Apple soon to release Aperture 4?

“The latest update to Aperture came on 14 November. Aperture 3.5.1 fixed White Balance to works as expected when using the Temperature & Tint eyedropper tool; it fixed an issue that could cause the rectangles indicating detected faces to appear incorrectly; when a metadata field is selected, the cursor now remains active in that field when using the Command and arrow keys to move between photos; it also included stability improvements,” Karen Haslam reports for Macworld UK.

“We thought it was possible that Apple will announce an update to Aperture at its 22 October event, and Apple did indeed update Aperture, but only to version 3.5,” Haslam reports. “The company did, however, mention that an update was on the way during a presentation about the Mac Pro in which the company referred to industry professionals who were testing the Mac Pro running new versions of Aperture and Final Cut Pro.”

“Many photographers are now looking for an alternative to Photoshop and Lightroom, especially now that Adobe has introduced the subscription model for Photoshop,” Haslam reports. “This could be a good opportunity for Apple to excite this market.”

Read more in the full article here.

23 Comments

  1. I LOVE Aperture but I have spent three years learning to use it. I am always a bit amused when people say “I can’t wait for the upgrade to xxxxx (version)” – I always prefer to say “I can’t wait until I can DO xxxxxx (task)”. While I always appreciate new features I can use I hate when Apple redoes the interface making me relearn how to do all the critical tasks I need and use daily in order to learn two or three new features I may not use very often. Or as in the case of the new iWork suite where they actually remove features with a new version. One of the things I have always appreciated about OSX is how little they “tweak” the interface with each new version. I hope they keep interface changes to a minimum in the new version.

    To be honest not sure what I really “need” in the new version but I am sure they will tell us shortly 🙂

  2. “Many photographers are now looking for an alternative to Photoshop and Lightroom…”

    Lol… are they now.

    While it’s true that many photographers and designers are miffed by the subscription model (myself included), this does not affect Lightroom. And I know of exactly zero photographers that are complaining about Lightroom enough to be ‘looking for an alternative’.

  3. I have used Aperture almost daily for years and use it in conjunction with Photoshop CC. Lightroom finally has features that Aperture has had for a long time. Now Apple needs to once again not only match, but exceed what Lightroom offers.

    Lightroom is HEAVILY promoted and if Apple wants Aperture to continue to be taken as a serious option by professionals and prosumers they need to come out with a really innovative upgrade and do it quickly. I certainly hope they will. Aperture is a great tool!

  4. There is no reason why Apple apps can’t be first rate like their hardware. Come on Apple, stop holding on to those billions and give us great apps and keep them updated and bug free.

  5. I’m going to grab 4 when it’s available. I’ve outgrown iPhoto. Aperture looks to have some pretty cool editing features. The multi-white point filters look really good. I’ve always used Photoshop to do my photo editing, but with subscription, forget it. I’ll run CS6 as long as I can. You know at some point it’ll break with some iteration of OS X.

  6. I am one of those Aperture users (since 2006) who has begun a slow but steady transition to Lightroom 5. It’s not that Aperture is not a fairly good product. But it hasn’t evolved with photography technology and with my own needs. For example, I shoot primarily with a Nikon D800. Compressed raw files from that camera are about 45MB. Uncompressed raw files are about 75MB. To use a plugin that generates a TIFF file or a PSD file usually results in an image that immediately becomes 200MB or more. Aperture will only hand off a RGB file to a plugin or other application like Photoshop. So, once I activate a plugin, a new file (a large file) is immediately created. After a while, it begins to really use up storage space.

    In contrast, I can make many of those corrections for which Aperture requires plugins (e.g. lens correction, perspective correction) or cannot do (e.g. graduated filters) in Lightroom in a nondestructive way. Instead of a new file, Lightroom just has a set of instructions. Of course, there are a number of other features Lightroom offers also that are simply not available in Aperture. The upright feature is one I really like. Synchronizing edits is another.

    That said, I think Aperture does some things better. I like its raw processing engine and its white balance. It renders skin tones especially well. I also like the retouch brush a lot.

    Now, about the Macworld UK article: A number of longtime Aperture users have already debunked the idea that the photo of Aperture on a 4K display is anything but 3.5. In fact, an interview with the photographer confirmed it was Aperture 3.5. At best, Macworld UK is being speculative. Now, I hope they are right. I would love to see an update to Aperture.

  7. I stopped using Aperture over a year ago… I am sorry to say that LightRoom is light years ahead, and I have heard that the Aperture team is not pursuing the quality of upgrade required to realistically compete.

    1. You exaggerate. LR is not light years ahead of AP. I use both and AP is much better at file and project management than LR. LR’s user interface is not much better and I like the sideshow and book publishing features of AP much more. LR does not support iCloud and photo sharing. Both programs have their strengths and weaknesses. I can’t comment about the Aperture team’s dedication to quality.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.