Future additions to Aperture?

Kinda like a features request...didn't know where to post it really...
Motion has similar attributes as Aperture does I suspect, Not a tech guy but I would think it was coded similarly-using core image and the GPU for rendering it's effects. What I'm wondering is....if this is the case wouldn't it be cool to have more additions in terms of adding Motions 2d effects to the "adjustments" of what Aperture already has? As well as it's masking tools and text tools?
I love Aperture so far I'm just wondering if this would be possible. Sure not many photographers will use most of Motions 2d effects but they might want to. For instance adding glow would be cool depending on the subject.
Aswell as having Motions abilities in the slideshow features not to mention a better fading effect like the darks fading out first and then the lights. I've seen this effect and it's MUCH better than the average fade.
I guess one can always export the images from Aperture and THEN use Motion etc...but It would be cool to stay in one app to do it.:)
I was also the first to use Motion v.1 and it was rendered unusable at that time. In no way to be used in production...v2 has since changed that and it's a great app for what it does. I hope Apple spend the same resources to make Aperture a little better optimized to be snapier. Amongst other things other people have mentioned to be added/changed, won't repeat it here.

here is the best place top post feature requests http://www.apple.com/feedback/aperture.html
DAVE

Similar Messages

Future features in Aperture

What would you like to see in Aperture in the future?
Some things i'd definately like to see:
- The ability to control the camera from Aperture. Very useful in a studio environment
- Some simple kind of masking
- Adjustable levels
- Better dual screen support, my main monitor is a 30" ACD and my secondary one is a 19" eizo so it would be nice to get thumbnails on the secondary one and the main image on main one.
- More RAW adjusments including lens correction (distortion, vignetting..)
- More advanced Noise reduction settings
- Color adjustments
I just switched from Lightroom beta 3 to Aperture 1.1.2 and it's really awesome. If Apple keep updating it with the current pace it might become a big name in the photo industry.

My number one priority is for them to get rid of the library format, or at least give me the option (as Lightroom does) of storing my files where I want to store them. This isn't a feature request so much as a bugfix, so hopefully it will come in 1.2 or 1.3 or whatever the next free update is.
From there, I want a way to archive to optical/removable media, and to distribute my files anywhere I choose to store them. Apple can/should take a look at iView for tips on how to do this well (take a look soon, before MS destroys the app) - it is critical to me that I be able to view my catalog even if images are stored offline.
Improving the speed at which images are loaded would be nice too - it's still glacially slow (several seconds) to load D2x nefs.
Those are must-have.
Then -
1. Make the book tool useful by:
a) Allow me to set the page size/aspect ratio
b) Allow me to export page layouts to jpg for my lab
c) Allow me to export page layouts to layered psd/tiff for further editing
d) Borders/dropshadows on photo boxes
e) Masks for photo boxes
f) Allow me to make my own themes/templates/etc (have a look at Portraits and Prints for a great template designer)
2. Improve sharpening tool
3. Improve noise reduction tool (have a look at what Bibble has done by integrating NN)
4. Make print tool useful by:
a) Allow package printing (2 5x7 on one 7x10 page, ferinstance)
b) Better UI for the print tool
c) Allow for positioning on-page when borderless
5. WB Presets
6. Curves
7. Incremental zoom
8. Proper dual-monitor support
9. Burn projects across multiple dvds

Future purchase of Aperture

Undecided still after reading all the disappointing cutomer reviews about Aperture on the App Store, Is it worth me making a purchase?

If the OS was installed 10 months ago and you havenot done any updates you will not have 10.7.4,
Open the App Store app, look under purchased you should see OS X Lion select download.
Before doing any update you shoud have an up-to-date backup of your system.
regards

How to move all videos out of Aperture and in to iMovie?

I have a MacBookPro with a 240 GB SSD for OSX, apps, etc. and a secondary itnernal HD that is 1TB.
Remaining space as of today:
240GB SSD = 130 GB free
1TB HD = 103 GB free
My Aperture library (managed) resides on the 1TB and measures 139 GB on disk.
How can I effectively "move" all of my videos out of the Aperture library and in to my iMovie library?
My goal is to slim down my Aperture library to be able to move it on to the SSD for better performance. In addition, I rarely find myself referencing or modifying video in Aperture, almost exclusively using iMovie for video.
Thanks for advice!

With these stats, I would expect that you need to make your Aperture Library entirely Referened, and not any Managed, unless you have mostly video in it.
The process would be to use the Relocate command to move masters from the library to folders elsewhere on the 1 TB drive, and then simply copy the parred down library to the SSD drive in the Finder -- drag and drop will work.
I am not sure the connections will survive, and you might find the need to reconnect to all the referenced files, which is not hard to do, once the library has been moved to the SSD. You need always a good measure of free space on the drive with the library, as space is used for many housekeeping tasks, including conversions associated with any future updates to Aperture.
The Relocate command will work with either photo or video files.
Ernie

Is there a way to select an Aperture library to import photo's?

Hi, I use multiple libraries in both Aperture and iMovie to keep size and speed under control.
The problem is that when importing photo's, iMovie won't allow selection of an Aperure library for browsing and import.
Instead, it automatically adds a library for browsing, but not the right one!
I tried opening Aperture with the library I want to import from, hoping to change the default, but it doesn't change anything in iMovie.

Ok, but does this set it for FUTURE additions? In other words, if I select all the current podcasts I have and right click, get info, set EQ preset to spoken word, then say next week I add a new podcast will it automatically set it to EQ spoken word or will I have to do the same thing all over again?

Apple is right to let Aperture go

After at first being a little surprised at Aperture’s demise it occurred to me that Apple is right to do this. Continuing to develop an app with small market share on an operating system with small market share makes little sense. It is better for them to admit defeat and try something better then continuing to go down the wrong path.
The technology landscape has changed a lot since 2005 when Aperture 1.0 came out. There are different ways to access files such as sandboxing and iCloud drive. These technologies will become an important way to get photos between a Mac and an iOS device. Tagging files in Aperture was helpful but relying on the tagging system built into the OS would be a much better solution (someone else just mentioned this recently and I strongly agree.) If a new pro photo app made it’s tags available to the Finder and Spotlight those tags should show up along side similarly tagged files that were created in other programs.
Also Aperture’s competition from Adobe is fundamentally flawed. An all new pro app could address the problems that Adobe’s photography apps have. Anyone who has used Adobe’s solutions should be well aware of their shortcomings.
1. Photoshop, which came into being in the 1980s, was not built around technology like raw and therefore requires a rather clumsy workflow.
2. When a document gets exported to Photoshop the user is presented with a confusing array of choices as to how that photograph should be handled. Each option with it’s own series of advantages and drawbacks.
When a photo gets brought back into LR after being edited in PS it creates a new copy. If that photo then gets edit a second and third time it just keeps creating more copies of the image. The same problem can be said of adobe camera raw.
4. I always thought it was a little odd that you have to export an image from LR in order to use it in another app. App’s like LR, Aperture, and Photos are file navigation programs so why do I need to bring a photo from one navigation program (Lightroom) into another navigation program (the Finder) in order to work with it? Yes, I realize that at times you may need a smaller resolution file of an image like for a webpage but why can’t I just make a smaller version from within the photo navigation program and keep the images all in the same app? Doesn’t make sense to me.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Modern apps like Pixelmator are similar to PS except they can handle raw directly from within the app. It seems like it would be possible to team up with Pixelmator so that a raw photo could go between the two apps while keeping all their settings in tact and not requiring users to make unnecessary duplicates of exported files. For an example you could change the brightness in Apple’s Pro app and then it would still stay at the same setting in Pixelmator. And then if you changed the brightness again in Pixelmator the adjustment bar setting would be brought over to Apple’s Photos.
Since Pixelmator didn’t exist when Aperture 1.0 came out the two companies were not able to unify their two products. When you start over with a new product considerations like this can be taken into account. One of the things I hate about Adobe’s photo apps is the way that a lot of modern technology like raw feels very tacked on (because it is.)

Well there are standards and they are the IPTC/exif metadata. Across all OSes. And even after Apple adopted Mavericks tags it still uses keywords in its photo applications. And no mav tags in iOS either (but you CAN read IPTC/exif data in photos in iOS). Tags are in extended attributes, and hence may be inaccessible in another filesystem.Even Apple Mail doesn't use them. You have to put the tag in the form of x-tag or something into the header info (BTW, if you like tags, as I do, check out MailTags. It does this and more).
If you photo apps don't read standard IPTC/exif data something is seriously wrong. Also you don't have to dig through hundreds of criteria to search for photo metadata. The stuff is already indexed; the categories like aperture, caption, etc are ways to narrow searches. All your LR keywords would be in the Spotlight index, assuming you enable Spotlight on the volumes where they reside, and that you wrote the keyword metadata to the files.
I think you have a stronger point re tagging/keywording in regards to XMP sidecars. Yet another area for improvement. If you add keywords to a RAW in Aperture or LR they are not gonna write that keyword to the RAW unless you apply some force. The standard way of doing that is by using XMP sidecar files. And short answer is that for some Spotlight indexes the XMPs via the rich text mdimporter; for some this means modifying that same importer. In either case, if Spotlight finds the keyword it can only point you to the sidecar, not the companion RAW. Since a tag is in the extended attributes, it sorta isn't in the RAW, but Spotlight would send you to the RAW if it were tagged. So allowing THAT kind of tagging in Aperture, LR or whatever would be great IMHO.
And I'd like to ADD tags from Aperture. But I'd always want it to be in addition to photo keywords and other metadata. Just like captions, filenames, and other stuff is separate. I can still search for them at the same time if I want. Or ignore them. And you may already have the "wedding" problem: that word may in the content of files, or in a filename, or in an email header, or a web url, or whatever. Even without photo metadata you sometimes have to tell Spotlight to ONLY search tags and ignore other criteria.
Since you like tags, check out Leap. I use it to keep lots of stuff together that have tags and keywords, and other searchable attributes. Even email. All in one place. And HoudahSpot; it has templates you can set up for just photos and it displays all the photo metadata in one panel.
And although I'd like to see it happen, non-destructive editing can be a problem because edits have to be stored somewhere. A universal format would be cool, but we'll see. Editors like Pixelmator are different tools than DAMs like Aperture, even though they both can say crop or change contrast. You'll find tons of photographers who never use PS, and tons of graphic artists who never use Aperture. Depends on the focus of your work. Even the system wide versioning Apple introduced for stuff like Pages or Text Edit hasn't been universally loved. And BTW, not sure Pixelmator doesn't view Apple as a competitor. Sure, Apple may provide them with some cool tools to sell more Pixelmators...or may develop an application that'll make Pixelmator disappear. And Filemaker is an interesting example: Apple formed Claris, which bought whatever FM was at that point (from MS?). Eventually Apple brought stuff from Claris back in (AW?), and left FM with Claris, which changed its name. Maybe they should Aperture OUT to Pixelmator I'd LOVE that. Shoot, given Apple's assets they could send it to 'em free.
And sorry Frank, I shoulda been more specific. I meant "in Aperture" as in the program itself, not a media browser like what you show (and basically iMedia Browser is the same thing, but with LR catalogs in addition to Aperture or iPhoto or file folders).

Aperture to Capture One Pro via Catpult - working

FYI I figured out how to make the Aperture to Capture One Pro connection work with the Catapult plugin in both directions, preserving repeated image edits in Capture One Pro. We can now use Capture One Pro as a (slightly awkward) plugin for Aperture, many people like their RAW conversion.
I think more could be done to make it simpler, but it is working.
My write up is on the Capture One Forum, here:
http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=16675&sid=46e9c25c5f1d3770cc66 be99bda3441d

Hi,
Aperture is a versatile application, which lets you perform all or at least the most tasks to handle your digital camera image files. It helps a lot to edit files, which means you can select winners and losers very quickly and in a very sophisticated way. It renames files and adds IPTC meta data.
One thing is really cool: It imports your master RAW files und does not touch them any more. When you alter an image (cropping, brightness, white balance etc) this is only written in a data base and Aperture shows you the altered master file in a new preview called Version. This version does not exist physically. It is only a little descriptive text file. When you export your image for delivery Aperture creates real images.
It is possible to automate workflows with Apples´s Automator. Aperture organizes files in a single library but you can export master raw files or tif, psd or jpg copies. Aperture creates niece Websites, and offers book templates for PDF-output or printing via a print service. There is many more. But one thing I should point out: the raw conversion of Capture One Pro is in my opinion much better. More details, better color control. This will get better, I hope with future version of Aperture. We got a version 1.1 now and the developers of Aperture seem to know about our problems. So for me, Aperture is a very cool Workflow tool. RAW conversion is not state of the Art but equal to ACR. And having master file and derivatives alltogether without cluttering the harddisk is very clever. But I will keep my version of Capture One Pro for quality reasons.
I hope this helps a bit.
(Sorry for weak my english)
Regards,
Eberhard

Duplicate in APERTURE ???

However, excuse for bad in English, I has urgent questions to the APERTURE forum.
- Unfortunately, from iPhoto I could fade in no events about " iPhoto overview " in APERTURE import, the window remained mostly empty.
- How can I find in duplicates APERTURE and delete, with the import of iPhoto-Library I came a little bit in a mess?
- Are there for additional programs APERTURE (Apps) as for example " duplicates of Annihilator " for iPhoto?
Many thanks

There is a Duplicate Annihilator for Aperture, from the same makers too.
http://www.brattoo.com/
If you've imported a Library from iPhoto, are you sure these are duplicates, and not the iPhoto versions brought over? If they are the versions then you can find them with the keywords.
Regards
TD

Location of Watermark in Aperture is Incorrect

Using the instructions in Aperture I've created a watermark in Word, saved it as a pdf, selected the photos in Aperture I want to be watermarked, imported the pdf watermark file and selected the necessary choices to apply the watermark to my photos through Aperture's File/Import menu. I selected the option to have the watermark applied to the lower right-hand corner of my photos....But the watermark appears in the middle of the photos and slightly to the right.
FYI, when I created the watermark in Word I reduced all the margins so they encapsulated the text I intended to be saved as the watermark.
How do I fix this problem? Did I fail to make the proper settings in Aperture? Is there a specific format in Word I should adhere to? Thanks everyone!!

You mean the ability to add watermarks to other then exported images? I wouldn't hold my breath, its been this way at least since 3 came out but you can always suggest it to Apple, see Aperture->Provide Aperture Feedback.
Using BorderFx is really a better solution, in my opinion, anyway. In order to add watermarks with Aperture you first need to create the watermark file in some other program and then aligning it and sizing it in Aperture is a bit of a pain.
BorderFx gives you a lot more options not only for watermarks but for a range of useful features. It's a worthwhile addition to Aperture no matter what, And the price ain't bad either.
regards
Message was edited by: Frank Caggiano

Sports Photographers and Aperture

I was wondering if there are any sports photographers out there that use strictly use Aperture for their post processing. I am considering a Photo Mechanic/ Photoshop workflow perhaps in addition to Aperture. Anyone have any thoughts or pros and cons in reference to modifying my process?
Thanks in advance!

I shoot predominantly sports and use a PhotoMechanic/Aperture workflow from location on a macbook pro or at home with a Mac Pro. A typical workflow:
1. Ingest with PM (I tend to shoot JPG unless big time event or uncertain light)
2. Select pics to file with tagging and create new temp directory for just the keepers
3. Caption and rename the keepers
4. Upload the temp keeper directory into Aperture and make minor adjustments as necessary (typically horizon line and cropping)
5. Save the files into a temp upload directory at a compression setting to get size down to 2MB or less (usually PS 8)
6. FTP the upload directory to the wire service site
Given that I do very limited editing, I find Aperture the most efficient tool. It also then creates an auto-archive of the keepers. At a later time, I may review the rest of the ingest pics for anything I may want to keep for stock. If editing on a Macbook Pro, I'll export the project to a portable hard drive and later upload it to my master Aperture Library on the Mac Pro at home (which, in turn, has on online vault and off-line vault) and burn the project backups periodically to DVD. No chance for lost images with several redundancies.
I'd be curious to hear other experiences / workflow tweaks.
www.backstopimages.com

IPhoto 09 to Aperture

Can anyone tell me how difficult it is to transfer or copy photos from iPhoto 09 to Aperture 3?? I understand it is easy if you are currently running iPhoto 11. Am trying to figure out if I need to upgrade iPhoto even if I have no plans to use it just to make the change to Aperture easier.
Thanks.

Do you have a large iPhoto Library or libraries? Then you would have a much smoother transit to Aperture using iPhoto '11.
The problem is the lossless workflow. As you know, iPhoto 09 stores the original images and the edited versions of your images. To migrate from iPhoto 09 you will have to export the edited versions and the original master images and import both to Aperture. You will have to maintain two separate copies of each image in Aperture, for you will not be able to combine the easily into "original and version" pairs. This will be wasteful and a lot of work.
If you upgrade to iPhoto '11 you will have the big advantage that you simply can import and merge your iPhoto Libraries into Aperture or browse and edit them using Aperture. And if you import, your iPhoto images will appear as single images in Aperture - as proper pairs of original master and edited version - this will save a lot of disk space; and you can revert all edits and restore the original, if need be. The added bonus - you will be able to browse two libraries at the same time - one in Aperture and one in iPhoto. Since Apple introduced the unified library format I find myself using iPhoto a lot again in addition to Aperture - to create cards, to reveal managed originals in the Finder, or simply to browse a second library.
Regards
Léonie

Store Files - Aperture Library or Pictures

Newbie here.
First question asked when importing photos from iPhoto is where to store the images - Aperture Library, Where they Are or in Pictures.   I have not been able to find anything from Apple to explain the advantages of these choices.
Looking at the discussions, I get the impression most people use the aperture library.
Does anybody have some pros and cons for these options? Or maybe just some words of widom?
Thanks muchly.

Both referenced and managed solutions have their advantages and disadvantages. If you research managed vs referenced Aperture 3 library you will find a ton of good info. Also, as suggested above, User Manual can be of great help.
However, I would recommend using referenced library. If you have 10 000 or 100 000 thousand photos and would like to at any point switch to other program or also use another editing software in addition to Aperture 3, you may run into issues and lots of work. Having used Aperture for about 8 months, I just reloaded entire Aperture 3 and created brand new setup with referenced library. I created folder structure on the hard drive that is reflected in Aperture's folders and projects. For example, starting with the root folder on the hard drive.
hard drive folders                            Aperture 3 structure
Photos
Travel                                             folder Travel
   American South-West '08                folder American South-West
     Utah                                              folder Utah
      Bryce Canyon                                 project Bryce Canyon
       Arches                                            project Arches
        Canyonlands                                    project Canyonlands
Of course this is only an example. Everybody's work flow will be different, one solution can't fit all here but in either case, I would definitely recommend referenced model.

Feedback for future versions

hi, can anyone tell me where i can leave comments for fixes in future versions of aperture?
thanks
aidan

This might be a better way:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=767741&start=30&tstart=15
I can be reached at [email protected]
Feedback, suggestions, feature requests -- even complaints -- are always welcome, of course!
- Joe

Aperture and shooting Raw+Jpeg

In camera Jpeg processing becomes better and better with each generation of cameras. One example is the dynamic range optimizer in my Sony A700. You often have a hard time to get similar results from the Raw. So for quite a lot of shots - especially the not so important ones - using just the Jpegs is a real time saver. Still it is good to have the Raw handy in case the camera processing went in the wrong direction, which still happens occasionally. With 8 or 16 GB cards it is not an issue meanwhile to shoot Raw+Jpeg. Unfortunately IMO there is no smooth Raw+Jpeg workflow within Aperture. Especially it is almost impossible to delete the Raw without loosing the Jpeg and vice versa in a managed library (see thread mentioned below).
Thus I just posted this to www.apple.com/feedback. If you think this is an important issue, that should be added in a future version of Aperture, you might sent your feedback as well:
It is nice, that Aperture already imports both pictures, if you shoot in Raw+Jpeg mode. But the further workflow of dealing with the Raw+Jpeg combo is not optimal:
The main reason to shoot Raw + Jpeg is, to save time in using the ready processed Jpegs for the less important shots or the ones, where the in-camera processing left not much to improve, but still having the safety-net of the Raw for a more advanced development, in case the picture asks for it.
So instead of showing the Raws and hiding the Jpegs by default it should be vice versa. If there is a Jpeg accompanying the Raw, the Jpeg should be displayed and the Raw should be hidden. At least you should be able to set in the preferences, whether you prefer to see the Raw or the Jpeg. If you realize while rating the picture or doing adjustments, that the Jpeg doesn't fit the bill, you should be able to give precedence to the Raw, aka showing the Raw and hiding the Jpeg.
After having finished the work, you should be able to either delete or archive the not used version (either Raw or Jpeg), without loosing any metadata or adjustments already applied to the other version.
Currently it is an extremely complex task, to get rid of the unused version. Workarounds are suggested in this thread: http://www.oreillynet.com/digitalmedia/blog/2007/09/gettingrid_of_unwanted_manage1.html
Peter

SierraDragon wrote:
I am unfamiliar with Sony DSLRs and do not know what might make a Sony JPEG visually equal to a Sony RAW image file.
What I refer to is the dynamic range optimizer, which is based on Apical’s IRIDIX image processing engine. I think it is used in recent Nikons as well, but as I have only a Sony DSLR I mentioned this.
Basically it is a kind of highlights and shadows adjustment, but it works very well and in many cases you have a hard time to generate similar good results with your RAW processor (aka. Aperture).
However, JPEG is still a lossy image format that IMO should only be used for low end usages. RAW converted by the camera vendor's software to non-lossy formats like TIFF should generally be quite superior to JPEG.
Of cause the RAW holds more information and carefully processed often leads to better results than the in-camera JPEGs. But not every picture will be printed in poster size. And although JPEG is a lossy format, with a low compression setting the artifacts are almost undetectable at least with my DSLR.
Shooting in RAW+Jpeg mode can be a real timesaver. You look at the Jpegs firsthand, rate them, make small adjustments, if neccessary. For the majority of the pictures you can use these Jpegs even for slideshows and prints. If you step over a picture, where the in-camera processing went wrong, like oversharpened, oversaturated picture with wrong WB etc., you can easily resort to the accompanying RAW and process it to your heart's content. The only drawback with this workflow is the increased temporary storage capacitiy you need. But with today's low memory card prices, the benefits outweigh the cost by far IMHO.
That said, the reason for my post was not to discuss the benefits of a RAW+Jpeg workflow, but Aperture's issues in dealing with it.
Peter

Will aperture 4 work in my macbook pro running 10.6.8?

Will Aperture 4 work in my Macbook Pro? I've got 10.6.8? thanks

There is no Aperture 4 at this time.
Aperture 3.5.1 requires OS X 10.9 or higher, so one would figure that any future versions of Aperture (3.5.2 or higher) would require 10.9.x at minimum, as well.

Future additions to Aperture?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for