“It is no secret that I wasn’t a fan of Aperture 1.0. From the outright broken things like 8-bit TIFF export and EXIF data stripping on output to the Zen take on a manual (there is no documentation”), everything about Aperture 1.0 pointed to an unrealistic deadline and a QA department with their monitors off. While the EXIF bug was fixed with the OS X 10.4.6 update, the problems I saw in Aperture 1.0 were sadly only the tip of the iceberg and eventually users’ different workflows exposed numerous additional flaws, some nastier than others. After inconsistent responses to some angry customers who wanted their money back, the whole thing got even uglier,” Dave Girard writes for Ars Technica. “By all accounts, the Aperture 1.0 launch was a big fart with Apple doing its best to light PR matches wherever it could.”
“It is very nice seeing Apple reduce the price from US$500 to US$300, but it’s even more encouraging that they have offered a US$200 ‘e-coupon’ to those who bought Aperture 1.0. Besides the obvious need to stick an ‘e-‘ in front of something concrete, Apple needed to send a message to their professional customers that said ‘this won’t happen again and yes, we were at fault.’ Giving people money back was the best way of sending exactly that message,” Girard writes.
“I have to admit, I was very skeptical that Apple could whip together professional-quality RAW conversion for numerous camera models in a few months. Their competitors have been honing their technology for years and reverse-engineering your way into the subtle differences in manufacturer’s RAW formats is not a matter of ticking the’unsuck’ radio button. Either they bought some existing technology we don’t know about or there are some seriously overworked software engineers getting some much-needed sleep right about now. But who cares? The plain fact is that Aperture 1.1’s high-quality RAW processing says ‘we can move quickly in areas where we’ve had little experience’ and the discount/refund says ‘users won’t be expected to beta test at their own expense again.’ Everybody is winning here, even those professionals who were frustrated for shelling out for the lackluster 1.0 version,” Girard writes. “As it stands, Aperture can now genuinely claim to be among the better RAW converters and when you combine that with the serious workflow benefits the program offers with its now-cheaper price tag, you have a serious professional photography companion as well as a tempting upgrade for iPhoto users. Apple’s managed to pull an about-face on many levels here and I’m happy they did—my flame-retardant suit was starting to give.”
The comprehensive review – a must-read for those considering purchasing Aperture – here.
Advertisements:
• Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
• Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
• Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
• Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
• iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
• Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
• iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Apple: Rumors of Aperture’s demise have been greatly exaggerated – May 05, 2006
Apple releases Aperture 1.1.1 Update – May 05, 2006
Rumor: Apple axes bulk of Aperture team, app’s future in doubt – April 27, 2006
Apple releases Aperture 1.1 for $299; free update for early adopters of Aperture plus $200 coupon – April 13, 2006
Apple calls on pro photogs to provide RAW photos for Aperture improvements testing – February 02, 2006
Ars Technica: Apple’s Aperture ‘a big, expensive misfire’ – December 05, 2005
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
Hey arse-man, time for another lithium dose. Never read Ars before? It reads like you live there.
Good thing you’re not in the professional moovie business. The footage is neutral, bland, unexceptional, minimal color, sometimes too dark. You make your selections, pick the good stuff, and then you bring out the magic. No doubt an Ars review of the entire process would give it a 2.
Now the consumer crap has to look good out of the box — like video and point / shoot cameras — ’cause you know that mom and pop consumer are not gonna touch that footage ever again.
To think that an entire workflow solution rests primarily on the arbitrary RAW conversion is hogwash. To think that a review of a 1.0 product based primarily on this one conversion is so flawed, it requires 3 more reviews to get it right.
Did you check out the Siracusa take on this whole review debacle? He got it right the first time and that’s all what’s required. He showed the good, the bad, the ugly, and the wonderful solutions that the software provides to the target audience — professional photographers.
Again, see you again at aperture 1.1.2??
Hey all you posers.
The poor reviews of Aperture 1.0 were not limited to ARS Technica. Some very pro-Apple folks reached the same conclusions. It was this review that made me stop considering the $499 purchase:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/aperture-none.shtml
There were numerous others.
What gets me is how all you non-photographer types get all bent-out-of-shape pretending to know what you’re talking about. “ppc” writes this incredibly stupid remark to make a “more balanced” defense of Aperture 1.0:
“…thus whenever Apple updates the OS, Aperture gets better…”
Like it is somehow acceptable for ANY kind of software to produce different results depending on the version of the underlying OS.
Like Photoshop would continue to be used if it behaved that way.
Then he shouts this moronic statement: “THERE IS NO RAW STANDARD, THUS ARS REVIEW WAS WRONG FROM THE START.”
The lack of RAW format standards is not relevant. There ARE standards of RAW conversion. Two, in fact – Camera RAW and Camera One. Aperture 1.0’s results were SUB-standard by all comparisons. These conversion results were repeatable and near-universally panned.
So repeat after me, dimwit: ARS TECHNICA’S REVIEW CRITERIA WERE VALID FROM THE START. Except, you don’t have to shout.
Another poser writes: “To think that an entire workflow solution rests primarily on the arbitrary RAW conversion is hogwash.”
To think substandard RAW conversions that may vary unpredictably in the future is even a “solution” exposes a fundamental lack of knowledge. To believe that a program for pro photographers that requires all the pro’s images reside on a single disk volume is a viable “workflow solution” shows a complete lack of any professional data management knowledge. Aperture still has major deal-breaking flaws.
I concur with arse-man’s summation to the posers.
anyone out there use one of the Foveon cameras with Aperture ??
and if you have to ask, you dont
What’s a Foveon?
Hello illinformed…
It’s time for you to read a big-boy review, from the folks at O’Reilly:
“I just spent two days with Derrick Story teaching photographers how to use Aperture at Macworld. During the class, it became apparent to me that most of the criticism surrounding Aperture comes from people simply not knowing how the program works. When you show people how to make the software do what it’s supposed to do, most of the pain goes away.”
http://digitalmedia.oreilly.com/2006/01/25/aperture.html
Add Ars technica review to those who simply don’t understand how the program works (Initial rating, a 4) Once they understand it and actually use it, things are “better”. (new rating, an 8)
And illinformed: the term you’re grasping for is “poseur”. Seriously, no charge for the remedial writing lesson:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=poseur
Chris says:” Odyssey67: I agree with you, but, …
1) LightRoom is “cheaper”? Have they announced what the price will be when it’s an actual, for-sale product? (Maybe they have said, I haven’t heard). Beta doesn’t really count, since it will expire. I mean, sure it’s cheaper for now, but…”
Good call. I intended to point out only that Adobe’s free beta was doing a better job than Apple’s $500 full release version, and that the overall price reduction (even retroactive to 1.0) was obviously in recognition of that fact. Should have been clearer. The release version of Lightroom hasn’t been priced yet, but I doubt it would have been anywhere near Aperture’s original price point (that was Photoshop territory), and will probably even undercut the current number if only b/c the free beta seems to be perfectly usable (I don’t know how easy it would be to disable the b on users systems). Regardless, Adobe now has all the incentive it needs to be uber-reasonable on pricing – i.e. to cut a stumbling Apple down at the knees.
“2) The shake-up that Apple denies?”
“Anyway, good post though, not criticizing.”
thanks.
Contrary to what you try to imply with your name, you are a very disinformed folk.
Technically, EVERY software relies on the underlying OS…
Aperture relies heavily on CoreImage, Quartz, etc.
It is amazing that you want to nitpick with that.
SECOND and most important, go educate yourself with some very basic logic and epistemology textbooks to undertsand for once and all that if you don’t have a standard to compare against, arse’s review was biased from the start.
A few indications:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0192892568/qid=1147365008/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-0784081-7886311?v=glance&s=books
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0415281091/qid=1147365008/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-0784081-7886311?v=glance&s=books
Every camera maker does his own conversion algorithm and has ITS own idea of what it is to LOOK BETTER. So, it is useless, after someone understands that, that you could base the core of your review on the so called poor raw rendering of Aperture.
It is a completely different thing to ask Apple to bring Apertutre CLOSER to already existing raw conversions from other programs if that’s waht YOU think would be a good raw conversion rendering and another one to state that Aperture is crap and doomed.
Remember that in a few months when you’ll be sitting in front of version 2.0.
In the meantime, don’t forget that textbook on logic and your daily visit to arsetech.
Bill
Foveon is a technology used in Sigma (and 1 other) high end digital cameras.
Check out
http://www.foveon.com
for a better description than I could give you. I just purchased the x530 from Polaroid which uses the technology in a consumer model.
mugwump: glad I could expand your vocabulary. I don’t believe I said anywhere that Aperture isn’t a fine piece of software. But it isn’t ready to become the centerpiece of my processing workflow. Its data management shortcomings are far too great. The O’Reilly “big boy” link you post doesn’t actually say anything. It certainly isn’t a “review.” It doesn’t even defend the product from its major criticisms. It is nothing more than pro-Apple fluff. You are the ultimate poseur.
Aperture requires all of your working images to reside on one disk volume or else be completely off-line and archived. Including myself, I know of no one who would be willing to work that way. Most of us early adopters of digital photography/media have developed our own storage/retrieval methods to match our businesses. While RAW files are relatively small, scan files and retouched layered files are not. We don’t want to completely change our systems to accommodate a single piece of software. Especially since Aperture (as your linked article makes clear) isn’t Photoshop, and the need for Photoshop hasn’t gone away. But, since you are a poseur, you probably wouldn’t understand that.
ppc: give it up. You lost the argument. For all you know, I wrote those epistemology books. If you knew the slightest thing about logical fallacies, you wouldn’t have concluded that the lack of RAW format standards implies a “lack” of image quality standards. And if you really knew anything about philosophy you certainly wouldn’t be defending Aperture’s essential reliance on mutable system parameters as a “good.” You can stop already.
the other camera that uses the Foveon technology is Hanvision
http://www.hanvision.com
So you decide I lost any argument? This is really logical, isn’t it? Good to know…
Get some sleep and calm down mr. knowitall.
There’s no point in discussing with you. If Aperture is not for you fine, but it is not you who says what’s right or wrong…
Illformed:
“mugwump: glad I could expand your vocabulary.”
— Huh? I don’t get it. But I’m glad to school you on the proper use of “poseur”. Let me know if you require any further information.
“But it isn’t ready to become the centerpiece of my processing workflow.”
— Um, who cares? This is about the ars review, not the ill formed workflow. I just spoke with a powerhouse pro photographer, and she already switched everything over to Aperture. But she’s just a shooter, not a pro photo manipulator.
“It is nothing more than pro-Apple fluff. You are the ultimate poseur.”
— Good, you learn quickly.
Now go read the John Siracusa take on the whole Aperture review shortcomings. He had the right overview, with bold faced predictions for the future: It may very well become the dominant professional photography tool going forward. When Final Cut Pro 1.0 came out, their dv codec was the worst in the industry. Ars would’ve rated that a 2. Everyone else gave it a 9. Everyone else was right.
And if you really knew anything about philosophy you certainly wouldn’t be defending Aperture’s essential reliance on mutable system parameters as a “good.” You can stop already.
I never said it was a “good”. It’s just the way it is. You cannot argue and only twist others arguments…
mugwump: And your superstar photographer’s use of Aperture discounts the original ARS Technica review how again? How does this invalidate the criticisms? Ask Mr. Logic (ppc) about the fallacy of “Appeal to Authority.”
I haven’t read a single review that gave Aperture 1.0 a “9.” Even the Apple-buttkissers at MacWorld gave it a luke warm review, at best. Please don’t rewrite history. Your status as a poseur is quickly elevating into holocaust-denier.
ppc: please. You’re the one waving logic books in my face. Here’s your argument reduced to a syllogism:
RAW formats must be converted to standard formats to be judged.
No RAW format is standard.
Therefore, no RAW conversions can be judged.
I’ll let you break down how flawed that deduction is, Mr. Logic. And no, you never used the word “good” (and by your confused response, I can deduce that you’ve never read Plato or Aristotle) But you did proclaim that the dependency on Core Image’s still unsettled design was a major plus for Aperture.
Unless you can’t follow your own “logic”….
Do you really think that by writing down a silly syllogism (which is wrong by the way, since that’s not my reasoning) and the names of two philosophers you somehow “win” something here? Dis is getting pathetic…
It’s not judgement, it’s comparison, you don’t have a criterion, this a classic epistemological problem, but I believe that for most users of Aperture and the readers of MDN that’s not really that important. What matters is that Aperture will continue its development and become a killer app. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it, do not use it, whatever, but don’t come up with some silly rhetoric because that’s lame.
ppc: by all means, correct my breakdown of your argument. If its a classic epistemological problem, do elaborate. I cry out for your immense philosophical knowledge.
Wow, you are full of shit. A comparison is a form of judgement.
Coupons are a great source for saving money. Such discount coupons are provided by CouponAlbum site through its branded stores including Apple store.