Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Alternatives to Aperture (What are your plans?)
- Thread starter JDDavis
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This is Corel AfterShot Pro 2 (formely Bibble). This is actually not bad at all. I think I am starting to like it more than Aperture
I'd wait, from reading the threads in the 10.10 forum, its stable but at the end of the day, its still a beta and if you need your computer, then a beta may not be the best bet. Just my $.02
I pick up my new rMBP today I got from the great deals at Adorama. So I can load Yosemite and see if it is OK. If so, then I can port my apps and data over.
It will be interesting to see if I was one of the first million persons who signed up for the beta. I might not be offered the OS. I guess I will know by the end of the day.
It will be interesting to see if I was one of the first million persons who signed up for the beta. I might not be offered the OS. I guess I will know by the end of the day.
Of the photography related software I have, the two that plain don't work for me on Yosemite are DxO and onOne. Everything else seems to work OK:
* Adobe's stuff (LR, PS)
* iPhoto
* Aperture
* C1
* Iridient Developer
* Photo Ninja
* Photo Mechanic
* Nik plugins
* Topaz
* Raw Photo Processor (RPP)
* Raw Digger
I haven't exhaustively tested these and, while I haven't yet noticed any in DP4, there are occasional graphics corruption issues that restarting the app seems to solve. This is on an early 2013 rMBP.
* Adobe's stuff (LR, PS)
* iPhoto
* Aperture
* C1
* Iridient Developer
* Photo Ninja
* Photo Mechanic
* Nik plugins
* Topaz
* Raw Photo Processor (RPP)
* Raw Digger
I haven't exhaustively tested these and, while I haven't yet noticed any in DP4, there are occasional graphics corruption issues that restarting the app seems to solve. This is on an early 2013 rMBP.
Ya. I wish I still had my '09 MBP to play with it. I'll wait for the .1 release as usual. I like to let the heathens work it out first.
I remember talking to someone at OnOneSoftware about their products working as plugins to Photos as they do today to Aperture and LR. She told me they just have not seen enough from Apple to decide it Photo Suite 9 will do Photos or would be part of another release.
It could be that they need to release Perfect Photo Suite 9 to work properly on Yosemite. That is just guesswork on my part. I have no idea about the contents or dates for release 9.
It could be that they need to release Perfect Photo Suite 9 to work properly on Yosemite. That is just guesswork on my part. I have no idea about the contents or dates for release 9.
Last edited:
Since this Aperture announcement I've taken it upon myself to learn and start using Adobe Lightroom 5 regularly. It's taken awhile to get used to, and the UI is definitely NOT designed by Apple (i.e., not as user-friendly). The biggest issue for me has been getting used to the way it stores photos and then figuring out how to best catalogue them.
Currently what I'm doing is editing everything in Lightroom, using it to store my RAW photos, and then anything I especially like or want to show people I export as JPEGS into Aperture to transfer to my iPhone or iPad. It works quite well and will probably remain my main way of doing things into the future.
Lightroom definitely is more powerful than Aperture in a lot of regards. Shadow recovery is pretty decent, but the highlight recovery is far more substantial. Cloning and healing are also more powerful.
I really miss being able to see the focus points on the photo. I found that feature of Aperture to be really useful, and I hope Apple's new Photos app retains it.
I compared Lightroom to CaptureOne and a plethora of other photo editing software, including Corel's After Shot 2. While CaptureOne was quite good, I found Corel's offering to still be buggy. Both, along with other photo editing software, also seem to lack the necessary plug-ins for my work flow. I use Nik Software a lot, and while I can simply use each plug in as a standalone app, I rather have everything integrated. Lightroom 5 at least allows this.
Currently what I'm doing is editing everything in Lightroom, using it to store my RAW photos, and then anything I especially like or want to show people I export as JPEGS into Aperture to transfer to my iPhone or iPad. It works quite well and will probably remain my main way of doing things into the future.
Lightroom definitely is more powerful than Aperture in a lot of regards. Shadow recovery is pretty decent, but the highlight recovery is far more substantial. Cloning and healing are also more powerful.
I really miss being able to see the focus points on the photo. I found that feature of Aperture to be really useful, and I hope Apple's new Photos app retains it.
I compared Lightroom to CaptureOne and a plethora of other photo editing software, including Corel's After Shot 2. While CaptureOne was quite good, I found Corel's offering to still be buggy. Both, along with other photo editing software, also seem to lack the necessary plug-ins for my work flow. I use Nik Software a lot, and while I can simply use each plug in as a standalone app, I rather have everything integrated. Lightroom 5 at least allows this.
To me your last statements about having everything integrate is key. I want one workflow, not a different workflow for each of several independent products. I doubt any DAM product will be a major player if they don't step up to that. They have to accept, as Apple and Adobe long ago did, that they can not provide the best of everything a photographer could need in their single product.
You only win market share by having by far the best niche product (i.e. plugin) or by having the best DAM. I doubt anything else will achieve and hold significant market share.
I guess we can all better judge the situation next year when we see Photos and who signs on as a Photos plugin maker. In the meantime, know your options.
You only win market share by having by far the best niche product (i.e. plugin) or by having the best DAM. I doubt anything else will achieve and hold significant market share.
I guess we can all better judge the situation next year when we see Photos and who signs on as a Photos plugin maker. In the meantime, know your options.
Interesting. I use LR to simply import, make the selects, edit those selects with round-trip to Photoshop and/or Nik, and export to JPEG. I don't fool around with collections, or smart this or that. I literally just have one folder, "Camera RAW Originals", that I dump all my photos into. I make my selects, do my edits, export the jpeg, then close the program.
I don't feel the need to get to involved with collections and folders, star ratings, color flags, and what not in DAM's. I simply flag the photos I want to work on and make a Quick Collection of those for the editing session. The reason being is that after I make my edits and export, I'm usually done with that image for good. I rarely go back in to "redo" my photos with whatever new RAW engine Adobe comes up with. I rather go out and make new photos and work the new stuff on those.
Perhaps my use for LR is too simplified. My family snaps are organized by Year>Event. My more professional/serious stuff is organized by genre (Street, Architecture, Portrait, etc.)
Alternative to Aperture
Six months ago, I bought Capture One. I tinkered with it on and off, but recently completed a small(ish) job with it and am getting to enjoy it. I have no compelling reason to hope that the mostly empty promise that Photos will be better/different and that I should blindly trust Apple.
Good luck
Six months ago, I bought Capture One. I tinkered with it on and off, but recently completed a small(ish) job with it and am getting to enjoy it. I have no compelling reason to hope that the mostly empty promise that Photos will be better/different and that I should blindly trust Apple.
Good luck
Not at all - Using it in a single catalog mode and not flagging, organizing a more complex set, etc, etc is just right for your workflow.
I work with someone who has 30 plus collections in each of 5 catalogs, publish to Smugmug, Facebook, and uses the hell out of the flag/star system to cull thousands of travel images before returning to a desktop system - repeat the cull of 20 to 40 thousand images from a single tour 3-5 times a year. Almost 200 pins on a world map - you get the idea.
I have 1 catalog with perhaps 2500 images for my entire life. She has 150,000 and seems to know precisely where everything needs to be in all the various collections. I'm thinking somewhere between us is the average
Last edited:
I am looking again at Capture One. Just did a comparison of 30 photos I processed in Lightroom (which I have been using since April) and Capture One. Capture One clearly beat Lightroom in 25 of the processed files. Right now Lightroom's only benefits to me are all the resources available for it and its stability (Capture One crashed on an empty catalog while importing one 16-bit tiff file).
Have you had any performance problems with Capture One?
I had the trial version for a few weeks along with LR. I went with LR in the end. Although Capture One did have nice out of the box processing of RAW files, the interface was clunky IMO. I did have it freeze up a few times when just moving around in the interface. Buttons would just stop responding.
Problems with Capture One?
I have not had problems with Capture One. Lucky perhaps. I, too, have been impressed by the results.
I am using a mid-2010 Mac Mini, 2.4 GHz, Core 2 with 8 GB RAM & 10.9.4
I am going to upgrade to Mac Pro soon, it will be so sweet to have renderings go a whole lot quicker in Final Cut Pro.
There were a few times that I grumbled about not having PhotomatixPro easily available. I had to export the files and use it as a stand-alone app.
I am also worried about Apple dumping Final Cut Pro.
"Always have a plan B, Dave" Quote from the Movie Rare Birds
I have not had problems with Capture One. Lucky perhaps. I, too, have been impressed by the results.
I am using a mid-2010 Mac Mini, 2.4 GHz, Core 2 with 8 GB RAM & 10.9.4
I am going to upgrade to Mac Pro soon, it will be so sweet to have renderings go a whole lot quicker in Final Cut Pro.
There were a few times that I grumbled about not having PhotomatixPro easily available. I had to export the files and use it as a stand-alone app.
I am also worried about Apple dumping Final Cut Pro.
"Always have a plan B, Dave" Quote from the Movie Rare Birds
That is a downside of Capture One I forgot about - plugins.
Just the one crash so far - but I had Lightroom, DxO and Olympus Viewer software open at the same time. Maybe I was stressing the machine.
Last edited:
I've been using C1 for about a week, in tandem with Aperture and LR. Fuji XTrans files.
Here's my take:
Easy to pickup, closer to Aperture than LR. The interface made a lot of sense to me after a first stage of intimidation then simply looking at the screen and absorbing the tools and the organization.
I've imported 400 shots so far into a referenced catalog. No issues with stability.
Slow, not enough to be a turn-off, but slower than Aperture or LR.
DAM is new and not there yet unless you shoot sessions. The simplest of expectations are often not met, like looking in a top level folder and expecting to see images or scrolling through a folder that contains more thumbs than fit on the display (need to use to film strip and view one at a time).
Initial renders are better than either Aperture or LR, for the most part. Some shots are rendered a bit overexposed relative to the other 2. Lowering exposure tends to warm them up more than I'd like to see. Probably not an issue once I have a better handle on the app.
Colors can be off. I took some shots over water and what C1 presented bordered on a lovely tropical sea instead of the subject Alpine lake. I much preferred it to A and LR but it certainly was an interpretation. Oranges tend towards the yellow side. Not enough experience to draw a conclusion but no color issues with the other 2.
I like the editing module. As it turned out, the auto mask feature does not work with Fuji XTrans files and, per C1, don't count on it coming. This is a tool I wanted to see work.
As a stand alone editor I might consider it. As a one-stop solution the DAM kills it for me.
I can't talk about LR. It would take me back to life in a dungeon as I find the interface and overall GUI unpleasant. Though if I had to make a decision today, that's where I would go.
I speak for the fuji xTrans but I found that the color rendering for my Olympus was great. Much more vibrant then LR or AP. I found the images out of the box so to speak were much more sharper as well.
I agree with the DAM, its all but absent, I also didn't like the lack of a grid view, maybe its a minor point for some, but I love that view in both Aperture and LR. I can then click or double click on an image to see the larger image. In C1, I have to constantly resize that film strip below to get a larger grid view and then resize it down when I'm ready to work on an image.
I agree with the DAM, its all but absent, I also didn't like the lack of a grid view, maybe its a minor point for some, but I love that view in both Aperture and LR. I can then click or double click on an image to see the larger image. In C1, I have to constantly resize that film strip below to get a larger grid view and then resize it down when I'm ready to work on an image.
That's the beauty of C1. The initial renders I was getting on XTrans were sharp and had a dimensionality to them that Aperture and and simply lacked. A potted plant I shot looked like I could reach out and touch it. Not simply a picture. I now understand why XTrans shooters like it. The few that came out bright I could live with once I figure out how to keep them from warming up, as I like a cool draw. And I'm not a color zealot who needs to record the absolute accuracy of the scene.
Where are you on DAM? I too tried moving the film strip up. Sort of a pain to accomplish something that should be a default ability. I'm waiting to see what v8 looks like. Its already out being tested so it should be within the pre Photos release timeframe.
Well maybe I'll be the one turning off the Aperture lights?
I will stick with Aperture, it's workflow file management and PP ability is fine for all my uses.
(I'm a non-pro hobbyist)
When the successor is fully launched and out then I will transition, why all the doom and gloom?
There is so much more in life to worry about, things under your direct control.
I will stick with Aperture, it's workflow file management and PP ability is fine for all my uses.
(I'm a non-pro hobbyist)
When the successor is fully launched and out then I will transition, why all the doom and gloom?
There is so much more in life to worry about, things under your direct control.
I hate C1's DAM features, its enough for me to avoid using it. Maybe things will improve with version 8 but as it stands now, C1 is not the right tool for me.
Also what are you doing about plugin use? Are you doing a manual trip with the final image not stored beside the original?
I'd have to largely forgo the use of plugins. In all fairness to C1, some of the stuff that ended up in plugins with Aperture wouldn't need too in C1. Still, its an added layer of complexity that I don't want to embrace, export/use PS/Reimport.