I have to explain it to you… then I doubt you’ll get it anyway…
RainFreak, I just freed up my calendar and now you are hawking on Kassandra? how is a girl to get any action…. Veronica you around? maybe we could hook up? ps I still have your 2cents ;P
xo
Betty
Betty and Veronica,
Just wanted to let you 2 ho’s know I borrowed Freddies Mystery Machine and ran over Archie (and his punk friend Reggie) in the Riverdale High school parking lot.
Now you ho’s work for me. And I want my money!! If I catch you 2 doing girl-on-girl pron with that slut Josie, you know I best be getting paid!!
BTW – I haven’t tried Aperture yet, but since I shot some new rolls of Scooby banging Daphne, I will be giving it a shot tonite. Bet you all didn’t know Daphne was a beatiality freak (and she likes midgets as well).
MacDude: “…when did a 1.0 version ever be perfect?”
Answer: When I invest my money and time in it.
Macdude – you obviously are just an internet chatschoolboy. don´t use your computer for much more.
Amazing all the whining Mac boys here trying to defend Apple´s not so good product.
It´s a computer company, not a religion.
I agree with Reality Check.
t’s the same thing with a lot of Apple’s software offerings… a little half-baked (Soundtrack, iPhoto, GarageBand etc.)… All great ideas, but all more-than-a-little sluggish and buggy. I sincerely hope Apple keeps on these projects, polishes them up and corrects the problems. If Apple really had all these software offerings that actually worked as Steve said they would then I don’t think there’d be a Windows user left on this planet. As it stands well…
Then again, I can’t see a SINGLE REASON ANYONE in their SIGHT MINDS would shell otu $300+ for MS Office!
MW: “yes”
-Yes, they are idiots…..
MacDude: “…when did a 1.0 version ever be perfect?”
When a company (Apple) charges $500.00 for it, then it better be close to perfect. If Apple is is going to release a product with so many issues then they should only charge $99 for it. Why do we have to be they’re paying beta testers?
This article is spot on in it’s criticisms of Aperture, and all this ‘cussin & cursin’ by the fanbois is really sad. No wonder the rest of the computing world wonders what our (Mac users) problem is.
Relating to the disses I’ve seen posted here:
1] The author is perfectly qualified.
“… while I’m not a professional photographer, I work with high-end digital and scanned images as a commercial retoucher and formerly as art director for a fashion magazine. I also shoot as a hobby and often use the RAW format for maximum control over images, so I understand the needs of a professional…”
2] He doesn’t compare Aperture to PhotoShop, and is very specific in his criticisms.
“It saddens me to say that Aperture’s innovations are only skin deep… At this point it is an expensive and questionable alternative to Camera Raw, a free extension to Photoshop, and Adobe’s Bridge which can batch produce better quality images in arguably less time. For US$500 (Photoshop itself retails for US$750), there is no excuse not to be aware of professional needs like a high-quality sharpen tool, DNG exporting or more basic things like curves, a sampler tool for RGB pixel readings, or retention of EXIF data on output.”
3] He’s also very clear about the program’s limitations, and how he was himself hoping for more from Apple:
“I’d like to get excited about things like instant books and the light table, but if the base technology in Aperture is flawed, it can’t be the high-end imaging hub it wants to be. The quality of Aperture’s RAW converter is bad, and for an application that’s selling point is iterative nondestructive RAW editing, that’s like building a house on a plate of Jello. It doesn’t matter how nice the Ming vase looks next to the Fabergé eggs, or how fast the place heats up; it’s all built on a bad foundation so the chances of anyone wanting to live the good life there are next to none.”
Also of note is the clear language in a relatively obscure topic (in’s & outs of pro digital photo editing), and all of the high quality graphics that really help the reader ‘get’ what he’s talking about (and which this guy obviously spent some time and expertise on including).
Frankly, the flamers here need to shut the hell up. Shame on all of you – if a person can’t accept the conclusions of a review like this, then objectivity and intelligence just don’t run in your family.
stupid riverdale punks . . . think they’re better than me
Odyssey67, I was going to post something along the same lines, but you beat me to it.
For the record I am a Mac fanboy, but I am also a profesional photographer. With that in mind I was soooo hyped by Apeture and the preview movies. I don’t think it has delivered on its promise because all of the speed of handling my photo organization and workflow means NOTHING if the output of the program renders my multi thousand dollar SLR as noisy and flawed as a small chip digicam. Not that digicams are terible, but large chips and high end glass aren’t on the market for looks.
Apple creates and inovate great technology, but this program in its present state is not their finest work. I really want to buy Apeture, but with that want I am forced to wait until the quality is fixed in perhaps 1.5 or 2.0. It saddens me. I was looking so forward to it.
I will do ALL of you up the butt! Right now! C’mon, you pansies!
The criticisms in this article are all valid – Apple should take note. The fact that their RAW image algorithm has been demonstrated to be inferior should be a big wake up call.
For $500 it’s a sure bet the app will move forward. And the interface is really sharp; educational even. Maybe now some shareware battler will take the baton and run … backwards … to about $50 … for us non-Professionals by skipping most editing (we’ll use Photoshop anyway) and filing features (we can make, rename and move folders manually). Oh wait … I just installed Classic to run QuickNailer. Sometimes, if you can’t have the best, less is more.
The review of Apeture I think is pretty much accurate.
To be advertised as a ‘professional’ tool and a $500 price tag, it falls a little short.
Apeture’s interface is very nicely organized, with most everything just a click away – but try looking at it on a 30″ cinema display at maximum resolution and it’s kinda hard to see.
For a professional phtographer’s workflow software, it’s a start in the right direction, but not for the price.
Most of us professional photographers have already developed our own workflow and cataloging system, or have already purchased software. Apple better reduce the price – by at least half, or get busy fixing Apeture’s shortcomings.
No thank you…
Ok.
I stopped reading when he said this:
“Note that while I’m not a professional photographer…’
So I can test a flight suit and say, ” So while I’m not a pilot…..”
I’ll wait for someone who IS a pro to test it before forming any opinions.
That said, so far everyone is not impressed.
A software developer should aim for perfection (or as close to it as possible) in version 1.0 – End of story.
Now then.
What I’m looking for is an ACDSee killer.
Anyone??
–
Oh, and MDN; this crappy ‘ad crammed next to the feedback box’ really sucks. It’s like the M&Ms; advertising special Regis did last New Years. Much too invasive. I’ll check back but for now I won’t be going this far down the page till it’s gone.
They need to be fixed.
They will be.
People like Ars pointing the problems out will encourage Apple to avoid repeating such problems.
So as an Apple fan, THANK YOU Ars.
Here’s looking forward to the Aperture that SHOULD have been. It will be–as a free update. Better late than never. Better early than late. Better RIGHT than early!
Instead, try RAWShooter.
Oh, too bad! It’s only for Windows, and it’s better than Aperture. And, it’s only $100.
I’ll wait for version 1.01 or 1.5 to buy after this article
MW: involved as in “I don’t want to get involved.”
i dont know what other company could release a better first release of a product. version one of a product always has a couple of things wrong with it. theyve actually taken the time to research what exactly a photographers work flow is. Most software companies dont do that and adobe sure is hell dont. The only way adobe make progress is buying other companies, ie macromedia because they were too shit to be able to release a wysiwyg web design package that acutually worked. or a flash product either.
adobe have no imagination.
carlo you are clueless – photoshop and illustrator are the best products out there. golive is a top seller. (i use it, works great)
adobe pdf files – great
indesign – great
adobe bought macromedia for flash.
As a professional with 6 years experience working in RAW this program promised to be a panacea. If this is true “………not to be aware of professional needs like a high-quality sharpen tool, ……. or more basic things like curves, a sampler tool for RGB pixel readings, or retention of EXIF data on output” then for me it will be the opposite. I will find out when I unwrap my copy on the 25th
SunSeeker – read the article, see their examples. Very devastating review of Apeture. It does not even read the RAW data correctly – Photoshop does a much better job.
Ho! Ho! Ho!
Sorry folks…he’s right…I’ve worked with every Raw workflow on the market Phase One, Bibble, ACR, Nikon, Canon, Leaf…etc. Apertures sole value (limited as it is) is as an editing tool. Aperture is NOT a production tool. The final quality of images converted to “fixed file formats” like TIFF are well below the quality of other converters. Aperture does not have the level of detail and control a pro needs- period….I really hope they come to bat with some better math in later versions. The whole point is to have a “non-destructive” workflow that allows for flexibility and control while maintaining the highest quality image data…..
This app Rocks on my new Quad!
Ars Tecknica sucks ass!
“Blow me Girard, when did a 1.0 version ever be perfect?”
call me, big boy. lol
Good Day. Preserving health by too severe a rule is a worrisome malady.
I am from Lanka and also now’m speaking English, give please true I wrote the following sentence: “Get low cost cheap airline tickets.”
Thank you very much
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”wink” style=”border:0;” />. Nikolos.
How are you. Perhaps, after all, America never has been discovered. I myself would say that it had merely been detected. Help me! I find sites on the topic: Payday loan. I found only this – payday loan online. Anti allergic drug azelastine on immediate and late phase cutaneous allergic reactions, assessed by traditional meth ods evaluation of weal and erythema. On taking one table, it stays relieved for days and again appears. THX :rolleyes:, Enos from Paraguay.