If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
In article , Randy
Howard wrote: As to "burying photos in its own directory structure," well, they've got to be copied SOMEWHERE from your camera, might as well let iPhoto manage them -- it does a better job than you can. I disagree. More importantly, it makes multiple copies (without asking you), making it very difficult to keep track of which version has your edits in it, and very difficult to get photos back out of it once you give up on it. It's easy to keep track of which version has your edits in it -- it's the one that opens when you double-click it in iPhoto. Getting the files out is fairly painless, just select all and drag to whatever folder you want them in (by album if you like). -- Jerry Kindall, Seattle, WA http://www.jerrykindall.com/ Send only plain text messages under 32K to the Reply-To address. This mailbox is filtered aggressively to thwart spam and viruses. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
srm wrote:
[snip] I think the point is that it's not a RAW converter. With CS2/Bridge, you can't do all that much with the file until you convert it from RAW to another format. With Aperture, Apple has designed the entire workflow around the RAW file - so it never actually gets converted until you have to output it or send it somewhere. As all the changes are non-destructive, you can go back and tweak any changes you've made based on the original raw data. It looks an interesting idea, however... [snip] I disagree that with CS2/Bridge you can't do all that much the file until you convert it. (I accept that Aperture has some good things I would like to see in Bridge+ACR). Look down the right hand side of: http://www.apple.com/aperture/process/ Yes, I would like red-eye, spot, and patch. But I appear to have just about all the rest in ACR 3.2. Plus curves, lens aberation correction, and camera calibration. (All non-destructive). Nowadays, I typically do my first A4 test print without doing any per-image work in Photoshop. If only I can find a way of printing straight from Bridge+ACR... (Perhaps I can?) Aperture, and perhaps lightcrafts' LightZone, are good pointers to future non-destructive raw editing. But I really like the ability to keep all my extra metadata, and the ACR settings, in my DNG files instead of elsewhere. I would like a superset of Bridge+ACR and Aperture - running on Windows! -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
I think the point is that it's not a RAW converter. With CS2/Bridge,
you can't do all that much with the file until you convert it from RAW to another format. With Aperture, Apple has designed the entire workflow around the RAW file - so it never actually gets converted until you have to output it or send it somewhere. As all the changes are non-destructive, you can go back and tweak any changes you've made based on the original raw data. It looks an interesting idea, however... ==================== I believe you can do the same thing in Nikon Capture by saving the NEF file. Also, I believe the latest ACR can save the adjustments into the original file. Both of these are non-destructive since the picture data isn't being changed, only the feature set that accompanies it. Kind of like changing the Table of Contents or the Index without changing the book itself. Also, just about any editing can be done in Photoshop non-destructively. It's called "layers." But I'm glad for Apple's latest release, even though I'll never use it. Anything that will make Photoshop and the other RAW converters take notice can only be a good thing. Competition is cool. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
Annika1980 wrote:
Also, just about any editing can be done in Photoshop non-destructively. It's called "layers." Not on RAW images. That said, if you want to go beyond Aperture's basic set of image manipulation features, you're going to have to convert to something like PSD or Tiff anyway, to do that work in PS. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
Annika1980 wrote:
[snip] I believe you can do the same thing in Nikon Capture by saving the NEF file. Also, I believe the latest ACR can save the adjustments into the original file. Both of these are non-destructive since the picture data isn't being changed, only the feature set that accompanies it. Kind of like changing the Table of Contents or the Index without changing the book itself. [snip] True, except for a detail: Yes, Nikon Capture can save settings to a NEF. Yes, ACR can save settings - *but only to a DNG*. It wouldn't update a NEF, etc. These raw converters are building up metadata that describes the settings being made (plus other things like copyright, etc, in the case of ACR). If they understand the format of the raw file sufficiently, they may provide the option of saving the settings to the raw file. Otherwise they save it elsewhere. Nikon understands NEF, and Adobe understands DNG. In principle, Apple & Aperture (or anyone else) could write back to DNGs where that is the raw format, because the format is documented. (DNG for the file, XMP for the metadata) They appear to have chosen not to. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
In comp.sys.mac.system Annika1980 wrote:
Also, just about any editing can be done in Photoshop non-destructively. It's called "layers." Well even Photoshop doesn't do what I would really like, which would be to have a kind of object-based editing model. So you could have a range of objects and parameters applied to them, non-destructively of course. Filters shouldn't alter the original, but just provide different lenses for it. This would be much more versatile than simple layering. Photoshop has added some functionality like this, but it's not there yet. -- / http://www.fishpool.com/~setok/ |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
Kristoffer Lawson wrote:
[snip] Well even Photoshop doesn't do what I would really like, which would be to have a kind of object-based editing model. So you could have a range of objects and parameters applied to them, non-destructively of course. Filters shouldn't alter the original, but just provide different lenses for it. This would be much more versatile than simple layering. [snip] You are right, of course! I've just addressed this elsewhere. I'll repeat some of what I said: Here are two "paradigms" for holding photo-edits here. One is to hold "instructions", the other is to hold "results". [snip] Once it is the instructions that are saved, there are some super possibilities. Think about the way that lots of HTML web pages can all use a single CSS file as their style sheet. Change that CSS, and all of those pages change their rendition without changing their data. Imagine lots of image all refering to a single instance (not multiple copies) of metadata. Edit one of those images, that metadata changes, and all of the images change simultaneously. This is the sort of thing that is becoming necessary when handling 100s of raw images at a time. With ACR, and probably with Aperture at the moment, you have to apply the change to every image, perhaps by some sort of copying operation. But, in future, by sharing metadata, changing one bit of data would change them all. All the computer science concepts of OO, type hierarchies, and inheritance, could be used to make the workflow easier. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
In article .com,
"Barry Pearson" wrote: Kristoffer Lawson wrote: [snip] Well even Photoshop doesn't do what I would really like, which would be to have a kind of object-based editing model. So you could have a range of objects and parameters applied to them, non-destructively of course. Filters shouldn't alter the original, but just provide different lenses for it. This would be much more versatile than simple layering. [snip] You are right, of course! I've just addressed this elsewhere. I'll repeat some of what I said: Here are two "paradigms" for holding photo-edits here. One is to hold "instructions", the other is to hold "results". [snip] Once it is the instructions that are saved, there are some super possibilities. Think about the way that lots of HTML web pages can all use a single CSS file as their style sheet. Change that CSS, and all of those pages change their rendition without changing their data. Imagine lots of image all refering to a single instance (not multiple copies) of metadata. Edit one of those images, that metadata changes, and all of the images change simultaneously. This is the sort of thing that is becoming necessary when handling 100s of raw images at a time. With ACR, and probably with Aperture at the moment, you have to apply the change to every image, perhaps by some sort of copying operation. But, in future, by sharing metadata, changing one bit of data would change them all. All the computer science concepts of OO, type hierarchies, and inheritance, could be used to make the workflow easier. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ I'm basically a video producer who lurks here to learn, but I'll note that in Apple's Final Cut Pro, one of the most useful software designs is the ability to globally cut and paste "attributes" across a range of clips. Essentially, if you filter a single clip to your taste, you can simply COPY those filter attributes with a keystroke combo, then paste them to any range of clips you select, including ALL. If you don't like the result on some or all of the clips, you can use the "remove attributes" command to pull some or all of those attributes from some or any of the clips. It's completely non-destructive, undo-able, save-able and exportable. It sounds like precisely the kind of non-destructive meta-data changes you're talking about here. I suspect that the thinking behind this approach to image manipulation that Apple already has successfully built into FCP and Motion will be a part of the interface to Aperature as well. It's been interesting to watch as Apple has applied their expertise to my field (video production and editing) and truely re-invented a lot of the traditional work flow for the better - making it more accessible and arguably more powerful while maintaining manual control for those who want to "dive deep" into the software. If Aperature does for photo manipulation what FCP did for video manipulation, I suspect it will be a pretty large success. Tho there will be plenty of people who hate it because it makes quality photo manipulation easier for the "average" user. I always ignore that because it's never the tool that achieves excellence - it's always the brain behind the tool. And if you have excellent photographic and artistic skills, you should never be any more threatened by this stuff than an outstanding piano player is by the addition of more buttons on the latest fancy digital keyboard. FWIW |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
Barry Pearson wrote:
Kristoffer Lawson wrote: [snip] Well even Photoshop doesn't do what I would really like, which would be to have a kind of object-based editing model. So you could have a range of objects and parameters applied to them, non-destructively of course. Filters shouldn't alter the original, but just provide different lenses for it. This would be much more versatile than simple layering. [snip] You are right, of course! I've just addressed this elsewhere. I'll repeat some of what I said: Here are two "paradigms" for holding photo-edits here. One is to hold "instructions", the other is to hold "results". [snip] Once it is the instructions that are saved, there are some super possibilities. Think about the way that lots of HTML web pages can all use a single CSS file as their style sheet. Change that CSS, and all of those pages change their rendition without changing their data. Imagine lots of image all refering to a single instance (not multiple copies) of metadata. Edit one of those images, that metadata changes, and all of the images change simultaneously. This is the sort of thing that is becoming necessary when handling 100s of raw images at a time. With ACR, and probably with Aperture at the moment, you have to apply the change to every image, perhaps by some sort of copying operation. But, in future, by sharing metadata, changing one bit of data would change them all. All the computer science concepts of OO, type hierarchies, and inheritance, could be used to make the workflow easier. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ You might have forgotten that Photoshop has "HISTORY" and "ACTIONS" features. It's a just a matter of fact for Adobe to incorporate them with the original "untouched" file. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Apple: Aperture not a Photoshop competitor
l e o wrote:
Barry Pearson wrote: [snip] Here are two "paradigms" for holding photo-edits here. One is to hold "instructions", the other is to hold "results". [snip] Once it is the instructions that are saved, there are some super possibilities. Think about the way that lots of HTML web pages can all use a single CSS file as their style sheet. Change that CSS, and all of those pages change their rendition without changing their data. Imagine lots of image all refering to a single instance (not multiple copies) of metadata. Edit one of those images, that metadata changes, and all of the images change simultaneously. This is the sort of thing that is becoming necessary when handling 100s of raw images at a time. With ACR, and probably with Aperture at the moment, you have to apply the change to every image, perhaps by some sort of copying operation. But, in future, by sharing metadata, changing one bit of data would change them all. All the computer science concepts of OO, type hierarchies, and inheritance, could be used to make the workflow easier. [snip] You might have forgotten that Photoshop has "HISTORY" and "ACTIONS" features. It's a just a matter of fact for Adobe to incorporate them with the original "untouched" file. No I haven't forgotten them. I use them just about every day. (I've just been recording some more actions, trying, and so far failing, to satisfactorily emulate some of the features in Aperture! Specifically printing directly, instead of using Photoshop as a UI to the printer driver each time. I often use batch actions from Bridge+ACR). Actions and history are yet more ways of trying to get some of the advantages of the "instructions" paradigm when you began software development with the "results" paradigm. Whereas adjustment layers are a relatively easy form of instructions, actions need special invokation, and have lots of limitations. (Try doing "print with preview" from an action and see the warnings you get). History is getting close, and saving history could achieve some of the effects. But Photoshop is simply the wrong starting point! If you are in Photoshop, you have already converted from raw to RGB or CYMK or whatever. You are no longer working with the "digital negative". Some decisions got committed in the conversion from raw linear space to converted gamma space. Working with Aperture is like working with Bridge+ACR. You are still in raw, linear, space, with no committed decisions such as WB or exposure, etc. The maximum possible information from the camera is still available. -- Barry Pearson http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lenses with fixed aperture | Skip M | Digital Photography | 2 | January 12th 05 06:08 AM |
Photoshop CS leaves Photoshop 7 on my hard drive??? | Anonymous | Digital Photography | 3 | December 17th 04 06:31 PM |
Cinematte for Photoshop on Macintosh | Kermit Woodall | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | October 27th 04 01:21 PM |
ANN: Fantastic Photoshop Plugin Available on Mac/PC | Kermit Woodall | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | May 26th 04 02:17 AM |
FS: Cinematte for Windows and Macintosh Photoshop now Shipping | Kermit Woodall | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | May 7th 04 01:01 AM |