Apple stops development of Aperture

Apple introduced a new Photos app during its Worldwide Developers Conference that will become the new platform for the company. As part of the transition, Apple told me today that they will no longer be developing its professional photography application, Aperture.

“With the introduction of the new Photos app and iCloud Photo Library, enabling you to safely store all of your photos in iCloud and access them from anywhere, there will be no new development of Aperture,” said Apple in a statement provided to The Loop. “When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X.”

PhotosforOSX2

Apple’s new Photos app

The new Photos app will also replace iPhoto, giving users a more seamless experience on Apple devices. The app will allow you to edit and search your entire photos library in the cloud on any of your Apple devices.

Apple was very clear when I spoke with them this morning that development on other pro apps like Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro is continuing. Professionals in those app categories should not worry about their apps—they will continue as normal.



  • itpromike

    Noooooooo! ;-(

    Well actually that depends… are they going to maintain the same Pro type features and options as Aperture and to a lesser extent iPhoto or are they simply going to beef up the photo features of preview for instance and make the new Photos app just consumer focussed and leave photo folks in the hands of the likes of Adobe?

    • freediverx

      “will no longer be developing its professional photography application”

      That’s a very precise statement. If they meant that Photos would take over Aperture’s capabilities they would have worded this differently. The fact that they made a point of saying “their professional photography application” suggests they are completely giving up and focusing entirely on a dumbed down photo storage app with simple editing tools.

      • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

        You missed the quote over the paraphrase by one paragraph.

      • Sigivald

        It suggests to me that they won’t have a separate pro application, not that they’re removing any sort of “pro” features.

        It’s far too early to simply assume “it’s just a reworked iPhoto”, based on one phrase in a statement not even directly published by Apple.

        (Not that I think Jim’s paraphrasing or foolin’ us – just that a statement made to The Loop might not be subjected to the same level of Fine Parsing Control as a press release.

        And honestly, the idea that Kremlinology-like one must finely parse every statement to winkle out The Implications They’re Not Willing To Say Openly is a bit much.)

        • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

          I’m sure he is paraphrasing, as otherwise he’d have put it in quotes. But he’s not misleading anyone. Too much not being said is being read between the lines.

          • freediverx

            Given the sensitive nature of this announcement, would you agree Apple could have done a better job communicating it?

          • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

            If they wanted complete understanding about every aspect of Photos replacing iPhoto, then sure they could have communicated better.

            But they said what they apparently wanted to say: iPhoto is being replaced by something more useful and capable. Photos being less than Aperture is just speculation at this point (though probably true, at least for 1.0).

    • JohnDoey

      My guess is that the Photos app will be both iPhoto for the cloud and Aperture for the cloud. If you use Photos with an iPhone or similar camera, I would bet it will treat you like you are running iPhoto, but if you use Photos with a Canon 5D or similar camera, I would bet it will treat you like you are running Aperture.

      The reason I say this is that Photos is a photo front end for iCloud, and sells iCloud storage. Why wouldn’t they encourage people who own a Canon 5D to buy $100 of additional iCloud storage and upload their giant RAW files to the cloud? At the same time, consumers who are using an iPhone will buy $25 of iCloud storage to store their tiny JPEG’s.

      So there is an obvious way to monetize Photos for both consumer and pro photographers, and the app is going to have to support both consumer and pro cameras anyway.

      Right now, there are likely users who are using a pro camera with iPhoto, and users who are using a consumer camera with Aperture. It makes sense to combine the 2 apps into one app and respond in a consumer or pro way to whatever camera is being used, and to have only one kind of cloud library for Apple to manage on the back end.

      Of course I don’t know this for sure. But I would certainly hold off on freaking out until more is known about the Photos app and see if it is a good upgrade path for Aperture users.

      The other alternative would be Apple abandoning the pro photography market to Adobe, which would put Apple in the same situation that they were in during the 1990′s when they had to go begging at Adobe for them to port Premiere to Mac OS X, which is what resulted in the creation of Final Cut Pro and the purchase of Logic.

      • nuttmedia

        I’ll take the other side of that bet. Apple is getting out of supporting pro-level photo features. The vast majority of Apple users want a simple solution to sync, store, and organize shots taken chiefly with their iDevice; the 95% solution. The edge case of users who want and need solutions beyond what Photos will provide can turn to Lightroom.

        Also, your 1990′s analogy is a bit misplaced. The scale and marketplace, and thus the leverage, is dramatically different.

        And as an aside, FCP was bought from Macromedia, not developed internally at Apple.

        • sassymacgeek

          I don’t agree. Aperture was one of the top grossing apps in the App Store. They are doing a Final Cut X… starting from scratch bringing together all their modern frameworks, adding a robust plugin architecture, for all the great plugins that came make a powerful and complete app even better. I will wait and see what happens before jumping ship.

  • Boback

    Oh fuck me! Lightroom it is then.

    Not so sure the Photo app will be designed for pro/semi pro photographers who need more fine tuning than grandma on her iMac.

    • M. O.
      • KD

        Yes ;-) Way better tahn LR

      • Travis

        Thank you! I loved iView MediaPro when I started using it many years ago. I thought this software was just abandon-ware after MS bought and re-branded it. Looks like PhaseOne has revived it and offers nice upgrade prices too for us old iView and MS software owners.

    • GFYantiapplezealots

      Then if you’re not sure why have you already decided on lightroom?

      • Boback

        Because I had already bought Lightroom, just hadn’t moved my 450Gb of RAW images over to it. But it’s decided now I guess.

    • Mary Sobers-Levitt

      Hey! There are plenty of professional photographer Grandmas!!

  • http://adamstein.com Adam Stein

    They will continue as normal… until they dont….

    • http://www.theuniversalsteve.com SSteve

      That was my first thought exactly. Luckily, though, I don’t see them ditching Logic Pro for GarageBand in the foreseeable future.

      • http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/ Russ Hughes

        Just like we didn’t see them ditching Lightroom, or Shake, or Final Cut Server, or X-San, or X-Serve or…

        • Todd Bradley

          …Color.

        • JohnDoey

          The difference with Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro as compared to Aperture:

          • Aperture has 5 years of history and is the least most popular app in its class
          • Final Cut has 15 years of history and is the single most popular app in its class
          • Logic Pro has 25 years of history and is the single most popular app in its class
          • Ayvee

            Aperture has 9 years of history. And it is NOT “the least… popular app in its class”

          • Sasparilla2

            Aperture is the #4 top grossing app over in the Apple App Store.

          • sassymacgeek

            There are only two real contenders.. LR and AP… in this scenario it definitely isn’t the most popular app in it’s class. I still think Photos will surprise us.

  • Colin Mattson

    Balls.

    Aperture may be lacking in features, but unlike Lightroom, it has reliably worked.

    • nutmac

      Not for me. My Aperture library has become corrupted several times (thankfully, photos are still intact), requiring me to rebuild the project structure (it doesn’t help that it doesn’t report the corruption, which means my backups also got corrupted).

      I switched to Lightroom since then, which I frankly don’t think has as good UI as Aperture, but much faster and much more capable.

      • matthewmaurice

        Yep.

      • M. O.

        I’ve got 30,000 photos in Aperture going back to 2004, and have never had a single corruption issue in its library. So, your mileage clearly varies. I suspect disk sector issues cause a lot of people’s issues, but they would cause issues with any data that sat on top of the disk corruption.

        • nutmac

          According to DiskWarrior, my disk is fine, although HFS+ not doing data integrity check, I can’t be 100%.

          Having said that, Aperture frequently gets stuck in “Updating Library” when quitting the app and I have on many occasions, forced quit Aperture as a result. So my library corruption could be a direct result of that.

          • M. O.

            I had a lot of that “stuck” when quitting behavior, too, at one point. I had 8 GB of RAM in my 2011 Macbook Pro, and always thought that was adequate. But recently I upgraded to the max for this Mac… 16 GB. A lot of the spinning pinwheels have disappeared.

            But yes, if you force-quit out of Aperture, it’s going to cause some issues it will have to rebuild at some point.

  • Robs

    Will they also stop developing iPhoto? It’s not quite clear to me from the text.

    • Sean Doran

      “The new Photos app will also replace iPhoto.”

      Yep!

    • Dmitri

      seems to me they stopped development on iphoto a number of years ago.

  • Dave Aiello

    Since iOS 7 was released, I’ve become convinced that Apple had to move in this direction. The vast majority of photos created in the Apple ecosystem are never edited, and aren’t as extensively curated by the photographer as was the case even 5 years ago.

    So why should the primary photo applications on MacOS X be associated with curating and editing anymore?

    • freediverx

      If Apple were to cater solely to what “the vast majority” of their users did on their computers, do you really think they could sell a lot of $2000-3000 computers in an age where a $600 PC can accomplish the same tasks?

      • Sigivald

        “The same tasks” don’t including “running OSX”.

        (And I’d love to see the links to these $600 PCs that are equivalent to a $2000 Mac?

        I can imagine, industrial design and the like aside, spec-equivalence for a little less [maybe as low as $1500!], but not 1/3 the price.

        The other interpretation is that you believe people are buying Retina MBPs and 27″ iMacs to do jobs a midrange Dell could do “the same”.

        Which suggests either 1) they think OSX and OSX-only apps, and Apple’s design features and quality provide them lots of value or 2) somehow Apple and only Apple can convince huge numbers of people to spend three time as much money as needed on a computer?

        Why can’t e.g. Sony get in on that action? Didn’t they kill their high-end VAIOs because nobody would buy them?

        Is this some weird Apple mind control?)

        • freediverx

          “I’d love to see the links to these $600 PCs that are equivalent to a $2000 Mac?”

          I didn’t say $600 PCs were equivalent. I don’t think ANY PC is equivalent to ANY Mac, given the difference in OS and ecosystems.

          I said they were capable of doing what “the vast majority” of Apple customers probably use their computers for (email, web browsing, light office work, light photo management, music/video consumption.)

          I believe it is an influential minority of Apple customers that make better use of their computers’ potential and these people evangelize the brand and help inspire others to buy Apple products.

          • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

            people buying $2-3000 macs aren’t using hem to just browse or send emails. get real.

          • JeanLucLabarre

            Fix your shift key. Idiot.

      • Dave Aiello

        I never said anything about the vast majority of users. I was talking about the vast majority of the photos that users create.

        The pro-level photographers who used Aperture will have to think about switching at some point, mainly for large digital photo repository management.

        But I’m willing to bet that the App Extensions in Yosemite that add editing and workflow support features to the new Photos app end up remaking the workflows of many professionals soon after Yosemite’s final release.

      • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

        a $600 desktop cannot accomplish the same tasks as a $3000 workstation. you simply have little idea what you’re talking about.

    • http://www.myspace.com/davidschwab DavidRavenMoon

      Actually I have found that many of the things I used to do in Photoshop, I’m now able to do in iPhoto, such as adjusting color. I have done this for a living for the past 2 decades, so I was impressed with some of the editing features brought into iPhoto.

      Since they keep adding more features, my feeling is that they are just coming out with one application, Photos, that will replace both of the older applications.

      I have never used Aperture, or Lightroom, so I can’t comment on those. And lately I actually do a fair amount of editing right on my iPhone using Adobe PS Express and a few other apps, which actually surprised me. lol So a more robust editing app that will run on iOS is welcomed. I can’t even remember the last time I opened iPhoto.

      • sassymacgeek

        Agreed. A photos app built for their new hardware and core iOS services, which were demoed at WWDC and looked amazing!

    • sassymacgeek

      Photos will have a robust editing system more like Aperture than Photos, or perhaps surpassing both. The question is why develop two separate applications when Apple’s new mantra is to give the stuff away? When Photos is installed on millions of Macs there will be much better plugin support for truly advanced features beyond those that will already come with the package. Apple could build one app and have in-app purchasing but again I think for photography they will give this stuff away for free.

  • DougFisher

    I don’t want all of my photos to be on all of my devices. I use Aperture for my pro stuff for a reason, it stores thousands of photos that need to be culled through before they end up on any cloud.

    • 11thIndian

      Since we don’t know what the feature set of Photos will be yet, it’s hard to say if curation will be negatively impacted. It will be a truly odd move though if Apple can combine the consumer and professional apps into a single program.

      • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

        You think so? I think that keeping them separate is odd.

        Having extra metadata and editing tools isn’t going to hurt the consumer if they’re done well. The risk is that the pro users might lose out on a few tools. (In fact, I think that’s likely.)

        Meanwhile, we’re getting so many photos that I think new organizational tools will useful to everyone. Can Apple build organizational tools that will satisfy everyone? I don’t see why not.

        That said, I assume Photos is going to take a hit somewhere just like iMovie 08 did. And what pro users are most upset about losing will be in Photos 1.1 or 2.0.

        The interesting thing, I think, is that Apple communicated this at all. Aperture 3.0 and iPhoto 9.0 (iPhoto 11) both shipped in 2010, after all. The smart money is on Apple working on Photos for a year (probably more, maybe much more) already.

  • Dave

    That bytes, I love Aperture. Very sad, unless of course all the things I love about it are brought over to the Photos app.

    • Prof. Peabody

      I’d like someone to clearly explain what’s really different about the Aperture app as opposed to iPhoto, and what extra features it really has. Every time I’ve looked into switching to Aperture and downloaded the demo, it seems kind of like six of one and half a dozen of the other except for the look and feel.

      I’m not saying they are the same, but they sure are very, very similar. As are all photo library applications from any vendor. Most of the folks I know that prefer Aperture, seem to do so only so they can pose as a “pro,” not because of any real extra features that they actually use that much.

      • Wayner83

        Aperture gives you much better access to EXIF data, organization, advanced editing, Filters, External editing, Importing and Exporting, as well as much better Raw support.

      • Dave

        I wouldn’t be surprised if many consumers of Aperture could do just as well as iPhoto, but Aperture is still MUCH more powerful – especially when working with multiple projects.

      • Snowrider

        Importing options are TONS better. Like where, importing with presets. Tethering? Tethering to an external HD + Internal drive at the same time? Choosing where you want the photos to go if you don’t just want them in the Library?

        -Adjustments- Brushes. Brushes on top of Brushes. Selective adjustments with brushes and adjustments. Retouching tools?

        -Exporting? Millions of customizable Export options? There’s ton’s. Not just “SHARE”. I’m talking about full on customized export options. And with BorderFX plug-in, customized borders and watermarking? I can export 16bit psd files to 500pixel wide medium rez jpegs with in a batch process and expedite to clients.

        EXIF options?

        I’m pretty upset if they REMOVE the tools pros need to expedite jobs.

        But if the UPGRADE of let’s say….

        The new Keynote 11′ or Pages 11′

        is to… the new Mavericks Keynote or Pages… is comparable to Aperture’s future. This will be very very disheartening.

        Right now though… I’m concerned about file management and how continuity will be between Aperture and the new…. Photos app…

        • man

          iMovie 2013 was a bad deal for my event library, so I’m not encouraged.

      • Prof. Peabody

        With the greatest respect, (and thanks for all the responses), this still doesn’t seem hugely different in terms of feature sets to me. iPhoto has EXIF data and lets you edit it, so it seems like Aperture having a bit more is not an essential difference and not impossible to add into the new app.

        IMO if you are using “brushes” then you should really be using a different app altogether too, but most of the other differences could easily be addressed by a simple plug-in architecture.

        • Kirby Krieger

          Don’t speak out of ignorance. The differences are extensive and profound.

          Do you have any experience with Aperture? Do you have any reason for your statement about brushes, or just spreading ignorance?

          As for posing as a “Pro” — stop the troll-baiting as well, PROf. Peabody.

        • http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

          You don’t edit EXIF information. (I know it’s possible, but there’s no reason to.) You edit IPTC information. Is that what you meant?

          iPhoto is a shadow compared to Aperture or Lightroom or Bridge/Photoshop when it comes to metadata management.

          • ricohflex

            Yes you do. For example when the date on camera was set wrongly and many photos were taken. When you realise it during post process, you can edit the EXIF to set the dates correctly.

          • http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

            My point was EXIF is not the metadata we’re talking about. That is something you normally don’t edit – except in circumstances like you mention, and with specialized software. You can’t edit EXIF metadata with Bridge, for example. And for good reasons.

        • Phil Mildren

          At the most basic level…iPhoto allows you to store RAW photos but only lets you edit JPEGs. Aperture of course stores RAW but let you edit an uncompressed photo. There is a drastic difference in your results. The amount of light and color data lost in a JPEG is something like 90%.

          Another difference is the way that Aperture and iPhoto handle their respective libraries. I have seen number iPhoto libraries become corrupted/crash/”move at a snail’s pace” because it loads all of the pictures in its Library. Aperture only loads quick thumbnails then loads a RAW image one at a time.

          We could fill a page with features we use that aren’t included in iPhoto but it would take even longer to explain how we use all those features. The reason it doesn’t seem like a big deal is because you’re not understanding its significance to the user.

          • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

            Have you used iPhoto recently?

            RAW: iPhoto applies edits to raw files and saves the edits as JPEGs, true. However, as you edit the edit list is re-applied to the RAW file from Masters. You can export the edited images as RAW, too, bypassing JPEG entirely.

            THUMBNAILS: iPhoto loads photos as necessary to render thumbnails. Those are stored in Thumbnails. You can sometimes outrun it and see the thumbnails in odd places as the full image is loaded.

      • Billy Razzle

        I always thought the big draw of Aperture was RAW editing.

        • http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

          That and a lot of other stuff.

      • freediverx

        Aperture has far more flexible tools for managing and browsing image libraries along with far more sophisticated image editing tools that some years ago would have been the domain of apps like Photoshop.

        No point going into detail when Apple has a nifty page to do it for me:

        https://www.apple.com/aperture/iphoto-to-aperture/

        Lightroom has many of the same features but its interface and workflows are horrible, as are all Adobe apps.

      • man

        Aperture is the better at organizing and processing photos than iPhoto. There isn’t that much difference in the presentation layer, but Aperture really shines when you have RAW workflow with multiple libraries. Also, the database structure is very solid.

      • Gerard J

        iPhoto is aimed at the average home user, Aperture at advanced users. I won’t say Pro as anyone with a large library could benefit from Aperture over iPhoto. There’s no one single thing that makes Aperture better than iPhoto, and iPhoto has done a lot of catching up but here’s the top 10 reasons I use Aperture instead of iPhoto:

        • Until recently (and I don’t know when) Aperture would import all iCloud photos and put them in your library automatically, it created a uniquely named project for each month of imports.

        • Vaults. You can have multiple backup drives that you rotate through and Aperture updates them all whenever they are seen.

        • Library switching from within the application. iPhoto requires you to restart. Export all your less-than-three-star photos to a separate library every year and you can keep down the number of photos active in your main library.

        • Light table. When you’re previewing photos for a project you can drag a bunch of photos to a workspace and arrange and compare them.

        • Robust oranizaion: Libraries, Projects, Albums, Folders suits my needs better than just the albums and libraries of iPhoto

        • searching/EXIF data access. I shoot with several cameras: my iPhone, iPad, Canon 40d and my GF’s Android phone. With Aperture I can quickly locate images by the camera that took the image, the image size, whether the flash fired, exposure, or just about anything else you can imagine related to a photo.

        • Stacks. If I shoot in high speed shutter rate I can choose the single best image and stack all the others behind (in rating order) so only the one image shows in a list.

        • Versions. I can make edits to a photo without altering the original just like iPhoto, but I can freeze and permanently apply changes by creating a version at any time. The version then can be altered and then the single best one put on top of a stack.

        • Plugins. I regularly use de-noise and resize plugins for Aperture, the de-noise in bulk. Theres simply no way to do this easily in iPhoto which does allow external editors but that requires manual interaction in the external editor.

        •Loupe. Bring up the loupe and any photo on the screen (even thumbnails) can be viewed at 100% (or more) just like looking at a light table for film.

        For me, those features add up to a compelling upgrade to iPhoto and if the Photos app does at least most of those things then I’ll eventually move to it.

  • http://paulsalzman.com psimac

    This could be good. Of course, it could be limited. On the bright side, it could be one less application I need to manage. Does anyone know if Photos will have any sort of plugin architecture?

    Perhaps I should get up to speed on Lightroom…

    • http://www.thegraphicmac.com/ JimD

      You should start looking at Lightroom now, that way you have a grasp of it when Photos finally comes out and iPhoto & Aperture are no longer available.

      • freediverx

        Sure, and get ready to give up Aperture’s elegant interface and intuitive workflows for Adobe’s clunky and bloated alternative along with a forced rent-an-app subscription service.

        • http://www.thegraphicmac.com/ JimD

          What’s your point? Do you have a better option that Lightroom for pro-level photo management?

          Besides that, there probably isn’t a single person in these comments that has seen or used the new Photos app – so it’s kind of early to be worrying about this anyway.

          • Brian

            I like DxO Optics. The library management is so-so, but the editing is fantastic.

            I can’t think of anything better for management than Aperture though.

    • http://www.ubuntouch-fr.org/ Arnaud Ober

      Today, we don’t Know Anything about Photos. Just That it Will be available early 2015 with icloud gallery photos. Nothing more.

  • James Williamson

    This is unfortunate. What if I don’t want to pay Apple to store my photos? Will Apple own or assume rights to my photos (as many cloud licenses decree)? What are the cloud licensing complications of Apple storing photos that I don’t own (such as those borrowed from the web or licensed from stock images houses)?

    • Renverse

      Presumably they’ll only store photos in a certain directory. It’s incredibly unwieldy to just upload all of the photos on your disk to the cloud, not to mention plainly dumb.

      • Ron Miller

        I hope so … I have 910GB of photos and videos in my Aperture library!

        • isitjustme

          Just a suggestion keep them in your hard drives.

          I don’t think you need to store them in iCloud when you are using the new Photos app if you don’t want to.

    • Sigivald

      Will Apple own or assume rights to my photos (as many cloud licenses decree)?

      Which licenses would those be?

      Especially that make the cloud provider “own” your photos?

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      can you please cite your hysteria-panic suggestion that iCloud is mandatory?

      • CN

        Tell me Kyron, how does that ass taste?

      • James Williamson

        Certainly didn’t intent to sound hysterical or panicked — just asking a set of questions based on what I had read: “The big change with Photos compared to Apple’s own iPhoto app image-storing app is that the former relies on iCloud for storage.” http://www.cnet.com/news/apple-teases-icloud-centric-photo-app-for-mac-in-2015/

  • http://www.borz.me/ gborz

    would be nice to know which screenshot is real: the one in the article, or this one from the keynote: http://static.trustedreviews.com/94/00002c63c/356c_orh350w620/OS-X-Photos-2015.jpg

    • visnaut

      The one from the keynote is definitely real, as that was demoed. The screenshot above is interesting because: a) it shows a lot more control than was implied in the keynote. b) I can’t find it anywhere on Apple’s website. c) can’t see a reason why The Loop would post anything other than what was provided by Apple.

      Jim, would you mind clarifying where that screenshot came from? Or posting a higher res version of it? If I can fiddle with the histogram and curves, then I won’t be so worried about this transition.

      • visnaut

        Looks like the Photos app will be capable of showing a histogram, and at least the following adjustments:

        • Light (Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Brightness, Contrast, Blacks)
        • Color (Saturation, Contrast, Cast)
        • Black & White (Hue Strength, Neutral Boost, Photo Tone, Grain)
        • Definition
        • Vignette
        • White Balance
        • Levels

        Source: http://tctechcrunch2011.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/photosforosx.jpg

  • to

    This is really bad news! Apple is giving up on Pros again. There is no way that the new Photos App is as featured as Aperture. So its Lightroom all the way – maybe switch back to Windows?!!! Stupid Apple.

    • Renverse

      There is no way that the new Photos App is as featured as Aperture.

      You know this, how, exactly?

      • http://www.lethbianlove.ca/ Jonathan Ruzek

        History repeats itself? Example: Quicktime X

        • joel richards

          Quicktime X was a bit different. It traded flexibility for efficiency. This is pure abandonment without a replacement product. Why Apple? Why?!

          • SKR Imaging

            IMO the new photos 2015 app IS the replacement product you are reffering to.. IF the screenshot is any indication, this actually has hopes of greatness. really a wait and see aproach for me..

          • http://www.lethbianlove.ca/ Jonathan Ruzek

            You’re telling me that abandoning development of Quicktime 7 Pro for a more “efficient” Quicktime X is not the same thing as abandoning Aperture for Photos? It’s the exact same thing.

    • Kyle Sweeney

      What professional photo editing software does Microsoft produce? The third party professional software that you’d purchase for windows likely also works on Mac OS, so I don’t understand how changing operating systems would solve the problem here. I’m assuming if you switched back to Windows you wouldn’t use any Adobe products or Phase One products, which are also popular in the pro community and run on both Windows and Mac OS… Maybe Correl Paint Shop Pro is your thing, which only runs on windows. I dunno. I feel your pain though. I also switched from windows to Mac OS in the past but I don’t feel like there is a shortage of Mac OS compatible software that would cause me to switch back.

      • to

        I am using Photoshop since Version 4, currently i am working in an mixed environment – mostly Mac some Win-Workstations. And it is a fact that all the Adobe Applications run way better under Windows then OS X. If Apple is giving up on the Pro Community, why should a Company like Adobe not give up on the Mac? I am sure – most if not all Adobe-Users will follow to Windows. Since everybody else seems to be happy that the Mac is reduced to iOS-Functionallity – well there goes the Pro-Community and well there goes 50 % of Mac-Users. And then – why should Apple even bother with those Macs anymore – iOS is good enough for everybody – look there is a cloud… and the sun is shining…

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          except youre talking out of your ass — Adobe/photoshop runs perfectly on OS X. Adobe isn’t abandoning OS.

          and can you cite your data on Mac being 50% “pro” users? as the only PC seller not in decline, and MacBooks being their number 1, I doubt it very much. I think normal people buy macs.

    • matthewmaurice

      I don’t know any “real” pros (i.e. majority of your income derived from a particular skill set) who used Aperture much. Yeah, it was more powerful than iPhoto, but compared to Lightroom was pretty much useless for serious workflow. Lack of support for color profiles being the most obvious.

      • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

        Aperture supports color profiles very well, for editing and outputting. So much for “the most obvious”.

        • matthewmaurice

          You probably shoot jpegs with Auto White Balance. Aperture supports printer profiles well enough, but try getting a camera profile into Aperture. I’m not knocking Aperture, I use[d] it, but for working “professional” photographers who shot RAW and care about color accuracy, Aperture doesn’t cut it.

          • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

            Sorry, you’re making wrong assumptions about my shooting. In any case, many professionals don’t bother with custom camera profiles, which are necessarily specific to one lighting condition. For those whose focus is commercial or product photography, where exact color reproduction is a goal, yes, Aperture doesn’t support the necessary camera profiles.

      • http://VintagePhotoFX.com/ BobRodkin

        I spent many hours researching both Aperture and LR. I decided to go with Aperture as I’m a 30 year loyal Apple user and put my money on them improving Aperture and, in the meantime, I had my own workflow that got me around any Aperture limitations — slow processing of larger RAW files being one. That said, obviously it was bad thinking on my part and I regret not going the LR route a few years back — especially since I already use a few of the other apps in Adobe’s suite. Oh well, live and learn.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      go back to windows because of aperture? hahahah…talk about cutting your nose off to spite your face.

      go fer it!

  • Prof. Peabody

    I am pleased about the idea of this, but the screenshot is very depressing. It shows a Yosemite screen wherein the user has chosen the “light” UI, but the application is “dark.”

    One of the main reasons a lot of folks didn’t switch to Aperture is the “all black, all the time” user interface. I hope they at least give us a choice as to whether we want to live in this dark cave-like interface or whether we want to stay in the light.

    • CN

      From what I gather Aperture is a light UI and only goes black when you use full screen mode.

      • Prof. Peabody

        Every time I have downloaded it and used it, it was “dark.” I am pretty sure that Aperture has never had a light UI unless you think medium dark grey is “light” simply because it isn’t 100% black.

        • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

          Wrong. See my earlier reply.

        • CN

          Aperture is the same shade as Safari. I would call that fairly light, but to each their own.

    • freediverx

      Wow, you see no value in Aperture and you don’t like the dark interface. That puts you at odds with a lot of folks whose taste and opinion I value, lol.

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Ummm, like someone else said earlier, it appears you haven’t actually used Aperture, at least in a serious way. You seem to have missed the Preferences > Appearance tab, which lets you independently control the lightness/darkness of the Viewer, Full Screen Viewer, Browser, and Full Screen Browser. The range of brightness ranges all the way from totally black to totally white.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      if you’re choosing your workflow tools based on the window color, then I question your pro credentials.

      my LR UI is dark. why? so my images stand out against it. that’s the point.

  • Moeskido

    I’m almost on the cusp of wanting something more than iPhoto as a repository for my personal images. Hope what replaces it is significantly more robust, because I’d rather not go with an Adobe solution.

    • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

      I don’t think it’d be hard to be more robust than iPhoto at this point.

      It’ll be interesting to see what gets cut from Aperture. I imagine it’ll be to Aperture what iMovie 08 was to iMovie: Better UI and a feature cull of useful but lesser-used things, to be added later.

      It ought to be a pretty dramatic upgrade for iPhoto users, though.

  • rfr1

    “Next Year”, when next year? It does make a big difference in your photo strategy. I am completely undecided as to what to do next. Move to Lightroom, and then I can’t convert. Stay, and end up with a App. that doesn’t do what I need. Aperture has needed an update for sometime now. I keep using it because I can bring it up in FCPX. Apple says it is continuing development with that software but you get worried about that too. When it comes to program software, Apple seems to start something and then move away and there is always a wait for an replacement and your never sure what it is going to until it is released. Really hard to make a good business decision with the data provided.

  • Chris

    Okay, but can we get a better icon? :) (on iOS too)

    • Prof. Peabody

      I was just thinking the reverse. The iPhoto icon as well as the Aperture icon are so old and silly looking. They look like something out of the 90′s.

      I love the new colourful non-figurative, non-realistic icon and I hope it stays.

  • http://www.thegraphicmac.com/ JimD

    The cold hard reality is that Apple is a consumer products company now – has been since the iPod took off.

    The new Photos app will not replace Aperture in functionality. It’ll be closer to iPhoto, but not even that flexible. It’s going to cater to the “snap and share” consumer crowd. That’s why they’re working with Adobe to make it easy for professionals to switch to Lightroom. Think iWork vs MS Office and you’ll get the idea.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      now a consumer products company? uhh, guy? jobs changed he name of the company from Apple Computer to Apple Inc seven years ago, in 2007. there’s nothing new here.

      also, iWork runs my company just fine. office is enterprise bloat and I don’t need it.

  • IwanoMai

    This was predicted years ago – Adobe shipped LR before Aperture, was cheaper, had a much stronger community and continual updates. Apple can’t be great at everything. LR is even on iOS now.

    • jabohn

      WRONG. Aperture was released in 2005. Only the BETA of Lightroom was released in January 2006 with the final release in Februrary 2007.

      • rb763

        You’re right, I definitely remember Aperture coming out before I even heard of Lightroom.

  • Tommy Weir

    Could have used this with a route forward clearly in front of me. I’ve over 50k photos in my Aperture Library. Don’t want to lose that organisation, ratings, adjustments. Presumably the new Photos app will take them on board. I can’t face the workload of rebuilding all that in Lightroom, that’s quite apart from the pain in committing to an Adobe product.

    Need to know more about Photos. Wait another six months…

    • Wayner83

      I am migrating to Lightroom as we speak. So far it has not to bad to export Originals into folders named after projects, and then export versions the same way and input them all into Lightroom. All of the metadata and Exif data comes over as well.

      • DavidC

        Won’t that double up on all the photos?

      • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

        I’m confused. A bit further down you say “so far it is a nightmare”.

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          yes, that was before he actually tried it. typical hysteria.

  • Dave Crossland

    DarkTable to the rescue :)

  • man

    First they release a Mac Pro without vetted storage solutions and now a Pro level tool is being phased out. It may be the post PC era, but I was not ready for the post Mac era.

    Mac – you DO NOT have my permission to die.

    • Prof. Peabody

      The Mac is in no danger of dying. Old-school photography is though.

      • joel richards

        Uh. Wouldn’t be too sure about that. “Dying” may be a bit harsh but the tool as this user knowns and uses it will probably disappear sooner rather than later. Apple just makes so much more money from iOS.

      • man

        Sorry to inform you – if you remove the reason for having a truck, then nobody will buy them. The Mac is being merged into iOS devices sooner than we think.

        Further, iMovie 2013 was a disaster and is terrible for organizing home movie clips. It messed up the dates on many MiniDV and AVCHD files. If the Photos app follows this, it will be the worst tool ever.

        As for”old” school photography, write me when you have reinvented optics (physics) with some new tech at a reasonable price.

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          omfg… apple literally says “WE ARE NOT MERGING IOS AND OS X” and what are you here crying about? them merging iOS and OS X. it’s insane.

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          old school photography means film, not optics. optics are a mandatory part of even digital photography.

  • dr.hell.no

    So you have to put all your photos in the Cloud.

    No Thanks.

    I guess I will be buying VM to run older version of Mac OS X. People need to make this clear. It is only matter of time when Syncing your iphone to your mac will be forbidden.

    • jdb

      What makes you think you have to sync your photos to the cloud? You don’t want to, don’t. I’ve been storing all my photos (about 20 gigs) in both Google+ and Dropbox for a while now and it’s quite liberating. But if I didn’t want to, I could just sync the photos over a wire to my Mac, and store them in a folder or any number of third-party apps.

      • dr.hell.no

        Apple actually took away syncing of contacts, email, calendar from SyncServices for around 4 months. so if you upgraded to latest iTunes/Mavericks. You could no longer sync your content the way you wanted to. The only reason they didn’t do for photo and music is because icloud is not ready to flip the switch but it is coming.

        Writing is on the Wall. Just like taking away RSS and then putting it back. I don’t want to fight or complain to ceo just to get back functionality I use every day. I rather use older versions.

        Apple has not gotten the message that Cloud is tainted with NSA spying. Shoving it down our throat just because it is convenient is not right.

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          please seek help.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      hysteria! conjecture! unfounded rumor! god live SUCKS!!

  • Wayner83

    This is horrible. I have been a strong supporter of Aperture from day 1. I am downloading Lightroom and migrating my library as we speak and so far it is a nightmare. I am a die hard Apple fan, but this blow hurts.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      breathe. eat a sandwich. you’ll be okay.

      • CN

        That’s right @Wayner, listen to @kyron. If you’re an avid photographer invested in Aperture you only have the minor disadvantage of migrating terabytes of data with the potential complete loss of every edit you’ve performed over the years. As a bonus, you have to spend more money and learn a new photo editing suite. Or you can use GrannyPhoto(TM) by Apple (TM) that may or may not be offered next year, and whose details will only be announced to you when the execs at Apple finally decide on which designer jeans look the most “organic” and “tech-chill” for their speech at the keynote.

    • CN

      That’s right Wayner, listen to @kyron:disqus. If you’re an avid photographer invested in Aperture you only have the minor disadvantage of migrating terabytes of data with the potential complete loss of every edit you’ve performed over the years. As a bonus, you have to spend more money and learn a new photo editing suite. Or you can use GrannyPhoto(TM) by Apple (TM) that may or may not be offered next year, and whose details will only be announced to you when the execs at Apple finally decide on which designer jeans look the most “organic” and “tech-chill” for their speech at the keynote.

  • M. O.

    Or there’s always a chance to return to Media 1 Pro (formerly iView Media Pro). I had used that extensively until Microsoft took it over and ruined it – and never even offer a Mac version of the pro version as far as I know. Subsequently it was sold to Phase 1 and looks viable again.

    http://www.phaseone.com/en/Downloads/Media-Pro-1.aspx#

    • rb763

      I could be wrong but I feel that Capture One’s move to a Catalog system (like LR and Aperture) might spell the end of Media 1.

      • Colin Mattson

        Media Pro’s still being developed. It’s a more powerful, more general-purpose cataloging application compared to what’s now built into Capture One.

  • susankappelstein

    Phew. So glad I picked Lightroom back in the day.

  • CN

    Adobe is much better in this arena, and I am just embarrassed to say I put faith in Apple when buying APERTURE in January.

    Apple should offer refunds to those who purchased Aperture less than a year ago. Their libraries will become obsolete, as will new camera RAW compatibility in less than a year.

    • http://www.lethbianlove.ca/ Jonathan Ruzek

      You should have just installed the trial and opened up the Mac App Store. Free upgrade!

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      And you know this how?

      Perhaps Apple will continue to release Digital Camera Raw updates to OS X (which is how iPhoto and Aperture get support for new cameras). And perhaps Apple will support a graceful migration of Aperture and iPhoto libraries to the new Photos application.

      • CN

        Not just about RAW support. It’s about committing to a now extinct photo ecosystem. That commitment is OVER for Aperture users. Not sure what “Photos” will entail, but from all signs it appears to be photo software for the layman.

        • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

          We’ve seen lots of speculation, but given that we do NOT know what the Photos application will offer, it’s simple FUD to say Apple’s photo ecosystem is extinct.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      apple should also include you and all the other aperture owners in its will. because, fairness.

      • CN

        Apple should also build users like you a perch on their anus, so the proximity for ass kissing is minimized, for efficiency.

  • Hedwig Guerra

    Curious about iPhoto on iOS …

  • visnaut

    Jim, thank you for digging for an answer to this, and for sharing it with the community. Much appreciated.

    Would you mind clarifying where the screenshot you posted came from? Or posting a higher res version of it?

    That screenshot is very interesting, as it implies a lot more control possible with Apple’s new Photo’s app than was demoed at WWDC. And I can’t find it anywhere on Apple’s site or PR material.

  • Andwhynot

    Will Apple provide at no cost increased iCloud storage capacity to cope with what will inevitably be large datasets ?

    • Sigivald

      Doubt it.

      But I equally doubt you’ll be forced to use iCloud for all your RAWs.

  • http://www.lonseidman.com lonseidman

    I probably have half a terabyte of RAW files in Aperture format. Ugh.. No way I’m uploading all of that to iCloud. The bigger issue is what happens to those Aperture libraries when we’re on OS XI or whatever comes out down the road.. A lot of conversion work for pro photogs. This really sucks.

  • rfr1

    Apple says libraries will be able to migrate across to the new application when the application ships. Apple is working with Adobe to offer a upgrade path to Lightroom.

    • Nate

      Where did you hear that Apple is working with Adobe on a Lightroom upgrade path? I would be interested in seeing that source.

      • Sigivald

        I think the Techcrunch post listed above said that, since it now has an “update” saying it was removed in error.

        On the other hand, Adobe seems almost certain to do such a thing, and doesn’t actually need Apple to actively help, does it?

    • freediverx

      I haven’t seen any quote from Apple indicating they were working with Adobe on anything. The Techcrunch article quoted Apple as saying,

      “users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS X.”

      It was ADOBE who said they would “‘double down’ on Lightroom support and offer Apple users a way to migrate”

      Big difference.

  • Jeremiah_Nilsson

    Many years ago I tried Aperture – a CPU Hog, with strange flipsy levers etc.. took me five min to decide on Lightroom. Used it ever since.

  • joel richards

    What a poorly handled announcement. You tell a blogger (no offense) that you’re pulling the plug on a (supposedly) pro software package you swore to users only months ago would still be supported and you offer no substantial information on its pseudo replacement (Photos—the only info is relevant to iOS) merely a vague promise to help us transition to your competitor?! Wow. I ran all Apple Pro apps for years (Logic, Aperture, Final Cut) and I’m sorry but this is real blow.

    Apple, you do realize that if I sign up for Lightroom (notice I didn’t say “buy” because Adobe only rents now) I’ll get their pro video and audio apps too, right? Why would I continue to use/pay for your apps now that you’re forcing me to use your competition? I’m not happy with Adobe’s scheme but since it doesn’t cost much more to use the whole master suite this transition may end my decade long relationship with Apple pro apps.

    • freediverx

      “a vague promise to help us transition to your competitor”

      Nothing of the sort was stated in this story. Here’s the relevant quote:

      “When Photos for OS X ships next year, users will be able to migrate their existing Aperture libraries to Photos for OS.”

    • Nate

      You can still buy Lightroom as a standalone product. At least I did, last month. Right now I can’t check because as usual their systems are down.

      • freediverx

        That’s to soften the transition to Creative Cloud and avoid having a ton of customers leave the platform. No doubt their long term plan is to eventually force everyone to the service model once they feel they’re in a strong enough position to do so.

        Apple’s abandonment of Aperture will only accelerate this.

    • Sigivald

      I’ll get their pro video and audio apps too, right?

      Well, I reckon they think that anyone using Adobe’s video workflow already ain’t using Final Cut – and that the people using Aperture mostly aren’t pro video editors, because that’s not a big market, is it?

      And Adobe isn’t even competing in the same space as Logic, is it? Audition appears to be for soundboard recording, not so much tracking.

      Apple isn’t so desperate to keep your potential business with Final Cut that it’s going to keep Aperture going to keep you from maybe using an Adobe product and thinking that just maybe you want a CC subscription.

  • SKR Imaging

    HEre is how I see it.. If Photos 2015 app let’s me do everything I am used to with Aperture and also allow the benefit of syncronising my edits to my iDevices and let me continue editing on iPad and back to my Mac seamlessly, then I have no issues with Aperture being replaced by Photos 2015..

    • freediverx

      Just look at the screenshot. Does that even remotely look like something that’s going to let you do what you did in Aperture?

      This is not like when Apple updated Final Cut. In that case they stated from the get go that it would still serve the pro market, and over time they added the features that were initially lost.

      This is different. Photos is clearly a desktop version of the iOS app. While they will no doubt include some rudimentary editing features there’s no indication they aspire to make it a pro-level app.

      • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

        I’m not one to judge an app by just one screenshot but if you brought it up, most of the editing panes found in Aperture are present in said screenshot.

        I’m hopeful that there are preferences for adding and removing different panes just like it is possible in Aperture today.

        • freediverx

          Nothing would make me happier than to be proven wrong. :)

      • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

        So many people jumping to conclusions here!!

        “Just look at the screenshot. Does that even remotely look like something that’s going to let you do what you did in Aperture?”

        Well, the little row of icons in the upper right COULD allow you to switch views – and give all the equivalent views as Aperture. As for the editing tools, well, there’s this thing called “scrolling” that could easily reveal numerous other tools…. sigh

  • imthedude

    I’m shocked at all the shock. Aperture is inferior to Lightroom. It wasn’t so in the beginning (I used Aperture for a while, it was the best in the beginning) but then Apple basically stopped developing it, where as Adobe moved right along.

    The conversion from Aperture to Lightroom is a pain in the ass though, but I can’t blame Apple for killing an app they obviously don’t care about anyway.

    • freediverx

      While Lightroom may have some advantages over Aperture, it’s interface and workflows reek of everything that is wrong with everything Adobe. Add the Creative Cloud software as a service subscription requirement, and Lightroom is a nonstarter for many of us who do not live in an Adobe bubble.

      Aperture’s interface, usability, and image management features are far superior to any bloated crap Adobe has ever produced and for many its image editing capabilities were more than adequate.

      • imthedude

        I thought they still offered lightroom as a stand alone non-subscription product.

        Again, I used both, so I think the exact opposite of what you’re saying, from experience. I’m no adobe champion, I just found Aperture to be terrible in many ways, and it was clear that Apple had no interest in developing it any further. I’d rather they use their man hours on other things.

  • GFYantiapplezealots

    Man I can’t wait for the new Photos app!!! That looks amazing!

    • freediverx

      If that were the case, why wouldn’t Apple just say so and spare themselves the negative backlash?

  • freediverx

    This sucks. And the verbiage in Apple’s statement does not suggest they have any intention of including pro-level functionality in the new Photos app.

    This will make a lot of otherwise loyal Apple customers think twice about embracing their technologies in the future. Doesn’t make me feel very confident about investing in the new iCloud Drive, especially not with its stingy cost structure.

  • turco320

    very logical decision, path to unification, well Apple

  • Udo Schmitz

    :-( Adobe needs more competition; not less …

  • http://www.jphotog.com Hrunga Zmuda

    Well that does settle it. Migrate Aperture libraries to Lightroom. I hope Adobe feels free to make Lightroom’s interface more usable by borrowing some of Apple’s great ideas. This is sad, but then it’s been tough keeping Aperture going when they have done so little to it.

    Oh, and I hope Adobe gets a clue and starts really using the second GPU in the new Mac Pros.

    • Sigivald

      I hope Adobe feels free to make Lightroom’s interface more usable by borrowing some of Apple’s great ideas.

      It won’t.

      Adobe doesn’t care about interface, to speak of. “What’re you going to do? Use GIMP?”

  • georg

    anybody knows hot to migrate from aperture to lightroom easily?

  • Nate

    On a side note: does that photo show a tree growing in the middle of a road?!

  • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

    I just wanted to add my condolences. It’s really sad that three years after the last major update (right?) everyone’s copy of Aperture spontaneously stopped working today, simultaneously.

    I urge you to rush out and replace it right now, because there’s no possibility at all that Photos will do what you want.

    • Sigivald

      slow clap

      • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

        When I tweeted a shorter version of this, someone actually asked if Aperture had really stopped working. :)

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Exactly! And all that stuff Apple told us about new APIs to allow plugins to operate DIRECTLY on RAW data, so the adjustments are EDITABLE? Naaw, won’t help a bit.

      • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

        When I tweeted a shorter version of this, someone actually asked if Aperture had really stopped working. :)

  • Massimo Fiorentino

    Oh double-f**ck me sideways. I have migrated my entire frigging 30.000+ photo library to Aperture because of the iOS / iCloud integration and now you’re telling me I have to move it all back to $$$Adobe$$$ Lightroom and loose all the iCloud integration. I need an aspirin…

    • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

      What makes you so sure Photos won’t do what you want? There’s really no need to panic and move RIGHT NOW.

      • Massimo Fiorentino

        I know, I know. But if it as much as comes close to iPhoto I won’t be able to use it. And I’m getting a slight headache just by thinking of the amount of work that has to be done… But of course I’ll wait and see…

        • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

          I think wait and see is wise. If it worked yesterday, it’ll probably work until Photos is released. Then you can try Photos and move if you don’t like it.

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Anyone who is telling you that you have to move it all back to Lightroom is spreading FUD.

  • http://www.mike-pulsifer.org/ WVMikeP

    Now to figure out how to get years’ worth of work into Lightroom. I won’t be moving my work to the cloud. Nope. No way.

    • Sigivald

      Why?

      Did a cloud server kill your family?

      (Note that you assume iCloud is required, and possibly that somehow you don’t have a local library.

      Why assume either of those?

      The announcement says “enables” the use of cloud storage.)

      • freediverx

        As far as cloud photo storage goes, I would assume it will work similarly to iTunes Match. I have all my music stored on my iMac’s hard drive, but it’s also accessible from any device through the cloud. Any time I buy a song from any device, the iMac automatically grabs a copy and stores it locally.

        My guess (hope?) is that all photos taken on your Apple devices will go to the cloud and will be accessible from any of your devices, but you’ll also have the option to automatically download and store all those photos on one or more of your computers.

        • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

          Sounds reasonable, and would be a good architecture.

          But… I can’t help but take the analogy to a (silly) extreme. You shoot a beautiful photo of the Grand Canyon using your iPhone 6S. It magically syncs to the Apple Photos Match service. But, just like iTunes Match, Apple notices it already has a similar photo of the Grand Canyon in the cloud, so no need to actually upload yours! So when Photos Match syncs with all your devices, you get SOMEBODY ELSE’S photo of the Grand Canyon!! :-D

  • Ron Miller

    You would think that they would have announced a little more info about the new Photos app before announcing that Aperture is being end of lifed. The fact that they didn’t (and that they are going to offer a “Lightroom” upgrade path) makes me worry. I have been using Aperture for many years and my flow is set up around it … I don’t relish the thought of switching to Lightroom. Sigh!!!

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Where, exactly, is Apple QUOTED as saying they will offer a Lightroom upgrade path?

      • Ron Miller

        You’re right … I had read another article that talked about Apple helping with a migration path to Lightroom, but when I looked for it, it seems that the statement has since been retracted.

        However, Adobe will of course offer an upgrade path. I have a collection of perl scripts that extract all of the meta data from the Aperture library which is stored in SQLite format, so I don’t think it would be too hard for Adobe to do something similar.

  • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

    This news really hurts if you just bought Aperture on the Mac App Store today for 80$ and to find out it is being dicontinued.

    • http://tewha.net/ Steven Fisher

      Assuming Photos ships in January 2015 and Aperture stops working THAT DAY, you still have six months of use out of it for $13.33 per month. But it probably won’t drop dead that day.

      If Photos is better, it’s like a free update to Aperture.

      If Photos is worse, you’ll get to keep using Aperture.

      I get what you mean emotionally, but rationally this is not so bad.

      • freediverx

        I’m hoping that Apple plans to make the new Photos app closer to Aperture’s capabilities than to iPhoto’s. But if that’s not the case, the loss is worth a lot more than the purchase price of Aperture. A lot of time goes into learning all the ins and outs of an application as rich as this and it would take a significant amount of time and effort to select and migrate to another product.

  • RadCap

    I purchased Aperture in order to have full control over the production of printed Apple photo books (as opposed to having to deal with pre-formatted styles in iPhoto). With the elimination of Aperture, does this mean the full control is being eliminated? Or will it be available in the new “Photos” app?

  • blackdoor

    What about the photo books and video presentations. We have a business built around these services!

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      there are photo book plugins for LR as well. youll just have to learn some new tools. such is life

  • http://shebanation.wordpress.com Andrew Shebanow

    FWIW, the TechCrunch article about this announcement also says that Apple will work with Adobe to help transition users to Lightroom. Which implies that Photos will most likely not be addressing the full set of pro workflows.

    • freediverx

      Nope, it didn’t.

      • http://shebanation.wordpress.com Andrew Shebanow

        TechCrunch changed the article. See note at the bottom: “Article updated to clarify that there is no official workflow for migrating to Lightroom.”

  • http://www.bartbusschots.ie/blog/ Bart Busschots

    The name Aperture doesn’t matter, what matters is the functionality. Aperture and iPhoto already share a library format.

    If this new unified app gives me the same editing sliders that I now have in Aperture, then this is a good news day – one unified app with cloud syncing and all the power of Aperture!

    On the other hand, if all we get is the paltry few sliders iPhoto has, then this is a very sad day indeed.

    Annoyingly, this article gives too little information to actually be of any use. All it does it worry people, but without giving them any of the facts they need to know what this news actually means for them.

  • Dan Walker

    Well I could never decide between Lightroom or Aperture, guess that decision has been made now.

  • Mark Holmes

    “Apple was very clear when I spoke with them this morning that development on other pro apps like Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro is continuing. Professionals in those app categories should not worry about their apps—they will continue as normal.”

    The problem with this statement is Apple has made this or a similar announcement with the termination of other pro apps. Repeatedly they prove that when it comes to pro apps, their word is meaningless. Professionals make software decisions largely based on future support – and Apple, time and time again, is proving they cannot be relied on for professional level software. Increasingly it seems Adobe is the only game in town…

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      i dont really use pro apps much so im in the dark — when have they said apps will continuing as normal but then terminated them instead?

  • cajaygle

    I believe the new extensions architecture in iOS 8 is shared with Yosemite. So, as they demoed in iOS 8, you could seamlessly invoke a 3rd party photo filter from within the Photos app. If the same is true of the Photos app on Yosemite that could open it up to more pluggable integrated editing tools, replacing some of the edit functionality of Aperture. That wouldn’t address the other features of Aperture that may not be replaced but it would help.

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Not only that, but I heard these plugins would actually do their job early in the RAW conversion process, and be Editable (i.e. not “baked in”). This could be HUGE!

  • Will

    Glad I jumped ship early. It crawled on my machine anyway.

  • http://www.johncblandii.com John C. Bland II

    Apple, Adobe thanks you.

    The writing was on the wall though. This isn’t as much a shocker as a “finally!!!!”

  • JeanLucLabarre

    My next computer will NOT be a Mac.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      oh nos.

      have fun with windows. i dont.

      • JeanLucLabarre

        Oh don’t worry, I probably won’t. But I’m a pro, and Lightroom runs faster on PC. I will wait and see how W9 looks. If it’s W8-level ugly I’ll buy a used iMac, but Apple will not be getting another cent from me.

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          do you realize how fucking crazy you sound? seriously. a niche product with solid market alternatives reaches end of life and you make yourself out to be a leukemia victim. it’s obscene.

          Lightroom runs like lightning on a capable machine (SSD, ram, etc). mine is from mid-2011 and still rocks.

  • JamesNW

    They probably realize the features set is no longer competitive.

    • freediverx

      If it’s not competitive why do you think so many people are so upset to lose it?

  • http://jy.lv/ Kārlis

    As long as the existing Aperture runs on future OSXs…

  • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

    The feature I like about Aperture is how easy it is to manage the Unified Library compared to catalogs magement in Lightroom. And also how well the photos from selected Aperture Projects can easily be synced to my iPad using itunes. If these features are maintained in the new Photos solution in Yosemite without requiring icloud, I will be happy.. I am really NOT A FAN OF MANDATORY CLOUD.

  • Alexandros Roussos

    My humble opinion is that Apple will allow developers to add features to the Photos app through the new Extensions API.

  • MichaelQ

    Probably time for a do-over of both programs, and doing two going forward made no sense.

    I was surprised Apple mentioned Photos in the WWDC Keynote given its 6-9 months away at best. Really was no need to mention it. All it did was raise questions.

    Long wait time for an Apple product.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      first people complained when apple was tight-lipped, now people complain when they share info. fabulous.

      • JeanLucLabarre

        They either say nothing or tell us about a product we can’t get for a year….

        • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

          oh nos! Jesus Christ it’s the end!! you have TO WAIT! what a cruel, cruel world…

          please.

          • JeanLucLabarre

            Idiot.

  • Bill Johnston Jr

    Will Apple continue to provide and update the RAW formats for non-Apple cameras?

  • Me_2

    I’m going to store 75+GB of photos in iCloud? Is Apple NUTS?

    Never once have I desired to access a RAW workflow from my iPhone….

  • Gerard J

    Calm down.

    Breathe.

    Apple is not updating Aperture any more. Ya know what? The version you have on your computer RIGHT NOW has been working fine for 2 years and will probably continue to work fine for another 5.

    Sit tight and lets see what the Photos app is all about or if Apple has another game plan up its sleeve for pro photos.

    Remember, all the RAW stuff is cooked right in to the OS, Aperture just allowed access to the Adjustments and had some nice cataloging features.

    Calm, breathe, wait.

    • https://plus.google.com/u/0/112961726029592953039 Jim Warthman

      Truly, this post is a breath of fresh air!

  • man

    I wonder if Apple even realizes they punched us in the guts with this news. Do they care about Mac users?

    Why do we think they will continue FCP or Logic ? Those apps will also get killed.

    This is bad news. I’m really upset.

    • http://www.laugh-eat.com/ kyron

      I’m a Mac user, but I don’t give a shit about aperture. don’t make the mistake of thinking just because you do something everyone else does as well.

  • My 2 Cents

    Sad. Truly sad. I use Aperture regularly and love the advanced features as compared to iPhoto, which I are very limited. I absolutely will not put an Adobe product on my Mac – they are gastly expensive, horrible, bloated and absolutely awful.

    Even if Photos or whatever Apple’s next product is does everything that Aperture does today (which I seriously doubt given what was stated by Apple today and their other migrations such as iMovie and Final Cut) I will have to relearn everything I do. If it doesn’t (far more likely) then I am left without a solution at all.

    Seriously, if I have to use Adobe’s software I might as well get a cheap Windows machine to run it on and dive full into the pain and suffering – Adobe crapware runs better on Microsoft crapware anyway.

  • John K Goodman

    “Professionals in those app categories should not worry about their apps—they will continue as normal.”

    Isn’t that what they told Aperture users last year?

  • queeky

    Sigh. I don’t want my photos in the cloud. Partly because I have way too much data for decent performance. Partly because I don’t always have internet access. Partly because some of it is private. Partly because I don’t want to have to pay a monthly fee for the rest of my life to access my own stuff. I’m all for some type of cloud based syncing (bittorrent sync anyone?) but I want my stuff to be local, mine, and only mine. Are there really no companies left that get this?

    • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

      Same here.. Cloud is not the defacto way to store and companies should embrace this thought.. Who in their right mind can trust cloud storage to local Hard drives for backups is puzzling to me.. icloud is great for users who just want things to sync but should not be the only way to sync. it’s like telling me I can’t sync my songs from my itunes Library if I’m not connected to the web.. that would be ridiculous. same goes for photos..

  • abdoradus

    If you look at the price and how it has dropped over time, then it’s obvious that Aperture has never really taken off as a pro app. The vast majority of users have to be amateurs. While I find iPhoto a bit too limited and dumbed-down, I only use a rather small subset of Aperture’s functionality. Moving to that new photo app may not be that bad, and better cloud integration is definitely a win. Not sure how it’s going to work with large libraries, though.

    • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

      Price of an app should not be the criteria to judge if an app is a Pro app. I agree with you that the new Photo solution could be not all that bad though.. hoping that if they want huge libraries to migrate to it, they will have thought of something for the pro users that will migrate aswell.

  • Steven

    This is a decision influenced by Apple’s increased popularity amongst general consumers. In the past, even if nothing else were going well, Apple could count on creative pros like graphic artists and filmmakers, and they could count on Apple. When Aperture was introduced, it was a natural extension of this partnership. I was puzzled as Aperture began to atrophy from lack of attention from Apple, now I’m a little perturbed. As much as I hate to say it, this appears to be one of those never-would-have-happened-on-Jobs’-watch decisions – abondoning Apple’s photographers to Adobe. If I were a Logic or Final Cut user, I’d be nervous right now.

    • http://skrimaging.wordpress.com SKR Imaging

      Same feeling I’m having.. It will be hard to trust Apple with the remaining Pro Apps (FCP X and Logic X).. What if they come out and tell users to migrate to Premiere/After effects and Ableton Live or something… I used Motion on a friend’s Macbook Pro recently and compared it to After Effects.. The speed of the real time rendering with audio is blazing fast on Motion 5 compared to the sluggish rendering on Adobe After effects.. Aperture aswell gives me better image results compared to exports in a Lightroom test I once did. Apple has so much potential with it’s Pro software division and should not abandon the creative users.

  • otis_w

    Tell to Apple, please, that here in Italy (Europe), with the slowest Internet connection in the Western world, it is absolutely useless to have photos in the cloud. As we say: with iCloud we can make the soup, the chicken stock, the consommé… ;)

  • StruckPaper

    Jim D comes thru again. With his true connections at Apple, one wonders why the rumormongers out there don’t check with him first before spreading unreliable news.

  • http://VintagePhotoFX.com/ BobRodkin

    I primarily use Aperture after migrating from iPhoto a couple of years ago, but still go back and forth. So, while I’ve become comfortable with Aperture, and don’t want to change, this new “merged” app (and I’m presuming better, more features) could be good. If it integrates nicely with iCloud and photostream it may even get me back to using those, which are nice features. My issue with icloud / photostream has always been storage. Apple simply charges too much for too little storage. I hope they address that as well.

    • matthewmaurice

      “I’ve become comfortable with Aperture, and don’t want to change” Then don’t! It’s not like Aperture will stop working anytime soon.

      • http://VintagePhotoFX.com/ BobRodkin

        I should have mentioned I do have LR as well, I’ve just been lazy. Apple has given me the incentive I’ve needed. Bottom line is, Aperture is just one piece of software, not the cure for world hunger.

  • Norman Head

    This is pretty much the end of the line of me and Apple. As a 30 year user, a person who convinced his school board to put in Apple labs instead of PC labs, who has sold millions of dollars of Apple equipment over the years, it’s time to say goodbye. Those of us who were power users, who kept the company afloat during it’s lean years who’s goal was to produce results efficiently have been abandoned by the company. They’ve become champions of fluff. When they cancelled, idisk, I lost thousands of files. I know Apple will say, I had lot’s of warning and it was my fault. Well Apple that might be true.

    I don’t care, the bottom line for me was I lost thousands of file. I had to migrate two websites, I’ve since lost my iWeb files because of the stupid storage system built into iWeb. With the loss of Aperture, Apple product is a hindrance to my work flow, not a help. It’s hard to bleive that charging me $200 a year, Apple couldn’t make money doing what photobucket and godadday charge me less than $100 a year for. The efficiency of product integration is gone, It’s not the company I signed up with 30 years ago. They’ve become an expensive option that’s more complicated than it’s competition and really saves you nothing, if you know what you’re doing. I guess it’s good for the great unwashed masses.

    • matthewmaurice

      Get over yourself.

      • Norman Head

        Naw, I’ll just get over Apple,

  • Kungaloosh

    Why not take the Aperture sources & try one of the following things:

    • create a small company, like FileMaker, to continue development.
    • sell the sources to a decent OS X development shop for continued development under OS X

    or…

    • place the Aperture sources on opensource.apple.com

    I’d like to think that a small OS X shop could make a decent living by continuing Aperture development, even if that development involved feeding all improvements into a project on opensource.apple.com.

    • perfectfaceforradio

      Let Apple know what you think…

      apple.com/feedback

      can’t hurt…

  • http://sublevel.net/lucian/ Lucian Marin

    I like this. We get the best of both worlds: simple, yet powerful.

  • Pepe

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Apple (in their last year’s conference) use Apperture as one of the great examples of how the new Mac Pro can be used by professionals? Now I don’t want to over-dramatise here, but if this means they’re abandoning the power user segment (and Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro will maybe follow soon), aren’t they contradicting their own statements and losing the edge they had over the PC platform? If they’re moving away from being a premium brand and trying to become a mainstream company, then they need to also start introducing low-cost products and pretty much change their overall philosophy and I’m really not sure if this then isn’t the beginning of their end. I’m slowly but steadily losing confidence in the Apple we all love.

  • Rod

    Apple has recently been completely abandoning the professional market. Just look at the new Final Cut Pro X, “improved” versions of iWork, and the discontinuation of Aperture. Apple seems to be giving up on the pro market. Software is being discontinued and the hardware is changing. Just look at the new Retina MacBook “Pro”, non-upgradable Hard Drives, RAM, and battery. Apple has completely abandoned the professional market, instead creating expensive devices that come with the same software as an iPad.

    • Pepe

      And that’s really a shame, because when you think about it, what reason will a professional photographer now have to actually buy a Mac device? OK, Macs are still quality HW, but HW alone will not sell and we all know it and Apple should know that too. Assuming Lightroom is cross-platform, I can see lots of their customers switching to PC instead. Now if this trend continues and they’ll eventually abandon their remaining pro SW too, I think I will start to seriously question why they even introduced their new Mac Pro.

  • GertSterner

    Apple don’t care about stuff, that don’t sell in very large scale. I am certain, that the moment they have got enough users on iOS App’s, they stop all that has to do with OS X. Both box’es and app’s. A petty. I don’t much like Windows and think it is hard work to deal with Adobe software.

  • perfectfaceforradio

    Very disappointed to see Apple kill off yet another great tool (Aperture) I depend on.

    And people wonder why I can’t get excited about iBooks Author or Swift.

    If this matters to you, let Apple know.

    apple.com/feedback

    Can’t hurt, may help more than anything posted here or anywhere else.

    I’ll hope for the best, that Apple will have Aperture-level tools built into optional settings in Photos, or will offer an Aperture Plug-in or Extension, even at an additional cost… But.. I won’t hold my breath.

  • http://www.michaelpalmer.com/ Michael Palmer

    Aftershot Pro for the win.

  • Bill Lescallette

    I’ve been an Aperture user since the beginning. While I understand the technology and cost issues (some of which is Apple’s fault for neglect); my major issue is the cowardly way this was announced.

  • Sebastian

    This is how rumours start. This is spreading across the net and I’d like to see your source. This doesn’t seem very Apple to just go and announce the end of development of Aperture to ONE news outlet. I’ll believe it when I see the source or the press release. The introduction of the Mac Pro pretty much proves that Apple isn’t giving up on their pro market.

  • http://about.me/juanmcm Martín Coppedè

    For me is a very big mistake leave Aperture because is one of the best photography application. Is true that in Windows we will find better ones, but of course much more expensive, and this is one indication that demonstrates that Apple cares and wants to mantain the profesional target. In audio, photo or video edition and more. I hope that Photos will improve in all Aperture and mantain the professional status that Apple wants.

  • peterbreis

    …is continuing…

    … for now!

  • alaanile

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Apple (in their last year’s conference) use Apperture as one of the great examples of how the new Mac Pro can be used by professionals? Now I don’t want to over-dramatise here, but if this means they’re abandoning the power user segment (and Logic Pro and Final Cut Pro will maybe follow soon), aren’t they contradicting their own statements and losing the edge they had over the PC platform? If they’re moving away from being a premium brand and trying to become a mainstream company, then they need to also start introducing low-cost products and pretty much change their overall philosophy and I’m really not sure if this then isn’t the beginning of their end. I’m slowly but steadily losing confidence in the Apple we all love.

    شركة عزل اسطح بالرياض

    شركة عزل خزانات بالرياض

    تنظيف فلل بجدة

    شركة رش مبيدات بالمدينة المنورة

    رش مبيدات مكة

    نقل عفش مكة

    شركة كشف تسربات المياه بالدمام

    شركة تنظيف موكيت بالدمام

    here

    here

    here

    here

    here

    شركات تنظيف خزانات بالدمام

    شركة كشف تسرب المياه بمكة

    شركة عزل اسطح بجدة

    اسعار ايجار السيارات فى مصر

    شركة تسليك مجارى بمكة

    here

    here