
Aperture 2.0
#1
Posted 12 February 2008 - 06:52 AM
Apparently including raw support for the d300, d3, 1DSMK III, faster 'optimised' database and extra juicy sweet filling.
Maybe less beachballs too. We can only hope.
D300, D200, D70, 12-24 f4 AFS DX, 60mm f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 AF-S VR, 105 f2.8 AF-S VR, Tokina Wunderlens.
Photo galleries @ Ruaux.net
#2
Posted 12 February 2008 - 07:14 AM
Like me

dhaas
www.haasimages.com
#3
Posted 12 February 2008 - 08:36 AM
#4
Posted 12 February 2008 - 09:57 AM
When I auditioned raw converters recently I chose to see how each converter handled a ColorChecker chart. Such a test is objective and I had a script that could tell me how well, or badly, each converter did. I found, much to my astonishment, that many of the most highly regarded converters were difficult or impossible to achieve good results with. I did not test Aperture at that time. I would love to see anything that demonstrates anything "amazing" from any raw converter. Meanwhile, I like to see a converter get colors correct.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith
------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries
#5
Posted 12 February 2008 - 10:03 AM
I spent some time with Vincent Versace a few weeks back and he is convinced that the only RAW convertor Nikon users should use is Capture NX, even if using Aperture/Lightroom etc. With Canon he does not think it makes a difference as he was not too impressed with Canon's proprietary software.Which video demonstrates amazing capabilities? I watched quite a few of the raw conversion videos and read the section on new raw image quality features but didn't see anything I'd describe as amazing. Perhaps the results are, but that can't be shown in a video.
When I auditioned raw converters recently I chose to see how each converter handled a ColorChecker chart. Such a test is objective and I had a script that could tell me how well, or badly, each converter did. I found, much to my astonishment, that many of the most highly regarded converters were difficult or impossible to achieve good results with. I did not test Aperture at that time. I would love to see anything that demonstrates anything "amazing" from any raw converter. Meanwhile, I like to see a converter get colors correct.
Did you test Capture NX?
#6
Posted 12 February 2008 - 10:19 AM
I have the current NX but haven't run ColorChecker shots through it.
It's possible to use NX or any raw converter and import the TIFFs into Lightroom. Doing so will still give you access to every Lightroom adjustment, including those associated closely with ACR. I've been considering trying that combination.
- Col. John "Hannibal" Smith
------
Nikon, Seatool, Nexus, Inon
My Galleries
#7
Posted 16 February 2008 - 10:18 AM
I do like the aperture 2.0 converter better. Not sure how to describe it, I haven't spent that much time with it yet. Donno.. more saturated, more pop, more something. Maybe smarter contrast or detail out in the wings of the histogram or something.
In high speed mode, where adjustments are shut off, aperture 2.0 screams. My laptop is almost 6 years old, a 1.33 GHz G4, and I can page through raw files like they are small jpegs. No delay at all. This is fantastic for making your initial edits and selects. It's just what I want.
Turning on the new raw converter and all the new stuff when you get out of high speed mode... I think it's slower than 1.1 on my laptop, but that figures, it's doing more.
Overall, I'm very happy with it.
And hoping they announce 17" laptops with LED screens and the new trackpad soon.
#8
Posted 16 February 2008 - 03:10 PM
I spent some time with Vincent Versace a few weeks back and he is convinced that the only RAW convertor Nikon users should use is Capture NX, even if using Aperture/Lightroom etc.
I went to a Nikonians Capture NX class in December. The instructor felt that Aperture/Lightroom didn't work too well in a workflow when using Capture NX. He likes using Photo Mechanic, then Capture NX and then Photoshop if additional work is needed after Capture NX. I don't have PM, Aperture or Lightroom yet and am still trying to decide what would be the best workflow.
Edited by ornate_wrasse, 16 February 2008 - 05:54 PM.
www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse
#9
Posted 16 February 2008 - 03:46 PM
I don't have PM, Aperture or Lightroom yet and am still trying to decide what would be the best workflow.
You may want to hold off a bit and see what happens when Aperture hits the streets (I ordered a copy earlier today

Of course some of it may be puffery, but it seems that Apple took a long hard look at Aperture to improve it and really make the application more mature and they dropped the price to $199 (like Lightroom). Apple claims the engine is rewritten to focus on RAW conversions and being to bring the application up to date quicker for new cameras. Guess we'll see.

#10
Posted 16 February 2008 - 04:35 PM
I went to a Nikonians Capture NX class in December. The instructor felt that it Aperture/Lightroom didn't work too well in a workflow when using Capture NX. He likes using Photo Mechanic, then Capture NX and then Photoshop if additional work is needed after Capture NX. I don't have PM, Aperture or Lightroom yet and am still trying to decide what would be the best workflow.
there's no one answer for everyone. The system has to work the way you do. And these things have steep learning curves, you need to take the 30 day free trials and really live with the aps, really give them a fair trial. You can't back away after 5 minutes if you don't get the interface immediately. It's a hard problem, you can't expect the solution to work instantly.
and this may be blasphemy, but to me there is more than just the quality of the final output. The ap also has to let you work with your photos, back them up, etc, do other things... if it gets you a great final image but it takes hours to get there, you won't get there that often.
#11
Posted 16 February 2008 - 04:45 PM
Cor
website | tripreports/journal | facebook | wetpixel map | twitter
#12
Posted 16 February 2008 - 05:29 PM
And lastly I import the PSDs into Imatch, where I add additional custom property information and use scripting to generate SQL data for my web gallery database. Unfortunately, Imatch is windows, so for now I'm stuck with that. I'm playing with Iview to see if it'll do what I need, but it seems to have some limitations. If I could define my own custom metadata fields in Lightroom I might be able to get by without a separate database.
I also have Aperture 1.5 and plan on upgrading it and delving into it a little further to see how it compares to Lightroom for fitting into my particular workflow. I have not spent alot of quality time with it so far.
#13
Posted 16 February 2008 - 06:13 PM
I use Photo Mechanic to rename, cull, and stamp basic IPTC info on my images every time I download. Then I import them into Lightroom and do the bulk of my processing there.
That was another point my instructor made, i.e. to use PM to stamp basic IPTC info as well as name/date on his images. His point was that if someone were to steal an image, you had the info to prove the image was yours. Doing the stamping of the data on the image meant there was no need to place a watermark on the image.
Linda, we are just going to have to get together for coffee/lunch somewhere in this great town we live in. I promise I'll buy if you'll teach me all about your workflow.

www.pbase.com/ornate_wrasse
#15
Posted 17 February 2008 - 03:01 PM
That was another point my instructor made, i.e. to use PM to stamp basic IPTC info as well as name/date on his images. His point was that if someone were to steal an image, you had the info to prove the image was yours. Doing the stamping of the data on the image meant there was no need to place a watermark on the image.
Linda, we are just going to have to get together for coffee/lunch somewhere in this great town we live in. I promise I'll buy if you'll teach me all about your workflow.
I'm always glad to share what I know, Ellen, but I'm the first to admit that my methods aren't the right choice for everybody. Mine are tuned to produce the data for my website, and also to incorporate all the film stuff that I still do along with digital. I try to simplify as much as I can, but it's always a struggle.
Much of what I do in PM is doable in Lightroom or Aperture as well; they both have support for IPTC metadata. There seems to be overlap in many of the tools these days, as the software packages strive to be the overall right tool for everyone. They all have strong and weak points, though.
Hmmm, looks like the Aperture upgrade package is finally in stock. Think I'll mosey over there

Linda
#16
Posted 19 February 2008 - 04:36 AM
Merrily using Aperture and Leopard at the moment!

Edited by loftus, 19 February 2008 - 04:38 AM.
#17
Posted 27 March 2008 - 08:26 PM
I am really enjoying the new Aperture so far. The improvements are significant. I'll have more to say when I've put it through more.
Hi Eric,
I was checking back to see your opinion on Aperture 2 now hat you have had some time with it? I am getting a new Mac and am wondering whether to get the Aperture, Lightroom or Photo Mechanic for the workflow.
Decisions, Decisions?
Also, It doesnt appear that Proshow Gold is available in a Mac Version I dont think. What slideshow software would you recommend for Macs?
Cheers,
Chuck (Hups)
Nikon D300 in Aquatica Housing, Duel Ikelite DS125 Strobes
Nikon 60mm, Nikon 105mm, Tokina 10-17 fisheye
web.mac.com/undersea4me
#18
Posted 27 March 2008 - 11:27 PM
Paul C
#19
Posted 28 March 2008 - 07:34 AM
#20
Posted 28 March 2008 - 08:35 AM
I think all 3 programs offer trial downloads you may want to try. I have used Aperture since it's release and liked it but Version 1 had real speed issues. Version 2 flies, and on a new Mac should be awesome. I prefer the interface providing everything directly available from one window. I also think the sort and stack workflow on Aperture beats Lightroom and is Aperure's strongest point.Hi Eric,
I was checking back to see your opinion on Aperture 2 now hat you have had some time with it? I am getting a new Mac and am wondering whether to get the Aperture, Lightroom or Photo Mechanic for the workflow.
Decisions, Decisions?
Also, It doesnt appear that Proshow Gold is available in a Mac Version I dont think. What slideshow software would you recommend for Macs?
Cheers,
Chuck (Hups)
I have not looked at Photomechanic in a while but the earlier versions were more limited for editing purposes.
The main advantage of Photomechanic was it's speed of downloading - I'm not sure it's as much of an advantage anymore vs Aperture 2's improved speed, particularly now that one can review in Quick Preview mode. It takes a little time getting a feel for Aperture's keyboard shortcut's, but once oriented, the program is extremely fluid and fast to work in.